270 wsm

[codfish]

Is the 270 wsm enough for big game such as moose and what rannge is good for

[RocketRider]

The 270 wssm should be fine for moose out to about 400 yards. That being said, so is the standard 270 win.
The only difference is a couple of hundred fps with the same bullet weights on a fairly thin skinned anamal. A well placed shot with either would do a fine job, and the wssm ammo is much more expensive and harder to find.
Although some may argue the point, the standatd 270 has been around for years and is fine for elk. Besides, you won't knock your boots off every time you pull the trigger.

RR~

[WSM Man]

You'll get a bunch of answers on this, but I've got a friend who took a Moose with a 243Win, one shot, as it's all about shot placement, but I say a 243 may be on the minimum side. Plenty of Moose are taken with a regular 270Win, and the 270WSM is even better. Many swear by the 30-06 as being the best all around hunting cartridge for North American game, and you won't get argument against that from me, but look at these ballistics off of Remington's site:


This is the 30-06 150gr, 165gr and 180gr.
Energy (ft-lbs) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
150 Core-Lokt 2820 2305 1868 1498 1188 933
165 Power Point 2872 2352 1909 1534 1220 963
180 Core-Lokt 2913 2457 2059 1713 1415 1161

This is the 270WSM 130gr and 150gr.
Energy (ft-lbs) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
130 Core-Lokt 3114 2573 2114 1724 1392 1112
180 AccuTip 3325 2941 2595 2283 2002 1748


As you can see, the 150gr 270WSM has 400ft-lbs over the 180gr 30-06, and over 500ft-lbs over the 150gr 30-06 at the muzzle, and retain it down stream..

Drop at 500yds for the 150gr 270WSM is 28 inches. Drop for the 180gr 30-06 at 500yds is 52 inches, 49 inches for the 150gr 30-06 round, and look at how much more energy the 150gr 270WSM is carrying over the 180 30-06 at 500yds.

A more similar comparison for a 270WSM is with a 7mm Remington Magnum, and the 270WSM is slightly more powerful than it.

I'm not knocking the 30-06 or 7mm Rem Mag, just showing the 270WSM is plenty capable of being a Moose gun.

[Scott7m]

i'd personally go with a regular 270 over the wsm

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

You'll get a bunch of answers on this, but I've got a friend who took a Moose with a 243Win, one shot, as it's all about shot placement, but I say a 243 may be on the minimum side. Plenty of Moose are taken with a regular 270Win, and the 270WSM is even better. Many swear by the 30-06 as being the best all around hunting cartridge for North American game, and you won't get argument against that from me, but look at these ballistics off of Remington's site:


This is the 30-06 150gr, 165gr and 180gr.
Energy (ft-lbs) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
150 Core-Lokt 2820 2305 1868 1498 1188 933
165 Power Point 2872 2352 1909 1534 1220 963
180 Core-Lokt 2913 2457 2059 1713 1415 1161

This is the 270WSM 130gr and 150gr.
Energy (ft-lbs) Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
130 Core-Lokt 3114 2573 2114 1724 1392 1112
180 AccuTip 3325 2941 2595 2283 2002 1748


As you can see, the 150gr 270WSM has 400ft-lbs over the 180gr 30-06, and over 500ft-lbs over the 150gr 30-06 at the muzzle, and retain it down stream..

Drop at 500yds for the 150gr 270WSM is 28 inches. Drop for the 180gr 30-06 at 500yds is 52 inches, 49 inches for the 150gr 30-06 round, and look at how much more energy the 150gr 270WSM is carrying over the 180 30-06 at 500yds.

A more similar comparison for a 270WSM is with a 7mm Remington Magnum, and the 270WSM is slightly more powerful than it.

I'm not knocking the 30-06 or 7mm Rem Mag, just showing the 270WSM is plenty capable of being a Moose gun.

ft lbs of energy has nothing to do with killing power. that is determined by a bullets design & constuction, & what it does once on the inside of the animal.

[WSM Man]

A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER

To say that energy has nothing to do with it is kinda absurd. Bullet design is crucial, but bullet weight and velocity determine "killing power" if there is such a thing (other than bullet placement). If you take the best designed 22LR and shoot an animal, it will not do as much damage as say the worst designed .30-30 or 30-06. The bullet weight and velocity of the high powered rifles make the difference, not bullet design, and the impact energy's of bullet weight and velocity is read in ft-lbs.

By your post I can conclude that if I have the exact same type of 12g rounds, one is 2 3/4, and the other is a 3 1/2 inch Magnum, then regardless of distance they will have exactly the same effect on any animal I shoot, right? Of course not, even though they are the same design, the velocity has changed, so the energy has changed.

Your "killing power" is really just energy, which is determined by weight and velocity. When You say that it is "determined by bullet design & construction, & what is does once on the inside of the animal" I agree, but modern bullet exspansion is designed to work best corresponding with specific velocities, which again directly relate to energy, read in ft-lbs.

If energy didn't matter, and it was all about "bullet design & construction, & what is does once on the inside of the animal" we would hunt Grizzly Bear and Elephants with the best made .243 bullets, same ourselves from the harsh recoil and extra expense of ammo for a .375H&H Mag or 458Lott. But it doesn't work like that, to safely hunt those animals, you need the extra weight of the big game rounds, which increases ENERGY.
Can it be done with a .243? Yes, but we could all ride bicycles to work instead of drive too.
I'm not trying to be smart, or start a caliber war, I'm just saying that energy (ft-lbs) plays a big part in a guns performance, and velocity, which directly influences energy, and weight, which directly influences energy,plays a major factor in bullet performance. the combination of the two is read in ft-lbs.

In my post I eluded to the fact that a 243, 30-06, or 7mm Mag would all work, and only tried to show that when compared to more accepted calibers for Moose, the 270WSM stacked up just fine.

The orginal poster's question was not -which gun is best or would you use, but is the 270WSM enough gun, which it is.
Again like I said in my original post, this is all secondary to shot placement, but a 270WSM will work just fine for Moose

With Respect
WSM Man

[stalkingbear]

In the right hands and with proper bullet selection,the .270 wsm is plenty of gun for ANY deer/elk/moose EVER to walk the earth. I would by all means use a stoutly constructed,controlled expansion "premium" bullet but they are easy to find for this cartridge almost anywhere-even wal-mart! Quit worrying about your rifle and get out,practice,and share pics of your successful hunt with us-if not the meat:p:D.

[steelslinger]

Wonder what Jack O'conner would have thought of the 270wsm. I think he might have traded in his beloved 270 for one of them.

[westkybanded]

A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER


By your post I can conclude that if I have the exact same type of 12g rounds, one is 2 3/4, and the other is a 3 1/2 inch Magnum, then regardless of distance they will have exactly the same effect on any animal I shoot, right? Of course not, even though they are the same design, the velocity has changed, so the energy has changed.



Same type of 12ga rounds? I.e. same pellet size, and same velocity?

Yes, they will have the same effect on an animal. The only thing a 3.5" gun is giving you is more pellets. The pellets don't hit any harder or go any further.

I guess you could look at it like hitting something with ALL the pellets, then yes, a 1.5 oz. load will hit harder than a 3/4oz load, but all things equal it's the same thing.

Just like a #6 pellet out of a .410 is the same as a #6 pellet out of a 10ga if they're going the same speed.

[Gnarly]

Amen,steelslinger!

Rocketrider,recoil is less than the .270 Win.Considerably less.We (brothers & I) have 2 of each flavor.Barely more recoil than the .25WSSM,not a whole lot more than the .243WSSM...I know they were (are?) considered a commercial failure, but it's easy to get hooked on the shortfat cartridges.

Powerwise,I strongly agree with WSMMan, and the facts he posted here.

And had to go back and read stalkingbear's post again-especially his closing sentence-enjoyed the common sense and humor.

For all of you who are interested in WSM/WSSM rifles, there is a helpful forum dedicated to 'em....handloaders/gunsmiths/wildcatters/varmint hunters/deer & elk hunters/benchrest shooters/old outlaw mercenary biker types.Who'll use their QuickLoad program to help you fine-tune a handload....some of them are friends with Chris Long, who developed the 'Optimum Barrel Time' theory as related to handloading.(I'm still trying to wrap my brain cells around that heavy info- all I know is: it works!)

And the Forum was started by a fine disabled gentleman who shoots his .270 WSM from a wheelchair, by biting on a special triggering device!

www.wssmzone.com (http://www.wssmzone.com)

Usually,if I'm not here,I'm over there.

Tell 'em Gnarly sent you!

[hootowlman]

Hey, I have been looking at a new gun for my self also and was thinking about the 270 or the 270 wsm. What answered this question for me was price on shells I was going to buy the wsm until they told me that the cheapest box of shells was $30 up to like $50. I shoot alot so I can't see spending that on shells and who knows if they are going to be available from what I have heard which mean the price will only go up. A box of 270 shells is like $16 and are in no shortage so I know I am gonna go with the 270. As far as one vs the other I have hunted with a 270 for 10 years and all I will say is one shot one kill. Every deer I have shot with a 270 has not gone more than about 10 yards most never moved out of their tracks.

[WSM Man]

Same type of 12ga rounds? I.e. same pellet size, and same velocity?

Yes, they will have the same effect on an animal. The only thing a 3.5" gun is giving you is more pellets. The pellets don't hit any harder or go any further.

I guess you could look at it like hitting something with ALL the pellets, then yes, a 1.5 oz. load will hit harder than a 3/4oz load, but all things equal it's the same thing.

Just like a #6 pellet out of a .410 is the same as a #6 pellet out of a 10ga if they're going the same speed.

westkybanded,
I'm sorry but that isn't really correct or the point I was making. The same round with the same shot/pellet size, but obviously not the same velocity, because one is a regular 2 3/4 inch, one is a 3 1/2 inch Magnum, like I stated in the earlier post. Yes, the 3 1/2 will have more shot shells (wieght in ozs/gms), and also higher velocity (usually about 150-200fps) by most ballistic charts. That is why it isn't the same, the added velocity (and wieght) adds energy! A Magnum round does not have the same velocity as a standard round, a point I was purposely making to show the difference, assuming that it would known. Dead is Dead though, shot placement.

I do agree that #6 pellet is #6 pellet, regardles of what guage it comes from, but changing the velocity of that #6 will change the energy that #6 is carrying.

Remember, all a Magnum is by definition, is an increase in velocity. Use to be it was generally accepted that Magnum meant "above 3,000 fps", and that still holds true to most high power rifles, but now it is also accepted to use it for an increase in velocity which adds a ballistic improvement.

That's really the only difference in the 270Win and the 270WSM, same diameter and weight bullets, but the velocity increased to over 3,000fps, which gives it increased energy, which is all I'm trying to say.

Now, I agree with the different posters on that a 270Win would work fine, and the ammo is much cheaper compared to a 270WSM, but I'll say it again, per the original question a 270WSM will work just fine, better even.

Again, no disrespect to no one, I am enjoing the discussion/debate!!

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER

To say that energy has nothing to do with it is kinda absurd. Bullet design is crucial, but bullet weight and velocity determine "killing power" if there is such a thing (other than bullet placement). If you take the best designed 22LR and shoot an animal, it will not do as much damage as say the worst designed .30-30 or 30-06. The bullet weight and velocity of the high powered rifles make the difference, not bullet design, and the impact energy's of bullet weight and velocity is read in ft-lbs.

By your post I can conclude that if I have the exact same type of 12g rounds, one is 2 3/4, and the other is a 3 1/2 inch Magnum, then regardless of distance they will have exactly the same effect on any animal I shoot, right? Of course not, even though they are the same design, the velocity has changed, so the energy has changed.

Your "killing power" is really just energy, which is determined by weight and velocity. When You say that it is "determined by bullet design & construction, & what is does once on the inside of the animal" I agree, but modern bullet exspansion is designed to work best corresponding with specific velocities, which again directly relate to energy, read in ft-lbs.

If energy didn't matter, and it was all about "bullet design & construction, & what is does once on the inside of the animal" we would hunt Grizzly Bear and Elephants with the best made .243 bullets, same ourselves from the harsh recoil and extra expense of ammo for a .375H&H Mag or 458Lott. But it doesn't work like that, to safely hunt those animals, you need the extra weight of the big game rounds, which increases ENERGY.
Can it be done with a .243? Yes, but we could all ride bicycles to work instead of drive too.
I'm not trying to be smart, or start a caliber war, I'm just saying that energy (ft-lbs) plays a big part in a guns performance, and velocity, which directly influences energy, and weight, which directly influences energy,plays a major factor in bullet performance. the combination of the two is read in ft-lbs.

In my post I eluded to the fact that a 243, 30-06, or 7mm Mag would all work, and only tried to show that when compared to more accepted calibers for Moose, the 270WSM stacked up just fine.

The orginal poster's question was not -which gun is best or would you use, but is the 270WSM enough gun, which it is.
Again like I said in my original post, this is all secondary to shot placement, but a 270WSM will work just fine for Moose

With Respect
WSM Man


So bullet weight & speed determine killing power? wrong again. A moose, deer, elk, whatever the animal may be isn't going to know the difference between 900 or 1200 ft lbs of energy. Yes, we do need to match the size of bullet to size of game, but we also have to match the right bullet for the job. Now let's compare apples to apples,(not varmint guns to grizzly guns) or should i say caliber to caliber. I will agree that the 270 short mag should handle a moose with no problems if shot placement is correct.Now, lets take 3 bulllets of the same weight for the same caliber going the same velocity, travelling the same distance. we'll say a .308 cal. 150 gns. lets compare a full metal jacket, a v-max & an accubond. shoot a deer with all 3 & tell me the results . the FMJ is going to do what ? punch a pecil hole through the deer, He's going to run off, maybe die & most likely never be found. Now smack him with the v-max. What happens here ? the wind blew our shot a little more forward than we like & our bullet blew up on the deer's shoulder, making a real nasty splash wound, never making it to to the spine/vitals. once again deer runs off only to be permanately crippled or die of a nast infection. Now lets shoot the deer with the accubond. what happens? bullet penetrates, mushrooms on the inside of the animal, sending a shock wave outward, making soup of the organs, or as in scenario 2, ripping through both shoulders, piling him up on the spot. So, how absurd is this?You do have one part of the equation right, a bullet must retain X amount of velocity(not enrgy) for the bullet to do its job. So, is "Killing power" all about "weight & velocity" as you put it? obviously not. From what your saying all 3 bullets should have the same effect on the deer, which is hardly the case. So what was the determining factor in a successful hunt here? That would be the design & construction of the bullet used;) By the way a turkey isn't going to know the difference between dying from a 1oz. load of #4's traveling at 1200 fps. or a 1 3/4 oz. load going 1350 fps. here success comes from the right load & choke combo to achieve the pattern results needed down range tu put enough pellets where there needed.

[westkybanded]

Not to mention that a HUGE amount of that energy is being wasted outside the animal when you have a full pass-thru.

[trust me]

We've established the whizbang short fat magnums are plenty for deer/elk/moose/whatever. Nobody will argue that point.

If the standard rounds are good enough, as they have been for 70+ years, I see no reason to go to something more expensive and harder to find.

Truthfully, all the voids in the cartridge line were filled long ago and the manufacturers keep drumming up new whizbang creations to get our money out of our wallets. They get our attention with the short-fat, long-tall, extra-fps marketing and it hits big for a year or two, and then you often have a commercial failure on your hands. Meanwhile, all the old standbys are killing game just like always, at a substantial savings in factory ammo.

All that energy and fps at 500 yards sounds good, but who is killing game at that distance? What percentage of us can even see game at that distance?

The orginal poster inquired about moose. I don't see a lot of moose in Kentucky, but from what I've read, they are often killed at archery distances, deep in a brushy swamp or around a bog.

Stalkingbear said it best. Pick your weapon, practice, practice, practice, hit them well, and eat good.

[WSM Man]

Ahh, trust me, Its seems I might have hit a nerve with you and others by stating the answer to the original poster's question, of whether or not a 270WSM was enough for moose, was yes, instead of telling him to go with a standard cartridge, which oddly enough, wasn't even mentioned in the question. It also wasn't my intent to hit anyone's sore spot. +1 for Stalkingbear, he is correct.

A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER, you say "Yes, we do need to match the size of bullet to size of game, but we also have to match the right bullet for the job." Chuck Hawks, whose opinion I trust and take much more seriously than most, wrote an extremely interesting article on this. His conclusion was that other than accuracy/trajectory there is really no killing difference at all for modern bullet types for any thin or medium skinned North American game. If you want to disagree with Mr. Hawks, that is fine, but I tend to agree with him.

Then you state "Now let's compare apples to apples" and go on to talk about three different .308 bullet designs, same weights, same velocities, and the results. I have two problems with this. 1st-This has never been about apples to apples, my whole point has been that more velocity from any given bullet equals more energy regardless of design, while your's has been energy doesn't matter, it's all about bullet design. You use examples of the same velocity, so you either haven't really read my posts or you don't understand my point. 2nd-To make your case you use one bullet design that is illegal (which I say would still do the job if shot true, but I would never do or reccommend this as I try to respect and follow the law), the next design you allow to drift off course (because I figure you know that if hit the vital zone it would get the job done just as well as the Accubond), and last use a bullet design I suppose you favor that hits the intended target and gives you the result you want. Apples to Apples but one misses and one hits?:confused:

You go on to say "You do have one part of the equation right, a bullet must retain X amount of velocity(not enrgy) for the bullet to do its job. So, is "Killing power" all about "weight & velocity" as you put it? obviously not. Velocity x weight = energy. You simply cannot remove one or the other from the equation as you would like and it still work. If a bullet does have sufficent velocity when it reaches the animal it will not get the job done, likewise even if you have velocity but do not have sufficent mass (weight) you will not have the energy to get the job done.

You state "By the way a turkey isn't going to know the difference between dying from a 1oz. load of #4's traveling at 1200 fps. or a 1 3/4 oz. load going 1350 fps." I agree with this, but ask a question, if the weight or load is the same for both a 12g 2 3/4 and a 12g 3 1/2 magnum shell which will have the greatest effective range? You know the magnum will, the extra velocity of the magnum gives the same load the energy to get the job done at a longer range. Even when the load is more (increased wieght) which is common for 3 1/2 magnum round compared to standard rounds, the extra velocity makes the difference to get the job done at increased ranges. The magnum round will kill the game at a greater distance because it has enough velocity over the standard round to let the mass do the job. Velocity x weight = energy.

You add "So what was the determining factor in a successful hunt here? That would be the design & construction of the bullet used;)"
I absolutley disagree with this one, Shot placement overides your design, or my standard vs magnum, and there is no way around that for either of us.

You did say "I will agree that the 270 short mag should handle a moose with no problems if shot placement is correct." Well, we agree on both parts of that one, a 270WSM is sufficent for Moose, and shot placement is a must.

My favorite cartridge/gun is a 270Win, yes, a standard. I am not trying to talk any one in to getting a magnum, but I do have one as I believe it is an improvement over the original, NOT a replacement (I still have 2 270Wins), but an improvement on something that was already great.

I will not post on this again, you can post that I'm wrong, beat on my theory if you want, I can take it. I think that we could go back and forth on this forever, so one of us should cry uncle, and I'll go ahead and do it. I do look forward to your response though, you are obvisously knowledgeable, articulate, and believe in your view, and I respect that. I guess I think we should agree.....................to disagree;)

Best wishes, Happy Hunting, and I truly have enjoyed our 'discussion', I'm sure we will meet again in another thread, but not in this one, I'm out.
(Hopefully we'll be one the "same" side of the next one!!!!!!!)

[trust me]

Ahh, trust me, Its seems I might have hit a nerve with you and others by stating the answer to the original poster's question, of whether or not a 270WSM was enough for moose, was yes, instead of telling him to go with a standard cartridge, which oddly enough, wasn't even mentioned in the question.

No, no nerve hit with me. I'm not the one with an axe to grind. I don't design/manufacture/sell guns or ammo of any kind so it's no skin off my nose what anybody chooses. I just was freely throwing my 3 cents (inflation) into the conversation.

I just feel that the short/fat/long/tall magnum craze was an answer in search of a question.

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

the horse is dead. We'll put the whips up for now. Enjoyed the discussion as well

[RLWEBB]

In the right hands and with proper bullet selection,the .270 wsm is plenty of gun for ANY deer/elk/moose EVER to walk the earth. I would by all means use a stoutly constructed,controlled expansion "premium" bullet but they are easy to find for this cartridge almost anywhere-even wal-mart! Quit worrying about your rifle and get out,practice,and share pics of your successful hunt with us-if not the meat:p:D.

Excellent post, as usual by stalkingbear, and this certainly was an intelligent and excellent thread of discussion. I'm seriously considering a .270 wsm now!