In my opinion, the .270 Winchester is the finest "all-around" cartridge for North American game. Furthermore, the Winchester "Black Shadow" is my personal favorite in .270 rifles, followed closely by the Ruger Mark II. As for scopes, I have been a lifelong fan of Leopold, however, I hear good things about Nikon and the high-end Burris scopes.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 09, 2000

Answers

Don't see why this should be controversial.

I don't own any guns now. I owned a .22 rifle many, many years ago. I enjoyed target practice.

Back then, we lived next door to a deputy sheriff. His kids found his "hidden" .22 handgun (of course). We had enough sense not to play with the gun. All we ever did was throw cartridges into a fire, for the "pop."

Talk about dumb kids.

I was pretty good with the MI Garand and the MI Carbine, lousy with the Colt .45.

The History Channel has an excellent series on guns, and bios of the great designers: Colt, Smith, Garand, Wesson, Browning et al.

Rare guns are priced in the $millions. Collectors have been priced out of the market. They are bought by investment syndicates - who could care less about guns per se.

-- (retired@nd.happy), June 09, 2000.

Ken,

What is wrong with the good old .30-06? I have read some opinions that state the .270 doesn't quite do it for the biggest of North American game, like a bull moose or a big grizzly bear. Any comments?

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), June 09, 2000.

Granted that I'm totally out of touch with modern guns...

But can a .270 really bring down a grizzly?

What's the muzzle velocity? Compared to?

-- (retired@nd.happy), June 09, 2000.

Whats wrong with the .308? It hits harder than a .270 and there is plenty of cheap ammo available for practice.

-- NATO Sharpshooter (NS@straightshooter.con), June 09, 2000.

You cannot hunt grizzly in the lower 48. The .270 might be underpowered for brown bear, but one normally hunts browns with a guide (and back-up rifle). Moose are suprisingly easy to kill. I have seen a one-shot kill with with a 6.5mm Magnum.

The .30-06 is a fine cartridge, although I find the .270 a bit more comfortable to shoot. Advances in bullet technology have made the .270 deadlier than in years past. I have enjoyed success with 160 grain Nosler partitions.

With 150 grain bullets and hot loads, you can push both the .270 and .30-06 to around 3000 fps. Obviously, the .03-06 can push up to a 220 grain round nose where the .270 limits out around 170 grains. I like the .270 for varmits pushing a 100 grain bullet at 3500 fps. What's the muzzle velocity? Compared to?

-- (retired@nd.happy), June 09, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Whats wrong with the .308? It hits harder than a .270 and there is plenty of cheap ammo available for practice.

-- NATO Sharpshooter (NS@straightshooter.con), June 09, 2000.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 09, 2000.

My personal favorites are the Marlin 30-06 the Winchester 30-30 and I have an old British Enfield .303 that I can part your hair with at 1000 yds.

For can shooting and teaching the kids I have a couple of .22's that have had literally thousands of rounds run through and are as true today as when I first sighted them in.

Leopole optics are all I buy. I have never tried anything else.

For the last several years I've been building replica long rifle's and holding them steady.

Recently my interest has been in bowhunting, compound and recurve, and today I ordered a cross-bow to play with.

All this gun talk makes me want to get into the woods but instead I have tee times this weekend. No bears round here.

-- Swampthing (in@the.swamp), June 09, 2000.

Ken,

My first answer was "It's all good." But, I prefer my M-1 Garand, Ruger 10/22, and am itching to get a 30-30 lever action (for fun) but haven't decided on which to get (I'm pretty cheap, so it takes me a few years to settle on something).

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), June 09, 2000.

If you had to pick one and only one it probably should be either the 7mm or 300 Winchester Magnum.

The 270 is to light for Moose, Elk, black bear (some get quite large) as well as brown. The 7mm has slightly better balistics then the others mentioned though all will do the job for most hunting done in North America. For Brown, Polar and Grizley (which you can hunt in Canada) nothing below a .338 Winchester Magnum should be considered and even that is light. If you mostly hunt deer and don't bother with the larger game the 270 ( or any of the others) is fine. You also save on weight.

-- The Engineer (spcengineer@yahoo.com), June 09, 2000.

I really haven't messed with guns in years, the last hunting I did was with the bow. Still have the same guns I had as a teenager...a Marlin 30-30, H&R 16 gauge single shot, and a 22 rifle. The H&R has put more squirrel, rabbit, dove and quail on the table than anything else I ever owned. The 30-30 once took the head off of a running rabbit - I could hit a can at 100 yards with it. These days I do more fishing than anything else.

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), June 09, 2000.

Ken:

You live in the east. A 0.270 is really good there. If you move back to the west, you will find that you need a little more.

I have a Win 30/30 that I have had since I was 10. It has worked well, but it hasn't been fired in 30y. My favorite when I was young [when I shot in competition] was custom made. It used 220 swift cartridge necked down to 17 bee. If the wind wasn't blowing it was good forever.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 09, 2000.

F'ing rednecks. You actually kill for the sport?

-- cin (cin@cin.cin), June 10, 2000.

cin,

I occasionally hunt, to maintain my skills. I also eat what I kill, or give it to someone who will also make use of the meat. I hunt because I want to maintain the skills necessary to feed my family, in the unlikely event that I cannot provide food by other means.

I also enjoy to some extent the hunt itself; it involves a fair amount of planning, woodsmanship, and patience to track an animal that doesn't want to be found. I have never enjoyed the actual act of the kill, and quite frankly, I hope I never do. I would want to have a long talk with myself if I ever found myself enjoying the killing of anything but a fire ant (no apologies, and no mercy for those little monsters). Mostly, I shoot with a camera. But bagging game isn't something you can simulate; you actually have to pull the trigger, from time to time, or you lose the skill.

But then, I am a Doom Zombie, always over-prepared for the most unlikely catastrophie. I prefer to think of myself as redundantly skilled. :)

-- Spindoc' (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), June 10, 2000.

Will wonders never cease! I like the .270 Winchester a lot also. My Browning semi auto is perfectly capable of making a three inch group at 300 yards, even in my relatively inexperienced hands. The guys at the shooting range were astonished at how accurate it was; they usually find bolt action rifles much more accurate than semi autos.

On the other hand, I've never done any hunting, but only shoot targets. So I'm not really qualified to discuss the virtues of the .270 for hunting big game.

-- Sergeant Friday (just.The@facts.Maam), June 10, 2000.

I like to use a Army surplus 25mm. That way there's nothing left to dress, and I still get the thrill of taking the life of a poor defenseless animal.

-- Ken Pecker (kcpecker@worldnet.att.net), June 10, 2000.

Cows, pigs, and chickens in the slaughterhouse are killed in a much more unmerciful fashion. Hunters do it quickly for the most part. For the sake of decorum no mention of how the hamburgers make it finally to your burger. Further, it has been scientifically proven that plants have nervous systems, and that they feel pain, fear, and apprehension, not to mention pleasure. Perhaps we should just breathe air and hope for the best? Staring

-- Staring (A@A.A), June 10, 2000.

Well, again I must disagree with the Engineer. I have killed most of the game on your list with calibers lighter than either the 7mm Rem Mag or the 300 Win Mag. It really isn't the caliber as much as bullet placement. My grandfather killed most of his elk with the diminutive .243.

I chose not to hunt predators including any species of bear and mountain lion. One might choose a heavy caliber for brown bear, but I don't plan on making that hunt.

And Z, I grew up in Montana and hunt there every fall. The 30/30 is inferior to the .270 and most other modern rounds. It's nice in a lever action when you plan to kill something at under 100 yards, but it drops like a stone at any distance. Most leve actions like the Model 95 do not accomodate anything but round/flat-nosed bullets. If you like, I'll save you some elk steaks from my hunt this fall... courtesy of the "underpowered" .270 Winchester.

Cin,

I hunt because I eat meat. I'd rather eat an elk steak taken with my own hand than veal raised in some corporate factory farm. Unless you are a vegan, I suggest your stance is quite hypocritical. I respect true vegans, but I simply ask they not impose their value system on me. I won't ask anyone to eat meat for my sake, and I expect the same courtesy in return.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 10, 2000.

Ken:

And Z, I grew up in Montana and hunt there every fall. The 30/30 is inferior to the .270 and most other modern rounds.

Yeah, I recall. I lived there for a while too. While I haven't hunted in years, it was my experience that the .270 was very good in open territory. In brush or heavy cover, the 30/30 or 35 was better. You are correct that a 30/30 carbine is not much good over 100 y. I have run into some things in Montana and Idaho that I wouldn't confront with a .270. Fortunately, they recognized guns and ran at the sight, so you didn't have to fire.

My good friend used a .270 only. Most folks had something with a heavier bullet. Now in the eastern mountains, the carbine is very good. Heavy brush in those timbered areas; you can't see much further than 100 y.

Best wis

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 10, 2000.

Ken,

You may disagree but your original question was what is the best hunting rifle for North America. Not: What is the best rifle for what I (Ken Decker) choose to hunt, or even what is the best gun for hunting in North America, or what is the best for the United States.

Nor was your question based on assuming a great shot every time. I remember reading years ago about someone who went to Africa to hunt elephant with a bow and arrow. Yes you can do it but it isnt the best thing to use. If you assume perfect bullet placement along with perfect stalking skills then you can hunt almost anything with anything more then a .22 and most things with a .22. Get real close and put a bullet through the eye or into the ear.

Essentially you are changing the rules of the debate because you dont like the answers. Tough!

Any time you choose to pick one and only one caliber for hunting you are going to pick something too small for large game and too big for small game. Similarly it will either be good for brush but not good at long range or good at long range but not good in the brush. Z1X4Y7s comment is correct.

-- The Engineer (spcengineer@yahoo.com), June 12, 2000.

There probably isn't an absolutely "the best ctg for north america", although there are a bunch of them that work really good. The 270 is one of them.If you hunt a wide varity of game, then to be properly outfitted, you'll need more than one gun.30-06 is probably a better choice if you're stuck with one gun, closely followed by 280 rem. I like the bore size of the 7mm, but don't feel that much is gained by setting the bullet in a mag case, unless you are dazzled by paper ballalistics. I've found the old 7x57 mauser to have a very wide range of use. Give me a break about varmit hunting with a 270, sure you can kill varmites with one, but you an't gonna shoot a lot of them. If deer is your biggest game, and do varmits also, the 257 Roberts is a very good choice.

-- lester l griffin (lgrifff@yahoo.com), April 09, 2002.