haugenna

I agree with old elk, there are better calibers. My friends, close friends, have lost game to the 270. The bullets were in the pump house. This happened twice to two different friends. Unfortunately there are some cowboys in the woods. My buddy shot at this elk with his 270, hit him in the vitals, not a heart shot, lung shot. The elk ran 100-150 yards all the while getting made into swiss cheese by some long range lobbers. He, buddy, had a difficult walk to the elk and when he got there the dipsticks already had a tag on it. Why bother with two idiots with guns in the middle of nowhere. The shot was 250-300 yards. A bigger caliber he might of had the velocity and power to take the elk out right there.

haugenna

Who makes a good lightweight 270wsm

2ndtimer

And I am sure that no one has ever had the same thing happen with a .300 Win Mag, a .338 Win Mag or a .375 H&H. Since there were "two idiots" already there with guns in the middle of nowhere that had also shot the animal, who's to say who put the round into the vitals that put the elk down? Maybe your buddy's shot wasn't where he thought it was. I believe the .270 Winchester Short Magnum, with appropriate loads, is entirely adequate for non dangerous North American game. I am talking about good bullets of at least 140 grains at velocities over 3000 fps. It shoots flat and hits hard to take game out to 300 yards which is certainly as far as most hunters should be attempting to humanely take an animal. My Model 70 Super Shadow shoots the 140 gr Nosler Accubond at a little over 3100 fps with 65.0 gr of Vihtavuori N-165 and a Federal 210 primer, and groups under an inch at 100 yards off a benchrest, (frequently well under an inch for 3 shots). While it does kick a little harder than a standard .270 Win, it feels like less than my old 30-06 lightweight carbine with 180 gr bullets. And I believe most elk guides would much rather see a client with a well worn .270 or 30-06 that they can shoot, than a brand new "Mega Magnum" that he has only sighted in because it is so punishing to shoot.
I haven't had the opportunity to take game yet with my .270WSM, but when I do I will let you know how it worked. Others who have used the .270WSM on elk have only reported very positive results, provided properly constructed bullets were used.

haugenna

I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU CANT SHOOT AN ELK ADEQUATELY WITH A 270 OR A 270WSM.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT THERE ARE BETTER CALIBERS FOR ELK OUT THERE.

The reason he knew he hit the vitals is because there was a lung shot and the other guy shot it and hit it in the spine and then one in the neck once the animal was down. They field dressed the animal and there were three holes. Lungs, my friends shot, Spine, which disabled the animal from moving, idiot shot, and neck, idiot shot. He was there when they field dressed the animal, He hit it in the lungs and bedded the bullet in the opposite shoulder. They shot it in the spine and then finished it in the neck. Pretty cut and dry.

2ndtimer

My point still is that the same thing can and has happened with larger, more potent calibers. I understand your point, and it is true that there are more powerful calibers. I hope you take mine that an adequate caliber that can be shot accurately is better than a boomer shot poorly. And unless all three rounds were recovered from the animal, we still don't know for absolute certain who hit where. Particularly if all shots were all fired at long range.

James B

Any lung shot animal with any caliber is going down. It would not matter a lung hit by a 375 H&H or a Lung shot with a 243. The damage is going to be the same. Bigger calibers won't kill on a lung shot any faster than a small caliber. I have killed to many to be told otherwise. However if someone needs a bigger caliber they are out there for the buying.

Goose_Getter

Can someone answer my question? I would think a 270 WSM would be an excellent elk gun, it is more powerful than a 7 mm rem mag and more accurate.

Roskoe

I would say "yes" and "yes" - by a very small margin. If both guns have comparable barrels and are loaded with 150 grain bullets, the .270 WSM is a little faster and the bullet has a little better sectional density. If you shoot 140's or 130's, the WSM is even faster at about the same sectional density. It also seems to have alittle less recoil to boot - although this is subjective on my part, and not based on any sort of quantitative comparison. Accuracy with either can be very good -but the short fat case w/o a belt would give the WSM the nod in that regards as well - at least on paper. In the field, however, you probably wouldn't notice any difference.

stubblejumper

My own chronograph has shown this to be total B.S.You have been reading too much winchester and browning advertising propaganda.The 7mm remmag has more case capacity and a larger bore and if both are loaded to potential the 7mmremmag will produce more velocity with the same bullet weight and therefore more energy making it more powerful.Even the 7mmwsm falls slightly short of the 7mmremmag in real life.I have chronographed the 270wsm and 7mmremmag myself both with 140gr bullets and the 7mmremmag did develop over 100fps more velocity.
As to the theoretical accuracy advantage that the wsm's supposedly hold,it is purely theoretical.The quality of the barrel,the bedding and the load are far more important than the cartridge where accuracy is concerned.A fellow came to our range and spouted the same nonsense about how his 300wsm was more accurate than the 300win mag and all other full length magnums.When I offered to put my 300ultramag up against his 300wsm for a three shot group he smirked about about it because he did not believe that the much heavier recoiling ,much longer cased 300 ultramag could compete with his short cased much milder recoiling 300wsm.He was quite proud of his group which did measure under 1" but the smirk disappeared after my sub .600" group.I offered to go again and he accepted and managed to shoot a group just over .750" but my second group measuring almost exactly 1/2" really discouraged him.I have also had the pleasure to outshot a few other 300wsm's and a couple of 270wsm's with both my 7mmstw's and 300ultramags and I must admit that I enjoy the looks on the faces of their owners who believed that any wsm is more accurate than any of the longer cased magnums.
Not that the wsm's aren't very good cartridges,because I do believe that they are.It's just that they don't live up to the misleading advertising used by winchester and browning to promote them.

James B

From my new Lyman manual there is only 93 fps difference between the 270 Win. and the 270 WSM. that with 150 grain bullets. The 7 Mag shoots the same bullet weight 100 fps faster than the 270 WSM. Not enough to make a practicle difference in the field but it certainly fall short of the 7 Mag.

I do think however that it would make a fine elk gun because I have found that the 270 Win. Does just fine on elk. Accuracy has not much to do with the caliber and I don't buy the hype they sell on superior accuracy over the longer actions. Some may be more accurate but some may be less.