12 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: delmont, pa
Joined: 03/30/2003
Posts: 1
weatherby vanguard wsm vs. savage and rem

i am going out to montana this fall for elk and mule deer. i currently shoot a wincehest 270 and i dont think this will have enough power and i was looking at diferent .300 short mag rifles including the weatherby vanguard and savage fcx.. and remington model 700 which is the best gun and most accurate i am lost in tryin to figure out which is the best gun for the money. also is the short mag the way to go or not?? help would be greatly appreciated. thanks ~ben

Offline
Moderator
Location: Nova Scotia
Joined: 08/17/2002
Posts: 1762
weatherby vanguard wsm vs. savage and rem

If you are accurate with your 270 win, it should be all the gun you need. If you don't feel confident in the calibre, you could step up to one of the new short magnums are even to the 300 win mag. The 300 win mag is probably the best choice if you intend to shoot it a lot. It has basically the same ballistics as the short magnums but ammo is cheap and everywhere. If you just want one of the newer varieties(much like I did when I bought my 300 Ultra), then the 300 WSM is a nice choice. Don't feel that you 270 is not up for the task though. It is more than sufficient to do the job and do it well. Shot placement is key with any of the calibres mentioned. A hit will still be a hit (and a dead animal)and a miss is still a miss(and an empty tag). If you stick with the 270, or any of the other cartridges for that matter, bullet type is important. Use a top quality bullet such as Nosler Partition, Barnes-X, Swift Scirroco, Trophy bonded bear claw. Penetration is the name of the game with larger animals.
I don't hunt elk but the moose are large up here and a lot of hunters use the 270 with premium bullets. Hope this helps.

Offline
Moderator
Location: Nova Scotia
Joined: 08/17/2002
Posts: 1762
weatherby vanguard wsm vs. savage and rem

To answer your other question on makes of rifles, I don't think you can go wrong with any that you named. I am a big Remington fan, but the savage is probably the most accurate of the less expensive models of any rifle. They do feel a little more "cheap" than the other two but I don't buy on looks if the rifle is a tack driver. Being bias, I say buy the remington :smile:

Offline
Joined: 01/08/2004
Posts: 29
weatherby vanguard wsm vs. savage and rem

I'm a savage man myself I think certain ones are every bit as accurate as the 700's. I shoot a savage 114U and love it. I have also had a model 11FNS and the 12FV. All have been very good and dependable rifles. I recomend the 114U it is built to a little higher standards than the lower end savages.

Offline
Location: hanover, pa
Joined: 01/27/2004
Posts: 70
weatherby vanguard wsm vs. savage and rem

shot placement is the key, and to obtain the key , one must practice, practice, same as any other sport. if you feel comfortable with any rifle, you will score great. buying a super magnum does not make you a better shot, it only makes you a sore shoulder and a disgruntled hunter. imho shoot what you feel comfortable with, you wouldn't wear a new pair of unbroken in boots hunting would you? nuff said--good hunting.

rgbwmb's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/19/2011
Posts: 26
which rifle

In my humble opinion, the Weatherby Vanguard is hard to beat. You get a synthetic stock, matte blued barrel and action, very good accuracy, stock configuration that kicks less than others, can get new for around $425 including shipping. Can't go wrong with 7mags or 300mags for elk. Don't neglect to top it off with a good quality scope. I prefer Pentax lightseeker scopes.

buffybr's picture
Offline
Location: Montana, USA
Joined: 11/15/2007
Posts: 326
Elk rifles

My favorite elk rifle for about 25 years was a .30 Gibbs which is an improved .30-06 at close to .300 Win mag velocities.  It killed a bull just about each of those 25 yrs.  With that in mind, I would recommend a .300 Win mag over any of the short mags.

My new favorite elk rifle is a Weatherby Vanguard in .300 Wby.

I also have a Rem 700 in 7 mm Rem mag.  It's my back-up foul weather elk rifle as it's stainless in a synthetic stock, and my Weatherby carries a fancy walnut stock.  I've not had any trouble putting elk down with this rifle, and it worked well in the Canadian arctic and on two plains game hunts in Africa.

I have another Rem 700 in .375 RUM that I built for African Cape Buffalo, and I have also used it on two African plains game hunts.

My Weatherby Vanguard and both of these Rem 700s shoot moa with my hunting handloads.

I have several friends that have hunted elk for many years with their .270s, and have killed a pile of elk with them.

Bullet placement is more important than bullet diameter.  Forget the 500-1,000 yd "stunt" shots that are popular on several of the outdoor TV shows, and hunt close for a sure and quick kill.

Don Fischer's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Antelope, Ore
Joined: 03/24/2005
Posts: 3183
Your 270 is more than enough.

Your 270 is more than enough. Just go to a 150gr bullet. Of the rifles you mention, just pick the one that appeals to you. There is a misconception that there are poorly made rifles out there. Might be but none by the companies you mentioned. Just because a rifle is concidered entry level means little or nothing in the way it preforms as a hunting rifle. If you took a Stevens 200, I think thats the one, and put a different stock on it and a accu-trigger you'd pretty much have a higher cost Savage. As for the Rem 700, I've read that Rem discontinued the mod 788 because it embarassed the 700 in accuracy on a regular schedule. The Weatherby Vanguard I believe is made by Howa. You want to save a few bucks, buy a Howa! The origional Vanguards with wood stocks were beautiful rifles. I'd take one of them over any Mk 5 ever made.

possum's picture
Offline
Location: SK Canada
Joined: 03/31/2009
Posts: 212
Your 270

If you shoot your 270 well and you have confidence in that gun and your abilities to make a WELL PLACED SHOT go with what you know..... Unless you need an excuse for another rifle in your arsenal...LOL   Use a premium bullet and no elk will walk away from your 270.

 I have seen numerous people buy a new rifle for the hunt which is a bigger calber and they don't shoot it as well as the old one, mostly because of more recoil. Personally i would stay with tried and true........270, the caliber has a long history of taking all game.  The short magnums ....up here anyway,are just more HYPE AND TYPE for the magazine writers (smoke and mirrors)....many old calbers have the same effect on game at a lesser cost                                                 

Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: NE NV
Joined: 03/18/2010
Posts: 383
Need to have or excuse to have

I'd agree with most of the replies above - your 270 will get the job done. BUT...if you're using your trip to Montana as an excuse (perhaps the term reason is a better choice of words) to buy a new gun.The idea of getting a new gun just because you want to is enough justification on its own.

Between the 300 win mag & the WSM I'd go with the win mag because of the cost and possible availability of ammo.

I own & shoot both a Vanguard & a Remington 700 but out of the three choices you have in mind I'd go with the Savage.  You really seem to get alot for your money with Savage weapons & they are noted for accuracy.  I suggest picking the one that feels the best in your hands, keeping in mind that the hills in Montana just might be steeper & definitely will be at a higher altitude than what you have in PA.  If your rifle ready to hunt weighs much more than 8.5 lbs you'll be carrying un-needed dead weight.

Unless you already own some quality glass, you might consider using the money for a new rifle for a set of 10X binoculars instead.  A good spotting scope is also never a bad idea when hunting the western states.

jamminj's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2014
Posts: 1
yes

A 270 is sufficient but a 7mag has more knock down power and faster velocity and for sure dead on at 300yrds.

 

Related Forum Threads You Might Like