Help me decide……

I plan in buying new rifle next summer. It will be a tikka T3 in laminate stainless. I was planning on a 7mm rem mag. After reading lots of posts on this forum (thanks randy) I am no longer sold on the 7mm being a shoe-in for the choice. The 270 WSM has entered the list of choices.

300 win mag is not an option…..too punishing for my likes. The .270 win is not my first choice either, as I already have a pair of 30-06’s…….I can load a 150 grain bullet and get similar performance…..

Randy – tell me why he 270 WSM is better or vice versa. This gun will be my western elk rifle(going for my first time next fall…..) as well as my whitetail gun around here some times. I will be handloading. I am set on the tikka in the aforementioned configuration, but the caliber is still up in the air.

One note – this gun is a want and not a need……

I was surprised how close the ballistics were in comparison.

Everyone that has gotten to know me, understands I share a lot of info about what works for me. I don’t promote things that I don’t use. That said, you really won’t go wrong with either caliber. Both are proven tools for taking game at long distances.

I gave my daughter my Browning A-bolt .270 Win and it was time for me to replace it with a rifle that would be my primary large game hunting rifle. Mostly whitetail, mulies, and antelope, with an occasional elk hunt tossed in. My average shot at my farm on whitetails is about 200-250yrds with the easy possibility of up to 900 yrds. Being realistic, I wanted a caliber/rifle set up for 200 – 500 yrds for hunting with a tremendous amount of energy at that 400/500 range.

From there, I looked at what I liked and hated about all the rifles I ever used. A few things really stood out. I like short action bolts with an easy throw. Because I walk miles through crap, I don’t like long barrels.

I may have been a bit partial to the .277 bullets, as I love the performance of the Barnes Bullets and seeing the internal vital damage done on many animals that I have killed. But I then started looking at what a few close friends were shooting and why. Mostly guys hunting with the same situations as me. The 7mm ultra mag and the 7mm WSM came up the most. After shooting 80+ rounds through a RUM at prairie dogs, I accepted that I really wasn’t a fan…my face agreed as I caught it in the face twice. I really liked shooting the 7mm WSM, but after a little investigation found that they are hard to come by. So I really didn’t know what I wanted at that point.

So I just started reading everything I can about WSM’s. After months of reading, a few things started to stand out.

1. Better/more consistent burn rates on powder

2. More PSI with equivalent charge of powder

3. FPS was trending at 200-300 more than conventional cartridges.

4. Same or better performance with a WSM in a shorter barrel.

5. SO dang many guys that went with a .270 WSM just loved their performance from them.

From there, I just kept pulling up and reading comparisons of the 7mm WSM and the .270 WSM In most cases, it was a coin flip because they were so close ballistics. Oh, one other thing I found was nearly everyone had the best performance in a 7mm with 150 to 160 gr bullets. In the .270, 130 to 140 gr bullets was the sweet spot.

So when it came time to buy, I had already knew Tikka, Howa, and a Rem Sendaro were of the 3 I wanted. The .270 WSM on most loads had a higher density rating, used a little less powder, had more PSI, was just a bit faster, a little flatter, and delivered just about equal amount of energy at 500 yrds. Then considering I was able to shoot 140 gr ( higher side of the 270 sweet spot) and still maintain just slightly better or equal ballistics, I leaned towards the 270 WSM.

Now, in all fairness, I didn’t look long and hard at a 7mm mag. I was more interested in the 7mm WSM. But after shooting 300 win mags, 7mm RUMs, 7MM WSM, and a 270 WSM, I would jump on the WSMs. As for the 270 WSM and a 7mm WSM, check on availability and make sure you can get what you want.

The first thing that you have to understand is that in today’s cartridge landscape, there is a LOT of overlap. While that can make it difficult to decide exactly which way to go, the good news is there is also little chance of making the wrong choice. Simply because there are so many RIGHT choices.

First, since you’ve narrowed the brand of rifle already, we need only address chamberings that are in Tikka’s current stable. Tikka doesn’t make a 7 Short, only a conventional 7 MM Rem Mag, so that narrows things down considerably.

There is no doubt, the 270 WSM is a good cartridge and fully up to the task of elk while not being so overblown that it’s too much for deer. The added benefit of the 270 Short is just that–it’s a short action. How much that matters to you is down to personal preference.

The knock against the 270 short is the cost of ammo (if buying off the shelf) and the limited overall offerings. Also, it does not represent a big departure from the .30-06 you already own. And just ask any outfitter, they will verify that a LOT of elk have been taken with vernerable ought six.

With the conventional 7 MM Rem Mag, you’re stepping up into a long action and, again, there is lots of overlap with the 06.

But the 7 MM has been and will continue to be around for lots of good reasons. It shoots flat and there is a huge selection of top-performing bullets. The 7 MM may also have a modest advantage over the 270 WSM in terms of the availability of factory ammo.

If you’re going to really depart from where you stand now, the “step up” option is clear: The 300s. The classic Win Mag or the WSM.

Obviously, you’ve put your finger on the key disadvantage. Recoil increases. The problem is you can’t fight the law. In this case, the law of physics. More = more.

But really, have you shot a .300 Win Mag or equivilent 300? I’m no sadist in terms of recoil, but it isn’t THAT bad. Get a decent pad fitted and shoot off of a lead sled when bench testing and it’s liveable.

The advantage is that the .300 class is a clear performance upgrade over both what you own and the 270 Short. You are going to shoot flatter and hit with more authority with a .300, especially on bigger game where it will be desireable to have more bullet options in higher weight classes.

Obviously, it is no accident that the .300s are the King of the Elk Rifles. Big, hard-hitting, and with lots of knockdown power even taking into account the poor bullet performance of yesteryear compared to today’s bullets.

Again, the good news is that there really isn’t a wrong choice here. I would say much depends on how much you want to bias the rifle toward elk hunting as opposed to getting a versatile, all-around performer that can be used for elk.

Grouse

Randy and Grouse, great, informative reads….thank you. With that being said, I absolutely love my 7 WSM. I have taken about 10 whitetails that never took another step once I figured out my bullet selection. A bonded bullet is a must in my opinion for big game. My only negatives I can find with this caliber is cost of shells, and not being perfectly matched to the brush country in McGregor, Mn that our land is at. I am still a bit hesitant to shoot through brush.