Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Franken Mauser
Why are you guys even arguing about the effectiveness of .270 Win, here?
The OP was seeking input on ANOTHER rifle to back up the .270, not a discussion of its efficacy.
|
Because he wrote this:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hopeisnotastrategy
I had originally considered my 270 great for hunting elk, but I'm beginning to rethink that. 200 yards and under I think I'm fine, but I'll be in Montana and Colorado where the shots could be longer so I'm thinking I need an option with more energy at longer ranges.
|
That is the whole reason the discussion on the .270 Win was started.
In the real world the 7mm RM doesn't offer you anything better than the .270 unless you hand load. The .300 WM is only better than the .270/7mm RM as long as you're using 180 grain bullets or heavier with high BC's, making it a true LR rifle. The .338 WM is really a .30-06 on steroids, same trajectory as a 180 grain 30-06 but with a 250 grain bullet. The .338 WM isn't a true LR rifle, but really shines at 500 yards or less.
The OP is talking possibly about Africa, the .270 will take all the plains game a guy could want to shoot. So none of his choices are any better than his .270. If dangerous game is ever in the future he'd be better off with a 9.3X62, .375 H&H or Ruger than a 7mm RM, .300 Win, or .338 Win. However, none of those are true LR cartridges as well and best used inside of 400 yards.