Is less gun sometimes more?

[timbrayford]

Well folks. Been using a .270 for years, since day one really. And for my distances, it’s point, shoot and usually drop on the spot,(if not, then very close).

The old man wanted a rifle for the occasional stalk and I suggested a 6.5x55. I’ve pinched it a few times. It’s accurate, mild recoil,(not that the .270 is bad unless you’re plinking) and the deer drop nearly as well. Possibly marginally less bang flop but there’s nothing in it.


Spoken to a few PH’s recently and for the usual stuff, they’re just using .270’s and .308’s.


Have I missed a trick by not going down the .243 or 6.5 route at the start? Lots of folk have used a .243 for reds for years. I have to say, a factory 6.5 creed or T3 in 6.5 prc does seem like it would tick all boxes.


Anyone down scaled in the past? I have a .222 and refuse to get rid of it because it’s just a delight but I’m getting towards the idea of one rimfire and one,(or in this case 2) smaller CF being appealing.

I've gone the other way. I'm not into all this woke save the world nonsense but Barnes ttsx give brilliantly tight groups through my rifle. However copper is fine on the smaller deer in 243 but slightly inadequate on fallow upwards, so I've gone to 270

 

[Heym SR20]

Well folks. Been using a .270 for years, since day one really. And for my distances, it’s point, shoot and usually drop on the spot,(if not, then very close).

The old man wanted a rifle for the occasional stalk and I suggested a 6.5x55. I’ve pinched it a few times. It’s accurate, mild recoil,(not that the .270 is bad unless you’re plinking) and the deer drop nearly as well. Possibly marginally less bang flop but there’s nothing in it.


Spoken to a few PH’s recently and for the usual stuff, they’re just using .270’s and .308’s.


Have I missed a trick by not going down the .243 or 6.5 route at the start? Lots of folk have used a .243 for reds for years. I have to say, a factory 6.5 creed or T3 in 6.5 prc does seem like it would tick all boxes.


Anyone down scaled in the past? I have a .222 and refuse to get rid of it because it’s just a delight but I’m getting towards the idea of one rimfire and one,(or in this case 2) smaller CF being appealing.

I would be very careful before going down this rabbit hole. Your 270 works well and does everything you need. If it’s not broken don’t try and fix it.

To change the rifle will cost at least £1,000.

And for what result. You point the rifle at a deer, squeeze trigger, it falls over, or goes a short way and falls over.

I would suggest the differences are not so much the cartridge but the set up of the rifle and choice of bullet.

I had a shot of 6.5 CM the other day. Fecking horrible as I could not get away from the scope, which had nice flip up aluminium scope covers to add insult to injury. Nowt wrong with cartridge, rifle or setup - it just didn’t fit me.

I have had issues with 243 in the past with bullets over expanding and not penetrating through to the vitals on red deer. I was shooting the RWS 100gn softpoint which is very soft. Using a bonded or monolithic bullet the 243 is good for most things.

Recoil - it is one of those things that really shows up poor fit and poor technique. On a well fitted and set up rifle with good technique, recoil is not an issue and not noticeable when you shoot in the field.

 

[Dunwaters]

I have both, and there definitely is a difference. The 270 both hits noticeably harder and kicks a bit more.
For the 3 bigger deer that margin is worthwhile for me, especially on stags.
I use copper in both, 130Gr in the .270 and 120 in the 6.5, both rounds tend to exit, but I mostly use the 6.5 for sika hinds and calves and I neck shoot whenever possible.

 

[twoseventy]

Well folks. Been using a .270 for years, since day one really. And for my distances, it’s point, shoot and usually drop on the spot,(if not, then very close).

The old man wanted a rifle for the occasional stalk and I suggested a 6.5x55. I’ve pinched it a few times. It’s accurate, mild recoil,(not that the .270 is bad unless you’re plinking) and the deer drop nearly as well. Possibly marginally less bang flop but there’s nothing in it.


Spoken to a few PH’s recently and for the usual stuff, they’re just using .270’s and .308’s.


Have I missed a trick by not going down the .243 or 6.5 route at the start? Lots of folk have used a .243 for reds for years. I have to say, a factory 6.5 creed or T3 in 6.5 prc does seem like it would tick all boxes.


Anyone down scaled in the past? I have a .222 and refuse to get rid of it because it’s just a delight but I’m getting towards the idea of one rimfire and one,(or in this case 2) smaller CF being appealing.

I started out with .270 as my first centrefire as well and have no regrets and currently on my second rifle. I'm currently using 110g Barnes TTSX which are apparently a bit softer on the shoulder and almost laser like. I can't say i've noticed the slight drop in recoil, but little drop over the first 200 yards helps with confidence on making snap decisions.

I think you can achieve a lot more than you might have considered with your current rifle. While there isn't the bullet choice of say the 6.5/7mm or 30 cal options for .270, there is still some good offerings out there. If you want to stretch its legs, its worth having a look at the 150 nosler acubond long range for excellent BC, but realistically how far do you plan on shooting? Maybe dropping bullet weight might put you in the same ball park as a slightly "softer" calibre..

 

[Wmjas]

A great example of more being less is that a 7mm Rem Mag uses 40% more powder to push the same weight pill 10% faster than a 7mm-08.

6.5PRC and .270 are similar yes but remember that due to the twist rate the PRC can stabilise a wider range of more modern and better penetrating projectiles. They both suffer from needing long barrels to get the best out of them whereas anything based on a .308 case is inherently superior in a short barrel (why this is the case I have never got to the bottom of).

My point is regardless of calibre I have come to realise that being able to comfortably practice with a rifle that fits you is worth more than killing power to a certain extent. When I was guiding we always were more relaxed when someone turned up with a worn .243 than when someone turned up with a custom built .900 Massive Magnum as you could almost guarantee it hadn’t been shot any more than was needed to sight it in and even then barely. As one old boy said to me, “you can kill a buffalo with a .22 and a mouse with a .500NE but I would recommend trying either, find something you like and stick with it…my only problem is that I’ve found lots I like!”

 

[finnbear270]

I loved my .270 ........., but I could never forgive its muzzle flip, the sound of its report echoing around a hillside was a memorable and enjoyable event (before the moderator thing), stuff was bang flop ... 130grain Partitions (Nosler never made a bad bullet), but the PRC is a world away, it is a Magnum cartridge but without the drawbacks, How did they do that? .............

 

[Bowland blades]

Not bashing CM at all - I have one and shoot all the deer species with it.

But having had a .270 and now using a 6.5PRC as well, I do notice a difference.

Never used a 6.5 PRC , shot plenty deer with 270 there is very little if anything wrong with that regards killing deer . . TBF everything legal gets the job done and the cartridges allowed made sure of that . I had a 243 for decades the lack in bullet mass i feel was totally mitigated by the low recoil and higher speed . Folks told me it wasn't a good choice for rutting stags but i did some real big Sika rutting here at home, big fallow in forestry. Have so much faith in the 243 I recently re-added the slot but i will go fast twist

 

[old 30-06]

Wildfowler.250.........I think you are missing a trick. Years advance upon us all, but there are ways round it. Go down in bullet weight, and load them lightly. I have managed to snaffle a reasonable amount of Hodgdon's H4895, and I load to the start weight in the book. Yes, I am loosing up to 250fps, but the recoil is very much reduced. It allows you to carry on as before, with what you have already got.

 

[Dhindes]

Fun thing with rifle calibers is that we all have favorites but at the end of the day most do what we need. I have 9.3x62 for boar - but have also used it for Roe with no excess damage. Have a 7x64 for Reds but have used it on boar. Have a 243 - which I love - but thought it might be a bit light for copper so justified a 6.5x57, which I have used on roe to boar. I probably only need one of the above but …….
The one I need confidence in is a 222 rem. I love it and it is more accurate than me but when it comes to Roe I get cold feet and reach for the 243 or 6.5. I guess I should trust it.

 

[finnbear270]

Fun thing with rifle calibers is that we all have favorites but at the end of the day most do what we need. I have 9.3x62 for boar - but have also used it for Roe with no excess damage. Have a 7x64 for Reds but have used it on boar. Have a 243 - which I love - but thought it might be a bit light for copper so justified a 6.5x57, which I have used on roe to boar. I probably only need one of the above but …….
The one I need confidence in is a 222 rem. I love it and it is more accurate than me but when it comes to Roe I get cold feet and reach for the 243 or 6.5. I guess I should trust it.

Waiting on a .222 barrel for a build, then I can retire the .25-06 Badger / Fox basher, ... too much boom at night.

 

[VSS]

I loved my .270 ........., but I could never forgive its muzzle flip, the sound of its report echoing around a hillside was a memorable and enjoyable event (before the moderator thing), stuff was bang flop ... 130grain Partitions (Nosler never made a bad bullet), but the PRC is a world away, it is a Magnum cartridge but without the drawbacks, How did they do that? .............

Out of interest, were you shooting the 270 off a bipod, or sticks / bag / highseat rail etc?
I found the muzzle flip a bit annoying when using a bipod, but since ditching the bipod I barely notice it, particularly when shooting off quad sticks.

 

[finnbear270]

Out of interest, were you shooting the 270 off a bipod, or sticks / bag / highseat rail etc?
I found the muzzle flip a bit annoying when using a bipod, but since ditching the bipod I barely notice it, particularly when shooting off quad sticks.

In all positions and support situations, They are just naturally feisty, I never thought they kicked much, just a little bit like an unbroken stallion.

 

[VSS]

In all positions and support situations, They are just naturally feisty, I never thought they kicked much, just a little bit like an unbroken stallion.

I've just come back into the house after zeroing mine. It flipped a bit on the first shot (probably because I was trying to watch the horses in the next field out of the corner of my eye, to see how they were going to react, so wasn't perhaps quite so steady as I should have been), but for all subsequent shots it was very well behaved (as were the horses).

I've never shot a moderated 270, but I should imagine that the addition of a mod would calm it down considerably.

 

[Smellydog]

Never ever found 270 an issue on firing.
Just hold the for end well. Not a death grip but firmly. It takes a lot of recoil out.

 

[Utectok]

“ At 300 yards, that difference between a .270 and a creedmoor has narrowed to just 83 ft-lbs. By the time we get to 500 yards, the 6.5 Creedmoor is now traveling with more energy, with an additional 34 ft-lbs over the . 270.”

 

[tim@tcs]

Have I missed a trick by not going down the .243 or 6.5 route at the start? Lots of folk have used a .243 for reds for years. I have to say, a factory 6.5 creed or T3 in 6.5 prc does seem like it would tick all boxes.

I started with a 6.5 x 55 full stocked CZ as my daily go to rifle and had a .303 because I could.
I’ve still got that CZ

 

[Smellydog]

“ At 300 yards, that difference between a .270 and a creedmoor has narrowed to just 83 ft-lbs. By the time we get to 500 yards, the 6.5 Creedmoor is now traveling with more energy, with an additional 34 ft-lbs over the . 270.”

Nothing in it then...

 

[Keith Edmunds]

Regarding muzzle flip of the .270, of course a lot depends on stock design and weight. My Parker Hale .270 was by far the lightest CF rifle that I have ever owned. Beech stock with very narrow fore-end. Recoil didn't bother me but the muzzle was very jumpy.

See attached with Ron Spomer's .270/6.5 table

 

[Heym SR20]

The other part of simplicity is the optics and lack of other accoutrements. A simple scope makes life very easy. No buggering about with setting the parallex, clicks, eyepiece, zoom etc. see deer get steady and shoot. And at 6x muzzle jump etc is irrelevant especially if you make the first shot count.

 

[tim@tcs]

I’ve a lovely built Mauser in the cupboard! Simple QD Zeiss scope no mod nothing flashy and traditional stock. It’s a 308 so out of fashion but built on a military receiver in the 70’s to a calibre that was readily available in Africa at the time!
I may pop it up sometime but it shoots lovely
Found it:
The rifle was made by a man named Watson. He was an apprentice at and then worked for Boss, the famous LONDON gun maker, and became a qualified gun smith. He continued with his gun smithery from his Glos home, repairing and altering guns and making a few to order. The original owner chose a.308 because at the time it was the standard NATO round and that would ensure that the ammunition would be made for a long time to come and be ready available. Also versatile for different types of game depending on what weight bullet used. It took about a year to be made. Nice Zeiss sight never the less. The medallion on the stock is a silver 6d. The engraving done in the Jewelry 1/4 of Birmingham.