mule1028

I have heard from everyone I know, and everything I have read, that .30 cal (308 or 30-06) is the primary competative size.

But in reading posts on this site alot of people have said that the .270 is a better long range hunting rifle. Why is this?

I already have a .308, wondering why the difference?

stubblejumper

Ask those same people just how many long range shooting matches are won with the 270win.

Judson

First we have to determine what is long range. Let us say that is over 300 yards, well then we have to look at the rough rule of thumb saying that we want over 1000 foot pounds of energy for deer at the range we are shooting. If we go with this then all the cartridges mentioned are in the 30-30 class at these ranges, minimal at best. add to this the shooting capibilities of most hunters at extended ranges and we find a lot of missed and wounded deer. Think about this, at long range, with out snow, what are the chances of finding where that deer was standing and then picking up a blood trail? As for the match shooters, they are poking a hole in paper, nothing gets wounded, dies, runs off, and no energy is required. Also they are shooting at a known range, and indition to this they fire thousands of rounds a year which hones their ability unlike the average hunter. In my work I fire several thousand rounds each year, work up accuracy loads for many cartridges and even so I will not shoot over 300 yards! A good hunter can get closer.

RedAllison

Judson DONT state such crap, "...A good hunter can get closer...". Thats the typical response from a person who couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle. Just because you can't hit or don't feel comfortable hitting something at long ranges, doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of us who can. The man asked a question about shooting long ranges, not who can come up with reasons why no one should shoot further than others. Or why they are any less of a hunter if they do take such shots.

Its pretty safe to say that Richard Petty could drive a car much better at 200mph than you or I either one. But would you tell him that, "... a better driver can drive slower..."? I wouldn't think so anyway. So why characterize the rest of us so? The use of modern equipment and some time in the practice field can make a fellow pretty deadily at the 400-500yd range marks.

I used to keep my shots under 300yds (for the most part!) when all I had was an ol 06 with a cheaper scope. When I "stepped up too" a 7mag with a quality scope I extended that range to around 400. When I got my Warbird with a premium scope I increased that range too over 600yds. Why? Because the equipment made it easier to more consistently connect on deer at ranges well over 1/4 of a mile away. If a gun has the power to "freight train" an animal at such ranges and the shooter has proven the proficiency of being up too the task, why not? I think to many people (your self included) use some artificial number like 250-300yds as a magic solution for any and everything. I'm not saying that situations ALWAYS present themself for taking such shots. The weather has ALOT to do with being able to properly make the decision for taking a shot over 400yds. Wind drift is the enemy of long shooters and it's only the moral, ethical hunter that knows that limit and properly makes the correct judgement call. But having the ability to first know whether they can or can't take advantage of such a shot opportunity is in my mind, a notch in our favor.

I dont know where you hunt but I can assure you that no matter how good a hunter you are, you will NOT be able to get out of your stand in the middle of a 1/2 mile long bean field and "get closer" on a wary buck at near dark if he is the only animal in the field (how many big deer are gonna step into an empty field by themselves?). And for more reasons than you can name (other animals which are closer will spook, darkness will settle in before you can get closer etc...), it's only wise and maximizing your own odds when you can setup to reliably cover as much ground as possible under such conditions. After all trophy hunting is simply a game of odds so the prudent will do all they can to put as many odds in their own favor as possible.

I'll leave the "opinionated max distances" too others,
RA

USMC PMI

Nothing is wrong with the 270, and I am sure that loads and rifles could be worked up to shoot with the best of them, but for what ever reason they just are not. I have never seen a 270 used in a rifle match, bench rest and target shooters just never took to it and so companies stopped producing match grade goods for it.

That being said I do love the 270 as a fine deer rifle, used one for over 20 years. MPO The 270's trajectory is a little flatter than say the 30-06 and .308 (common match calibers) keeping point of aim closer to point of impact and requiring less adjustment at longer ranges in a field/hunting environment. It has mild recoil for the most part so average or infrequent shooters are more accurate with them. While 270 target ammo is rare or non-existant, you can find a great variety of hunting bullet types in ideal weights for deer sized game. Lastly, thanks to Jack O'Connor the US has fallen in love with the 270, it is still one of the top three selling calibers during hunting season.

James B

Shooting long range targets is fun and sporting. Shooting further than you have to at game animals is a different story. Many bad things happen at long range. Very few hunters I have hunted with can make those long shots every time. To many variables. I have never seen an animal that I needed to kill bad enough to take iffy shots. If an animal is already hit then go for it other wise get closer or wait for a better shot.

DM

Hey Red,

I'm also one of those "hunters" that thinks you should get as close as possible!!! As for me not being able to "hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle" because i think this way.....

Well, among other things, i have a drawer full of medals and other junk that i've won "rifle and pistol shooting" that says otherwise!! And yes, some of them were from shooting at long range...

Drilling Man

duramaxlt

i read an article a couple of years ago where craig bodington an a couple of other writers got together and shot accross a canyon out west i believe the distance was between 400 and 450 yards.they used a handful of different rifles and cartidges i remember one being a dakota and a weatherby in 300-378 which was fairly new at the time i also believe they had a lazeroni.anyway not one of them could keep they're shots in a pie plate at that distance.i believe it even suprised them.by the way the weatherby preformed the best if i'm not mistaken.maybe someone else read this same article and remembers more.

Smokem Joe

Jim Carmichel wrote an atricle for the Nov 2004 issue of Outdoor Life entitled "The 270 Mystery". In it he conducted a series of tested to find if the 270 was simply inaccurate. It is an interesting article, I would suggest it as reading. The short of the matter is that several companies did produce target models for the 270, but they didn't sell well. If something doesn't sell, industry probably won't continue to market it. Otherwise, the 270 cartridge was more than accurate.

Judson

Have you ever thought about the time of flight of that peperoni cartridge at 600 yards? Shooting game at extended ranges if a risk at best, if the animal steps as you fire you just paunchedmissed or crippled the deer. That is not a consilation prize for hunters. If you want to shoot inanimate targets at extended ranges or critters that blow up and do not run off wounded like wood chucks great. One other thing, if you have no snow, and the deer you shoot at runs off what are the chances of you walking down 600 yards and findind where the deer was standing and picking up a blood trail??? Or if the deer runs off do you just assume you missed? Even that lazeronie at 70,000 pluss pressures that it runs does not have very much punch at the stated 600 yards, deffinately not enough to always put a deer down in its tracks, for that matter no cartridge does!