25-06 vs 270
01-06-2014, 07:11 PM
#21
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 30
01-08-2014, 08:55 AM
#23
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,143
Hard to argue w/ the success of either one. One thing you might want to consider is the 25-06 has a little more overbore than the 270 so it might be a harder on barrels, if you do a lot of shooting. Factory fodder is a lot easier to come by in my neck off the woods for a 270.
Recoil between the 2, the 25-06 is milder. Ive shot the Tikka in 270, IMO the recoil is not that bad, but more noticeable than my 243. I don't think any deer, whitetail, muley or otherwise is gonna know the difference between the two.
Me personally id choose the 270, JMO.
Recoil between the 2, the 25-06 is milder. Ive shot the Tikka in 270, IMO the recoil is not that bad, but more noticeable than my 243. I don't think any deer, whitetail, muley or otherwise is gonna know the difference between the two.
Me personally id choose the 270, JMO.
01-08-2014, 09:58 AM
#25
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 2,533
Go to your local stores and look for both boxes of ammo on the shelves.
I know that this past Fall in my area any of the more common cartridges like the .270 were in short supply.
A similar comparison with handgun cartridges is that for a long time in my area you couldn't find a .380, or 9mm round to save yer life, but often the .40S&W's were available.
Last edited by Lunkerdog; 01-08-2014 at 10:09 AM.
01-08-2014, 05:01 PM
#26
Spike
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 16
Both calibers are based on a necked down 30-06. A 25-06 115 gr. bullet has a sectional density of .249. A 270 130 gr. bullet has a sectional density of .242. .215 is considered a minimum for white tail deer.
25-06 120 gr. bullet based on an 8 lb rifle has a recoil energy of 12.5. A 270 130 gr bullet based on an 8 lb rifle has the recoil energy of 16.5.
Both cals. have the penetration. The 270 has a higher recoil fired from the same rifle suggesting it will be harder to place a second shot if required.
The 270 would give you the flexibility to buy heavier gr bullets for larger game.
25-06 120 gr. bullet based on an 8 lb rifle has a recoil energy of 12.5. A 270 130 gr bullet based on an 8 lb rifle has the recoil energy of 16.5.
Both cals. have the penetration. The 270 has a higher recoil fired from the same rifle suggesting it will be harder to place a second shot if required.
The 270 would give you the flexibility to buy heavier gr bullets for larger game.
01-08-2014, 05:31 PM
#27
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 2,533
Both calibers are based on a necked down 30-06.
From the info I've found, both the 30-06, and the .270 "cartridges" (not calibers) were based off of the 30-03 cartridge. I guess that since the 06 was developed about 20 years sooner one could surmise that the .270 was developed from the 06, but in fact both were based off of the 30-03.
You are correct about the 25-06 being a necked down 30-06 cartridge that was considered to be a wildcat until it became standardized by Remington in 1969. That said, all were developed from the original 30-03 platform.
Last edited by Lunkerdog; 01-08-2014 at 05:34 PM.
01-08-2014, 06:12 PM
#28
Spike
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 16
Close, but not quite, tho I may be splitting hairs on this one.
From the info I've found, both the 30-06, and the .270 "cartridges" (not calibers) were based off of the 30-03 cartridge. I guess that since the 06 was developed about 20 years sooner one could surmise that the .270 was developed from the 06, but in fact both were based off of the 30-03.
You are correct about the 25-06 being a necked down 30-06 cartridge that was considered to be a wildcat until it became standardized by Remington in 1969. That said, all were developed from the original 30-03 platform.
From the info I've found, both the 30-06, and the .270 "cartridges" (not calibers) were based off of the 30-03 cartridge. I guess that since the 06 was developed about 20 years sooner one could surmise that the .270 was developed from the 06, but in fact both were based off of the 30-03.
You are correct about the 25-06 being a necked down 30-06 cartridge that was considered to be a wildcat until it became standardized by Remington in 1969. That said, all were developed from the original 30-03 platform.
Cartridge would be correct.
The 270 is based on the 30-03. However 30-06 is considered the parent case. (Don't ask me why)
Regardless I think recoil might be a key consideration for choice.
01-08-2014, 07:14 PM
#29
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 2,533
Also, I do tend to be a bit fussy on the caliber/cartridge thing... Sorry, sometimes I just can't help myself... That said, I've made the same mistake myself many times before I started to reload... The terminology in the hunting community varies from person to person... I probably shouldn't be so fussy, but like I said...
Last edited by Lunkerdog; 01-08-2014 at 07:22 PM.
01-12-2014, 04:16 PM
#30
Fork Horn
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Allenton Wis.
Posts: 186
I saw both boxes on the shelf. The .270 Win was 18-19 bucks. The 25-06 was 26 bucks. If you reload go with th 25-06. Here is why. I got my son a Tikka t3 light in .270 win. It kicks like a mule. I had a migrane before it was sighted in and i hear a part wears out in it with the bigger calibers. We bought a new pad and it seems better now.