Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > General Rifle Discussion > 243 vs 270

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-15-2010, 08:33 PM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Default 243 vs 270

i want to get into long range shooting. i would like to start with a rifle that is good up to 400yds and then move on to a bigger caliber so i don't have to learn everything on .308. i was thinking of 243 or 270 for the 200-400yd and 308 for the 600-1000yrd. any help would be great, just getting into this.....



__________________
spacemonkey is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 04-15-2010, 08:46 PM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Missileman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Omaha,Nebraska
Posts: 492
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Honestly, if you check the ballistic tables, the 270 is just as capable or more of long range target shooting as the 308--they both are capable of firing a 150 gr bullet at about 2850 fps, but the the ballistic coefficient of the 270 is better, so it retains higher velocity and drops less in flight. So, if yo were considering the 270, get it and you won't need to get a 308 later (although neither is an ideal 1000 yard weapon, the 308 is more common because of M1A/M14 long range matches). I assume you're only talking target shooting and not even thinking about hunting at those ranges.



__________________
Dave

"Adversity does not make a man--it reveals him"
Missileman is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 08:55 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Default

no way would i hunt anything but paper @ those ranges. i am not in the "i took a elk @ 400yd last week" crowd. i know it is possible, i just have ethics. i forgot to mention that i was on a budget. also would you recommend Remington or savage?

__________________

Last edited by spacemonkey; 04-15-2010 at 08:56 PM. Reason: mistype
spacemonkey is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 09:28 PM   #4
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
c3shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Third bunker on the right,Central Virginia
Posts: 16,326
Liked 8392 Times on 3630 Posts
Likes Given: 1293

Default

For the money, Savage.

__________________

What we have heah is.... failure to communicate.

c3shooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 09:37 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Missileman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Omaha,Nebraska
Posts: 492
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c3shooter View Post
For the money, Savage.
I agree, especially with their accu-trigger--although I've noticed their prices creeping up lately and are almost on par with Remington. Either one would be a great choice.
__________________
Dave

"Adversity does not make a man--it reveals him"
Missileman is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2010, 09:45 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Default

is the accutrigger that good

__________________
spacemonkey is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2010, 01:28 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Centerfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
Default

I have a Savage 3oo Win Mag with an accu-trigger. It is pretty cool. It is just one more thing to adjust and play with.
Although I must admit that after adjusting it 1 time at the range, I have never touched it again.

__________________
www.CenterfireCS.com
WeaponCLP
Centerfire is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2010, 12:39 PM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 973
Default

.243 and .270 ammo roughly runs about the same price. I would go with the .270 because it's a good general hunting caliber and can do the long range target shooting you're wanting to do. I believe you'll get more use out of a .270 rather than a .243.

__________________
UnderFire is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2010, 02:52 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Stafford, Virginia,The state of insanity.
Posts: 14,043
Liked 33 Times on 28 Posts

Default

Why not take a stop in the forgotten middle with a quater bore and look at the 25-06. This is a superb medium rang caliber.

Both Sierra and Hornady offer bullets from 75gr Varmint bullets to 120gr hunting bullets. Berger offers 87gr and 115gr match grade bullets.

Granted you don't get the selection of either the 6mm or the 270 but the 25-06 is a great cartridge and I think it would fit your goals better than either a 243 or a 270...

__________________
cpttango30 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2010, 11:26 PM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Winchester62a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Default

I used to do a lot of chuck shooting when I came out of Nam in 66..I'm a small guy so recoil was important to me..I used a 243 and loaded my own stuff..you might want to look at the trajectory tables and recoil tables from Chuck Hawkes..they would give you an idea as what to expect..the fellas gave you some great advice on this website!



__________________
Winchester62a is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes




Newest Threads