Let's Have Elmer v. Jack Redux....

[Blaine]

Heavy, slow moving bullets are better than fast, light ones. When range is not a factor, I agree with this. Easier on the throat/barrel. A .45 or .44 heavy bullet in a handgun is not as loud, or recoils as much and works just as good or better.
Go: (This usually gets better than a Mayo v. Miracle Whip thread)

[AJMD429]

I rarely believe in 'compromise' or 'moderation', but if the 270 Winchester is awesome due to being so 'flat-shooting', I compare the 140 grain factory 270 Winchester load to the 270 grain 375 Ruger load in terms of trajectory (4 inches or so at 400 yards) and for the minimal difference, I'll take Thumper any time....

If I'm going to commit to larger bullets, then I'll skip past those puny 44's and 45's, and go with my 500 S&W levergun....

[wm]

Speed is a good thing

Weight is a good thing

Too much of a good thing is not a good thing

As in life so too ballistics …… balance and moderation are the key to the best outcome.

Wm

[jeepnik]

Started with a .243 as a kid. When big enough went to the “ought six”
And haven’t looked back in bolt guns. In my family the 270 is neither fish nor fowl.

These days I prefer levers to bolts. And that usually means the 45/70.

[Pisgah]

Oh, please. Let' not!

I loved both Elmer's and Jack's writings, but the fact is they were both crotchety pedants with a personal disliking for each other whose constant arguing boiled down to a way to both vent spleen and, conveniently, get paid. Both had good valid things to say but carried them to the point of absurdity at times.

[GunnyMack]

With modern bullets and powders any critter can be killed with a well placed shot, as we all know. Moose with a .22 short & tracked for 3 days. Costal brown bear killed by an airforce nco with a beretta 92, the list goes on. I heard a first hand account by an African game ranger of a Zulu warrior taking a 45-70 bullet that broke his hip, a week later the ranger found the guy DRT, almost 50 miles away.
Just pick whatever cartridge YOU like, learn the ballistics and go hunt!

[Old Savage]

Very little difference between the 270 and 30-06.

[J Miller]

When I was a lot younger, a fellow I knew said he didn't like the 44-40 because it was sooooooo slow you could shoot it, sit down down and smoke cig before the bullet got there. His favorite was the 30-06.
I have no objection to the 30 cal rifles, or the 270 or any others, however "most" of the time I shoot with my handgun caliber rifles. Less recoil, less noise, more rounds in the magazine and I can bring my eyes down to see the target before the slow moving Keith bullet gets to it.

As for the Elmer vs Jack bickering, I never got into that.

joe

[jeepnik]

Very little difference between the 270 and 30-06.

Yea. Nothing but bullet weight and diameter.

[Old Savage]

And velocity and so you think that is significant for what? What is it you think can be done with the 30-06 that the .270 won't do. ... that O'Connor never realized.

[piller]

Half a dozen of one, and 3 pairs of the other. Yawn!

[fordwannabe]

Have had both the 06 and the 270....still have a couple 06. Nuff said.

[Sixgun]

at reasonable ranges, the big slow bullet, properly placed, always works. Its not the same the other way around.

My Smith 642 38 Spl. stays loaded with 200 grain swaged bullets at a hair over 600 fps. I flatten out the rn tip. The British proved this in WW1. From what I've read..many times...the 200 grain 38 caliber bullet traveling a bit over 600 f.p.s kills as well as a 45 acp. Also, according to what I've read, NOT 700 fps but a bit over 6. Can't remember the load exactly without looking at my notes but I "think" it's 4 grains of 231.

Lost count on the deer I've killed with a 33 Winchester...I also can count many deer (not by me) that have kept going after being hit by high vel. bullets. My in laws run a deer processing business and one year, we had the hunters (several hundred) to write down the cartridge they used....every time , after skinning, a high vel. bullet destroyed 4-6" of meat and sometimes did not exit. 30-30 killed deer with nice entrance and exit holes every time.

Lots has changed since premium bullets entered the game and I can't comment on that anymore. I believe if I was still hunting today and I really needed the meat and ranges could be say..out to 300, I'd choose a medium caliber cartridge with a premium bullet.---6

[Bill in Oregon]

There is very little the .30-06 can't accomplish with the right bullets, and yet Keith disliked the cartridge.
I have never had any interest in a .270 for some reason, but am very fond of another O'Connor favorite, the 7X57.
Whatever turns your crank, eh?

[Ragnor]

Like Sixgun said. Maybe that's why I choose the 300 Savage for most of my Deer hunting? A little more than the 30-30 and a little tamer than the 06, and still a 30 caliber.

[Blaine]

And velocity and so you think that is significant for what? What is it you think can be done with the 30-06 that the .270 won't do. ... that O'Connor never realized.

What can be done? Not too much, but for starters shoot 220+ grain against grizz.

[Blaine]

I've seen 30 cal go thru our little blacktail deer without opening, but a .44 mag etc is instant death. 45-70 is more better, but I stopped shooting them when my shoulder got too painful.

[mikld]

I don't "follow" celebrities in anything whether it be shooting, auto racing, or entertaining. I've read info from both men and have a few books in my reference library, but it's the info/entertainment that I keep them for, not idolizing the writers (I even have books that I'll keep in my library forever and I can't tell you the author).

I like big bullets (but not waaay big for caliber) and my second gun was a 44 Magnum in '86 (S&W 629). I never reloaded any bullet under 240 gr except as an experiment (I loaded some 123 gr balls once, and a few 300 gr.). I now have 5, 44 Magnums and none are shot with bullets under 250 gr. and I keep a few light loaded 250 gr wadcutters around for "potting". I have 6 semi-auto pistols and reload for 5 of them and the small ones are 9mm, and I use 125 gr bullets at a quick pace, but that's the smallest bullet I reload and my 45 ACPs (4) all get 200, my "target 1911", and 225-230 gr. bullets, and 90% are running a bit less than 1,000 fps. So, while I've not thought a lot about it, I guess I'm in the "Big and Slow" camp...

As for rifles, I dunno, I don't hunt anymore so I just shoot for groups and I get some really good groups outta my Ruger in 308 (155 gr. A-Max) and my Garand 30-06 (155 Nosler HPBT).

I don know nuttin' about the 270 vs 30-06 "debate, but here in So. Oregon I have a good friend that hunts Elk, quite successfully, with her 270. When she goes out, she usually comes home with dinner...

[6pt-sika]

I to a degree follow both schools of thought . I like throat burning speed demons and I like launching overly large hunks of lead . And have and will continue to kill deer with both . As to the two individuals mentioned I personally viewed the guy in the five gallon hat , chewing on the cigar as an a...s...s ! But that’s purely personal opinion .

[Grizz]

I hunted deer with 25-20 thru 44 mag and 45/70. I had a remington 7mm mag that was amazing in that it would put 3 different weights of bullets in the black. I had a hunting load for deer, and it was pretty regular at taking them. But 'cept I cornered two on a beach and one broadside boiler room shot had the bullet lodged in the hide on the off side. There went my theory that the 7mm would be more better defense against brer bear than the 25-20.. and so it went. My guide gun, except for two rounds of copper jacket ammo, only shoots Marshall's exquisite hard cast bullets in weights from 325 to 525. I have done lots of comparison shooting comparing results in venison and water jugs and firewood. I get different info from each style of test and being grown up I am fixed in my ways and won't change my mind. Can I make meat with a .22 or .222 or .223, of course. I can still put a bullet in the ear or eye at normal contact distance for SEAK. The issue is that I have no confidence or presumption that the .22s will reliably make a CNS shot on a charging brown bear. And I am more worried about them than I am about a .46 caliber exit wound from the deer. Everybody knows these things, but not every one has done them. I have a 7.62 semi-auto with 21 rounds on tap. I consider that a viable alternative to cover the two things, making meat and stopping meat makers. I've seen freshly eviscerated deer, and I know someone who was eviscerated by brer bear. So my insurance is to not hedge with "this might work" because my confidence level is not that high when the viscisitudes start stacking against me.... kind of why I have fire extinguishers in my car, and bilge pumps on my boat, same idea.

Thanks for getting this going Blaine

[wm]

I am sure O'Connor and Keith had irreconcilable differences but I wonder how much they played it up in a dog and pony show to sell books and magazines. They were both sharp men and had to realize that the controversy was bonanza for them.

Wm

[AJMD429]

I am sure O'Connor and Keith had irreconcilable differences but I wonder how much they played it up in a dog and pony show to sell books and magazines. They were both sharp men and had to realize that the controversy was bonanza for them.

Yep. Both were savvy dudes.

[Blaine]

I am sure O'Connor and Keith had irreconcilable differences but I wonder how much they played it up in a dog and pony show to sell books and magazines. They were both sharp men and had to realize that the controversy was bonanza for them.

Wm

This.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

Faced with making a bowl of tuna salad, I have to think that both Keith and O'Connor would have gone Miracle Whip.

I have a light-weight BAR in 270 and can only conclude that it's gross overkill for the small frame deer we have here in Central Florida. From a tree stand in the area I used to hunt, 70 yards would be a long shot due to the crazy thick foliage we have around here. I should have gone with something more appropriate but everyone I knew had a 270 and so I followed the herd on that. Nothing wrong with it save the muzzle blast from that 20" barrel. We do have a ton of wild hogs in my area and the 270 will put quite a bit of spin on a moving hog if you can manage a hit in the front shoulder area.

If I had a do over, I'd probably get a 92 in 44 or 38WCF or maybe even 357 mag. These days, I'm likely to fall asleep and snore away any wild game in the area. You know, stand hunting being so exciting and all.

[JimT]

And then there is this ....
Jack O'Conner's brother lived near a friend who ran a gun shop. He stopped in the shop a few years back and was talking about Jack. He said Jack never used the 270. He said Jack and Winchester had a deal. Winchester paid for all his hunts and a little cash on the side and he promoted the 270 as the finest rifle and cartridge around. Jack mostly used the 9.3 X 62 while his wife used the 7X57. His brother didn't just come in the shop and start telling the story. He was in the shop several times before he told it. He mentioned keeping it to himself until after Jack died. The gun magazines were the ones who profited from the differences between him and Keith.

[Old Savage]

That would be a little hard to buy. The relative ballistics would not make any sense to choose the 9.3.

[JimT]

That would be a little hard to buy. The relative ballistics would not make any sense to choose the 9.3.

I am not looking to argue. I just am not sure I understand. When you say "The relative ballistics" ... relative to what?

[Old Savage]

9.3x62 would have deficits to the 270 or 30-06 ballistically with no apparent advantages particularly for Western hunting. So, why would Jack make that choice? Frankly, I do not believe the story is true.

[Old Savage]

According Jack's writings he liked both the .270 and 30-06. Now if his brother in likely his old age got the 30-06 confused with the 9.3x62 that might make more sense. I think somebody got the story wrong along the way.

[JimT]

I am only passing on what my friend told me Jack's brother told him. No one has to believe it.

[t.r.]

I've never owned a 270 because I have always hunted 30-30 style. That is, get close and wait for a sure shot into the chest organs from the side angle. The only exception is when I hunt antelope because the distances are much farther due to lack of heavy cover. For these amazing animals I hunt with a .243 and it works like a charm well beyond 250 yards!

Who needs a 270 awkward bolt action during organized deer drives with friends and relatives? If your state allows it, the older Ruger 44 MAG semi-auto is tough to beat but a good 30-30 levergun works well, too!

TR

[6pt-sika]

I've never owned a 270 because I have always hunted 30-30 style. That is, get close and wait for a sure shot into the chest organs from the side angle. The only exception is when I hunt antelope because the distances are much farther due to lack of heavy cover. For these amazing animals I hunt with a .243 and it works like a charm well beyond 250 yards!

Who needs a 270 awkward bolt action during organized deer drives with friends and relatives? If your state allows it, the older Ruger 44 MAG semi-auto is tough to beat but a good 30-30 levergun works well, too!

TR

I’ve been in on quite a few deer drives in the Keystone state and with a bolt action in hand I might add . Several times I’ve plunked a double on the drive with the bolt gun and corralling the empties in my hand to boot . Nothing wrong with the Ruger 44R Carbine I have my third one now and have killed a couple pickup loads with them . As to lever guns I have a place for the 444 with chunks of lead and have had MANY occasions where I got two or more with the gun and again catching the brass while I’m shooting . I’m kinda anal about not loosing brass but it doesn’t seem to slow me down much . Heck there have even been a couple times where I got a double with a Ruger #1 !

0FDF0DA8-C276-4B5E-AA19-14DF10F972B7.jpeg

That was a couple years ago , shot the pair of 8’s in about 15 seconds , it’s a 1H in 375 H&H

[GunnyMack]

Beware the man with a single shot!