Best Model in .270 for Deer Hunting - Opinion Please

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Pages: 1

Posted by: SPD522

.270 isn't my pick for a rifle but it is a decent caliber. I just prefer 30 cal. A .270 is only barely flatter shooting than a 30.06 yet doesn't have the bullet selection available to make it as versatile. You can load from 110-220 gr bullets in the 30.06.

My rifle experiences have been mostly with Winchester, Remington, and Ruger.

I never did like the Ruger. It was built solid as a rock but didn't have the smoothness of the others and was no where near accurate enough for me. I installed a Timney trigger to correct the horrible factory trigger, cryo treated the barrel and reciever, tried free floating and then bedding the barrel, tried several different kinds of premium ammo, and still could never get better than 1.5 MOA. Better than the 2.5 MOA it started with but not the kind of accuracy I expect.

My Winchester is a M70 Classic w/BOSS in 30.06. Extremely accurate and the factory trigger can be adjusted to a very crisp letoff. It's a consistant sub-MOA gun with the right ammo and if I do my part.

My Remington is a 700BDL in 300 WM. It is 15 yrs old now and is still my favorite all around gun for deer, antelope, and elk. Accurate? My best so far was a 5/8 inch group at 200 yards with a 180 gr Barnes X handload. My longest shot was with a Nosler 150 gr BT at 612 yards on an antelope.

I have considered getting a good .308 and will look at Browning A-bolt, Steyr Pro Hunter, Tikka T3, Weatherby, Savage, and Sig 200 along with the Winchester and Remington offerings.

Don't scrimp on the scope. The VXl may be OK for close shots in good light. But in low light or distance shots, you will want the better glass. I have a VXll 4x12 on the 30.06 and a VXlll 4.5x14 on the 300 WM. At equal power settings, the VXlll is much better.
I also have a Burris Signature 3x9 and it is brighter in low light than the VXll and comparable to the VXlll.

Back to your original post- if you still want a .270, get the Remington and as good of glass as you can afford. A Remington 710 will shoot as well as a BDL for less money. It's just not as fancy or slick of an action. But it will smooth up with use. Spend the money on better optics.

Craig

Posted by: SPD522

Quote
Originally posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: pwillie
I,

Man of few words. hr>

Glad it just wasn't me that noticed that. I though my computer went crazy for a moment.
BR>
Craig

Posted by: ShadyRascal

I guess I'll wade in here.

Tencubed, you say you spend your time in the eastern part of the state. Whereabouts? I grew up north of Spokane, my parents still have the old ranch out there.

I bought a Reminton 700 BDL in .270 some years ago. I really don't need any other rifle. With a small bit of fiddling and settling on a couple of loads, and a Leupold VX1 4-12, I can hit a pop can at 300 yards all day. It's put deer and elk in my freezer and is comfortable to shoot.

I also bought a Ruger 77 in .260 Remington for my boys. I had to float the barrel to get it to shoot but once things were dialed in it shoots under an inch now. Very good value in a rifle there.

One of my friends just bought a Rem 700 the cheapest one they make with the black stock in 204 Ruger. It shot like 2" groups but he relieved the stock where it touched the barrel, had a cheap bedding job and trigger done, worked up a good load, and now he has some spectacular one hole 100 yard groups.

So the long and short of it, just about any decent rifle can be made to shoot more than accurate enough to be a very good deer rifle, and the 270 cartridge will never let you down.

Posted by: CaptainQuint

Well, I did my hunting this year with a Kimber 84M Montana. I would definitely try to get your hands on one and handle it before you make your decision. I simply fell in love with the thing. If something as lightweight as the Montana isn't your bag try their more traditional wooden stocked models. Kimber is building some truly wonderful rifles.

My particular model is the .308 model in stainless with the synthetic Kevlar stock. Comes in just a hair over 5 pounds without the scope. Far and away my most favorite bolt action I've ever taken into the field. If I had to get rid of every other bolt gun I have the Kimber would stay. It is that good.

Don't cut corners on scopes. The there are some decent values out there but tacking on some wal-mart tasco or simmons with cheap rings and mounts is just defeating the purpose and is an exercise in futility. Stay with quality and don't cheap out on mounts or the actual mounting. Make sure that is done correctly. I generally find with standard telescopic scopes I usually can't go too terribly wrong with Leupold, Swarovski, Nikon or Zeiss.

I've been pleasantly surprised with Sightron scopes at least the ones I've tried. A very good quality piece of glass that seems to be running under the radar with a lot of guys.

I'm still trying scopes on my Kimber by the way. I just can't find exactly what I'm looking for. I'm torn between an Ultralight Leupold which is what feels the best on the rifle and several illuminated reticle models of several manufacturers of which I've tried which is what I actually need for deer season but don't feel as nice on the rifle. Catch 22.

Posted by: CaptainQuint

During rifle season the bucks in my area simply do not move during the day. They move in the very early morning and at dusk. You have maybe a half an hour to get your shots at the really elusive big bucks. During that legal shooting time you can sometimes see deer especially in timber but when you bring your rifle up the cross hairs simply disappear or with some lesser quality scopes you lose the animal all together.

I started using illuminated reticle scopes and found they worked great in these situations. Better quality scopes also made a big difference because they gathered that last bit of light which allowed you to spend that last 10 or 20minutes in the timber. Those last few minutes is when the big bucks leave their hiding spots.

For does it isn't quite as critical. They're not as wary. The bigger bucks here on my place are a totally different beast. That's the reason why they've lived as long as they have I suppose.

Posted by: Catterman

I am a huge fan of the BAR's. I have a Browning BAR Safari Mark II in the .300 Win Mag with the BOSS and love it. Got me my moose and caribou. FOr deer I just got a BAR .270 WSM in the shorttrak and LOVE it. Droped my 8 pointer in one shot running 150 yards away. Nothing wrong with other brands, but I have been shooting Brownings since I was 12 (now 30) and they have NEVER let me down, so until they do, I will stick with them.

Posted by: boss400

TK
i have a winchester model 70 in 270 its a fine gun i just don't like the top feed on it . i just got a browning bar in 30-06 i think i will like it to. as for scopes i looked through a swaroski, leupold, nikon, zess, and the clearest one was a browning 3x9 its made by bushnell elite. that what i put one it. it groupes 1-1/2 at 100 yds with 180gr winchesters i will fine tune it with 168gr bst for deer hunting.(always wanted a browning bar)

Posted by: boss400

BROWNING BAR SAFARI MKII ENOUGH SAID

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: TKhunter
I have decided on a new .270 as my choice for deer/antelope. Have it narrowed down to the Remington 700 BDL or the Ruger M77 (the new Hawkeye that came out in Feb or so). Any opinions on one vs. the other? Or is there another model you love that I should consider. Plan to outfit it with a Leupold 3-9X40 VXI or VXII.

Thanks for your input!

TK

The Remington or Ruger are both fine rifles as are several others on the current market. My personal preference runs more to the older Winchester Model 70's and the Weatherbys. If you don't have an allergy to used rifles there are always nearly new ones on the racks in most gun shops. Saves a few bucks and if you have done the research you can find an older model that is superior to many of the current offerings.

Congratulations, by the way, on your calibre choice. Many folks are falling into the trap of the newer short and super short cartridges which have very limited advantages and, IMO, several drawbacks. But that is a whole nother topic.

As to the glass you have listed. Take a look thru several different scopes before settling on a 3-9. Nothing wrong with that choice but I have found for my use about 7 power is as much as I want for general hunting. I do have more powerful scopes including a 24 power on a 6 MM wildcat but that is for coyotes and groundhogs. Most of the glass I use is Leopold as I see very little difference between it and the much more expensive brands. Leopold has always taken care of any repairs I've needed promptly and at reasonable cost. Never had a warrantee claim as one has never failed due to defect, only damage.

A really good place to read about new and old rifles and see reasonable comparisons of various makes is "Guns and Shooting Online". Chuck Hawks has built a really informative web site and offers good information on many subjects.

Posted by: tencubed

Glad I could help a bit. If you really want to learn a bit about internal and external ballistics and how there is really nothing new about most of the "new" stuff being touted by the gun rags take a look at P. O. Ackley's "Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders". You can find both volumes at most libraries. The information is getting to be a bit dated but the story of how we got to where we are today with smokeless powder is worth knowing for anyone that is really interested in the shooting sports.

EDIT:
Forgot to comment on the WSM cartridges. Nothing really wrong with this old "new" concept of a short, fat cartridge and I would probably consider playing around with the ones that have recently introduced but I never met a rebated rim cartridge I really liked. There always seems to be feeding problems that, tho they seldom occur, are bothersome and could be disastrous if a needed follow up shot is lost. I know lots of folks will disagree with my point of view but experience has brought me to this conclusion and it works for me.

Let us know how your search turns out.

Posted by: tencubed

wees440 is happy with his choices and has bought what he wants. I will take exception to his downgrading of Leopold scopes as being a "cheap out". Over the years I have owned and used a lot of different brands of scopes. Even had the pleasure of target shooting with the old external adjust Unertal 3/4" tubes. Now there was a limited field of view for you. At any rate to downgrade the current Leopold offerings is, IMO, a disservice to a good company. I have had many excellent scopes on a number of rifles and have never found a scope that will allow a shooter to do better than they can with the high end Leopolds. Not to say the Leopolds are better than other scopes but a cheap POS they are not.

Throwing lots of money at equipment will never replace practice and knowledge of the external ballistics of the rifle you are shooting.

Posted by: tencubed

The vx scope line is good stuff no doubt. Never really noticed the difference in clarity or brightness with them however. Have used them but usually pass them along to one of the kids as they seem to like them very well. As to the Burris scopes, I have never had one that I could get the parallax to go away to an acceptable degree. Only bought three of them but don't consider them to be target quality. Make for good tough short range hunting scopes however. They seem to gather light well.

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: pwillie
The Swarovski 6X24X50 is good for 30-600yds, I have used mine for both shots,as it can be tuned for each occasion----TDS---is valuable for the long shots......

What rifle are you using under that scope?

Posted by: tencubed

That is amazingly good shooting. Most folks couldn't hit a flock of circus tents at that range.

Posted by: tencubed

Not many folks know just how far a rifle will reach out. I have been involved in long range target shooting and varmint hunting for many years. I know of the type of equipment you are using and the capabilities it has. My personal preference is to avoid taking a shot that I am not very sure will result in a bullet being properly placed on an animal. Actually most of my hunting anymore is done with a 45-70 or 50-70 and shots are under a hundred yards. But that is simply a personal preference anymore. When coyote hunting I use the smaller bore rifles and shoot over longer ranges but for deer or elk, maybe out to three hundred yards. I have hunted enough to know what a badly placed bullet can mean and take great pains to avoid this situation.

Long range shooting such as 1000 yard competition is an interesting and demanding sport. It takes good equipment and a steady rest to put up a reasonable score in this type of competition. Lots of practice and dedication are required and the person that is not willing to dedicate the time required will seldom, if ever, excel at long range shooting.

If a person is able to consistently put ten rounds into a kill zone, with no flyers, at a given range then, it would seem to me, they would feel comfortable with taking game at that range. It has been my experience, however, that shifting wind patterns and heat haze as well as a number of other factors will make shooting over open country even more difficult than shooting at a range.

I simply am not a good enough shot to feel comfortable taking shots at the ranges you indicated. I will not take that much risk of a badly hit animal.

Posted by: tencubed

I absolutely agree that mind set has a lot to do with ones ability. Advancing years and a bit of an irregular heartbeat with eyes that are not as sharp as they once were also hold sway. I have been fortunate to have several places on the farm where long range target bunks could be set up and have had ready access to these all my life. Since I grew up carrying a rifle and belt gun it came as a natural thing to be involved in informal shooting contests. Sometime or another the formal competition came into the mix and I enjoyed that game for a number of years. My Dad was an excellent shot right into his advancing years but time finally took the edge from him and I see the same occurring with my abilities. For a many years I have enjoyed target shooting and hunting, the likes of which todays beginning hunters will unfortunately never see, but am enough of a realist to know what my limitations are.

The days of busting groundhogs at four or five hundred yards with a hotrod wildcat are no longer within my abilities. I have a couple of sons and, coming up, grandsons that now and in the future will practice these skills and continue the shooting sports which is just a much fun for me as the actual hunts.

Unfortunately there seems to be a smaller and smaller percentage of those involved in the shooting sports that really are willing to read and do the research to learn how we arrived at the point we are in this game. I see so many comments on various forums that, even with my limited knowledge of ballistics, clearly show a misunderstanding of what is going on. Many people seem to develop such a brand loyalty or listen to gun writer hype to the extent they think there is just one way to look at something. Anyone that has read the older books and studied the history of smokeless powder will know that there is very little that is really new on the gun shelves. There are different actions and materials which is some cases are major or minor developments in equipment and without a doubt the availability of higher velocity rifles has improved. At the same time there have been so many things offered to the shooting public that were brought forth simply as a money maker that the average shooter can often be hoodwinked into spending his hard earned cash for no good reason.

I applaud you and your friends for working at the long range game and apologize if I sounded a little skeptical of your comments. Too often I have heard the stories of the 500 yard running shot and when shown where this supposed bit of rifle wizardry was done found it to be more in the area of perhaps a couple of hundred yards at most. Since you have obviously spent some time on the range you know what I'm talking about.

Keep working at developing really new equipment and methods, it is often the guy in the garage that comes up with the good stuff.

Posted by: tencubed

Sounds like you have been thru the mill a time or two. We keep a place here in Seattle but home is in the Eastern part of Washington. Kids are on the farm and take care of things there.

The early model 70's are a great action, some of the late models leave a little to be desired but still good equipment. I have a few rifles, factory rounds and wildcats, built on them and find them very satisfactory. Years ago, when you could still get them, I was fortunate to trade into several Interarms Mark X early model actions. They are another Mauser type that come with the adjustable trigger and other good stuff. Been my favorite action for years. Also like the '03A3 actions for a lot of uses. Even have a few of the old US Enfield actions that I reworked years ago.

I seldom shoot factory ammo as I have been reloading for over half a century now and find I can get much better accuracy and consistency from a rifle with tailored ammo. Impossible to find factory stuff for a number of rifles I have as they are one-off or limited production wildcats. Last few years I have become interested in exploring the past and have been shooting some of the old cartridge rifles. Cast lead slugs at under 1500 FPS is a far cry from the 42 to 4600 FPS hot rods. Makes for a different kind of skill level and hunting methods.

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: pwillie
The later model 70s that I have are the "Classic" model with the clawfoot extractor.....these rifles do the stuff... I know about the later ones that had the push feed action.......not much to work with....I like the Norma ammo,its very expensive,30-378 cost 5.00 bucks per load....257 1.00 load and the 300 is around 1.25 a load......I have never been a reloader, but my brother-in-law was very adapt at loading. He was a gun collector and his collection was the "Springfield Armory".plus Military hats and old guns.I like to hunt and I use a shotgun,Browning Double Auto for upland game,and a new 28 gauge SXS Hueglo by Czech.Arms....for dove........I could talk about this forever...HAhAhAh

I admire anyone that can shoot a shotgun. I have shot a cartload of ducks over the years as we had a lot of them around, especially when I was a kid, and used them as a food source. The old Model 12 Winchester 12 gauge was the standard of the time and a couple of them my Dad had are still the only shotguns I am able to shoot reasonably well. I have a Browning 10 gauge my wife bought me for my birthday one year and I really believe a duck hanging from a string at twenty yards would be safe with me shooting that gun. Some skills a person just never seems to acquire and for me the scattergun has been a minor source of embarrassment for years.

You ought to look into the reloading game, it just makes the time on the range stretch out more.

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: Whiskers
Can I throw in 2 cents worth?

I like the T/C Encore in .280 Reminton. The balistics on it are better than the .270. This cartridge is good for an on the deer hold out to 400yds. with a 200yd. zero. You can even go out to 500 yds with confidence. I have liked Luepold and Burris scopes since the '60's.

There you have it. maybe not even worth 2 Cents !

Worth way more than 2 Cents IMO. You have found a combination of rifle and calibre that works for you and that is important. Single shots tend to make a better rifleman out of a person for sure. I have a TC Contender that I have a few barrels for and really enjoy hunting with it. I've looked at the Encore but to date have not fired one. They appear to be a dang serviceable rifle but I have wondered a bit about the balance of them. Not from the point of shooting but of carrying them around. Do you feel they are kind of awkward to carry without a sling?

Posted by: tencubed

Whiskers

Congrats on the buck. Always nice when you are able to take a chunk of meat home for the pot. Sounds like the practice paid off. The lack of rimfire capability on the Encour is something I hadn't even thought about. Course since you have the Contender you have the rimfire option there. Have you tried one of the 17's in rimfire on the Contender? I haven't bought a 17 rimfire but do shoot the 17 Ackley Bee from the Contender. Makes for a really fun 150 to 200 yard small game round. Kind of a hassle to load and about as spendy as top end 17 RF ammo.

I think my favorite bbls for the contender are the 223 for varmints and the 35 Remington for small deer in heavy brush. Also have a 45-70 bbl that makes it a good brush gun but have to hold the loads down due to frame strength of the Contender. Recoil is fierce to say the least if a heavy load is used with the 45-70.

Posted by: tencubed

Your endorsement of the 17 HMR echos what others have said bout this round. Guess I'm going to have to get one in some kind of rifle. Probably go with the Contender as I really like that little carbine. I too have been going more and more to the SS equipment with plastic stocks of one kind or another. Still like the looks and feel of the traditional blue and wood rifle but find I flinch less when I bump a plastic stock against a rock or whatever. Have a couple of old Winchesters that I carried in a saddle boot for years that look like they were drug down a gravel road for many miles but they still shoot good.

Didn't know that TC had sold out. Hope it's not another S&W type thing. Don't know if that company will ever get back to quality equipment.

Really don't see a great advantage to having the Encore in RF calibers. Unless a person is putting a heavy bbl on the rifle it would seem to me the Contender would do the job just fine. If a heavy barrel is wanted I would think a bolt gun would be indicated if extreme accuracy is the goal. Not to say the Encore is not an accurate rifle but to date I have never had a break open rifle that locked up as solid as a properly set up bolt gun. This may or may not hold true with the rimfires, can't really voice much of an opinion on this as I have never shot RF competition nor owned a competition grade RF rifle.

Posted by: tencubed

My brother-in-law has a Ruger #1 in '06 that he just loves. Nice rifle and easy to shoot but just doesn't fit me right. One of the best generally available single shots around IMO. His #1 shoots 165 grain hard cast bullets into 1" at 100 yards all day long. Only trouble is he gets his bullets off my shelf.

Posted by: tencubed

He's just a few months older than our oldest kid and spent a lot of time with us shooting and hunting. Turned out to be a good man so I really don't begrudge him getting into the cast bullets. I have noticed a load or two of firewood for the fireplace showing up from time to time and he has ready access to wood so it all kind of works out.

Posted by: tencubed

Got to agree that good glass is important if you want to use it. It has been my experience, however, that deer can be taken at any time of the day. As far as separating the men from the boys, well I just don't think a few minutes of dim light is going to make much difference in that area.

As to the original question about the .270. Take a look at the Savage rifles if you want a pure shooter with what could well be the best trigger system currently on the market. Crisp and smooth with a remarkable lock time. Cost is very reasonable and their out of the box accuracy is way better than most of the stuff on the market. JMO but based on the past couple years observation.

Posted by: tencubed

Different areas make for different types of hunting for sure. I have had the experience of having a good animal show up when light levels are low and good binoculars were needed to really get a good look. It's a personal preference to not shoot when I can not make out distant objects with the unaided eye. I really need to know where that bullet may end up if I miss or the bullet is a through and through. I can see where if a person is in an area where they know for sure what there backstop is and that nothing or no one is possibly going to wander into that zone then it could be reasonable to shoot in low light conditions. I have just never encountered that situation. Like I say, personal preference probably left over from the way I was taught and nothing against accepted practices.

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: pwillie
I,

Man of few words.

Posted by: tencubed

Quote
Originally posted by: SPD522
Quote
Originally posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: pwillie
I,

Man of few words. hr>

Glad it just wasn't me that noticed that. I though my computer went crazy for a moment.
BR>
Craig

pwillie sometimes don't say much but he's worth listening too.

Posted by: pwillie

I prefer the Model 70 Winchester(With a boss) if you can find one.The Winchester model 70 was voted the best bolt action rifle of the 20th century,by Shooting Times magazine.The Classic model 70 with the clawfoot extractor and three position safety,is paramount.I have several of them chambered in weatherby ammo. 257 and 300 magnums.....the 257 weatherby is one of the best rifles ever made.Flat shooting and highly accurate.A 270 is a good round,but want compete with the 257 or 270 weatherby.....Just my thoughts on a rifle.Scopes are a matter of money,if I could only afford American made scopes, I would use Leupold,but I use Swarovski which is high end and very expensive.

Posted by: pwillie

Check out www.gunbroker.com and look under "model 70 boss".

Posted by: pwillie

I have used Leupold scopes,and thats why I now use Swarovski. A Swarovski 6X24X50 tds cost around 1800.00, believe me, they are worth it! If you have only a few minutes before dark,and your trying to make out a deer or elk at 200 + yds low light conditions will tell you the difference.We did a test with several scopes and several different shooters looking,and the Swarovski was voted the best for low light.The Leupold was next.All the rest, a water pipe would work just as well.............

Posted by: pwillie

The Swarovski 6X24X50 is good for 30-600yds, I have used mine for both shots,as it can be tuned for each occasion----TDS---is valuable for the long shots......

Posted by: pwillie

Model 70 winchester,chambered in 300 weatherby,witha a Hart match grade barrel with the boss installed...constantly drops two in the same hole at 200yds.....also I have the same set up in 257 weatherby...scope and all,I like the 257 best for shorter distances.....like up to 300 yds.....all my guns are custom reworks by a smithy in Selma ,Al. who used to work for Walker Arms in Selma...they make a lot of the Sharps custom rifles in 45-70 and 45-90 all hand made for some type of shooting competition.....I also like a Ruger No. 1 with a Hart Barrel..... I have made several long shots(600 yds) and like hunting up to that range. A Swarovski spotting scope helps....

Posted by: pwillie

Ten! I have been shooting and hunting since I was 7 yrs old. Started with a winchester single shot 22. I got interested in long distance shooting when I was in Viet Nam...I watched snipers make shots up to 1000 yds,with single fire 50 cal., I know people arn't deer, but it gave me an idea 30 yrs later.Most of my group are into the long range deer hunting.On a Texas hunt this yr, a hun ter friend of mine took a doe at 635 yds with a single shot from a 30-378 weatherby.Most of the land we hunt on has been clear cut,and it offers this style of hunting.The long range hunting offers hunters better quality deer for us,because the deer can't windl us as easly.We see more now than ever because we are not disturbing their habitat.I forgot, I have custom stocks on my guns(MCMillian)Its just what I like to do.....besides,the deer killed by autos and trucks is skyrocketing,and the insurance cos are asking for more liberal seasons.WE now can take a both sex deer every day for 120 days.

Posted by: pwillie

Ten, I have friends that crow hunt with custom 700's chambered in 300 winmag....They are picking them up starting at 200 yds and then out to 300yds....We have a 1200 yd range close by,that an Army Major(retired) runs for sniper training for local police swat teams and such.It is open to the public only with his tutelage.....I am self taught shooter and have read some good journals about shooting. I think its in your mind how well you can perform......

Posted by: pwillie

Ten, I got aquainted to the model 70 by a fluke. A good friend of mine that owned a gun shop in my town ,bought a bunch of model 70s from a dealer that was going out of business.I asked him about them and he had high praise for the '70s with the boss. I bought several(They were relatively cheap) for around 400.00. I learned about re barreling them from another friend.I have since rebarreled about 20 of the rifles in different cal. I like weatherby ammo,but not much on the new weatherby rifles.The ammo(norma) is very expensive,but is the best off the shelf you can buy,IMHO..........BTW I have had five bypass surgery ten yrs ago,and had a stent put in last Nov... Two weeks later I was in a deerstand...blizzard came through...and I made it... I also have had laser eye surgery and removed cataracts,now I can see without glasses..that surely improved my shooting ability......I bought a Rhino,cause it kept my back from hurting . I also had back surgery 5 yrs ago.....lets see,maybe I will keep on working' till I die......My son loves to shoot,and we get together as much as possible.....The long range hunting keeps my interest up in a sport that I truly love.......200 yd running shot...HAaaahAaaHAaaaaaaaaaaaaa.......Your so right about that!!!!!!!!

Posted by: pwillie

TEN CUBE, I do some business in the Seattle area, I keep product in a local frozen food whse........never been there!

Posted by: pwillie

The later model 70s that I have are the "Classic" model with the clawfoot extractor.....these rifles do the stuff... I know about the later ones that had the push feed action.......not much to work with....I like the Norma ammo,its very expensive,30-378 cost 5.00 bucks per load....257 1.00 load and the 300 is around 1.25 a load......I have never been a reloader, but my brother-in-law was very adapt at loading. He was a gun collector and his collection was the "Springfield Armory".plus Military hats and old guns.I like to hunt and I use a shotgun,Browning Double Auto for upland game,and a new 28 gauge SXS Hueglo by Czech.Arms....for dove........I could talk about this forever...HAhAhAh

Posted by: pwillie

I like the falling block action of the Ruger No.1......in 257 weatherby.....Good shot on the buck, those kinds of shots and action make it what its worth...../

Posted by: pwillie

This months "Shooting Times" has an article about Perry Ohio....and the Springfield Armory...

Posted by: pwillie

Ten! Most of our super bucks are taken at low dusk or early dawn,after the season has been on for a while. Good clear definition is very important down south,were we have extreme pressure for 71 days....

Posted by: pwillie

I only hunt on private land that has sections I hunt only,and no one is supposed to be there but me.....We check out at our camp.

Posted by: pwillie

I,will post my thoughts later! I love the ballastics of Weatherby...

Posted by: pwillie

Thanks guys for your vote of confidence.......

Posted by: pwillie

Originally posted by: srwshooter

i have a remington 700 in 270 and just bought a tikka ts ss in 270 ,i can tell you now the tikka is the way to go. i think at 580.00 its the best buy out there . it is stainless with a synthetic stock . my remington was gettin beat up from haulin it around on my atv. the tikka have a fully adjustable trigger thats better then any factory rifle i've ever owned. it weighs a full pound less than my remington.

and you sure don't need a 6x24 scope for deer ,thats way to much power at close range . a running deer at close range would be hard to follow at 6 power. get a 3x9 or 4x12 . i've killed deer out to 400 yds with my 270 with 3x9 scopes. my deer rifles see hard use and i sure wouldnt want to carry a 1800.00 thru some of the mess i hunt in . there are plenty of scopes for under 200.00 that will do the job.

as for other brands of rifles , i own a bunch of savages that are all very accurate. i'm not a big winchester or ruger fan .

Posted by: pwillie

Originally posted by: pwillie

Originally posted by: srwshooter

i have a remington 700 in 270 and just bought a tikka ts ss in 270 ,i can tell you now the tikka is the way to go. i think at 580.00 its the best buy out there . it is stainless with a synthetic stock . my remington was gettin beat up from haulin it around on my atv. the tikka have a fully adjustable trigger thats better then any factory rifle i've ever owned. it weighs a full pound less than my remington.

Winchester model 70 classic,very accurate,and used for sniper work in Viet Nam.Voted by Shooting Times as best bolt action in the first hundred years

and you sure don't need a 6x24 scope for deer ,thats way to much power at close range . a running deer at close range would be hard to follow at 6 power. get a 3x9 or 4x12 . i've killed deer out to 400 yds with my 270 with 3x9 scopes. my deer rifles see hard use and i sure wouldnt want to carry a 1800.00 thru some of the mess i hunt in . there are plenty of scopes for under 200.00 that will do the job.

as for other brands of rifles , i own a bunch of savages that are all very accurate. i'm not a big winchester or ruger fan .

Posted by: weez440

i wouldn't rule out the 270 wsm. my buddy bought one this year before deer season and he loves it, if you go through and look at the ballistics the wsm outperforms the 270 in every category. the powder burns more evenly and cleanly because of the shorter cartridge. i have a 7mm short mag and once again it outperforms the 7mm mag in every category. oh and i have the new leupold VX-L scope the 4x12x50 and i love it. it sits as low as the 40 mm scopes so you don't need the high rise scope mounts thus making you more of an accurate shooter. leupold makes a great scope but if you are gonna buy a new rifle don't cheap out on the scope. if you go to the store and look athe the vx1 vx2 and vx3's you will deffinately see the advantages of getting good optics. you can make any gun accurate but whats the point if you cheap out on a scope?

Posted by: weez440

tencubed i am sorry if you took what i said about the leupold as being negative. my mom has a leupold vx2 and it is a good scope, i wouldn't mind using one for myself. i was just stating that compared to the vx3 or the vxL it doesn't compare. when it comes to optics you get what you pay for usually. the clarity is absolutely wonderful with the vxL the vx2 isn't as clear but still a all around good scope for the money. oh and don't rule out the burris scopes either. they have a good field of vision and all the parts and scope itself is all made in the USA. my dad has a burris and they are a good clear scope.

Posted by: chambo10

Getting back to the original question I would say the TC Pro Hunter makes a good choice in 270. I have the PH and love mine. I have a turkey barrel, 20 gauge rifled shotgun barrel, 243 and muzzle loader all for it. One of the benefits is that no matter which barrel I'm using I have the same feel and consistancy in trigger pull and such. IMO this gives me a little advantage for tough shots because I'm always practicing with the same setup just a different bullet type, depending on the barrel. I want to get the new Federal 338 barrel for it next.
Scopes are just as important as the gun if not more. Put a great scope on an average gun and you can turn it into a shooter with practice. Put a cheap scope on a great gun and, well, let us just say you can not hit what you can't see. Looking through glass in bright aylight is not the way to decide on scopes. The first few minutes and last minutes of daylight is where the boys are separated form the men. Make sure you get a quality scope and whatever you get make sure you enjoy it.

Posted by: Whiskers

Can I throw in 2 cents worth?

I like the T/C Encore in .280 Reminton. The balistics on it are better than the .270. This cartridge is good for an on the deer hold out to 400yds. with a 200yd. zero. You can even go out to 500 yds with confidence. I have liked Luepold and Burris scopes since the '60's.

There you have it. maybe not even worth 2 Cents !

Posted by: Whiskers

tencubed,

I have carried the contenders in practically every caliber since they came out. But I finally broke down and went to the Encore this year. I really don't mind the extra weight. It carries fine. I do use a sling for the long walks with it but through the brush, stalking and going into the deer stands I keep it unslung and at the ready. I love it. This year was fortunate to be surprised with a shot that took maybe 2 seconds from the time I rounded a heavy cedar stand to seeing a nice buck feeding across the field in the open. Swung up and made the shot without a thought. Standing freeform without any rest. Sure a nice tasting result! With all my sighting in shots I never would have thought it could be so easily swung to shoot on the fly. The only thing wrong with the Encore is the no rimfire barrels.

Posted by: Whiskers

Yep,

Have the .17HMR barrel for the Contender. You can throw everything else away!! It will literally drive nails !!! Tears up an animal too ! Great expansion and really nice to shoot. The one thing on the Encore is it's ability to handle the big loads like the 45-70. I have sold off all my Contender stuff except the .17HMR. I am switching to All SS nowdays. I hear there are some wildcat barrels out there for the Encores in rimfire. When they get more numerous I'll be looking for the .17 for it. Heard the other day that T/C sold out to one of the major U.S. makers. I forgot which one. But my dealer freind says that the new company is already looking at taking the Encore to rimfire. Can't wait!

Posted by: Whiskers

Sounds like your brother in-law has found something that works for him too !!LOL!!

Posted by: TKhunter

I have decided on a new .270 as my choice for deer/antelope. Have it narrowed down to the Remington 700 BDL or the Ruger M77 (the new Hawkeye that came out in Feb or so). Any opinions on one vs. the other? Or is there another model you love that I should consider. Plan to outfit it with a Leupold 3-9X40 VXI or VXII.

Thanks for your input!

TK

Posted by: TKhunter

Thanks for the input. Looked a little more tonight and heard a lot of good talk on the Tikka T3 Lite. They tried to talk me into the WSM, but I don't see enough of an advantage there as you said. Also, looked through a Monarch UCC scope and was impressed with it.

I have been reading a lot online today and have spent the majority of that time reading the articles and reviews of Chuck Hawks, what a ton of information!!

Thanks again.

TK

Posted by: PAPACHUCK

I understand your attraction to the .270, it is a great round for most applications.

For the best value in an all-around big-game rifle, I would choose a bolt action from Ruger, Savage, or Remington, chambered in the ultimate all-around cartridge, the .30-06, and top it with a Leupold Vari-x II or III in 3x9x40 or better. No big-game on this continent can't be hunted with this set-up.

just my .02

Posted by: srwshooter

i have a remington 700 in 270 and just bought a tikka ts ss in 270 ,i can tell you now the tikka is the way to go. i think at 580.00 its the best buy out there . it is stainless with a synthetic stock . my remington was gettin beat up from haulin it around on my atv. the tikka have a fully adjustable trigger thats better then any factory rifle i've ever owned. it weighs a full pound less than my remington.

and you sure don't need a 6x24 scope for deer ,thats way to much power at close range . a running deer at close range would be hard to follow at 6 power. get a 3x9 or 4x12 . i've killed deer out to 400 yds with my 270 with 3x9 scopes. my deer rifles see hard use and i sure wouldnt want to carry a 1800.00 thru some of the mess i hunt in . there are plenty of scopes for under 200.00 that will do the job.

as for other brands of rifles , i own a bunch of savages that are all very accurate. i'm not a big winchester or ruger fan .