6.8 Western vs. .270 Is The Hype Justified?

[Sackett]

So, I'm looking to buy a larger caliber rifle capable of Elk-sized game, without going to a .30 caliber cartridge. I'm liking the ballistics of the 6.8 Western but wondering if it's truly "far ahead" of the .270 (not the wsm) and worthy of my interest?

I bought my wife a 6.5 Creedmoor and like the round for her uses, but feel it has dramatically been over-hyped for most hunting scenarios (small or lack of blood trails, using Hornady Whitetail ). I'm traditionally a "Traditionalist" and feel most established cartridges will perform just as well as the latest/greatest in true hunting conditions.

[TacticalCowboy]

The Western is ~150 fps faster with a 150 grain bullet than the .270. Doubt that’s enough to matter at 300 yards and closer. Out to 500 it’s still splitting hairs.

The advantage to the 6.8 is the rifles are being offered in faster twist barrels to take advantage of the BC of heavy bullets.

I gotta know though, if you’re planning on shooting big critters, why not just move up to a 300WM/WSM??

[Southernhunters]

In for this also….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reaper]

270 is fine, 6.8 western is not worth the hype IMO.

For what its worth, this year, a guy in our camp made what we all though was a great shot on a bull at around 300 yards with his new 6.8. We tracked him for over 2 miles before we lost blood, looked the next 2 days because it was close to camp and never found him.

The following day another buddy killed a nice 6x6 at around 250 yards with a 25.06 [emoji3] and watched him die within 50 yards.

I've been lugging a 300wm M70 featherweight for the past few years and just switched to a kimber 84L Montana in 270 this year. It weighs 6.75lbs with a 3x9x40 leupold and 4 rounds, mountain slayer.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Diamond07]

You get to throw heavier bullets out of the 6.8 than you can with the .270 and get higher energy for those bigger critters.

[Diamond07]

270 is fine, 6.8 western is not worth the hype IMO.

For what its worth, this year, a guy in our camp made what we all though was a great shot on a bull at around 300 yards with his new 6.8. We tracked him for over 2 miles before we lost blood, looked the next 2 days because it was close to camp and never found him.

The following day another buddy killed a nice 6x6 at around 250 yards with a 25.06 [emoji3] and watched him die within 50 yards.

I've been lugging a 300wm M70 featherweight for the past few years and just switched to a kimber 84L Montana in 270 this year. It weighs 6.75lbs with a 3x9x40 leupold and 4 rounds, mountain slayer.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I agree. It’s more about shot placement than anything, to a certain extent. If you plan on shooting 500-600 yards, it’s still about placement, but I’d lean more for a 7mag to 300 at that distance over let’s say a .270 or 25-06 in my opinion.

[txhunt7]

ok, if your gonna shoot an elk, might some day you want to shoot a nilgai?
If so, wouldn't that require a 300WM or larger?
This is on the assumption the nilgai ranches require this.
Just asking because I'm wondering the same thing and would rather get a gun suited for both. Of course you may not care about that.

[Reaper]

I agree. It’s more about shot placement than anything, to a certain extent. If you plan on shooting 500-600 yards, it’s still about placement, but I’d lean more for a 7mag to 300 at that distance over let’s say a .270 or 25-06 in my opinion.

Agreed on both points:
-shot placement is the key
- if you're pushing past 500 yards you're probably better off with something bigger like a 7mag to a 30 cal

Personally I have not put in any practice beyond 500 yards so 270 works well for what I will confidently shoot out to at this point.

I have a 338wm for nilgia [emoji28]

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Bigfootwolff]

The unfortunate truth is that a lot of sponsored gun writers and gun publications routinely promote new calibers that ammunition manufacturers have developed. Most are highly favorable of the new rounds, even if there is an existing round that already provides similar ballistics. I am certainly not opposed to new round development, as technology is always changing, and a cartridge that offers less recoil, shoots flatter, resists wind drift, handles high B.C. bullets, is intrinsically accurate, and provides exceptional terminal performance on game is what many hunters are in constant pursuit of, myself included.

I genuinely appreciate the hunter, often an old timer, that is completely content with the hunting rifle and caliber combination he has been shooting many years/decades with highly effective results. Whether it be a 30-06, .270, or 30-30. Most of these hunters know their effective shot range, their marksmanship capabilities, and whether or not a particular round is sufficient for taking the intended game species. They accept that their rifles have limitations and elect to operate within those limitations, often focusing on woodsmanship, improving overall hunting skills, mentoring younger hunters, and enjoying the fellowship of the hunting camp experience. I sometimes envy the contentment these hunters have. Instead I am often driven, sometimes in a maddening way, to pursue the next latest and greatest rifle and cartridge combination.

I suspect whether it is hunting, fishing, or golf, men are in constant pursuit of that new gadget that promises to give us an edge and cause us to be more effective in these pursuits. I don know if it is related to some deep seeded insecurity about our own abilities, and the continued need to accel at these sports, but there will always be the new, the improved, the latest, and the greatest, and as long as we buy those things, manufacturers will continue to produce them. Please know that I am not knocking technology or new product development, because that is inevitable. Without these advances, we might all still be shooting lead balls out of black powder rifles. The OP's post really got me to thinking about what drives us in the pursuit of a new caliber and/or rifle combination when we may already have an existing caliber/rifle that is completely adequate for the task at hand. I am thankful for technology and being able to live in a country that allows me to purchase whatever rifle and caliber combination I may want, but I also hope that at some point in my life I genuinely become completely content with my selection of rifles/calibers, and choose to just focus on the other meaningful aspects of hunting as a whole.

To the OP, I apologize for hijacking your thread, but to answer your question I would lean toward the .270 Win over the 6.8 as long as your shots were no more than 300-400 yards. If 500 yards are longer I would give more serious thought to the 6.8, or even the 7mm mag. Not sure if you handload, but if you primarily purchase factory rounds, you will find a lot more choices in available factory rounds in the .270 or even 7mm mag, than you will 6.8. I like to test my rifles with multiple loads to determine which one my guns like best. Once I have found that particular round it definitely helps me develop confidence in my rifle/cartridge setup. As others have already noted, shot placement is in large part the key to a successful game harvest. If you have a rifle/cartridge that you shoot extremely well, without excessive recoil /muzzle blast, and one that gives you tremendous confidence in knowing where the crosshairs rest, the bullet will strike, you are going to be in great shape to harvest an elk. Good luck to the OP in his pursuit.

[diamond10x]

.270 and be done. Ammo for the other is hard to find and there isn’t much in the way of choices. Like stated above, manufacturers are putting fast twists in the barrels just like they did with the 6.5, giving it the appearance of a better performing cartridge.

[bbqfan5909]

Same bullet traveling faster, not the caliber's fault, that's a shot placement issue. Yall should be slinging 7mm and up IMO

270 is fine, 6.8 western is not worth the hype IMO.

For what its worth, this year, a guy in our camp made what we all though was a great shot on a bull at around 300 yards with his new 6.8. We tracked him for over 2 miles before we lost blood, looked the next 2 days because it was close to camp and never found him.

The following day another buddy killed a nice 6x6 at around 250 yards with a 25.06 [emoji3] and watched him die within 50 yards.

I've been lugging a 300wm M70 featherweight for the past few years and just switched to a kimber 84L Montana in 270 this year. It weighs 6.75lbs with a 3x9x40 leupold and 4 rounds, mountain slayer.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[ColinR]

If you buying a new rifle and plan to hunt elk and don't want a 30 cal. to me the easy and correct answer is 7mm family.

Now from there you can choose which 7mm you want based on how you want the rifle set up. Short barrel do 7-08 or 7 SAUM, Long barrel get a 7 Rem Mag, 28 Nosler, 280AI

At the end of the day, its shot placement that counts not caliber. I would take a well placed 243 over a bad 338 lapua any day.

[Barney1971]

The unfortunate truth is that a lot of sponsored gun writers and gun publications routinely promote new calibers that ammunition manufacturers have developed. Most are highly favorable of the new rounds, even if there is an existing round that already provides similar ballistics. I am certainly not opposed to new round development, as technology is always changing, and a cartridge that offers less recoil, shoots flatter, resists wind drift, handles high B.C. bullets, is intrinsically accurate, and provides exceptional terminal performance on game is what many hunters are in constant pursuit of, myself included.

I genuinely appreciate the hunter, often an old timer, that is completely content with the hunting rifle and caliber combination he has been shooting many years/decades with highly effective results. Whether it be a 30-06, .270, or 30-30. Most of these hunters know their effective shot range, their marksmanship capabilities, and whether or not a particular round is sufficient for taking the intended game species. They accept that their rifles have limitations and elect to operate within those limitations, often focusing on woodsmanship, improving overall hunting skills, mentoring younger hunters, and enjoying the fellowship of the hunting camp experience. I sometimes envy the contentment these hunters have. Instead I am often driven, sometimes in a maddening way, to pursue the next latest and greatest rifle and cartridge combination.

I suspect whether it is hunting, fishing, or golf, men are in constant pursuit of that new gadget that promises to give us an edge and cause us to be more effective in these pursuits. I don know if it is related to some deep seeded insecurity about our own abilities, and the continued need to accel at these sports, but there will always be the new, the improved, the latest, and the greatest, and as long as we buy those things, manufacturers will continue to produce them. Please know that I am not knocking technology or new product development, because that is inevitable. Without these advances, we might all still be shooting lead balls out of black powder rifles. The OP's post really got me to thinking about what drives us in the pursuit of a new caliber and/or rifle combination when we may already have an existing caliber/rifle that is completely adequate for the task at hand. I am thankful for technology and being able to live in a country that allows me to purchase whatever rifle and caliber combination I may want, but I also hope that at some point in my life I genuinely become completely content with my selection of rifles/calibers, and choose to just focus on the other meaningful aspects of hunting as a whole.

To the OP, I apologize for hijacking your thread, but to answer your question I would lean toward the .270 Win over the 6.8 as long as your shots were no more than 300-400 yards. If 500 yards are longer I would give more serious thought to the 6.8, or even the 7mm mag. Not sure if you handload, but if you primarily purchase factory rounds, you will find a lot more choices in available factory rounds in the .270 or even 7mm mag, than you will 6.8. I like to test my rifles with multiple loads to determine which one my guns like best. Once I have found that particular round it definitely helps me develop confidence in my rifle/cartridge setup. As others have already noted, shot placement is in large part the key to a successful game harvest. If you have a rifle/cartridge that you shoot extremely well, without excessive recoil /muzzle blast, and one that gives you tremendous confidence in knowing where the crosshairs rest, the bullet will strike, you are going to be in great shape to harvest an elk. Good luck to the OP in his pursuit.

best response... keep it simple. the .270 has taken LOTS of elk. if you want to shoot 500yds, like bigfootwolff said lean towards the 7mag..
get you a good reliable setup, find out what load it likes and practice, learn your rifle. you will get tired of trying to find ammo or getting someone to reload for you after a few years of having one of those wildcat calibers.

[saintsfan]

I love all of the new calibers that are being pushed by the manufacturers. It gives us a "reason" to buy a new gun. But at the end of the day, a .270 or 7mm Rem Mag would be the more prudent choice for your applications. Unless of course you are just looking for an excuse to buy a new gun.

[powderburner]

reading this.. I guess I need to buy 7MM so I can have the hat trick