Is the additional recoil (I have 4 kids in training) of the .270 worth it's additional performance on hogs, deer and maybe the one time elk hunt in Colorado, or will 6.5 CM suffice. Sorry if this question has been asked before, I tried searching the forums.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
.270 vs 6.5 CM for Hunting 25 - 300 meters
- Thread starter Bravo6
- Start date
For kids no.
For you as a serious dedicated hunting rifle sure.
For you as a serious dedicated hunting rifle sure.
Every time I hear it mentioned I have to ask myself, "Why is the .270 popular?".
Sorry, letting some personal opinion out... For what you've listed the 6.5 cm is adequate.
Sorry, letting some personal opinion out... For what you've listed the 6.5 cm is adequate.
Because back in the day the BCs were higher than the 30-06, it was faster and flatter. You know everyone thinks BCs are the only thing that matters.
Why wouldn’t it be. A plane Jane 140 GR .270 soft point hunting round shoots flatter, drifts the wind equally to and hits much harder than a good 6.5 creedmoor match load to any sane hunting distance.
Most real hunters (not Internet forum hunters) aren’t hunting game at 800 yards anyhow.
While this may be true, what I can kill with my .270 at sane hunting distances, I can also kill with my 6.5 creedmoor. I rather just use the creed, why do I want a rifle that kicks like a mule?
I have both, 6.5 and 270.
A 270 doesn’t kick like a mule anyhow. Well some of them do. A rifle that kicks a bit is of no concern to me when I shoot game. I don’t even realize it. Now shooting multiple rounds when zeroing the rifle or playing around is a different story. I do agree that a short action cartridge will do as good of a job as a long action in most cases. I usually kill 4-5 deer a year and several hogs on top of that. Plenty of those the last three years have been with a 6.5.
Actually run the numbers between the two. The .270 is not behind the creedmoor with soft point loads much less when you shoot a load like the Hornady precision hunter with the 143 eldx. It is superior with that load. None of which matters at the OPs realistic 300 number as almost anything will get the job done.
Ps: a 150gr .270 load kinda sucks.
.30-06, .280AI, 6.5-284, .280 , .284, 6.5x55, 6.5x55AI, 7x57, 7x57AI.. Just a long list of .473" L/A calibers that sit in front of the .270 in my mind. Many more line up in front of it if you open up to magnum bolt face. Even more line up in front of it if you consider S/A cartridges...
The question asked really comes down to terminal ballistics:
Figure out what game you want to hunt.
Figure out what distance you want to hunt.
Figure out what bullet you want to throw at it.
Figure out what velocity that bullet requires to do its job.
Ensure that at a given velocity you’ll still have enough penetration (exceedingly large number of variables-although energy on target isn’t the end all, be all, it provides an easily calculated/available measure that’s not completely incorrect).
At your max distance, make sure your cartridge meets/exceeds your bullet’s minimum opening velocity and isn’t super weak on energy (again at that distance):
Elk. 300yd. Barnes LRX takes 1600 FPS to open.
6.5CM with 127gr LRX has 2150fps/1300ftlb at 300yd (with MV of 2700fps).
.270win with 129gr LRX has 2490fps/1780ftlb at 300yd (with MV of 3100fps).
Those velocity requirements for the LRX to open are easily exceeded at the distances you mention and the energy at the max distance you listed to hunt is more than plenty (in both cases that’s significant more energy imparted than holding an 8 3/8 inch .44 mag on the animal’s skin and pulling the trigger).
As such, either will easily perform the task of taking efficient kills. Take what another poster offered regarding recoil into account and practice more with the less recoiling rifle (about 12ftlb with the 6.5CM and 18ftlb with the 270-both 8lb rifles with the above loads).
At the distances listed the 6.5CM is the theoretically superior cartridge due to being capable of all the same things with less recoil and (slightly less) expense.
This assumes you are capable of making good bullet placements through practice/technique and aren’t taking into account minimum point blank range.
Figure out what game you want to hunt.
Figure out what distance you want to hunt.
Figure out what bullet you want to throw at it.
Figure out what velocity that bullet requires to do its job.
Ensure that at a given velocity you’ll still have enough penetration (exceedingly large number of variables-although energy on target isn’t the end all, be all, it provides an easily calculated/available measure that’s not completely incorrect).
At your max distance, make sure your cartridge meets/exceeds your bullet’s minimum opening velocity and isn’t super weak on energy (again at that distance):
Elk. 300yd. Barnes LRX takes 1600 FPS to open.
6.5CM with 127gr LRX has 2150fps/1300ftlb at 300yd (with MV of 2700fps).
.270win with 129gr LRX has 2490fps/1780ftlb at 300yd (with MV of 3100fps).
Those velocity requirements for the LRX to open are easily exceeded at the distances you mention and the energy at the max distance you listed to hunt is more than plenty (in both cases that’s significant more energy imparted than holding an 8 3/8 inch .44 mag on the animal’s skin and pulling the trigger).
As such, either will easily perform the task of taking efficient kills. Take what another poster offered regarding recoil into account and practice more with the less recoiling rifle (about 12ftlb with the 6.5CM and 18ftlb with the 270-both 8lb rifles with the above loads).
At the distances listed the 6.5CM is the theoretically superior cartridge due to being capable of all the same things with less recoil and (slightly less) expense.
This assumes you are capable of making good bullet placements through practice/technique and aren’t taking into account minimum point blank range.
270 is definitely a little nicer to shoot than 30-06 but I feel the 30-06 is a lot more versatile like the 280.
you could say the 270 was the original inspiration for the 6.5cm.
Both excellent marketing jobs.
Both loads are adequate.
The CM is much more efficient. The case design is superior.
Short action is a bit easier to work the bolt (for young folks).
In rifles of identical weight, shooting bullets of identical weight, the 6.5 will have less recoil.
There is a plethora of 6.5 bullets available, for example, Hornady lists 22 6.5 bullets, while listing 14 for the .270.
The CM can double very well as a varmint rifle, while you can certainly use a .270, it isn't a good choice.
Factory offerings for the CM far outpace the ones for .270.
The fact of the matter is this. The .270 is an excellent cartridge, hampered by bullet selection. The 6.5 CM is an excellent cartridge with a wide selection of excellent bullets.
Of course the real answer is 7mm-08 with handloads.
The CM is much more efficient. The case design is superior.
Short action is a bit easier to work the bolt (for young folks).
In rifles of identical weight, shooting bullets of identical weight, the 6.5 will have less recoil.
There is a plethora of 6.5 bullets available, for example, Hornady lists 22 6.5 bullets, while listing 14 for the .270.
The CM can double very well as a varmint rifle, while you can certainly use a .270, it isn't a good choice.
Factory offerings for the CM far outpace the ones for .270.
The fact of the matter is this. The .270 is an excellent cartridge, hampered by bullet selection. The 6.5 CM is an excellent cartridge with a wide selection of excellent bullets.
Of course the real answer is 7mm-08 with handloads.
You aren't connecting SD to penetration are you? What is the SD of a bullet 1 millisecond after it hits something? The published SD of a bullet is only relevant if you are shooting solids that never deform.
People like .270 because it works well enough and it has been around for nearing 100 years. Lots of heritage with the cartridge. Lots of people growing up hearing and reading Jack O'Connor hunting stories. Not everybody is chasing 100% performance.
I‘m a .270 guy from way back and love them but with the criteria you cite, I’d go with the Creedmoor all day long. Noticeably less recoil with no noticeable reduction in terminal effects. The kids will appreciate less recoil and the confidence it brings.
John
For a kid, or a recoil sensitive adult? Short action. For anyone else? The difference between the 2 isn't material for hunting at those ranges. I'd (personally) hedge toward the 270 for hunting- but I've already got a 270 mountain rifle, so maybe I'm biased. For a range/fun/comp/anything else gun I'd go creedmoor. In fact, that's what I did...
ETA- my 270 is one of those afore mentioned mule-kicking SOBs.
ETA- my 270 is one of those afore mentioned mule-kicking SOBs.
The guy wants to go on an occasional elk hunt. Sorry, sectional density matters very much. It is not only relevant to solids. If it wasn’t relevant you could use a 90 gr bullet in that 270 to hunt elk. Don’t get published sectional density confused with published ballistic coefficient. SD is just A measure of the weight/ diameter squared... or grains/bullet diameter squarred x 700= SD. Has nothing to do with published or not. That being said, I agree bullet construction plays a major part, but the question wasn’t about bullet construction.
I’m probably the biggest creedmoor fan there is. I’ve taken many head of game with one. With kids involved it’s a damn good caliber. That being said at the distances you are talking about I’m shooting my 270 every day of the week. They both are adequate but I prefer the 270 for hunting
Animals don't care about headstamp or ballastics, they only care if they are hit in the engine room. Every animal is different, some give it easy, some don't. Every shot is different, some easy, some not so easy.
Light recoil in my experience outweighs ballistics.
Hunters who hunt to put food on the table Vs hunters who want to be about the shot.
Light recoil in my experience outweighs ballistics.
Hunters who hunt to put food on the table Vs hunters who want to be about the shot.
We aren't talking 90g bullets you were comparing a 6.5 to a .277 and saying the 6.5 would be better because of higher SDs.
I’ve recently shot both and for kiddos, 6.5CM is pretty gentle. I would put it next to the .243 which used to be the smallish big game kiddo cartridge. Now the CM is popular, all the components are available at good prices. I am personally fixing up my old .270 savage for next years hunting season, but I’m also moving from a .338WM so recoil isn’t my problem.
4 kids in training....6.5 Creed all the way. Lower recoil, burn less powder to get similar velocity, HUGE selection of bullets in 6.5mm to meet needs (target/plinking, hunting, match), shorter bolt travel ( matters/helps if you've shortened LOP) which all combine to make the kids better shooters, able to put bullet exactly where needed. All about shot placement.
Shoot the biggest caliber you can shoot well. Without knowing size / age of kids, needed LOPs, how recoil sensitive each shooter is, I'd hedge to the softer shooting of the two calibers. Hog, deer, elk isn't going to be able to tell the difference between 270 or 6.5 Creed at distances mentioned. Larger issue is how well can the kids shoot the rifle, place bullet where needs to be.
Adult hunter, 270 might have a slight advantage but me personally I'd take a 6.5 Creed, 260 Rem, 6.5 PRC, 6.5 SAUM, 7-08, 7 SAUM over the 270.
And it is better for that reason, not to mention others such as better bullet selection, and less recoil. Sorry, your argument, if there is any coherent one, just doesn’t hold up. Both are good cartridges and can do the job well. If the question is which one is better, it’s a different story. I’m a 270 win shooter too, but 6.5s win out for what that shooter is looking for.
You’re severely handicapping your Creedmoor if you’re only getting 2,700 with the 127 LRX...
I'm laughing inside because this entire thread is the modern equivalent to the old 270 vs 30-06 threads/articles from 25 years ago.
300yds? Put a bullet with enough weight that will open up, into the boiler room.
Done deal.
Recoil issues? Start them small and work up to bigger cartridges.
The kids will find their own tolerance to recoil.
300yds? Put a bullet with enough weight that will open up, into the boiler room.
Done deal.
Recoil issues? Start them small and work up to bigger cartridges.
The kids will find their own tolerance to recoil.
I don’t disagree. I just picked a round number in the upper end of barnes’ published load data for both bullets that made the point that at 300yds there is no difference in the ability to ethically harvest game, shot placement being equal.
I load the 127LRX in my own 6.5 and I also exceed 2700fps.
270 win with a 165 Matrix at 2840fps is wicked.
Or a 150 ABLR at 2960fps
Or a 150 ABLR at 2960fps
Wow, thanks for all the great feedback, men. The only reason I'm considering the .270 is that I accidentally bought a Sako Finnlight in .270 at an auction for a great deal (anyone want to trade for a 6.5 or a 260?) The Finnlight is a gorgeous rifle, still new in box, and I'm not sure I want to add another caliber to the mix, when I'm having a great time shooting my other rifles in 6.5 creedmoor. Based off of your advice, I think I'll shoot the .270 for a few months on hogs, sell it, and go back to 6.5
6.5 Creed with a 140 Berger hunting VLD is a magic pill and we have had almost as devastating effects with 120 Nosler BT's in 16.5" Creeds on deer. The 140 Berger is simply stated just devastaing. Both 270 and 6.5 great rounds if throated for the right bullets. But as stated above 300 in not enough to care on deer sized game. We shoot a ton of deer with a .223 at 300 in with 53 grain Barnes.......it's what started all my kids. Now elk no, but deer sized stuff perfect for kids taught how to shoot. Depends on the rifle for an elk gun and kids. As long as it's not a light gun the 6.5 or .270 is not a shoulder smasher by any means. The 6.5 my kids started on is about 12# and a very soft shooter in terms of recoil.
Last edited:
