View Single Post
Old May 30, 2013, 03:15 PM   #18
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Quote:
. For elk or bear, does it not make more sense to use a 30-06 with 180 or in the case of bear, 190, 220 grain bullets and not a .270 at all? If we accept the concept that one cartridge can do it all (well), then we as gun enthusiasts cannot justify having so many guns that fit a "niche". The .270's "niche", seems to be in the light-bodied (as in Deer, Antelope, Sheep and Goats as per Jack O'Connor),game niche. Not elk, not bear, etc. , which are arguably better served with bigger calibers and heavier bullets.
Key word there is "arguably." Jack O'Connor's "other rifle" was a 30-06, with a Sukhail barrel if I recall correctly. Jack used it for the "big stuff" in America.

If you were hunting deer in bear country, having 150 gr bullets in your 270 Win would be cheap "just in case" insurance. Personally I think the 270 Win is just fine for elk and black bear. I'd start to feel a tad loose in the bowels going after Alaskan brown bear or grizzly deliberately with a 270, but if I only had the choice between a 30-06 with 150gr bullets and a 270 Win with 150gr bullets I would reach for the 270.

Knowing how many Scandinavian moose have been taken down with the 6.5x55 and how many African plains game have fallen to the 7x57 I have a healthy respect for high sectional density bullets at a moderate velocity. The 270 with 150gr bullets has only slightly less SD, but quite a bit more velocity, than those two old standbys.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03340 seconds with 8 queries