Post by: actionshooter on May 05, 2008, 09:37:00 PM
Just looking for opinions on the 2 calibers and why.
Post by: ICEMAN on May 05, 2008, 09:42:51 PM
Post by: MountainWalk on May 05, 2008, 09:44:16 PM
Post by: Red Dawg on May 05, 2008, 09:47:27 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on May 05, 2008, 09:49:10 PM
Post by: Red Dawg on May 05, 2008, 09:50:52 PM
Post by: MountainWalk on May 05, 2008, 09:53:50 PM
i just think there are better more sensible choices out there.. shoot a box of 270wsm's runs pretty close to some of my 338 shells
Post by: bobcat on May 05, 2008, 10:03:09 PM
Post by: bobcat on May 05, 2008, 10:07:54 PM
The 300 is nearly identical and the 270wsm is much better than the traditional one.
I wouldn't say the 270 WSM is much better than the "traditional one." Sure it's maybe 200 feet per second faster but that extra velocity comes with the use of more powder and produces more recoil. And you're really not going to see any ballistic advantage until you get out beyond 400 yards. I know I don't feel handicapped in the least with my "traditional" 270 and I'd prefer to not have any more recoil than it already has.
Post by: MountainWalk on May 05, 2008, 10:14:12 PM
bottom line,, i dont feel a huge need to get over 3000fps,, i really like things between 2600-2800 feet per second.. dont like bullets flying apart at close ranges and i dont really need to buy premium bullets for deer hunting..
i agree, the 300sm will prolly outlive the 270sm... dont know what happened to the wssm's... golly thats a lot of "s's"....
Post by: Red Dawg on May 06, 2008, 05:46:16 AM
Post by: Bofire on May 06, 2008, 07:04:27 AM
Carl
Post by: Tony 270WSM on May 06, 2008, 07:31:35 AM
Post by: Curly on May 06, 2008, 07:41:58 AM
Personally, I think the T3 lite is too light for chambering in the 300WSM. I like a little heavier rifle for the 30 magnums to help reduce felt recoil. But the 270WSM seems like it would be about right for that rifle. I think 140gr Barnes TSX would be great in that cartridge.
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 08:29:30 AM
I don't need a short mag but I don't have one in the safe :chuckle:
I'm an ounce counter b/c this will be used as a backpack rifle.
I'm leaning to the 270WSM due to the ballistic coeficient, I don't go looking for long range shots but if one is presented and I can't get closer I will take the shot if the conditions are right.
Thats a whole other topic thats been covered here in the past. ;)
Post by: Intruder on May 06, 2008, 08:41:44 AM
Post by: archery288 on May 06, 2008, 08:50:13 AM
Post by: Bofire on May 06, 2008, 11:40:13 AM
I have a few Tikkas.
Carl
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 11:50:44 AM
:)In the Tikkas all the actions are the same length. I have one in 300Win Mag and my brother has the 300 short mag in Tikkas, the recoil is not a big deal.Ya carl thats a bummer about the Tikkas, long action is all thats offered.
I have a few Tikkas.
Carl
But a Tikka weighs 6.3# and cost $600, in comparison the Remington Alaskan Ti (Remingtons lightweight) weighs 6# and cost $2000
Post by: FOsteology on May 06, 2008, 12:23:57 PM
However, initially you mentioned that you considered the 7mm WSM. Are you aware that it's available in the Kimber Montana? Weighs in at 6 1/4 lbs ;)
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 12:28:51 PM
Post by: Bofire on May 06, 2008, 05:43:03 PM
LOL 8)
sorry couldn't help my self
Carl
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 05:53:24 PM
and a Kimber 'might' shoot as good as a remington, neither are close to a Tikka.The fact the Kimber might shoot like crap is an issue also. They don't have the best rep.
LOL 8)
sorry couldn't help my self
Carl
Post by: FOsteology on May 06, 2008, 06:18:23 PM
and a Kimber 'might' shoot as good as a remington, neither are close to a Tikka.The fact the Kimber might shoot like crap is an issue also. They don't have the best rep.
LOL 8)
sorry couldn't help my self
Carl
The Montana hands down is a MUCH better rifle than the Tikka. You actually get a lot of rifle for the $$. Nothing else on the factory market comes close.
A couple of issues are typically brought up when discussing the Montana..... feeding and accuracy.
I believe the feeding issues of a couple years ago have been resolved.
On accuracy.... honestly, I think some of it might be technique as some folks just don't shoot light weight rifles that well.
Plus, the receiver having thin walls, a pencil thin barrel.... the bedding needs to be just right.
I'd gamble on another Montana. If it didn't shoot well out of the box, for less than four bills Hill Country Rifles would square it away. Even with the extra $$ spent, it's still a lot of rifle for money.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 06, 2008, 08:33:31 PM
Post by: bankwalker on May 06, 2008, 08:38:19 PM
I'd go with a 270 too. And if I were spending Kimber $$$, I'd step up a couple more bills and get a Sako 85 Finlight.....
those finlights are awesome rifles. my budie has one and he wouldnt trade it for anything. i know ive try'd getting it many times lol
btw anyone know the wieght of the finlight? i have not been able to find those specs on it anywhere.
Post by: MountainWalk on May 06, 2008, 10:02:17 PM
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 10:05:11 PM
I looked it up one time and the finlights are actually a little heavier than the tikka T3 lite.I'd go with a 270 too. And if I were spending Kimber $$$, I'd step up a couple more bills and get a Sako 85 Finlight.....
those finlights are awesome rifles. my budie has one and he wouldnt trade it for anything. i know ive try'd getting it many times lol
btw anyone know the wieght of the finlight? i have not been able to find those specs on it anywhere.
As for the kimber montanas, They are everything I am looking for except for the bad reviews on accuracy. I have read so much bad press, there is NO way its coincidence or just all around poor shooting.
Post by: mossback91 on May 06, 2008, 10:08:34 PM
I looked it up one time and the finlights are actually a little heavier than the tikka T3 lite.I'd go with a 270 too. And if I were spending Kimber $$$, I'd step up a couple more bills and get a Sako 85 Finlight.....
those finlights are awesome rifles. my budie has one and he wouldnt trade it for anything. i know ive try'd getting it many times lol
btw anyone know the wieght of the finlight? i have not been able to find those specs on it anywhere.
As for the kimber montanas, They are everything I am looking for except for the bad reviews on accuracy. I have read so much bad press, there is NO way its coincidence or just all around poor shooting.
Didnt you see the vid of BIgStick shooting at 700 yards with his?
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2008, 10:11:53 PM
I almost forgot about that guy :chuckle:
The deal with the montanas are they shoot really well or crappy, luck of the draw
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 06, 2008, 10:20:22 PM
The tikka kinda defeats the "short mag" theory, being they have the same length actions, the feeding problems will be non-existent with the the straight stack clip as well. My coyote buster is a T3 223, just can't like the way it fits, but I get by... Here's mine, homemade camo job, 3x9 Ziess....
Post by: 700xcr on May 06, 2008, 10:22:31 PM
Post by: Tony 270WSM on May 06, 2008, 10:36:11 PM
Looked at the Sako, a very fine rifle. Heard nothing but good things about them.
Post by: MountainWalk on May 06, 2008, 10:42:14 PM
Post by: Tony 270WSM on May 06, 2008, 10:48:40 PM
Post by: MountainWalk on May 06, 2008, 10:54:06 PM
for deer and bear i like plain old 200 grain power points
Post by: bankwalker on May 06, 2008, 11:38:18 PM
:chuckle: Thats funny
I almost forgot about that guy :chuckle:
The deal with the montanas are they shoot really well or crappy, luck of the draw
yeah thats what made me turn away from them. they are everything i want in a rifle. but i dont want to take the chance and get a crappy one.
ill stick with my ruger...if i decide to trade my blackwidow to get it back from my buddie lol
other then that its gonna be a tikka t3 lite or remington mountain lss...
Post by: Bofire on May 08, 2008, 12:44:33 PM
Secondly, I will NOT put money into a new rifle, if it does not shoot well from the factory, it gets sold. Every Tikka I have fired shoots like crazy and they need nothing done. I was a Remington fan for years but when it got to the point of buying a new rifle, getting it bedded, trigger job etc, I quit buying them. Same reason I wont buy Ruger rifles.
Sako is super.
To your question, I'd go with the 300 for your use due to your range of 400 yards, I wont shoot that far, but if you can, I think a 180 or 200 grain at 400 yards is much more effective than a 130-150 grain.
By the way Fosteology shot my 300 mag Tikka T3 lite, if he comments, I am sure he will say, the recoil is not big deal.
Carl
Post by: Antlershed on May 08, 2008, 02:39:58 PM
To some degree it's a flip of the coin. Both are gonna be great out to 300-350yards. If you're talking 400 yard shots though I think you're be a lil better off w/ the 300wsm. Not that the 270 can't perform at those ranges but more that the 300's bullet weights are going to perform better. Once you get over about 300yards I think you're pushing the envelope a little on the 270... especially if on bigger animals.If you can place your shot right where you want it, the .270 is fine. There was a guy on another board that dropped a bear in one shot with his .270 at 452 yards. It was a total custom rifle, but as long as the bullet hits where you want, its gonna go down. And, if you are going to be shooting those ranges, you better be able to hit where you want to. :twocents:
Post by: FOsteology on May 08, 2008, 03:15:42 PM
The Tikka has no doubt earned a reputation for accuracy at an affordable price. The actions are very slick, they feed flawlessly, and have good triggers. Plus, they're light and balance well IMO.... however, after owning a few and handling/shooting several others, I simply couldn't warm up to the extensive use of plastic. The stock particularly exhibits too much flex....
Carl mentioned recoil is not bad..... that's subjective! I shoot mainly medium bores (.35 calibers) and up, so what feels light to me may feel like a donkey punch to someone else! lol
Plus, no fair throwing your .300WM T3 in the mix in regards to felt recoil.... your rifle had a braked! :tung: lol
While I have not owned a Remington chambered in any of the WSM flavors, I have heard consistently that they typically exhibit feeding and extraction issues.
If I were in the market for a WSM and wasn't building, the Montana would get my money. Dealing with a simple recrown or bedding issue is no big deal.
Post by: 700xcr on May 08, 2008, 06:35:41 PM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on May 08, 2008, 06:45:30 PM
Post by: Tony 270WSM on May 08, 2008, 07:03:29 PM
What kind of groups are you getting?
Post by: 700xcr on May 08, 2008, 07:07:46 PM
Post by: Red Dawg on May 08, 2008, 07:11:38 PM
Post by: NORRISKI2 on May 08, 2008, 09:33:42 PM
Post by: MountainWalk on May 08, 2008, 09:38:03 PM
Post by: bankwalker on May 08, 2008, 09:52:35 PM
im still in the market for a new rifle. and im trying my hardest to stay away from a wsm...thats all ive owned besides my 243. which is in reality a shortmag minus the magnum part :chuckle:
Post by: saylean on May 09, 2008, 01:29:09 PM
Of course, I dont reload or take 300 yard shots...so im no expert.