The Firearms Forum banner

.270 Winchester or 6.5 Creedmoor

  • .270 Win

    Votes: 15 78.9%
  • 6.5 Creed

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Neither

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Don't care

    Votes: 2 10.5%

.270 Winchester vs. 6.5 Creedmoor

882 Views 43 Replies 14 Participants Last post by  Old School or Nothing
Which would you rather use for deer, and why?
I'm posting this on behalf of my grandfather. He's in Kansas.

Many thanks!!
  • Wow
Reactions: 1
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Of the two, the 270, hands down....because that's what I used looooooong before the CM saw the light of day. As with engines, where "there's no substitute for cubic inches", in cartridges, "there's no substitute for powder capacity" and the 270 has that in spades over the CM. And I simply like the 270 better.
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2
Personally, I wouldn't use either one because I don't own either one of them. Now, having said that if I was still physically capable of trudging up und down the canyons and ridges and risking getting shot at by all the idiots in the woods these days, I'd use something I already own. As to what your grandfather uses that's his choice but .270 ammo is probably easier to find and it will do the job.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Of the two, the 270, hands down....because that's what I used looooooong before the CM saw the light of day. As with engines, where "there's no substitute for cubic inches", in cartridges, "there's no substitute for powder capacity" and the 270 has that in spades over the CM. And I simply like the 270 better.
After about 300 yards the 6.5 has more energy, though...
  • Like
Reactions: 1
You asked, not me.

Well, not according to Hornady



Hmm, after looking closer at the chart it appears the 270 has better ballistics across the board. How 'bout dem apples?
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 5
270 would be my pick. Bullets are likely easier and cheaper to get for the 270 also. Creedmore may not kick as much and would work fine out to 300 yards so it depends on what you like. The creed is a short action so may be a little lighter in the field and handle easier. For WT deer most like to use 1500ft# as a ranging factor but many have been taken with 30-30 and lesser loadings at respectable ranges and good shot placement. You would want a decent bullet for hunting and not something for shooting targets at long range (PSP).
  • Like
Reactions: 2
270 Win is my choice - mainly because I've reloaded it and have it for deer and pronghorn. It's a nice flat shooter with good energy for any reasonable hunting distances (I typically work for shots between 100 yd and 200 yd; although, pronghorn are sometimes closer to 300 yd). For the same bullet mass and design, the 270 Win ballistics have an edge over the 6.5 Creedmoor, out to maybe 500 yd. Now if you're talking long-range target shooting, I'd have to give the 6.5 Creedmoor a serious look. Either cartridge (or reloading supplies) is likely to be available from most ammo sellers.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
How 'bout dem apples?
???
  • Wow
Reactions: 1
lol....nevemind. As Louie Armstrong said, "If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand it."
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Between the two it would be 270 hands down but I'd take a 30-06 over the 270.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Jack O'Connor and I have a lot in common.

鈥淎ssuming a cartridge can make its way on merit alone, that cartridge is the .270 W.C.F. In its early years it sat in the corner, dressed in sackcloth and covered with ashes, while few riflemen suspected that underneath it had a figger like Miss America, a disposition like an angel, and it could bake pies like Mother used to make.鈥

鈥 鈥淭he .270 Can Do Big Things,鈥 featured in The Lost Classics of Jack O鈥機onnor, originally in Outdoor Life, 1943
  • Like
Reactions: 5
If those were my only two choices, 270. It's what you get when you take the legendary 30-06 and neck it down for a little smaller/lighter bullet, with the same horsepower behind it. If I were to expand beyond my typical selection of 30-30, 30-06, 30 Carbine, 45-70, 45 auto, 45 Colt, and 44-40, then 270 would be a top consideration along with 25-06, 35 Whelen, 300 Winchester Magnum, and 6.8 Western.

Given the choice of anything in the world for deer though, I'd use a Model 94 in 30 WCF/30-30 or maybe my Henry H010B 45-70 for a heavier brush setting in the woods, or 30-06 for longer shots in the open, maybe 270 or one of the other bottlenecks if I ever get one.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Looks like the 270 wins. No votes at all for the Creedmore. Is this the results you were expecting?
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 5
Is this the results you were expecting?
Not exactly.

Sooooo...

I haven't heard any real (scientific if you will) reasons why you wouldn't use the 6.5. I'm not looking for nostalgic, "I just like the .270 better" or any such answers. I want proof that the .270 or 6.5, whichever the case, is better. Gel block tests, better accuracy, better ballistics, less wind drift, etc. etc. You get the point.

No offense please!!
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Which does your grandpa favor?

Accuracy will be a function of the rifle, the load and the nut pulling the trigger. I DO NOT subscribe to "an inherently accurate" cartridge. One is as mechanically accurate as the other. After the mechanics and the quality of the rifle and ammo, the difference becomes the shooter.

The 6.5 Creedmoor is a fine cartridge, of that there is no doubt. However, it's no better than several European 6.5 cartridges that came out before 1900. The Creedmoor benefitted greatly from a lot of R&D and superb marketing that quite frankly simply wasn't available 125-135 years ago. In a modern rifle at modern pressures the Creedmoor isn't quite as good as the 6.5 Swede, it won't touch the 6.5 X 57, 6.5 X 68 and a half dozen other much earlier 6.5's. From American makers, the 264 Win. Mag. leaves the Creedmoor in its dust....as well as a lot of other 6.5's.

The 270 was introduced in 1925 in the Model 54 Winchester. Rosso is close when he says the 270 was developed from the famous 30-06 but not quite...and it's sort of picking nits. The 270 was actually the 30-03 necked down. The ONLY difference is the 30-03 had an ever so slightly longer neck than the '06, which accounts for the slightly longer neck of the 270. For all intents and purposes, it doesn't matter.

As I understand it, the 6.5 CM is based on the 308 case. That case is 51mm in length. The 270 is 64mm in length. That's a 13mm difference, so close to 1/2 inch in SAE sizes as to be inarguable. Now, you cannot have 1/2 inch more powder capacity in a cartridge case in a cartridge a mere 0.013 larger in groove diameter and having a 2,000 to 3,000 PSI HIGHER operating pressure, (accoding to SAAMI and CIP, respectively), and it NOT outperform a smaller case operating at a lower pressure. Yes, the neck length of the CM and the 270 precludes an actual 1/2 in. more capacity but, it's close enough for conversation. I've been doing this so long I didn't need Hornady to tell me the 270 had more energy beyond 300 yards than the Creedmoor, and that with essentially the same weight bullet in which the 6.5 will have a higher sectional density and, for a while, a higher ballistics coefficient. Put a 150, 160 or 170 gr. bullet in the 270 and the difference becomes even greater.

To re-cap, the 6.5 Creedmoor is a fine cartridge but, it isn't the 270. Guess what, the 270 isn't a 300 Win. Mag. There is no substitute for case capacity when operating pressures are, for all intents and purposes, identical. Mathematical games can be played and bullet weights toyed with but, ballistics are ballistics, they don't change. You can't make a 243 a 30-06 or a 6.5 a 270. All four will kill a deer graveyard dead and none is any "better" than the other. They do excel in different areas of ballistics but, beyond that, it is and always will be a matter of taste and a POPULARITY contest. Make your choice and go forth happily killing deer, or whatever, and don't concern yourself with what others prefer from their experience and THEIR taste. So what if someone "likes he 270 better", it's their money, taste and experience.

Those are the facts and they'll stand on their own.

I'm not anti-6.5. I own two, a 1903 Mannlicher/Schoenauer from the 1920's in 6.5 X 54 M/S and a mid-60's Husqvarna on a Mauser 98 in 6.5 Swede. I have a fondness for both.

Now, preferences and tastes are different. As a former employer of mine used to say, "it's a matter of taste and, there's no accounting for taste."
See less See more
  • Like
  • Helpful
Reactions: 5
After about 300 yards the 6.5 has more energy, though...
My sincerest apologies: I now realize that I wasn't comparing the same load and the .270 is indeed better in everything except wind drift and recoil. (I guess I don't know about accuracy) You were right, sharps4590, thanks.

Which does your grandpa favor?
He already has a .270, but it's here in Canada. He is/was thinking of purchasing a 6.5 as opposed to having 2 .270s.
Maybe he'll join and then he can continue the discussion...
  • Like
Reactions: 2
No offense taken. Sharps said it best when he said "Accuracy will be a function of the rifle, the load and the nut pulling the trigger. I DO NOT subscribe to "an inherently accurate" cartridge. One is as mechanically accurate as the other. After the mechanics and the quality of the rifle and ammo, the difference becomes the shooter". The rifle and more specifically the barrel determines a rifles accuracy. The trigger also helps with accuracy altho a bad trigger can be gotten used to. The rest comes down to the shooter. Recoil is subjective. Some people can't handle it and some don't notice it. My personal feelings on the subject is how a rifle is held. To me a 270 doesn't have enough recoil to be worth mentioning and that's without a recoil pad. Others a 270 will stomp a mudhole in their butt with a recoil pad.
  • Like
Reactions: 5
From my understanding, the 6.5 Creedmoor was developed specifically to "have good ballistics".....fast twist rate to stabilize longer bullets, short action because a half inch extra longer gun is somehow a big deal, sharper shoulder which I've heard helps with precision in some way, etc. This has resulted in some folks who like both precision long-range(500-1000 yard) shooting and also hunting to take it out in the field and harvest deer and elk with it. Lighter recoil, that short action that matters so much to modern shooters, and the "built-in ballistics" are all factors that seem to usually play into a decision in favor of this one.

270 Winchester on the other hand, while it can be handloaded with longer bullets and a custom rifle manufacturer can build a rifle with a faster twist or a gunsmith put a faster-twist barrel onto an existing rifle, doesn't have this particular "built-in ballistics" advantage in factory loads. Standard rifling twist when it was introduced was 1 in 10, ammo manufacturers always make ammo so it works in every gun ever chambered for a cartridge, etc. But, it has that extra "horsepower" on its side, the extra half inch action length probably isn't that big a deal anyway, and it's simply been around long enough that just about anybody in a hunting group will know it and understand how it functions. That last one is quickly becoming also true with 6.5 Creedmoor with the craze over it and the advent of the internet, but even the old-timers will know and appreciate a 270 if that's something that will factor in.

All that said, a well-tuned rifle and well-trained shooter will take a deer at any distance most agree is reasonable(probably within 500 yards for most) with either cartridge without a problem. And if you don't handload and factory ammo off the shelf is a necessity for you, 6.5 Creedmoor seems to be all over at the big online retailers, but I think I've only seen some 270 Winchester out of the two on shelves in my rural county recently.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 4
Yeah....well, you oughta apologize, even though I've never misspoke I do understand how it might happen.......:sick:, (if you believe that, let me talk to you about a bridge I have for sale)

No Ryan, no apology necessary or expected. There is NO WAY anyone can have the ballistics of......how many cartridges is there?.....at their instant recall. It ain't happenin'.

The free recoil calculation is a fun and interesting formula. But, all that has to do with is Newton's 3rd law of physics. It doesn't, indeed, cannot take into account "felt recoil", stock design or, as Hawg mentioned, an individual's perception of or reaction to recoil.

Wind drift, or more correctly deflection, changes with the weight, caliber, ballistics coefficient, (which is a constantly changing number) and velocity of the bullet. There isn't anything particularly advantageous with the Creedmoor that can't be duplicated in any cartridge, of any caliber....if one wants to stand or sit behind it. Again, ballistics is ballistics, the same rules apply to all rifle cartridges, Drift is more accurately a function of the rifling twist you will see/encounter at longer ranges. The bullet "drifts" in the direction of the rifling twist.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
My sincerest apologies: I now realize that I wasn't comparing the same load and the .270 is indeed better in everything except wind drift and recoil. (I guess I don't know about accuracy) You were right, sharps4590, thanks.


He already has a .270, but it's here in Canada. He is/was thinking of purchasing a 6.5 as opposed to having 2 .270s.
Maybe he'll join and then he can continue the discussion...

Thanks to whichever mod or admin combined these two post. Feel free to delete this one after you've seen it.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top