Weatherby Balistics Charts
257 Why-120 Nosler Partiion- Velocity/Energy
muzzle 3305/2910
100 3046/2472
300 2570/1760
500 2141/1221

Federal Balistics Charts
270 WSM - 130 Nosler Partition - Velocity/Energy
Muzzle 3280/3106
100 3037/2664
300 2808/1936
500 2183/1376

The 270 WSM w/150 Nosler Partiion actually looks a little bit better as far as energy goes and it doesn't slow down much at all even at 500 yds.

Please give me your opinions on these two rounds. Am I looking at this right to see them both performing almost exactly the same?

Both are ballistically good rounds, but what happens when you lose (or left at home) your ammo in the middle of West Texas? Alot of these new calibers that are out there are answers in search of a question. A .270 and .30-06 (or .338 Win Mag out west and up north) will handle anything in the U.S., there are a wide variety of bullets for any number of game species and ranges, and you can usually find ammo anywhere (the .338 moreso out west and up north).

I know what you are saying Log. That's the exact arguement I used talking to a friend not long ago. But now I have the bug.

I know what you mean. At one point, I was all excited about these new cartridges that were coming out left and right. 7mm STW, 7mm RUM, .300 RUM, .30-378 Weatherby, .300 WSM, .325 WSM, etc. And some of them are very interesting and have amazing ballistic properties. But then I started collecting military rifles, and realized what a hassle it is to try to keep up with many different types of ammo. Which made me realize "Hey, this is why there is a NATO standard for ammo: easier logistics." And then I realized that if something has worked for 80 (.270) or 100 (.30-06) years, it should work the same today, or even better, due to new bullet designs. So, basically, I now take all of the "Best Cartridge Ever!" claims by the companies and gun rags with a grain of salt.

If you'll remember, the .325 WSM that came out recently went through this. And I considered getting one. It was supposed to ballistically identical to the .338 WM, in a short action length. The guns were on the shelves, but there was no ammo. And then I found out that it wasn't quite living up to the hype. Close, but not entirely there. So I went with the .338 WM, a proven design, with a ton of ammo loadings to choose from (since I don't reload [yet]).

Log is right about ammo. The WSM ammo is getting easier to find though. The Weatherby has been around a while and is still not stocked everywhere, but as the WSM's are becoming more popular, so is the ammo among the manufacturers. If you reload, this is not that big of an issue. If you don't, you might want to keep it in mind. I don't know about price differences, is the Weatherby ammo more expensive?

Weatherby ammo is crazy expensive, think Norma expensive. That is why every person I know who shoots a Weatherby caliber reloads.

Not trying to endorse either round here, but it is not surprising that the 270 carries more energy since it is a larger bullet. What I would be more interested in is the bullet drop. What are those statistics?

500 yards is WAY outside my range. No way I'd attempt a shot that long.

I agree, I'd like to see the bullet drop.

[This message has been edited by SR90 (edited 5/11/2006 11:06a).]

Drop is exactly the same.

Again the Why numbers come from the Why charts and the WSM numbers from the Federal charts.

100 +3
300 0
400 -8.9
500 -24

I've used the .270 and the .30-06, but my Weatherby .257 Mag is outstanding for Texas Whitetail. If you can't remember your ammunition when you leave the house, or you shoot through a box of shells on a hunt, I don't buy that as good reasons to base your rifle selection. If you spend a $1000 on a rifle and $400+ on a scope, $38 for a box of Nosler BTs is not going to kill you.

To help explain the .270's almost identical ballistics to the .257, look at the ballistic coefficient (BC) of the bullet. The closer teh BC is to 1, the more retained engery it will have, and the greater ability it will have to buck the wind and have a flatter trajectory. Similarly, look at the sectional density (SD) of the bullet. The higher the SD, the greater the retained energy. It has been proven that the 6.5 mm spitzer type bullet has one of the highest BC's and SD's, which is why the 6.5 Grendel has such a great following. The .270 and .257 bracket the 6.5 mm (.264). Good examples of the 6.5 mm besides the Grendel are the 6.5x55 Swedish, .260 Remington, and .264 WM. The 6.5 Swede has reputation in Sweden as moose kryptonite.

[This message has been edited by Log (edited 5/11/2006 11:20a).]

That's why I am patiently waiting the arrival of my 6.5 Grendel 8 weeks after ordering it, Log. Very close ballistically to the 6.5 Swede. I studied the 6.5 a while before deciding, and you are right about the high BC. That and the ability for it to be fed through an AR-15 platform sold me on it. You don't need supr velocity when you have the flight characteristics the 6.5mm bullets possess.

[This message has been edited by str8shot1000 (edited 5/11/2006 12:17p).]

[This message has been edited by str8shot1000 (edited 5/11/2006 12:18p).]

The 6.5 Grendel would be a very nice replacement for the 5.56 NATO round if the Army would get smart.

CT,

What do you plan on hunting with the round? Mostly white-tails? Hogs? Occassional elk?

Also, what's your recoil threshold?

What about the .308?

quote:

---

If you spend a $1000 on a rifle and $400+ on a scope, $38 for a box of Nosler BTs is not going to kill you.

---

That may be true for some folks, mw, if they don't do much shooting at the range. I know people who've owned rifles, which they regularly hunt with, who haven't put 100 rounds through such rifle in 6 or 8 years.

Many people (myself included), however, like to pump many rounds through a hunting rifle at ranges from 100 yards out to 500 yards, so that we become very proficient with the gun at the various ranges and completely understand the ballistics, including wind effects.

For people like us, the price of Weatherby ammunition adds up pretty quickly.

If a hunter only buys a box of cartridges a year, shooting 10 or 15 rounds at the range before the season starts to confirm that it's still "lined up", and uses the remaining cartridges to "fire in anger" during a hunt, your assessment is correct. Or if the hunter has mucho disposable income, he may simply not care that the ammo is twice as expensive.

Doubtful,

CT is a friend of mine. Yes, yes, and yes.

Hap, I understand. To me, if I have to aim two feet above and one foot to the right of a target to adjust for drop and windage, I just don't feel confident in making a killing shot. Especially on a target that is probably not standing completely still.

Plus, I enjoy the stalk. Part of the fun is spotting an animal and then trying to get within range.

I just bought a stainless Weatherby Vanguard Sporter 270 WSM, and I'll let you know how it fares against deer, hogs, and targets.

"CT" I've shot a .270 WSM since shortly after they came out with the .300 ( yes,a buddy of minr in Pearsall and I had wildcats made ahead of schedule).
The caliber is great on everything from Elk to Deer.He shot a 385 bull at about 350 yds last year with the 140 Accubonds and stoned him.
I've shot Mule Deer from 50-400 yds with great results. Plus I've loaded it hotter than a .270 Wthby.
Personally there is NO question - .270 WSM!

Well it looks like I'm going to have to start a project and build something around a .270 WSM.

Then I'll have to find a place to go hunt Mule Deer so I'll have something far enough away to shoot at to really enjoy the ballistics.