270 VS 6.5 partitions

[orchemo]

Anything a 6.5 cal - 125 gr Partition @ 3050 FPS won't do that a 130 gr Partition from a 270 Win will do?

Essentially 6.5 Rem Mag verses a 270 Win?

Since the 270 Win was the "Anything in North America" why not the 6.5 Rem Mag?

 

[gerry]

You are correct you won't be able to tell them apart in the field, the 6.5mm RM is a really great round as is the 270 Win.

 

[SJB358]

I can't think of anything. I have some 125 PT's I always wanted to load for my 264, but I have done pretty well with the 140's in mine. Not much I wouldn't hunt with the 6.5RM and the 125 PT's. Pretty strong combo.

 

[6mm Remington]

I would think they both would work just fine. My buddies 270 with 130 gr. Partitions does a great job. I do not have a 6.5 of any kind, at least not yet, but you never know! :grin:

 

[DrMike]

Hunt North America with your 6.5 RM with confidence. Learn the trajectory, pick your shots and enjoy the game your bring home.

 

[sask boy]

DrMike hit it right on the head!! I am a 270 guy but confidence in what you are shooting and shot placement are the most important things in a hunt.
I recently witnessed a older gentleman :wink: with a 7mm-08 and a 280 that would likely not need any other calibers if he so choose too.
Enjoy your rifle and remember photos and good hunting stories are always welcome :lol:

Blessings,
Dan

 

[DrMike]

Likely not need any other calibers if he so choose too.

Ah, but the questions is, "Would he be content?" So many rifles; so little time. :grin:

 

[Teknys]

I own a 270WSM and have owned both the 264 WM and the 260 Rem. All have been used on deer and elk. All with Nosler PTs 150 and 140gn. The 260 with 130gn Scirocco Like others have said - hunt with confidence and place the shot. My son lost a buck with the 260 that was hit too far back. I can't think other any other issues with any of these rounds. I will have a 6.5 again some day.

 

[JD338]

I have not hinted with a 270 Win but the ballistics of the subject calibers are almost identical.
I have tested the 125 gr PT in the 6.5mm Rem Mag and the penetration is more than enough for big game hunting. If you are hunting elk and mose, I would opt for the 140 gr PT.
These 125 gr PT's were recovered in the 5th water jug at 100 yds. MV was 3040 fps.

JD338

 

[Oldtrader3]

I have used the 125 gr, .264 Partition in the 6.5 Swede (a CZ-Mauser) and the 130 gr, .270 Partition in my .270 Win. However, I have only shot one deer with the Swede, plus probably (75) or so deer with the .270 but based on a small 6.5 sample, I would rate them as being pretty close in performance.

 

[onesonek]

Anything a 6.5 cal - 125 gr Partition @ 3050 FPS won't do that a 130 gr Partition from a 270 Win will do?

Normally I would go with the larger frontal given a choice. But in this case, it's about a wash with the 6.5/125 having a slightly higher SD. At least for the critters I would use them on.

Essentially 6.5 Rem Mag verses a 270 Win?
Refer to above and below.


Since the 270 Win was the "Anything in North America" why not the 6.5 Rem Mag?

Maybe, if your totally in the O'Conner camp. But in that aspect, give me a .30 caliber of the .30-06 class or maybe a bit more.
That and in my opinion, neither bullet weight is an all inclusive bullet, as in "Anything".
Elk would be the endgate, but in limited circumstance's. Just not enough mass with either for my liking. Deer or smaller,,,flip a coin.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I am not in the JOC camp and sold all of his books but one, years ago. However, I enjoyed reading his books as entertaining stories which are well written. I have killed a lot of deer in my life with calibers ranging from 9mm Luger to .338 Win Mag. I just settled on what I had that works, killing deer DRT, with boring regularity, accuracy, and with sufficient energy. I don't follow anybody's life as a model for mine. Besides, a 6.5 mm Rem Mag or my 6.5 Swede would have delivered the same results and outcome 99% of the time.

Personally, I like the .270 as a deer caliber but it would not be my first choice for elk under most conditions, starting with my .300 H&H, 165 gr Partition as my preferred minimum, not that it matters. My days of elk hunting are numbered by old age and chronic illness. I will just have to be satisfied with those animals that I have harvested. With elk, my actual kills span using the .30-06 through various .338 mags. All did their job as predicted.

BOT, I have had several friends who I hunted with for 20 or more years who used the various 6.5mm or .270 Win cartridges for shooting mule deer. Looking back over the hundreds of deer that this grouping of hunters have killed with their particular 6.5mm or .270 caliber rifles, I can not honestly say, that practically speaking, one of these two closely confuged (BC and SD coefficient) bullets at similar velocities is superior to the other in any significant way. Experience just does not bear that out.

 

[onesonek]

Anything a 6.5 cal - 125 gr Partition @ 3050 FPS won't do that a 130 gr Partition from a 270 Win will do?

Normally I would go with the larger frontal given a choice. But in this case, it's about a wash with the 6.5/125 having a slightly higher SD. At least for the critters I would use them on.

Essentially 6.5 Rem Mag verses a 270 Win?
Refer to above and below.


Since the 270 Win was the "Anything in North America" why not the 6.5 Rem Mag?

Maybe, if your totally in the O'Conner camp. But in that aspect, give me a .30 caliber of the .30-06 class or maybe a bit more.
That and in my opinion, neither bullet weight is an all inclusive bullet, as in "Anything".
Elk would be the endgate, but in limited circumstance's. Just not enough mass with either for my liking. Deer or smaller,,,flip a coin.

I will add to that last part,,,,, with the heavier bullets available, would change things up a bit.

 

[muleman]

Eric,
Elk have been cleanly taken with 6.5s and smaller calibers as well. You don't have any concerns because I'm sure you'd take that pretty 35 Whelen elk hunting and save that 6.5 for deer. In the field with similar bullets you wouldn't be able to see the difference.

Scott