I wanted to thank everyone for the advice on the .270WSM and also on my previous thread about the 6.5PRC. After thinking a lot about it I believe that I am going to purchase a light weight budget rifle and as much as the .270 WSM has going for it I think I am going to go with the good ol' .270 Win. I am hoping this post can bring out some good reasons and maybe some not so good reasons about my choice and maybe others can let me know what they think.
The first reason is that pesky budget word. I want a starting rifle weight under 6lb. and there are not many rifles under $1000 that get there. Out of the few that can, I really like the Tikka T3X superlight (Sportsman's Warehouse edition) and it does not come in the short mag but does in the regular 270. The regular Tikka T3X stainless light comes in the short mag, but it weighs in at 6.3lb and not the sub 6lb that I want. Also the Tikka comes with a 22.4 inch barrel in the 270Win, that while still is a bit short to get full velocity it is quite a bit better than the 20 in tube on the Savage light weight hunter (although I have zero doubt that the Savage will shoot extremely well).
In the available calibers that the superlight comes in I wanted a fairly flat shooting rifle that doesn't enter the recoil arena of the 300 mags. I have a .300 Win Mag so I do not need that level of power (and don't want that level of recoil). If I ever decide to hunt moose or large bear with a rifle the .300 will get the nod but this is mostly a mulie and antelope rifle, maybe Ibex if I get the chance.
Another reason that the 270 Win seem to fit is that it pairs well with my scope of choice. Being that I am primarily a bow hunter I am all about getting as close as I can. I even love stalking Coues bucks and antelopes when I can. Because I want to stay "budget" and don't need to fling bullets out past 500 yards (still an extremely long shot in the field on a living animal to me) the scope I choose was a Bushnell Trophy Xtreme 4X16X44 with the DOA600 reticle. I have looked at a couple of these scopes and for the budget scope entry level I like what I see. With the handy new Bushnell app it shows that without too much effort I can get quite a few factory loaded 130gr loads to match up really well with the hold over references out to 500 yards. A bonus is that right now there is a 30% rebate on Bushnell scopes. While I know this is far from a quality scope (my last box of .458 Lott ammo cost more than this scope) I think it will work for me.
After re-reading this part I think a little bit of a sidebar is in order to maybe explain this choice a bit more.
I have written here before that I was blessed to actually grow up spending at least a few days a week in a ballistics lab. My father was divorced and had shared custody and he worked at the state crime lab. Back 30 plus years ago rules were a bit different then they are today and I often went to work with my father on the weekends and summer days and after school. I won't say I had full access to the gun library but I did get to play more than almost anyone I know of not named Barnes or Hornady. The criminalist and CSI guys there were almost all gun nuts and encouraged my brother and me to learn all we could about firearms. I knew muzzle velocities, energy levels and calibers like other kids knew baseball cards. While growing up I also discovered archery and it has become my preferred way to hunt. While I still was soaking up everything gun related it was the bow I used when I decided to hunt. Later in the military it was my knowledge of guns and ballistics (the M1A1/M14 and the .308Win) that got me nods and atta boys when I was explaining it as a specialist to the majors and 1SGs in the desert. When talks of opening up a designated rifleman or designated long range rifleman, or whatever they first called it occurred we were literally taken out in the Kuwait desert before traveling up to Iraq and shot at 55 gal drums at 600 yards iron sights to see who would qualify for a school that hadn't been put together yet (bet you didn't know that little bit of weird trivia). I also guess this is why I can't stand the pseudo tactical shows out there about long range hunting and some of the mutilated military phrases they use to talk about shooting. To me hunting is about getting away and being calm and relaxed, in the sandbox there was nothing but anger and rage. I NEVER want to cross or confuse those two things. I know this doesn't factor into my gun/scope choices but hopefully it shows why I do not have any interest in long range shooting at game animals (steel or targets a different matter). I know others are different and I try not to judge but it is hard for me to think how others could want to play sniper on game animals as a way of shrugging off the tensions of the modern world and to clear their minds as hunting does for me. While running up a mountain after elk in early Sept or stalking within bow range of a Coues deer can be physically challenging it has never caused me a feeling of hatred towards the animal or anger at what I am doing.
Anyway back on subject. The Bushnell DOA600 scope will reach out as far as I need and it is a lot less confusing then multiple MOA hash marks or mildots when I am trying to get quickly on a game animal at mid-range in a field environment, yet more precise then MPBR or guessing hold over. One more thing on the gun/scope combo; while my goal here was bargain even if I were to spend three times the amount I don't think I would ever consider a weapon made of plastic, carbon fiber and stainless steel as a pass down to my children. As useful as they are even the highest dollar custom modern rifles lacks the soul of my father's early 70's Remington 870 wingmaster with the high gloss wood and fancy checkering or my .458 Lott and the weight (both physical and spiritual) of that bone crushing, charge stopping rifle.
The regular ol' 270 also has some other real advantages I believe. For one ammo selection is there in spades and there is no reason a rifle like the Tikka can't find some that it really, really likes. Also If I ever need to scrape together ammo due to losing it on a flight (I know not a huge concern and sometimes laughed at by serious gun nuts) 270 ammo can be found about anywhere. Another benefit is there is low recoiling choices in factory loaded ammo that turns the 270 into a real pussycat for my kids to shoot as well. So the caliber choice seems legit to me, but I am very much wanting to hear from others to see if I might be using flawed logic. I am very aware that while I have spent most of my life learning about firearms and ballistics my actual time behind the guns are pretty limited in different calibers and while I used to shoot competitively and often in the military my life and job have changed quite a bit since I was in a conventional unit doing regular military things. Since I mostly bow hunt now I am curious to hear what others have to say about my choice on a light weight budget rifle and if there are other, better choices to be made.
Thanks for taking time to read that extra-long post.
The first reason is that pesky budget word. I want a starting rifle weight under 6lb. and there are not many rifles under $1000 that get there. Out of the few that can, I really like the Tikka T3X superlight (Sportsman's Warehouse edition) and it does not come in the short mag but does in the regular 270. The regular Tikka T3X stainless light comes in the short mag, but it weighs in at 6.3lb and not the sub 6lb that I want. Also the Tikka comes with a 22.4 inch barrel in the 270Win, that while still is a bit short to get full velocity it is quite a bit better than the 20 in tube on the Savage light weight hunter (although I have zero doubt that the Savage will shoot extremely well).
In the available calibers that the superlight comes in I wanted a fairly flat shooting rifle that doesn't enter the recoil arena of the 300 mags. I have a .300 Win Mag so I do not need that level of power (and don't want that level of recoil). If I ever decide to hunt moose or large bear with a rifle the .300 will get the nod but this is mostly a mulie and antelope rifle, maybe Ibex if I get the chance.
Another reason that the 270 Win seem to fit is that it pairs well with my scope of choice. Being that I am primarily a bow hunter I am all about getting as close as I can. I even love stalking Coues bucks and antelopes when I can. Because I want to stay "budget" and don't need to fling bullets out past 500 yards (still an extremely long shot in the field on a living animal to me) the scope I choose was a Bushnell Trophy Xtreme 4X16X44 with the DOA600 reticle. I have looked at a couple of these scopes and for the budget scope entry level I like what I see. With the handy new Bushnell app it shows that without too much effort I can get quite a few factory loaded 130gr loads to match up really well with the hold over references out to 500 yards. A bonus is that right now there is a 30% rebate on Bushnell scopes. While I know this is far from a quality scope (my last box of .458 Lott ammo cost more than this scope) I think it will work for me.
After re-reading this part I think a little bit of a sidebar is in order to maybe explain this choice a bit more.
I have written here before that I was blessed to actually grow up spending at least a few days a week in a ballistics lab. My father was divorced and had shared custody and he worked at the state crime lab. Back 30 plus years ago rules were a bit different then they are today and I often went to work with my father on the weekends and summer days and after school. I won't say I had full access to the gun library but I did get to play more than almost anyone I know of not named Barnes or Hornady. The criminalist and CSI guys there were almost all gun nuts and encouraged my brother and me to learn all we could about firearms. I knew muzzle velocities, energy levels and calibers like other kids knew baseball cards. While growing up I also discovered archery and it has become my preferred way to hunt. While I still was soaking up everything gun related it was the bow I used when I decided to hunt. Later in the military it was my knowledge of guns and ballistics (the M1A1/M14 and the .308Win) that got me nods and atta boys when I was explaining it as a specialist to the majors and 1SGs in the desert. When talks of opening up a designated rifleman or designated long range rifleman, or whatever they first called it occurred we were literally taken out in the Kuwait desert before traveling up to Iraq and shot at 55 gal drums at 600 yards iron sights to see who would qualify for a school that hadn't been put together yet (bet you didn't know that little bit of weird trivia). I also guess this is why I can't stand the pseudo tactical shows out there about long range hunting and some of the mutilated military phrases they use to talk about shooting. To me hunting is about getting away and being calm and relaxed, in the sandbox there was nothing but anger and rage. I NEVER want to cross or confuse those two things. I know this doesn't factor into my gun/scope choices but hopefully it shows why I do not have any interest in long range shooting at game animals (steel or targets a different matter). I know others are different and I try not to judge but it is hard for me to think how others could want to play sniper on game animals as a way of shrugging off the tensions of the modern world and to clear their minds as hunting does for me. While running up a mountain after elk in early Sept or stalking within bow range of a Coues deer can be physically challenging it has never caused me a feeling of hatred towards the animal or anger at what I am doing.
Anyway back on subject. The Bushnell DOA600 scope will reach out as far as I need and it is a lot less confusing then multiple MOA hash marks or mildots when I am trying to get quickly on a game animal at mid-range in a field environment, yet more precise then MPBR or guessing hold over. One more thing on the gun/scope combo; while my goal here was bargain even if I were to spend three times the amount I don't think I would ever consider a weapon made of plastic, carbon fiber and stainless steel as a pass down to my children. As useful as they are even the highest dollar custom modern rifles lacks the soul of my father's early 70's Remington 870 wingmaster with the high gloss wood and fancy checkering or my .458 Lott and the weight (both physical and spiritual) of that bone crushing, charge stopping rifle.
The regular ol' 270 also has some other real advantages I believe. For one ammo selection is there in spades and there is no reason a rifle like the Tikka can't find some that it really, really likes. Also If I ever need to scrape together ammo due to losing it on a flight (I know not a huge concern and sometimes laughed at by serious gun nuts) 270 ammo can be found about anywhere. Another benefit is there is low recoiling choices in factory loaded ammo that turns the 270 into a real pussycat for my kids to shoot as well. So the caliber choice seems legit to me, but I am very much wanting to hear from others to see if I might be using flawed logic. I am very aware that while I have spent most of my life learning about firearms and ballistics my actual time behind the guns are pretty limited in different calibers and while I used to shoot competitively and often in the military my life and job have changed quite a bit since I was in a conventional unit doing regular military things. Since I mostly bow hunt now I am curious to hear what others have to say about my choice on a light weight budget rifle and if there are other, better choices to be made.
Thanks for taking time to read that extra-long post.