Why 180 grain?

I have yet to met a deer or hog that I couldn't drop in one shot from a .270 Ruger M77 with 130 grain Remington soft points, and the total is probably around thirty. That's not bragging on me as a marksman, as`I don't like to shoot over 100 yards for personal reasons (just what makes the game fun to me, you play it your way). Still the rifle and el cheapo cartridge works well. If elk were on the menu, I'd be right there with you with the 30-06 and 180 grains. Hell, the only reason I own a .270 rather than an '06 is because that's what the gun shop had in the day I chose to buy, and I didn't think there was anything in Texas it wouldn't kill.

Lets get back to the OP. Do you want a magnum for TACTICAL, not hunting purposes? Well, what is a magnum? Its basically a way to get more powder than normal behind a standard grade bullet be that 7mm, .38 (.357 mag), .44 (.44 mag), .30 (.300 win mag) etc. Why do you do that? You do it for greater velocity and more foot pounds delivered. But do you need it? Tactically, you are looking at taking down a 200 pound mammal inside of 500 yards unless you are playing in a whole different leauge (hell, playing a dfferent sport) than most of us. Surveys says no, you don't need one. Will .300 mag or 7mm mag work as a sniper weapon? Hell yes. Will you get the same results with less bang and recoil with .308 or .270, or .762x54? Pretty much. So unless you want to shoot far and flat, which means a small bullet and lots of powder, leave the mags alone. If you need this, the not so pacifist Quaker would suggest a 7mm mag, .300 Win mag and .338 Lapua in reverse order. Otherwise, I think my 130 grain .270s are enough to keep someone off the lawn and venison in the freezer.

FQ13