Author Topic: Felt Recoil 270 WSM v. 270 (Read 3222 times)

Bart Solo · « **on:** January 07, 2005, 11:07:48 AM »

I have been told that the new 270 WSM has less felt recoil (for the same size bullet and charge) than the 270 Winchester, even though the 270 WSM has a higher velocity. Is that true?

HogFan · « **Reply #1 on:** January 07, 2005, 11:26:34 AM »

Ron,

Maybe I am comparing apples to oranges here, but my 270 WSM kicks a hell of a lot more than my .280 Rem or .30-06. I have shot the 270 WSM with 130 gr, and 150 gr. and could not tell the difference.

HogFan

Bart Solo · « **Reply #2 on:** January 07, 2005, 11:53:08 AM »

That is what I would have guessed but I heard from somebody that the wider shell leads to less felt recoil with the WSM than with the traditional 270. I have shot the 270 Winchester (a great round) but haven't shot a 270 WSM.

Bubba Jack · « **Reply #3 on:** January 07, 2005, 03:26:17 PM »

I would say if the charge and bullet weight are the same and the rifle weight is the same, then it would kick the same. But then you would be missing out on the preformance gain of the WSM.

Bubba Jack

old06 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 07, 2005, 06:20:02 PM »

I would go along with Bubba Jack given the same charge, bullet, and rifle, the out come is the same. Add more powder and recoil go's along with it.

RaySendero · « **Reply #5 on:** January 07, 2005, 06:30:48 PM »

Recoil difference of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?!

Recoil DIFFERENCE of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?

RECOIL DIFFERENCE of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?

I must have missed something - What's the question here? and why does it matter?? :mrgreen:

copp · « **Reply #6 on:** January 08, 2005, 04:44:38 AM »

I have noticed that the 270 wsms seem to recoil differently than the 270 win.I have been very recoil sensitive since 2 detached retinas about 15 yrs ago.Put muzzle brakes on 2 of my 270 win because what I perceived as hard recoil.My accuracy did improve with the brakes.

Have recently purchased 3 270 wsms.One is the light weight Winchester super shadow.Amazed at what I would call comfortable recoil with the 270 wsms.No brakes needed for the 270 wsms.I realize that many factors involved with perceived recoil.Could different pressure curves result in different perceived recoil ?

Notice a difference in recoil going from the 130gr to the 140gr in factory loads. 140gr have more perceived recoil but still not really hard.Have not tried the 150gr loads.

NYH1 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 08, 2005, 09:12:15 AM »

Quote from: RaySendero

Recoil difference of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?!

Recoil DIFFERENCE of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?

RECOIL DIFFERENCE of 270 Win vs 270 WSM?

Quote from: RaySendero

I must have missed something -

Evidently!
:shock:

Quote from: RaySendero

What's the question here?

The question is pretty simple. Ron Byers asked a question and wants an answer......no big deal.

Quote from: RaySendero

and why does it matter??:mrgreen:

It matters a lot because he wants to know!

RaySendero · « **Reply #8 on:** January 08, 2005, 12:05:11 PM »

Dxmn Yankee - Got no sense of humor! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Bart Solo · « **Reply #9 on:** January 08, 2005, 01:15:39 PM »

I want to know because recoil (or more accurately the fear of recoil) is one of the biggest causes of poor shooting. Poor shooting means missed targets. I don't like to miss targets. Eventhought I haven't shot a 270 WSM I have shot a 270 and believe it shoots just about as hard as a 30-06, which makes sense sence a 270 is a necked down 30-06. If the 270 WSM has less felt recoil, but the same or better performance, then it might be a world beater.

NYH1 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 08, 2005, 01:20:23 PM »

Quote from: RaySendero

Dxm Yankee - Got no sense of humor! :mrgreen:

Don't you mean Dxmn Yankee? Don't forget your "n" there smarty pants! :toast:

RaySendero · « **Reply #11 on:** January 08, 2005, 01:45:20 PM »

Quote from: Ron Byers

I want to know because recoil (or more accurately the fear of recoil) is one of the biggest causes of poor shooting. Poor shooting means missed targets. I don't like to miss targets. Eventhought I haven't shot a 270 WSM I have shot a 270 and believe it shoots just about as hard as a 30-06, which makes sense sence a 270 is a necked down 30-06. If the 270 WSM has less felt recoil, but the same or better performance, then it might be a world beater.

Ron,

Really think you are trying to split hairs between 270 Win and 270 WSM. Weight of rifle(scope) and design of stock can help reduce recoil. Addition of mercury recoil reducer or a muzzle brake can also help. Personally, I don't care for a muzzle brake on a rifle I'll use for hunting. But these are about your only options short of stepping down in caliber.

Excuse me now while I finish messing with the Yankee.

RaySendero · « **Reply #12 on:** January 08, 2005, 01:58:02 PM »

Quote from: New York Hunter

.... there smarty pants!

"smarty pants" - LOL

You are real tough! Not suprised to find you on a recoil reduction thread.

But you'll do for a spell checker. :mrgreen:

NYH1 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 08, 2005, 02:38:49 PM »

Quote from: RaySendero

You are real tough! Not suprised to find you on a recoil reduction thread.

But you'll do for a spell checker. :mrgreen:

I don't know if you noticed or not but I'm not the one that gave Ron any information on how to reduce recoil. That was you. You seem to know an awful lot about reducing recoil! Is that what you did to 243 Win. so it doesn't hurt when you shoot it?

As far as "You are real tough!" guys like you really love the anonym of the internet! Let me guess, you'll meet me at the airport so you can beat me up right?

Bart Solo · « **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2005, 05:41:42 AM »

Boys, thanks for all your comments. I was reading a Guns and Ammo article on the issue and the writer concluded that the felt recoil was about the same, but the 270 WSM provided an additional 200 feet per second. In a long shot that could mean the difference between hitting and missing. All in all, a good reason to buy the 270 WSM over the 270 Win. As to the theory behind the similarity in felt recoil has to do with the diameter of the case--larger in the 270 WSM than the 270 (duh) which has some effect on the combustion.

As to all the recoil reduction side play, I was at the range the other day and some 17 year old kid was the proud new owner of a 300 Weatherby Magnum. He shot it a few of times as I watched. He flinhed each time. By the time he stopped he was down right afraid of the damn thing. He would be much better off with a 243 or a 257 Roberts or someother similar round. Game would have a reason to be in fear.

I think that the problem with Magnums is that most of the users of Magnums have too much testosterone.

azshooter · « **Reply #15 on:** January 10, 2005, 07:25:11 AM »

I will try to give a serious answer here among all the jabbing. You can't expect any difference in recoil for the same weight rifle shooting bullets of the same weight and at the same velocity. The only things that will really impact felt recoil are rifle weight, a muzzle break and changing the recoil pulse.

You can calculate recoil here
http://www.huntamerica.com/recoil_calculator/
Notice there is no 'I'm shooting a wizz bang WSM recoil reducing choice'.

Recoil is just laws of physics. Here is a little commentary on some recoil and reducing it.

Adding weight to the gun - this is a very good way to reduce the recoil velocity of the rifle hitting you because a heavy gun takes more energy to accelerate to the same speed. Note you are not reducing the energy going back it is just a heavy gun will move slower and not hit as fast. On an additional note WSM's are claimed to have less recoil because of less powder being pushed forward. In the grand scheme of things, I don't see where a few grains will make much difference. If the charge is 20 grains less then yes but don't expect anywhere near that from a .270.

A muzzle brake has a similar effect in that it can use some of the gas redirected backward to cancel out some of the rearward force on the gun. It also reduces the muzzle climb.

Reducing the recoil impulse is probably the most complex. A mercury recoil reducer adds weight but it also absorbs some of the rear impulse and feeds it back to you over a longer duration so the felt recoil appears less. An autois similar because the gas is cycling the action and spreading the recoil over a longer duration.

Note on each of these the energy is the same. You can't change physics! You have to either absorb the recoil or counteract it as with a brake.

Bart Solo · « **Reply #16 on:** January 10, 2005, 07:58:17 AM »

I am still trying to figure out the following coment made by Holt Bodinon about the new line of WSM and WSSM rounds in the September 2003 issue of Gun's Magazine.

"Probably the most valuable quality of the new short magnums is that they permit a shooter who is accustomed to a .243 Win., .270 Win, or .30-'06 to step up to true magnum level performance without a noticeable increase in recoil and with a rifle that is lighter, handier and inherently more accurate. And that's saying a lot."

Apparently he is saying that the laws of physics have been tricked. My guess is that the trick has something to do with combustion efficiency and time. You will notice that many of the rifles being sold in the WSM calibers are light mountain rifles. The felt recoil issue must mean something to the manufacturers who are pushing the WSM cartridges.

Frankly if I buy a new deer rifle this next year, and I probably will, I might just buy a WSM. But I think I am going to try to find somebody who has one and ask to shoot it at the same time I shoot a standard caliber.

tcforec · « **Reply #17 on:** January 10, 2005, 11:48:57 AM »

My Tikka T3 Lite Stainless in 270 wsm kicks less than my previous .308 in same rifle(.308 was recalled and they were out of stock so they I agreed to take the 270wsm). I love it. Does not pop at all as far as I'm converned. Only regular .270 I've shot is my buddy's '64 Winchester Model 70. My Tikka is a little softer for some reason, be it the stocks or the round.

Buffalogun · « **Reply #18 on:** January 10, 2005, 01:06:03 PM »

Ron,

You might find P. O. Ackleys experiments on pressure very interesting. He was able to fire several full power loads in a Win. M94 chambered to the 30-30 "improved", after he removed the locking lug from the bolt and only the finger lever kept the cartridge in the chamber.

Interesting reading!

Buffalogun

Ramrod · « **Reply #19 on:** January 10, 2005, 01:08:29 PM »

Quote from: Ron Byers

Boys, thanks for all your comments. I was reading a Guns and Ammo article on the issue and the writer concluded that the felt recoil was about the same, but the 270 WSM provided an additional 200 feet per second. In a long shot that could mean the difference between hitting and missing.

Sorry Ron, it appears you have fallen for the Magnum hype too. With a 200 yard zero the difference in drop at 500 yards would be less than 2 inches. Not exactly enough to cause a miss, even if you did judge the range exactly.

Zachary · « **Reply #20 on:** January 11, 2005, 03:31:26 AM »

I own both a 270 Winchester and a 270WSM. I don't own a fancy gaget that measures recoil, but I can tell you from my personal experience that the 270WSM kicks more than the regular 270 Winchester. How much more? Well, I really can't say, but it's not a lot, and it not a little - perhaps somewhere in the middle. I can't understand how anyone would say that the WSM kicks less than the regular winchester. Don't get me wrong - I understand the whole short-fat concept, but more powder is still more powder.

Anyway you look at it, the additional recoil of the 270WSM isn't enough, or at least shouldn't be enough, to deter you from shooting it over the regular .270 Winchester.

Zachary

RaySendero · « **Reply #21 on:** January 11, 2005, 05:50:48 PM »

Quote from: Ron Byers

.....
Frankly if I buy a new deer rifle this next year, and I probably will, I might just buy a WSM. But I think I am going to try to find somebody who has one and ask to shoot it at the same time I shoot a standard caliber.

Ron,

Look real hard at the 270 Winchester.

1) If you don't reload its one of only a hand full of calibers you can find ammo almost everywhere.

2) If you do reload its one of the easier ones to load for - Plenty of bullets to choose from.

and 3) (My favorite reason for owning a 270 win.) A lot of rifles chambered for the 270 Win. will shoot most all ammo to the same point of aim at 100 yards! Mine will do this - It will put 130, 135, 140 and 150 grain loads inside of 1.5" at 100 yards. As a matter of fact if I didn't tell they were different weights you'd look at the groups and figure they were all the same when they weren't.

copp · « **Reply #22 on:** January 12, 2005, 02:32:00 AM »

My heaviest rifle the Browning M1000 recoils about the same as the Winchester Super Shadow in the 270 WSM's. Believe the WSM recoil is of shorter duration which leads to less felt recoil with the proper stock.
My son who hunts with me with the 270 WSM's agrees with this statement and he is in the process of getting his PhD in Physics. No laws of phisics are being broken.
Why not use a cartridge that has more energy and inherent accuracy when the recoil can be equal or less than its near twin.

RaySendero · « **Reply #23 on:** January 12, 2005, 02:46:50 PM »

Quote from: copp

.... Why not use a cartridge that has more energy and inherent accuracy when the recoil can be equal or less than its near twin?

copp,
Answer = 270 Winchester with 130 and 140s bullets almost in same hole!

copp · « **Reply #24 on:** January 12, 2005, 03:52:58 PM »

I am not saying every 270 wsm is more accurate than the 270 win.I have 1 270 win in a Browning that shoots great and this has been my favorite rifle for over 20 yrs.I also have another 270 win in a Vanguard that is only averge with about 1 inch groups.Not giving up on the 270 win but have also enjoyed using the wsm.I do believe the 270 wsm is inherently more accurate than the 270 win but many factors determine accuracy.I personally believe the 270 in either cartridge is a very good choice.

Still interested in recoil and what I have noticed with recoil differences between the 2 cartridges.

Zachary · « **Reply #25 on:** January 13, 2005, 03:21:29 AM »

Copp,

I understand and agree with what you are saying about the "inherent" accuracy. I too have a Browning Stainless Stalker in 270 Winchester and it too shoots super tight groups - sometimes out of a three shot group you will have two bullets go through the same hole - and that's with factory Federal Premium 130 grain Sierra Boat tails.

But back to "inherent" accuracy - while my Browning .270 Winchester is super accurate, it appears that the .270WSMs are inherently more accurate. Inherent doesn't mean always, it means inherent.

Funny how when the .300 Win Mag came out people thought that the belt would preclude it from achieving excellent accuracy, yet the .300 Win Mag has become a cartridge of choice among many long range bench shooters. Perhaps the .300 Win Mag is not "inherently" accurate, but it works well.

I'm not advocating anyone to give up their plain-jane cartridges and substitute them for WSMs - heck, I would never give up any of my tried and true cartridges, but I sure don't mind adding WSMs to my collection. :-D

Zachary

azshooter · « **Reply #26 on:** January 13, 2005, 03:54:36 PM »

Quote from: copp

My heaviest rifle the Browning M1000 recoils about the same as the Winchester Super Shadow in the 270 WSM's. Believe the WSM recoil is of shorter duration which leads to less felt recoil with the proper stock.
My son who hunts with me with the 270 WSM's agrees with this statement and he is in the process of getting his PhD in Physics. No laws of phisics are being broken.
Why not use a cartridge that has more energy and inherent accuracy when the recoil can be equal or less than its near twin.

Better ask the school for a refund

RaySendero · « **Reply #27 on:** January 13, 2005, 04:20:54 PM »

Quote from: azshooter

Better ask the school for a refund

:roll: :roll: :? >>>> LOL >>>> Took me a while on that one! :mrgreen:

Bart Solo · « **Reply #28 on:** January 13, 2005, 04:21:59 PM »

Great, I got you guys fighting. Thanks for all the comments. There seems to be a consensus that the 270 WSM doesn't outkick the 270 Winchester enough to be really detrimental to the shooter, if at all. It does have some inherent advantages over the 270 Winchester which is one of the best rounds ever developed. The 270 Winchester is a spectacularly good deer and elk round.

Are those advantages sufficient to demand anybody sell his 270 to buy a 270 WSM? The answer from this group would probably be a resounding NO.

Are they enough to encourage a guy in the market for a 270 class gun to choose the 270 WSM over the 270 Winchester? Maybe, but on the the down side, many rifles can only load two of the short fat cartridges in their magazines. But on the other hand, I wouldn't feel naked going into the field with a single shot. For many decades lots of folks hunted elephants and lions with double guns. It seems that most of us can't get off more than one good backup shot anyway.

The most serious advantage of the 270 Winchester has to do with the availability of ammunition. There are lots and lots of great loads for the 270 Winchester. Factory 270 ammo is relatively cheap. The WSM ammo is still a little rare and relatively expensive. Nothing you can't over come, but you are more likely to find 270 Winchester ammo at the local rural QuickTrip than 270 WSM. I haven't decided yet, but you have all given me a lot to think about.

Zachary · « **Reply #29 on:** January 13, 2005, 04:36:53 PM »

Quote from: Ron Byers

I haven't decided yet, but you have all given me a lot to think about.

Nahh, I don't think so. Thinking about which cartridge to get over which won't take much time. What WILL take some time is finding the right rifle at the RIGHT price. Patience is a virtue :wink:

Zachary