270 or 308
- Thread starter ryan lewis
- Start date
Envillegc1
Well-Known Member
6.5 by 55, simples
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
lets forget the recoil rubbish eh gents.
Chuck says...308 recoil 150 grains = 15.8 fp`s
.270 recoil 150 grains 17 fp`s
l
Chuck says...308 recoil 150 grains = 15.8 fp`s
.270 recoil 150 grains 17 fp`s
l
The difference is much smaller than most people think. 3 inches at 300m or there abouts. 1 MOA.
If you shot a group of 5 shots at 300m with a 270 and the same with a 308, most people would produce a continuous group. The variation introduced by shooter and set up is almost always greater than the difference in drop.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
You’ll never get anyone on here to admit to that, everyone is basically a world class sniper
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
from another place
And the Winner Is…If you’ve been following the Caliber Battle series, you know that choosing a winner is never easy. This is the toughest choice yet. Both the .308 Win. and the .270 Win. offer deadly ballistics in shootable cartridges and rifles. The .270 Win. shoots flatter and hits harder, but for an all-around hunting caliber, I’m going with the .308 Win. That’s not because the .30-caliber cartridge is better, but because it’s more versatile. I like all the bullet and rifle options as well as the availability of practice ammunition. The .308 Win. is damn hard to beat, but the .270 Win. almost beat it.
Overall Winner: .308 Win.
And the Winner Is…If you’ve been following the Caliber Battle series, you know that choosing a winner is never easy. This is the toughest choice yet. Both the .308 Win. and the .270 Win. offer deadly ballistics in shootable cartridges and rifles. The .270 Win. shoots flatter and hits harder, but for an all-around hunting caliber, I’m going with the .308 Win. That’s not because the .30-caliber cartridge is better, but because it’s more versatile. I like all the bullet and rifle options as well as the availability of practice ammunition. The .308 Win. is damn hard to beat, but the .270 Win. almost beat it.
Overall Winner: .308 Win.
They will both kill all uk deer if you do your bit. The biggest consideration I would say in these days is ammunition availability, some places you have to use non lead and factory ammunition, if you’re going to be in such a place then go into your local suppliers and see what they have the most of on the shelf and the cost.
I have a 308 and a 270 love both.
Generally use my 308 on smaller animals although more that capable on the larger species. But Generally my go to is the 270 use it on roe and not a lot of damage. Use the rite bullet and shot placement and the damage is minimal. Obviously you will have people giving you lists of pros and con for both.
Best would be try and have a go at both see which one you prefer.
But as mentioned both guns more that capable.
Generally use my 308 on smaller animals although more that capable on the larger species. But Generally my go to is the 270 use it on roe and not a lot of damage. Use the rite bullet and shot placement and the damage is minimal. Obviously you will have people giving you lists of pros and con for both.
Best would be try and have a go at both see which one you prefer.
But as mentioned both guns more that capable.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Find a rifle and scope combination that you like, that fits well and is comfortable. And make sure it’s comfortable in all positions including prone. Then look what calibre it is. I would split the difference between 270 and 308 and go for a 7x57.
And now that Scotland has dropped min bullet weight to 80gn there are plenty of good non toxic monolithic bullet options that work well, and given the performance of a monolithic bullet they will have all the penetration you need to put a decent wound channel through the vitals of any red deer you meet.
But I see you wish to keep your 243 as a dedicated night vision rifle.
And now that Scotland has dropped min bullet weight to 80gn there are plenty of good non toxic monolithic bullet options that work well, and given the performance of a monolithic bullet they will have all the penetration you need to put a decent wound channel through the vitals of any red deer you meet.
But I see you wish to keep your 243 as a dedicated night vision rifle.
Andy Mauthe
Well-Known Member
All true. But the question asked originally wasn’t “which of these two calibers is crap”. The question was which one would you pick of the two. I don’t own a .308 because I consider it a slightly compromised 30-06. It almost as good as a 30-06 ballistically speaking, but it all ways ballistically, it is lesser than the 30-06 from which it was born. The reason that the US military developed the .308 was to provide “similar” ballistic performance to the 30-06 in a slightly smaller and lighter package. Thus allowing the soldiers to carry more ammunition for the same weight than the 30-06. They achieved that goal. However, that advantage in weight savings really only applies to a soldier or a group of soldiers carrying huge quantities of ammunition. On the scale of the hunter, we can all agree that this weight savings is not applicable. So since the .270 is really just a 30-06, necked down to .27 caliber, and operating at a higher pressure than the parent cartridge it achieves higher velocities, flatter trajectory, and generally uses bullets with higher B.C. than the 30 caliber. The only real advantage of the .308 as compared to the .270 is that the former can use heavier bullets than the latter. But it does so at lower velocity and more drop. So in my opinion based on the above, the .270 is superior to the .308 for the purposes that the OP intends to use it for. No one asked which do you prefer, and by how much. There doesn’t have to be an enormous difference between two things to say that one is above the other. And that’s what I’m stating here. I don’t consider myself a “sniper” but if called upon to make a shot on game at 400 or maybe 500 yards, the .270 gives the shooter an advantage. That’s why in the US, when hunters have gone out west to hunt large game, or medium sized game at distance, they’ve historically picked the .270 over a .308. There is a difference and it’s quantifiable.
^ In a nutshell.
With modern powder and a good set up, the difference between 308 and 30-06 is so marginal as makes no difference.
The differences between them all are so small that for most hunters in most scenarios, they could choose one at random and it would have absolutely no effect on the outcome at all.
Don’t get me wrong: I like them both, a lot and shot with both for years. I shoot other things now, but if I was ever forced to use one of 308 or 270 for the rest of my life, it really wouldn’t bother me.
Andy Mauthe
Well-Known Member
I guess, with modern laser rangefinders, and the ability to immediately and accurately know a target’s range, we could put the 45-70 into this mix. It has certainly killed very large animals at extreme ranges in its long history. So much so that it nearly caused the extinction of the American Bison. Or we could go even further and say that you can throw a flintlock rifled muzzleloader into the mix. It certainly had the proven ability to provide food for our forefathers when it was the newest advancement in firearms technology. A difference is indeed a difference. And if you use the correct measuring device, it can be measured. If someone told me that I must use a .308 and nothing else, I guess I would use it. But fortunately we have more options now in caliber’s and rifles etc than ever and many of the newest ones have been developed using technology that didn’t exist when the .270 or the .308 were developed. And when looked at very myopically the difference between one and another might seem to “make no difference” when you back up a little it is in fact these small incremental “differences” that add up to all of the choices we have in this regard. And I agree both the .270 and .308 are good choices, otherwise they wouldn’t continue to exist commercially. But again the original question wasn’t “are these two calibers good”.
In the book "Modern Roe Stalking", Richard Prior states typical recoil energy of 16.5 ft/lbs for .270 and 22 ft/lbs for .308
(Although the 308, at 6.5lbs, was at that time typically a lighter rifle than the 270 at 8lbs average weight, which may account for some of the difference)
Andy Mauthe
Well-Known Member
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
Andy Mauthe
Well-Known Member
Although Richard Prior was a really funny comedian
Namman
Well-Known Member
Just get a 6.8 x 65
Superb cartridge, been around for nearly a 100 years.
Jack O'connor's favourite.
Do you really expect any self-respecting British stalker to accept the word of some Yank over the word of Richard Prior?
Similar threads
