Which Hunting Rifle - .270, .300, .308 or 30/06?

[Brian48]

I'm very impressed with the many endorsements of the .270. I would have thought the 30-06 would be king around here.

[ShootistPRS]

Brian, the 270 crowd is always proud and loud.
I won't say anything bad about either and you can likely find 270 any place that sells 3006. I will say that for big dangerous game the 3006 has the weight advantage. I have never used the 270 but you have to give it its due. It has been used as a sniper round just like the 3006, it can hunt most of the game animals that the 3006 can with limitations on moose and big bears. It's not that you can't kill moose or big bears with it, just that it provide less safety margin when doing it. I split a 5 foot granite boulder with my 3006 and I have never seen that done with a 270 but then I've never seen it done with any other gun either. I also don't know why anyone would try - it proves nothing except that a young man can be more daring than smart.

I have a feeling that the 3006 is going to fade away in the future and the 308 will take its place, and if I was to buy another 30 caliber it would likely be a 308. (just for the sake of ammo availability in the future)

[Pathfinder45]

Perhaps for military purposes, the 7.62 NATO round has replaced the 30-'06. Indeed, the two calibers have equal performance when considered in the context of M1 Garand versus M1A. But for hunting ammo in hunting rifles, the 30-'06 is more versatile and more powerful. In that scenario, the 308 Winchester is the replacement for the 300 Savage. As long as there is big game to hunt, the 30-'06 will remain with us. It does more things really well than perhaps any other caliber. Mind you, I'm a 270 Winchester guy, I've never owned a 30-'06. I think the 270 is slightly better for most purposes, but not all. I have a lot of respect for the '06 and I expect it to be with us for the long haul.

[shootbrownelk]

Shootist, the 30.06 isn't going away anytime soon. There are millions upon millions of rifles chambered for it, the geezer 30.06 will be around for over another hundred years.

[Picher]

I've had two .30-06s over a period of about 25 years. I switched to the .270 Win, primarily because my best hunting stand allows up to a 400 yard shot (which I've taken). The .270, with a 130 grain Ballistic Tip and a hefty load of Reloder 22 has nearly the same trajectory as a 7mm mag, but with less recoil and in a standard case. The .30-06 drops about 8-10 inches more at 400 yards, depending on how it's sighted-in.

I gave my .30-06 to my son and he's done well with it. If I kept my shots under 300 yards, the '06 would be fine. It's still be adequate over 300 yards, but I really like the higher velocity of the .270 and the fact that I can load 90 grain Sierras for lower velocity/recoil, informal target shooting, plus the fact that they shoot to the same POI at 100 yards as the hotter loads.

If shooting factory ammo, you can't go wrong with the '06. Ammo is often less expensive and more available than even the .308.

[shurshot]

I have two 270's, a Remington 721 and a 700 BDL, both of which have proved themselves to be "perfect" (for me anyhow), beyond question. In my experience, hunting whitetail deer, and I have had many hunting rifles over the years in various calibers, the .270 is best. Hits like a .30-06, but recoils less. As accurate as you and your scope are. From woodchucks to black bear and moose, the 130 grain .270 will handle anything I choose to hunt here in Maine. Years ago, I fell in love with the caliber hunting woodchucks with an old .270 Mossberg / Howa and a basic 4x Simmons scope. I wish I had kept that rifle!!!

[jackstrawIII]

Go back and re-read the first post by JMR40.

That's all you need to know.

[supercub99]

Having the hindsight of banging around in the woods chasing moose, caribou, bears and sheep for 40 some years, I have some thoughts on what I'd do starting over. That said, keep in mind, us old gas plants didn't have the choices you have today so we'll go with todays offerings.
From a practical point, I would go with a med contour barrel, synthetic stock and in 30-06. Hunting time is best spent hunting and not worrying about your gun, thus the synthetic stock. The caliber is capable of 110 gr. to 220 gr and does it well so you can adapt to the hunt, i.e.. more practical. With your budget I would look at a Remington 700 SPS on sale at Cabela's for under $600. I would spend a couple hundred having it blueprinted(barrel trued along with bolt face and lugs) and bedded. I would put a Leopold Vx 3i in 6.5-25 for somewhere around $700-$800. And finally, I would put a Timney or Jewel trigger in it.
Not only would this be a nice hunting setup, it would also be at home on the target range for informal shooting with light or cast bullets.

The gun I packed for most of those years was a 7mm Rem Mag. Great gun that served the purpose but it wasn't one I wanted or had time to just shoot. It came out during hunting season and that was about it. Every couple years I'd load up 20 rounds and when those were down to mag full, I'd load up a few more.
These days I'm more inclined to take my 1903 Springfield 30-06. The last moose I shot was with a Remington 1903A/4 sniper rifle so I have choices and if nothing else, I can go hunting at Safeway on the way home...lol.

Good luck in what ever you choose.

[GunXpatriot]

I don't know if I can articulate it correctly. But in short, and for the average shooter, the .270 is actually a better cartridge.

Same ballistics and a thinner bullet means better ballistic coefficient and better distance/energy retention...

The main criticism I've heard has been that the .270 can't really accommodate an over-sized bullet like a 220 grain, which I see as totally legitimate in regards to something like brown bear, but for a deer gun, I'd see no reason to take a .30-06 over a .270. And I say that as someone who owns a .30-06 and no .270...

[RC20]

No doubt in my mind that a 270 is very adequate for a lot of game.

Like 30-06 you will never see it go away, while not a 30-06 it works and works well and any new gun that comes out is in 270 Winchester.

If you can place your shot you can shoot elk with it, moose as well.

Deere sized game no question and I ponder people that shoot them with 300 WM and the like.

But, per the OP, if you want the best overall cartridge that can take anything, then the 30-06 is it.

One thing missing in the 270 is the plethora of bullets the 30 calibers have out. As those range from small 30s (30 BR) to mother 30s (300 WM) you get a wide range of bullets and the VLDs for them. Something around 30 cartridge that are 30 caliber.

In short, you can put a 130 gr bullet in the 30-06 and you can shoot as good as the 270.

270 caliber is not ever going to be re-discovered. The range of bullets will always be limited. Probably would have been the best by far military cartridge ever but it never got there and won't now. All of 3 cartridges use the .277 bullet.

Keep in mind it was the 30-06 that shot Grizzly bears by far the most, as time went by that was bucket up to 375 minimum, but the early hunters did not have 375, they had 30-06. US was not Africa, people were not on Safari, they were late century pioneers out West still (and AK) and they used the guns they hunted game with to kill Grizzly as needed. My step dads father killed 8 of them with a 30-06.

Hand load wise the 30-06 just keeps getting better as new powders come along. R-17 has put it up an easy 2900 fps in 175 gr bullets. New powders are coming out all the time.

Given the right region I would be good with a 270.

Given one cartridge to range the US (or the planet), it would be a 30-06.

[supercub99]

I would be reluctant to say better but agree it's on average a good round and would keep pace with a lot of them.
I do base my preference on the ability to shoot heavy bullets if needed. The largest bullet you can buy in factory ammunition is 150 gr. I won't swear there isn't someone out there making 160 gr, but I don't recall them. If you hand load you can get some spendy boutique bullets in up to 180 gr, Barnes comes to mind. I know Berger makes some target 170's but not hunting type.

This isn't just an issue with the .270, the heaviest bullet I could find for the 7mm Mag was 175 gr. but I could drive that at 2900-3000+ fps, you won't do that with a .270. There is a wild bison hunt up here that requires you use a minimum 200 gr bullet if you draw a tag. I did a few years ago and couldn't use the 7mm because of that rule.
If all you are going to do is hunt in Grizzly free deer range, I'm more than ok with the .270. In Alaska, no guide would let you hunt with that for bears and wouldn't encourage it for moose. The latter mainly because one often runs into the other while out in the woods.
Jack O Conner was the .270's biggest champion, he used if for just about everything, writers tend to have their cal/s. Mostly he was into sheep, deer and occasionally elk. He did go to Africa, what he shot there with it I don't know, but the average person wouldn't and especially today.

As far as accuracy, it's a hunting round and meets that requirement. As an accurate target round, it's hard to say as no one ever really developed a target bullet for it that I know of.

I have nothing against the round, it's just a little narrower in scope than what I would want.

[Art Eatman]

One of the things I like about the old '06 is the "fun load" play. An 00 Buck ahead of five grains of pistol powder makes a neat squirrel load.

OTOH, if you swage an 80-grain .32-20 flat-nose to .308 and load it ahead of 50+ grains of 3031, the muzzle velocity is right at 4,000 ft/sec. What that does to a poor innocent jackrabbit is not appropriate for a family video.

[lefteye]

If I was about 40 years younger and had the money I would opt for a custom left-hand bolt action rifle chambered for a .280AI. I have a .270 and 7mm Rem. Mag so I realize I'm being a little "picky".

[RC20]

Me, I would go with an 06.

Remington now has one in a heavy barrel through Cabellas, that would be the only market choice.

I can make a Savage like that if I want.

As for Jack O Connor, I think what he did was got a burr in his butt and decided to prove you could take anything with a 270.

He was right, you could. Some African hunter found you cold slip a bullet in behind an elephant ear and shot a lot (before they put the caliber Kibosh on him) and he used something like a 6.5 mm or some such.

Jacks load was also pretty hot. I don't know how good a shot he was, but he shot a lot of game with other guns too, he was not exclusive to the 270.

Reality is, if not for him it would probably be gone. Nothing wrong with it, but it that constant a bit to light for the big stuff and a bit too big for the smaller stuff.

30-30 is the same way but there are a god awful lot of deer on the East cost in trees and brush that makes it a go to.

Me, I think there are really 3 calibers out there. 375 in your choice these days (H&H back in my younger days) 30-06, 6mm or 6.5. Covers it all.

Nothing wrong with a 30-30, in brush it does what a 6.5 does. It does not do it out to the distance a 6.5 does well.

[lefteye]

I've had guides and outfitters, including those I've hunted with, tell me they have more confidence in hunters who show up with a .270 for elk hunting. I've used a .300 Win Mag on my three elk hunts and took two 5 x 5 bulls, one is on the wall. If I ever get another chance I'm taking my .270. A .270, .308 or .30-06 are all fine for elk and any smaller trophy animal in the lower 48.

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by RC20

Jacks load was also pretty hot.

His loads may not have been as hot as you think. He used 62 grains of H4831 but that was a military surplus powder back then. H4831 has been changed since then and 62 grains would probably be a very hot load today. However, his claimed 3200 FPS with a 130 grain bullets can be reached still today. Powders are better today and in some cases you can reach 3000 FPS with a 150 grain bullets with powders like MagPro and MRP.

The thing is it all really depends on the rifle. I've had loads below book max show pressure signs and loads a grain or two over never have a problem. Each rifle is different, and some just shoot faster than others for no apparent reasons. I don't worry about speed unless my velocity is erratic when I'm developing loads, I just take the most accurate load regardless of speed.

[RC20]

Point taken

Again, no problem with 270. Sheep hunting, Caribou, Deer etc.

Good shot placement you can do a Moose.

Back to the OP, 30-06 can do it all and has the larger range of capabilities.

There is a reason there has not been a major amount of development
around 270.

Some areas you know its all you need, others you should have more capable. If you are going to hunt moose vs have a crack at one or can run into a Brown bear, then I would vastly prefer to have the 06.

[reynolds357]

Lefteye, the last guide I Elk hunted with in Colorado was awful glad to see my 7Rum and even happier to see the Barnes X loaded for it. So, I guess they all have their varying opinions.

[lefteye]

Your rifle is probably sufficient for any animal in the world. Most guides try to please their clients to "earn" the largest gratuity. This is not a criticism of guides - it is an observation from many, many years of hunting.

Edit: typo

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by RC20

Some areas you know its all you need, others you should have more capable. If you are going to hunt moose vs have a crack at one or can run into a Brown bear, then I would vastly prefer to have the 06.

I get that you like the 06, I do as well and don't disagree it is probably the better rifle if you are hunting brown bears. However, how many brown bears are taken every year with a pistol or bow? The .270 Win is vastly superior to any pistol or bow IMO. However, if I were hunting brownies I'd probably use my .338-06 or .375 Ruger.

Bullet selection was mentioned earlier as well and the lack of it for the .270 Win. Yes bullet selection is more limited with a .277 caliber vs. .308, but the latter has been in service in the US military for 125 years. If the .277 caliber had ever been a service cartridge it would have a lot more bullet development over the years.

If sectional density is a indicator of penetration, it takes a 190+ grain bullet in .308 to offer better penetration than the 150 grain .277 bullet all else being equal. There are two manufactures of 180 grain .277 bullets, Woodleigh and Hawk and both should penetrate as well as any 220 grain .308 bullet. Granted the .308 Will always make a bigger hole, and that is why I'd pick it for brown bear over the .270 Win.

Someone also mentioned only three cartridges were available in .277 calibers, and there are actually five listed by SAAMI. Currently SAAMI lists 6.8 SPC, .270 Win, .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby, and .27 Nosler, but that doesn't include the many wildcats that have been made using the .277 Caliber. Probably the best endorsement for he .270 was from P.O. Ackley, in his books never listed data for a .270 AI stating that there was no gain on the original cartridge.

Anyway all this discussion probably means nothing to the OP as he has only one post and hasn't been on since the 29th of December. He's either found his rifle or he doesn't care anymore.

[Rob62]

Remington model 700 BDL, or an older 700 ADL with the walnut stock and iron sights.

Chambered in .30-'06.

For optics, a mid price range Leupold or Burris in the 3-9x power range.

(Bottom rifle in picture - but it's a model 700RS, which was only made for a couple years. Basically a 700 BDL with synthetic stock and matte metal finish. Sort of like today's 700 SPS, but mine has iron sights)

[RC20]

I think you miss the point. 30 caliber is very popular, 270 not nearly as much and never will be. It still a mainstay, I don't dismiss it, but the OP asked and my view is that sans a very specific location and hunting area that suits the 270 over the 06, I would take the 06.

You can make any wild cat you want off a 270 case, its bullets that count (just easier than doing it with 06 for smaller calibers) same as you don't see a 270-338. Easier to make those off the 06 case.

Certainly sufficient for hunting.

Quick count in my Hornady shows 27 bullets listed for 30-06 (that may not be all the 30 cal bullets) and 13 for 270.

Worth looking at as that is more than I thought there would be, figured maybe 8 - 10 for 270.


I

get that you like the 06, I do as well and don't disagree it is probably the better rifle if you are hunting brown bears. However, how many brown bears are taken every year with a pistol or bow? The .270 Win is vastly superior to any pistol or bow IMO. However, if I were hunting brownies I'd probably use my .338-06 or .375 Ruger.

Bullet selection was mentioned earlier as well and the lack of it for the .270 Win. Yes bullet selection is more limited with a .277 caliber vs. .308, but the latter has been in service in the US military for 125 years. If the .277 caliber had ever been a service cartridge it would have a lot more bullet development over the years.

If sectional density is a indicator of penetration, it takes a 190+ grain bullet in .308 to offer better penetration than the 150 grain .277 bullet all else being equal. There are two manufactures of 180 grain .277 bullets, Woodleigh and Hawk and both should penetrate as well as any 220 grain .308 bullet. Granted the .308 Will always make a bigger hole, and that is why I'd pick it for brown bear over the .270 Win.

Someone also mentioned only three cartridges were available in .277 calibers, and there are actually five listed by SAAMI. Currently SAAMI lists 6.8 SPC, .270 Win, .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby, and .27 Nosler, but that doesn't include the many wildcats that have been made using the .277 Caliber. Probably the best endorsement for he .270 was from P.O. Ackley, in his books never listed data for a .270 AI stating that there was no gain on the original cartridge.

Anyway all this discussion probably means nothing to the OP as he has only one post and hasn't been on since the 29th of December. He's either found his rifle or he doesn't care anymore.

[reynolds357]

My guide was not getting a gratuity. In addition to being a guide, he is a truck driver who hauls about 15 loads of freight cross country for me per year. The hunt was free. Considering his rifle is a .30-378 WBY, I think he might just have a man crush on boomers.

[Pathfinder45]

There are gobs of bullets for the 270 Winchester, more than anyone needs. In my 270, I limit myself to three bullet weights, i.e., 130, 140,150. And among those are Speer, Sierra, Hornady, Nosler, Silvertips, and others. And there are other bullet weights that I don't need. Finding bullets for a 348 Winchester could be challenging and quite limited. Not so for the 270. Sure, there are more 30 caliber than 270. So? Has anyone tried them all? I doubt it. Your needs will be well met by a small fraction of what's available. Not enough bullet selection for 270? Nonsense. But if you believe that, go ahead and get a 30-'06, it will serve just as well.

[ShootistPRS]

I don't think I have tried all the bullets for my 3006 but I have accurate loads for 125, 130 HP, 150, 165, 168, and 180 grain bullets. I have used mine to plink, varmint hunt, big game and small bears. I used to go out into the country side with a couple of friends and my brother to shoot a few targets and just blast a piece of branch that fell off a tree. They had their 22s and I had my 06. I missed a lot less than they did!