Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: .270 Win to .270 WSM

  1. #1

    .270 Win to .270 WSM

    Anyone ever moved from .270 to .270 WSM ?
    If so, why ?
    What are the noticeable differences ?
    Has it been worth it ?
    Was .270 not suitable ?
    Question only applicable in this instance to UK deer, and stalkers who had .270 previously.

  2. #2
    I didn't, wouldn't, but then, why would anyone consider such a move? Ballistically speaking, of course. We all have been schooled enough by now to understand how important it is to lose that 3/4" of bolt travel when you go from the long action to the shortaction. ~Muir

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Muir View Post
    I didn't, wouldn't, but then, why would anyone consider such a move? Ballistically speaking, of course. We all have been schooled enough by now to understand how important it is to lose that 3/4" of bolt travel when you go from the long action to the shortaction. ~Muir
    Thats a point Muir... never thought of bolt travel!..
    Cheers
    S.

  4. #4
    I was kidding. I have never noticed the bolt throw on a rifle during the heat of battle. Some people will spend thousands of dollars to get a short action. All for a few ounces of weight.

    As to the 270 WSM. I have noticed that the sales of rifles in these WSM (and WSSM) chamberings are falling off. The dregs remain on US dealer's racks. Brass is selling but the rifles are a dead issue. These were Winchester's last ditch effort to save their company: coming out with a new and "better" cartridge chambered for their rifles. It is a sales technique that has worked for them for 100 years but in this internet age, couldn't get the job done before people wised up.

    I am not saying that they are bad -tho the WSSM versions are troublesome feeding in come denominations- but just not worth trading in a good 270 for. I still suspect that brass supplies will become an issue. Just an observation from this side of the pond.~Muir

  5. #5
    I can’t see a lot of value with swapping from 270 to 270WSM, the WSM ballistic advantage only starts to show with heavier 150/160 gn bullets, and I own a WSSM. If you don’t already own a 270 and are coming at it with a blank piece of paper and have found a 270 WSM rifle that you really like at the right price then I wouldn’t be put off by it being a WSM.

    One last point this assumes you are a reloader, if not stick to a 270 win.

    ATB

    Tahr

  6. #6
    The WSM's are not a bad idea, they work perfectly well if you can be bothered with them. The 270wsm seems to throw a 140gr bullet at the speed a 270win can chuck a 130gr, which is to say, too fast for most UK stalkers.

    If you have the kit and the talent to shoot at longer ranges, 400 yards plus, there might be some merit in owning one.
    Brian.

    Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you......

  7. #7
    The main advantage with the WSM's is that the felt recoil is significantly less than the conventional old world cartridges.

    I am speaking from direct experience of owning both .270WSM's and .300WSM's. I have owned 2 x .270 win's also and it is one of my all time favourite cartridges. My theory in the less percieved recoil area is down to the short fat powder stack. That is my theory only I might add but it is one that makes sense to me as the difference was definitely not a figment of my imagination.

    You are also getting slightly more horse power with the .270 WSM but not enough in my opinion to make a practical amount of difference in the field. So more horse power with less felt recoil.

    You will not be dissapointed if you get a WSM but the conventional older cartridges are superb too (just to confuse you more than you perhaps already are).

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by jon2 View Post
    The main advantage with the WSM's is that the felt recoil is significantly less than the conventional old world cartridges.

    I am speaking from direct experience of owning both .270WSM's and .300WSM's. I have owned 2 x .270 win's also and it is one of my all time favourite cartridges. My theory in the less percieved recoil area is down to the short fat powder stack. That is my theory only I might add but it is one that makes sense to me as the difference was definitely not a figment of my imagination.

    You are also getting slightly more horse power with the .270 WSM but not enough in my opinion to make a practical amount of difference in the field. So more horse power with less felt recoil.

    You will not be dissapointed if you get a WSM but the conventional older cartridges are superb too (just to confuse you more than you perhaps already are).

    I'll bet it had far more to do with the stock and fit of the different rifles in question . As I have said before the only WSM I would even consider looking at would be the .325 the others I have no time, room for or even interest in. I just saw them as the attempt to re-invent the wheel and pander to the short action brigade . But that's another story.


    I have also yet to find the mystery heavy recoil that the .270 Winchester is famed my first full bore rifle was a BSA CF2 Stutzen in .270 Winchester which still resides in my cabinet and since then I have added a few more. My main use stalking rifle at present is a BSA Majestic Featherweight in .270 of 59 vintage that weighs 7lbs 12ozs ready to go:-




    As you can see. This rifle also spends a lot of time at the range on load testing and just practice and even prone recoil is not an issue. Others who have tried it are scared at first due to the .270's "evil recoil" reputation and on being handed the rifle due t oit's light weight are dreading the recoil and expecting to get the snot knocked out fo them . Watching their faces when it does not happen is really amusing and the second shot is quickly taken .

    Some have to be persuaded to even try it due to the recoil they have been told the .270 Winchester dishes out .

    Oh and my shoulder bruises easily .

  9. #9
    Would certainly second the missing recoil. I use fed.fusion 130 in the 270 I bought fron CD. Flinched first two shots looking for the recoil that never materialised. I take it the mumpers are the bipod brigade that rests the barrel on their shoulder rather than hold it cos the recoil is way under that of a twelve bore by a long way,
    Jim

  10. #10
    If people stopped buying light weight rifles with fiberglass stocks the recoil would probably be tolerable. I have never found recoil to be a factor in 30-06 class rifles unless there was a stock design issue. I once had a pre-war Remington Model 30 Express in 30-06 that kicked the living hades out of me but it has a severe drop at the comb; almost 1/2" below the line of the bore. The rifle tried to recoil up and over my shoulder at every shot. It soon became a 280 in a slim piece of Mesquite at weighed about 7 pounds, naked. Nice to shoot and very accurate.~Muir

Similar Threads

  1. Powder for 270 win
    By robbo'srifle in forum Ammunition, Reloading & Ballistics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-05-2011, 14:23
  2. For Sale Brand new in bag .270 WSM Remington (R+P) brass
    By jon2 in forum Reloading
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-10-2010, 06:26
  3. For Sale 270 Win brass...
    By AndrewS in forum Firearms
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 29-08-2010, 18:10
  4. .270 or .270 wsm
    By the scudd in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 22-02-2009, 18:42
  5. 6.5x 55 sewd or 270 wsm
    By Sam in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 13:46

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •