If trajectory doesn't matter? 270 win vs. 308 win
 

If a cartridge trajectory or flatness doesn't matter, what would you look for in a rifle?

I can't help but think, lighter and more accurate the better? within reason of course, I don't need a 3lbs rifle.

My point is if you know your bullets trajectory and have an accurate range finder, who cares how much your bullet drops etc... as long as it's got enough energy to get the job done on the game at hand?

I'm thinking of a western/mountain rifle, possibly 270win vs. 308win.

I'm thinking it would be easier to build a lightweight .308 than .270, can get away with a shorter barrel on the .308

also a short action, lighter, stiffer/stronger than a longer 270win.

Am I missing something on why to shoot a 270 over a .308? aside from flatness of trajectory?

It's a little more than just elevation. It's, as you put it, enough energy on impact. With the .308 you can have heavier bullets to make up for the loss in speed with the energy stored in the mass. Greater weight=more downrange momentum and penetration. But the question still remains, what animal are you intending to hunt and at what ranges will you limit yourself to. If just whitetail/mule deer then a .270 is just dandy out to 400-500 as far as energy is concerned. But if you are talking Elk or Moose then you will want to up the ante for those ranges and use the heavier line of bullets from the .308. Sounds more like to me you are wanting a more effective mountain rifle that you wont be taking overly long range shots with. My personal preference would be neither in your situation. 7mm-08 in a nice handy mountain rifle configuration is about as good as one can get for whitetail/mule deer or if you are stepping up to Elk/Moose then a .338fed in the same configuration. I hunt Elk with my 7mm.08 often and have found it highly effective out to ranges of 250 yards or below. I've also hunted Elk/Moose with my .338fed barrel on my TC and it is a dream of a cartridge as well. I personally have never been one of the .270 fan people because honestly I can load up a .30-06 round to beat it every single time. Not a huge fan of the .308 either as there are just too many rounds based off that cartridge that are better both ballistically as well as energy down range.

I like lightweight, maneuverable rifles. I have Rem 700 Mountain Rifles in .280 and .260

Great rifles, and to me they are awesome hunting rifles. I'd use my .280 with handloads for anything I'd ever hunt.

Caliber, well that is personal preference and what fits your hunting needs best. I would probably lean towards .270 out of those two, but nothing wrong with a .308

my advice . buy em both. lol.

I own a .270 . it has never disapointed me. that said , neither would 30/06 or 308.

personally ,I could care less about the balistics. if ,I can point it and hit where I want and animal I am hunting dies , then gun is sufficient. .270 has never failed me in that aspect. I HAVE KILLED EVERYTHING FORM COYOTES TO ELK, BEAR WITH MINE. and it will bring down any animal in north america, so long as you can hit where you aim.I will very seldom take a shot over a hundred yards and longest is generally no more then 4to 5 hundred. just more fun ,imo, to get close. most important to me is cost and availability of ammo.

.270 Win all day any day over a .308 Win...

Ditto....I've used both and IMO the .270 wins hands down

Accuracy is KING (either cartridge is capable) !!!

At 5'6'' and 150lbs. I prefer a complete rig at +/- 7.5lbs.

I have very definitive "personal" preferences in a mountain rifle - Obviously "light weight", medium contour stainless barrel, good trigger, synthetic stock, +/- 4x-16X 44MM scope

Lastly, I am not recoil sensitive - I actually enjoy the "kick" !

"Split the difference"& get a 7mm-08! Flatness of a 270 + much increased utility, doesn't require long actions nor long barrels for max velocity which equates to lighter & easier handling. MUCH greater bullet choices for reload/custom ammo in a 7mm vs a 270. Plus, as accurate as the 308 is, the 7-08 is typically even more accurate!

As for elk & larger game, I can't imagine ANYTHING a 7-08 with 150grn mono & prem bullets can't do that the 270 with 150 mono/prems can!!! :fighting0007:

So... this probably won't help at all, because I'm not exactly sure which I'd rather have of the two. Mostly because neither was my first choice for that purpose... But here are my scattered and unhelpful thoughts...


Comparing the rifles:

Comparing these two cartridges isn't complete unless you also consider that you're comparing long and short actions. If you're looking for a lightweight rifle, a short action Remington is about as light as you can build on - Sako, Winchester, Mauser, Ruger, and Savage actions are a half pound to a full pound heavier than the Remington 700. The 700 also gains less weight when you jump from short action to long action compared to other brands, so even in a long action, the 700 has the advantage in weight savings. Titanium 700 Ultralight is even lighter, if you can find one. Is lightweight just a buzz word, or is it your focus? If it's the focus, then the Rem 700 short action has the advantage. If it's not that important, then a 700 long is a good option too - still lighter than short actions from some other brands.

Comparing the Cartridges

I'm not sure why - and I'm quite certain I don't have a good reason for it - but the 270win just has never thrilled me. Maybe it's because I grew up with an '06 and my brother with a 270, or maybe because I got burned out by Jeff Coopers followers that were super closed minded to anything BUT the 270 with a forward mounted optic... I can't say anything bad about it, but I don't really have a hole where the 270 fits. I don't have a love affair with the 308win either - in it's case family, my heart belongs to the 7-08. For a 30cal, I find myself leaning towards the 300win mag over the 308 or 30-06, basically, if I need 150-180grns, then I can justify the horsepower, mentally.

If you're a subscriber to sectional density based rankings, like Winchester's CXP rating system, or a Chuck Hawk's fan, since he follows that program too, then you can consider that the 270's 140grn fodder is really a lower end CXP3 bullet, whereas the typical 150's in the 308win are mid to upper end CXP2 bullets for sectional density. Alternatively, the 308win has about a 10-15% edge for Taylor Knock-Out Factor... More impact vs. more penetration, to which philosophy do you subscribe?

Barrel length and overall length might be a consideration, depending upon model. 308win can burn powder well in a 20-22" tube, the 270win's larger case and smaller bore usually benefits from a 24" tube. Then add in the extra action length and the 270win might be a 2, 3, or even 5" longer rifle.

What I did, not that it matters:

My personal "mountain rifle" has been a 7-08 Rem 700. Despite the extra action weight, I'm working on a takedown mountain rifle, also in 7-08, but on a Ruger M77 action - using the Ruger because of the integrated recoil lug, rather than a sandwich type (although I might be changing my mind about that). I also hold a soft spot in my heart for the 284win, and it brings a little extra horsepower over the 7-08, although I'm internally conflicted about putting it in a short action - so that's a decision yet to be made.

Which I would pick - just between the two:

If weight matters most, Rem 700 308win. If weight isn't the top priority, then I'd go 270win.

If you're going to consider the .270, you might as well just get the .280 Remington and be done w/it. You'd be glad you did. The biggest difference between the .280 and the others you've inquired about is that you need to get the ammo from a real gun store instead of just walking into a Wally world type box store.(That can be a factor) The 280 has similar recoil to the .270 and its 7mm bullets are overall better ballistically . Standard and premium ammo is available to suit virtually any big game requirement.

A couple of inches of a light contour barrel is not very much difference in weight. The short action vs. the long action is not very much weight. I would not consider these as major factors unless I was shaving every ounce to include light weight sling, scope rings, and of course the scope. I see fellows with light rifles equipped with padded leather slings and big scopes and I do not quite understand their thinking.

A light contour barrel and a light weight stock make sense if you are starting with a fairly light action to begin with.

I have had light weight rifles before and decided that I did not need them. I had a Forbes and finally sold it a couple of years ago. There are a still a M700 Mountain rifle chambered in 270 here that my wife loves. If I wanted another light rifle I would just buy another M700 Mountain rifle chambered in 270 or 280.

The 308 is a very useful cartridge and it is a good compromise for most purposes. It is a "Jack of all trades, Master of none" and it certainly has it's place. However, for larger game and general versatility I think most would be better served with one of the long-action cartridges.

In Remington 700's, there's only about a 3-4oz spread for the two lengths. In others, like Ruger, CZ, and Winchester, it's a half pound difference between short and long action, savages fall between there - and again, these actions start out a pound heavier than Remingtons already.

So action choice can make a difference - you can add a half to 3/4 pound simply by switching a Rem 700 short action for a Ruger or Winchester long action.

Barrel length, while not a lot of weight, tends to affect balance quite a bit. I never noticed how much difference it makes until I started playing with different brakes on the same rifle. Since the weight is out on a long lever arm, the balance can totally change with just a few ounces.

Trajectory is why I would own a 270 over a 308. So I guess I'm ruled out of this post.

lf trajectory didn't matter, everybody would be usin 30-30's
RR

Good point - and probably worse than that!

If trajectory didn't matter, I could believe we still would have evolved metallic centerfire cartridges for the ease or loading and feeding in repeating firearms, but we probably wouldn't have worried about creating anything with a better trajectory than a 56-56 Spencer Rimfire or a 44-40 Centerfire, and probably wouldn't have worried about improving smokeless powder over traditional black.

Never have seen a shooter or an animal that could tell the difference in a .270 vs .280.

OP, at reasonable ranges, there is no appreciable difference in a .270 and 308, as far as performance on game, when both are loaded with good bullets. I've used both extensively. I am a little bit partial to the 270 win. It was my first CF rifle cartridge and I have killed enough game to fill a couple of large dump trucks with it. Lately, I've been carrying a Kimber Montana in 308 @ ~5 lbs, all-up. Hiking steep and far certainly favors that rifle. It kills chit.

Bottom line is that the bullet shoved in the brass matters more than what is written on the base of that brass.

PB, that could be said about any number of cartridges. Like the previous noted calibers, it's an option for the OP that deserves mention. Seems most people, including yourself, have or had a favorite. I agree that it's the bullet that does the job.