My thoughts for a new rifle. Please pick apart and help me learn

4IDARCHER

WKR
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
718
Location
Iowa
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.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2016
Messages
990
Location
SW Idaho
I dont think there's anything wrong with a .270Win at all. For the distances you're shooting it seems like just about any caliber would do fine. I dont know if you mentioned it, but what are you hunting for? One of my good friends has taken a few elk with a .270 without issue.

As for the Tikka T3X Lite... I have two of them and really like them. Some guys might get sick of seeing all the Tikka love here, but for me they've been a great balance of weight and cost. Plus they both shoot really well. Mine are in 7mm Mag and 6.5 Creedmoor.
 

elkduds

WKR
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Messages
956
Location
CO Springs
Ballistically you give up 100 fps by going from 7 RM to 270 w same bullet weight. Drop 10-15 gr of bullet weight for the 270 and velocity/trajectory are equal to the heavier bullet in the big 7. My 270 shoots 140 gr accubonds the same as my 7 mag shoots 160 grs. The reduced recoil of the 270 is appreciated in lighter rifles.
 
OP
4IDARCHER

4IDARCHER

WKR
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
718
Location
Iowa
Ballistically you give up 100 fps by going from 7 RM to 270 w same bullet weight. Drop 10-15 gr of bullet weight for the 270 and velocity/trajectory are equal to the heavier bullet in the big 7. My 270 shoots 140 gr accubonds the same as my 7 mag shoots 160 grs.

I saw the same thing with some of the factory loads. I know the superformance loads with Hornady just a couple of loads but between the 130 GMX or 130 SST or 130 Interbonds (if they ever start making them again) I am confident I will find one of those 3 that the Tikka likes pretty well. You get the same speed as a 7mmRM with a 140gr (non superformace loads). With much less recoil and blast.
 

V65Magna

FNG
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
87
Location
MD
I went through a similar analysis choosing between a .257 Roy and a .25-06 but with different analogies and life experiences to draw from. There's a reason why .270's, 308's, .243's, etc., are still around. They just plain work.........and the wildcatters, or guys that developed them knew what the hell they were doing.

I think you've made a fine choice.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
906
In your price range and cartridge dilemma I'd buy the tikka .270 win and not look back. I own one myself, I bought it with the hope that I could beat the snot out of it, paddle a boat if needed and not worry about dinging up my more expensive rifles/optics. The tikka hype is there for a reason and .270 win is one of the finest lower 48 calibers ever, if not the finest.....
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
15,528
Location
Colorado Springs
Last year I picked up a Ruger American with the brown stock in .270 Win for under $300 on sale. With the 19oz scope and NF Ultralite rings, it's by far the lightest big game rifle I've ever shot. I've been having a blast loading up different rounds for it, especially the 85gr Barnes TSX. The scope stays on target with those loads.
 

Capra74

FNG
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
31
Location
Victoria
One big change for the .270, probably the biggest in many years, has been Alliant Reloder 26. RL 26 will push 150 grain bullets in a .270 between 3,000-3100 fps (depending on your rifle) with ease. I personally shoot a .270 Wby, but RL 26 has bridged brought the the two within 100-150 fps of each other. A good 150 grain .277 bullet going starting out at 3000+ can kill a lot of stuff close and far.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2017
Messages
941
Location
N Idaho
Great rifle and great cartridge, congrats on a great combo. All thats left to do now is fret about taxidermy costs and wall space!
 

Jimbob

WKR
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
1,409
Location
Smithers, BC
I shoot a tikka. You already have a .300 and you're not looking to really reach out there then why not a 7mm-08? In a tikka I would do the .270 for sure as there is no advantage to go to a short caliber. However, the kimber hunter in 7mm-08 would be an option I would consider.

I'm sure you can't go wrong in a super lite .270 though.
 
OP
4IDARCHER

4IDARCHER

WKR
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
718
Location
Iowa
I shoot a tikka. You already have a .300 and you're not looking to really reach out there then why not a 7mm-08? In a tikka I would do the .270 for sure as there is no advantage to go to a short caliber. However, the kimber hunter in 7mm-08 would be an option I would consider.

I'm sure you can't go wrong in a super lite .270 though.

I thought long and hard about the 7-08, it was a close runner up but like you said in the Tikka it is all one action size so I loose that advantage but there would still be the advantage of less recoil. If only the 7-08 had an extra 100-150 FPS then it would pair up nicely with my chosen scope. When I plugged the fastest factory loads into the Bushnell calculator app it shows my holdover reference lines as 200,280,370,475. While not a ton different then the 270’s 200,300,400,500 (give or take a yard or three) I was thinking the simplest and easiest references would be the best in the field. The one other thing was that to even get the speed and therefore the reference holdovers I just wrote about you had to use the Superformance ammo, and while I am fairly certain one of the 2 loads listed would shoot well in the tikka there are a greater number of loads in the 270 that gets me the 3100 FPS I am looking for. It was a toss up there though after I decided on the regular 270 and not the short mag.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
1,544
Location
W. Wa
Like others have said, I don't think theres anything wrong with the 270.

However, already having a big magnum, I think I'd go short action regardless of rifle. 7-08, 260, creedmoor, 243 - all will do what you want inside 500 yards. Burn less powder, and ultimately recoil less. You mentioned your kids, you won't really have to worry about reduced loads with any of those as they're already soft shooters.
 

Muttly

WKR
Joined
Apr 30, 2014
Messages
576
Location
Ketchikan, AK
A 270 with 150s cover a fair bit of ground, a stainless from Whittakers should be under 600 bucks. 2-3 oz heavier than super light, non fluted barrel.
Last 270 I had was Featherweight, push feed, waaay accurate. Plenty of choices for brass, bullets, factory ammo...
The only thing I can add is take a look at the DNZ one piece mounts for it..
 

Jimbob

WKR
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
1,409
Location
Smithers, BC
I like how you are thinking with matching the gun and scope. The scope is not an after thought but a factor for what caliber you will choose. I think it will work out well for you.
 

Hnthrdr

WKR
Joined
Jan 29, 2022
Messages
2,494
Location
Co
For 15+ years all I had was a 270. I shot deer, pronghorn, elk, moose, audads and a desert sheep with it. I never once felt like I needed any more than that. I’ve since switched to other rifles and different calibers but in the years I ushad d the 270, I never experienced anything that would make me not reccomend the 270.

Tikka makes good rifles too, in fact I was looking on Whitaker’s a week or so ago and you could get the t3x stainless (not the so) for 579.00 while the tikkas at sports mans warehouse are like7-750.00
579 is a smoking deal
 

49ereric

WKR
Joined
Jun 21, 2022
Messages
834
Search for a Remington 721 in .270 and take a good hard look at the barrel.
find a little used 721 and you have something.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2023
Messages
3
Stay simple, you have a good idea and good reasons for it. Don't get distracted and over think it, go for it!
 
Top