Slander on the .270 Win. by Gun Writer Bryan Towsley
browningh...@yahoo.com
absolutely "worthless " he is as a knowledgeable gun writer. Some
time ago he actually admitted in a article he wrote that "he never
read "Jack O'Connor. Now even if he had not, and I believe him, any
gun writer with any "gray matter between his ears" would realize it
would be literary suicide to admit to such a thing. He then proceeded
to flame O'Conner, who he admitted he knew almost nothing about. The
article could not have been more moronic. The avalanche of hate e-
mail was most predictable.
Now he again has outdone himself in this months "American Rifleman
Magazine". This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge because no
really accurate "match grade bullets" are available for it in hunting
style bullets as compared to the rest of the big game hunting
calibers. Huh? Does he really think there is an accuracy difference
between a premimum hunting grade bullets in 7mm and .270. They are
both made on the same machinery at the manufactures plant and under
the same quality control systems. The difference in diameter is a
scant .007 inch in diameter. Is this man on drugs or what? Has he
never heard of Sierra who has produced some of the most accurate
production line bullets in the world?
Towsley who is also a moronic follower of the late Elmer Keith (one of
the biggest bull-crappers that every lived) states that the .270 is
just barely adequate for "deer size" game. This is right out of Elmer
Keith's archaic writings and it is surprising Towsely did not go all
the way with his "verbatim quotes" and further state that the .270 is
also noted for occasionally bouncing off of big game animals. Now
some people dispute wither old Elmer really ever said this but he
certainly implied it and Jack O'Conner gave the strong impression that
Elmer did indeed say it. It would not surprise me if Elmer did say it
as it would have been 100 per cent within his gun writing philosophy.
This statement even today never ceases to still send .270 users into
hysterical fits of laughter.
Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Conner" and probably
despite your bull-crap never did use the .270 either, at least not on
big game. If you had ever shot any big game with it your article would
never have seen the light of day. You certainly did read "Elmer
Keith" as your moronic babblings prove it beyond a "shadow of a
doubt".
Its amazing the "American Rifleman" actually pays this guy to write
such dribble. Mr. Towsley a "Jack O'Connor you certainly are not and
you do not even qualify as a mediocre clone of "old Elmer" either.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
Win a one-of-a-kind Fulton Armory AR-15 tactical rifle while defending
liberty in a front-line state. MPFO raffle details at http://www.myguns.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clark Magnuson
Rem mag, 300Sav, .308, 30-06, 300 Win Mag, 7.5 French, 7.5 Swiss,
303Brit, 7.62x54R, and 8x57mm.
The difference between those cartridges is insignificant.
It is like 8X binoculars compared to 10X.
It is like a 5" knife compared to a 6" knife.
I have to look carefully to see the difference.
But I can FEEL the difference between a 5 pound rifle and a 7 pound rifle.
But I can FEEL the difference between a 16 ounce hammer and a 22 ounce
hammer.
But I can FEEL the difference and see the difference and hear the
difference between a .223 and a 45/70.
Am I shooting a 6.5 Swede, a 270, or a 30-06?
I can't tell the difference in recoil, report, trajectory, or terminal
ballistics enough to make a difference.
What does it all mean?
There is nothing magic about one cartridge.
Bandit
# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
jadel
# Brian Towsley has now for the second time in print has proven how
# absolutely "worthless " he is as a knowledgeable gun writer. Some
# time ago he actually admitted in a article he wrote that "he never
# read "Jack O'Connor. Now even if he had not, and I believe him, any
# gun writer with any "gray matter between his ears" would realize it
# would be literary suicide to admit to such a thing. He then proceeded
# to flame O'Conner, who he admitted he knew almost nothing about. The
# article could not have been more moronic. The avalanche of hate e-
# mail was most predictable....
Golly, has someone's pet ox been gored?
The .270 vs (take your pick of caliber) debate has been going on for
eons. It is about as interesting and informative as the Ford vs Chevy
disputes at the local bubba watering-hole. Your abusive screed
contributes nothing new.
J. Del Col
J Buck
the Vermont deer hunting family of Benoits?
Del N. Quent
# Now he again has outdone himself in this months "American Rifleman
# Magazine". This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
# Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge because no
# really accurate "match grade bullets" are available for it in hunting
# style bullets as compared to the rest of the big game hunting
# calibers. Huh? Does he really think there is an accuracy difference
# between a premimum hunting grade bullets in 7mm and .270. They are
# both made on the same machinery at the manufactures plant and under
# the same quality control systems. The difference in diameter is a
# scant .007 inch in diameter. Is this man on drugs or what? Has he
# never heard of Sierra who has produced some of the most accurate
# production line bullets in the world?
#
# Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Conner" and probably
# despite your bull-crap never did use the .270 either, at least not on
# big game. If you had ever shot any big game with it your article would
# never have seen the light of day. You certainly did read "Elmer
# Keith" as your moronic babblings prove it beyond a "shadow of a
# doubt".
I jest got my Rifleman last night ... and read Towsley's article.
In it, he claimed to have read nearly *all* of O'Conner. Whether he
did or not, I couldn't care less.
That one bullet, might have some sort of *magical* qualities that
makes it far more accurate or effective than another is laughable to
me.
I believe what Towsley was trying to say was that, if not fer O'Conner
*championing* the .270win when he did, it may have gone the way of the
do-do. In part, as at the time, there were little to no .277 bullets
available to choose from. And, even today, those bullets are designed
much more for proper expansion, than *ultimate* accuracy.
Beyond that, I think the crux of the whole thing is that, given .264
bullets, and .284 bullets, who exactly *needed* .277 bullets? And, to
that extent, I agree ... probly no one.
HOWEVER, as they *ARE* available, I see no harm. In fact, I own a
few .270's myself. I like them jest fine. Jest that, if I had
otherwise had to choose 'tween .264 and .284, I don't believe I'd be
crying myself to sleep every night.
I only wished to reply to this as I felt the *assessment* almost
entirely misrepresented what Towsley wrote. I don't know Towsley. I
don't like him ... or hate him. But I don't think he deserves to have
rumors upon rumors floating around that he's a "babbling moron" who
thinks .270win is not acceptable for hunting nearly anything. In his
article, he mentioned he even owns multiple .270win rifles, and has no
intention of parting with them.
If I had to sum-up Towsley's article in very few words, I'd say it was
*thought provoking* ... nothing more. To that extent, as it was not
merely *another* tribute to yet another new rifle/pistol/shotgun who's
manufacturer happened to have a full-page glossy ad in the same
magazine, I actually enjoyed it ... jest a bit.
Mike Paulson
"I like O'Connor's writing a lot, and I have read just about everything he
wrote. He was one of the greats...."
browninghighpower9 wrote:
## Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Conner"
Bryce M. Towsley wrote:
"I own a couple of .270 rifles and have hunted throughout North America
with the cartridge. I have successfully taken a wide cross section of
game with it."
"After nearly 40 years of hunting off and on with it...."
browninghighpower9 wrote:
## and probably despite your bull-crap never did use the .270
## either, at least not on big game. If you had ever shot any
## big game with it your article would never have seen the light
## of day.
Bryce M. Towsley wrote:
"I have had little trouble achieving good hunting accuracy with my .270
Win. handloads."
"This load shoots about 1.25" from the author's Model 70 rifle...."
browninghighpower9 wrote:
## This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
## Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge
R Sweeney
<browningh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:erggh3
# Towsley who is also a moronic follower of the late Elmer Keith (one of
# the biggest bull-crappers that every lived) states that the .270 is
# just barely adequate for "deer size" game. This is right out of Elmer
# Keith's archaic writings and it is surprising Towsely did not go all
# the way with his "verbatim quotes" and further state that the .270 is
# also noted for occasionally bouncing off of big game animals.
BS...
any .270 bouncing off any furry animal is a shot taken way way out of range
Natman
<deln...@gmail.com> wrote:
#On Feb 20, 10:06 pm, browninghighpow...@yahoo.com wrote:
## Now he again has outdone himself in this months "American Rifleman
## Magazine". This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
## Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge because no
## really accurate "match grade bullets" are available for it in hunting
## style bullets as compared to the rest of the big game hunting
## calibers. Huh? Does he really think there is an accuracy difference
## between a premimum hunting grade bullets in 7mm and .270. They are
## both made on the same machinery at the manufactures plant and under
## the same quality control systems. The difference in diameter is a
## scant .007 inch in diameter. Is this man on drugs or what? Has he
## never heard of Sierra who has produced some of the most accurate
## production line bullets in the world?
##
## Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Conner" and probably
## despite your bull-crap never did use the .270 either, at least not on
## big game. If you had ever shot any big game with it your article would
## never have seen the light of day. You certainly did read "Elmer
## Keith" as your moronic babblings prove it beyond a "shadow of a
## doubt".
#
#I jest got my Rifleman last night ... and read Towsley's article.
#
#In it, he claimed to have read nearly *all* of O'Conner. Whether he
#did or not, I couldn't care less.
#
#That one bullet, might have some sort of *magical* qualities that
#makes it far more accurate or effective than another is laughable to
#me.
#
#I believe what Towsley was trying to say was that, if not fer O'Conner
#*championing* the .270win when he did, it may have gone the way of the
#do-do. In part, as at the time, there were little to no .277 bullets
#available to choose from. And, even today, those bullets are designed
#much more for proper expansion, than *ultimate* accuracy.
#
#Beyond that, I think the crux of the whole thing is that, given .264
#bullets, and .284 bullets, who exactly *needed* .277 bullets? And, to
#that extent, I agree ... probly no one.
#
#HOWEVER, as they *ARE* available, I see no harm. In fact, I own a
#few .270's myself. I like them jest fine. Jest that, if I had
#otherwise had to choose 'tween .264 and .284, I don't believe I'd be
#crying myself to sleep every night.
#
#I only wished to reply to this as I felt the *assessment* almost
#entirely misrepresented what Towsley wrote. I don't know Towsley. I
#don't like him ... or hate him. But I don't think he deserves to have
#rumors upon rumors floating around that he's a "babbling moron" who
#thinks .270win is not acceptable for hunting nearly anything. In his
#article, he mentioned he even owns multiple .270win rifles, and has no
#intention of parting with them.
#
#If I had to sum-up Towsley's article in very few words, I'd say it was
#*thought provoking* ... nothing more. To that extent, as it was not
#merely *another* tribute to yet another new rifle/pistol/shotgun who's
#manufacturer happened to have a full-page glossy ad in the same
#magazine, I actually enjoyed it ... jest a bit.
#
What issue does this article appear in?
Bill Smith
> ...
I just read an article in the March issue of "American Rifleman" by
Bryce M. Townsley, titled "The .270 Winchester" a second opinion about
Jack's favorite cartridge. Which article did you read?
He doesn't say anything about the venerable .270 that isn't true. He
does put a little too much credence in one anecdote, though. He says
he thinks, for game larger than deer, a heavier bullet from a more
powerful cartridge would suit his needs better, an opinion, hardly
slander.
Bill Smith
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas
habebunt
jadel
# > ...
#
# I just read an article in the March issue of "American Rifleman" by
# Bryce M. Townsley, titled "The .270 Winchester" a second opinion about
# Jack's favorite cartridge. Which article did you read?
#
# He doesn't say anything about the venerable .270 that isn't true. He
# does put a little too much credence in one anecdote, though. He says
# he thinks, for game larger than deer, a heavier bullet from a more
# powerful cartridge would suit his needs better, an opinion, hardly
# slander.
And we won't even mention the fact that one cannot defame inanimate
objects, or that, customarily, slander is spoken and libel printed--
though that distinction is legally moot today, thanks to electronic
media which make it possible to broadcast speech worldwide and
preserve it for years as recordings or files of one kind or another.
(Slander, being spoken,was traditionally considered to be of local
effect and short-lived)
J. Del Col
wb
crap load of game in the field. It is like telling a guy with a 30-30
that it isn't enough gun for deer hunting because it only has a fraction
of the power of the new ultra mags and such. Man, reading these writers
makes one feel that they think nothing of value was ever invented prior
to the year 2000.
I have shot the .270 out to 600 yards. It is very accurate and
even at 600 yards could drop a deer. In fact it, the .308 and even the
..260 can shoot through a 1/4" thick piece of mild steel at 400 yards. I
say another column by, I believe, John Sundra blasting the 30-06. Like
others, he offered every conceivable caliber which could best the 30-06
and went on and on. But the bottom line is that the .270 and 30-06 are
good rounds for hunting. They are also good rounds for long range target
shooting. Anyway, I know my friends will not be giving up their .270's
or 30-06's anytime soon. In fact, whenever a person new to hunting asks
me for a good all around hunting rifle I will always suggest they try
either a .260, .308, .270 or 30-06. These guys write from a position
of being able to use just about anything that is made. Most of us in the
real world have to make due with more modest choices.
.
J Buck
and even at 600 yards could drop a deer>
I'm not sure what you mean here. What were you shooting at 600 yards
away with a .270? And 'could' drop a deer? 'Could' is a pretty big fudge
factor, don't you think?
browningh...@yahoo.com
> ...
No finer words were ever spoken, Hear, hear.
nord...@yahoo.com
# absolutely "worthless " he is as a knowledgeable gun writer. Some
# time ago he actually admitted in a article he wrote that "he never
# read "Jack O'Connor. Now even if he had not, and I believe him, any
# gun writer with any "gray matter between his ears" would realize it
# would be literary suicide to admit to such a thing. He then proceeded
# to flame O'Conner, who he admitted he knew almost nothing about. The
# article could not have been more moronic. The avalanche of hate e-
# mail was most predictable.
Some time ago Dave Scovill, editor of Rifle and Handloader magazines,
said he "never read O'Connor" and he sounded quite silly saying so.
Perhaps Towsley said the same thing; I haven't read him as much. But
what's with all the anger? It's just one man's opinion. The 270 is a
fine cartridge for much big game hunting, but it it solved no problem
not already addressed by its contempories, the 256 Newton or the 7x64,
both of which proceeded it by several years. Even O'Connor himself
said the 30'06 was probably a better all around big game cartridge.
This is an old argument, but rarely an important one. A deer can't
tell the difference between a 270, 280, or 30'06.
Natman
wrote:
#Brian Towsley has now for the second time in print has proven how
#absolutely "worthless " he is as a knowledgeable gun writer. Some
#time ago he actually admitted in a article he wrote that "he never
#read "Jack O'Connor. Now even if he had not, and I believe him, any
#gun writer with any "gray matter between his ears" would realize it
#would be literary suicide to admit to such a thing. He then proceeded
#to flame O'Conner, who he admitted he knew almost nothing about. The
#article could not have been more moronic. The avalanche of hate e-
#mail was most predictable.
#
#Now he again has outdone himself in this months "American Rifleman
#Magazine". This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
#Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge because no
#really accurate "match grade bullets" are available for it in hunting
#style bullets as compared to the rest of the big game hunting
#calibers. Huh? Does he really think there is an accuracy difference
#between a premimum hunting grade bullets in 7mm and .270. They are
#both made on the same machinery at the manufactures plant and under
#the same quality control systems. The difference in diameter is a
#scant .007 inch in diameter. Is this man on drugs or what? Has he
#never heard of Sierra who has produced some of the most accurate
#production line bullets in the world?
#
#Towsley who is also a moronic follower of the late Elmer Keith (one of
#the biggest bull-crappers that every lived) states that the .270 is
#just barely adequate for "deer size" game. This is right out of Elmer
#Keith's archaic writings and it is surprising Towsely did not go all
#the way with his "verbatim quotes" and further state that the .270 is
#also noted for occasionally bouncing off of big game animals. Now
#some people dispute wither old Elmer really ever said this but he
#certainly implied it and Jack O'Conner gave the strong impression that
#Elmer did indeed say it. It would not surprise me if Elmer did say it
#as it would have been 100 per cent within his gun writing philosophy.
#This statement even today never ceases to still send .270 users into
#hysterical fits of laughter.
#
#Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Conner" and probably
#despite your bull-crap never did use the .270 either, at least not on
#big game. If you had ever shot any big game with it your article would
#never have seen the light of day. You certainly did read "Elmer
#Keith" as your moronic babblings prove it beyond a "shadow of a
#doubt".
#
#Its amazing the "American Rifleman" actually pays this guy to write
#such dribble. Mr. Towsley a "Jack O'Connor you certainly are not and
#you do not even qualify as a mediocre clone of "old Elmer" either.
I agree with you about *some* parts of Towsley's article and disagree
about others.
#This moron actually makes the statement that the .270
#Winchester is basically an inaccurate hunting cartridge because no
#really accurate "match grade bullets" are available for it in hunting
#style bullets as compared to the rest of the big game hunting
#calibers. Huh? Does he really think there is an accuracy difference
#between a premimum hunting grade bullets in 7mm and .270.
I agree that there is little difference in hunting bullets in 270 and
other calibers. I suspect that the paragraph in question is poorly
written and that the point the author is *trying* (and failing) to
make is that the 270 has a poor *reputation* for accuracy because it
does not have the match history (or match bullets) of cartridges such
as the 30-06 and 308. Despite this *reputation* the author say the
270s accuracy is quite adequate for hunting.
"I have had little trouble achieving good hunting accuracy with my 270
handloads."
#Yes Mr. Towsley you never did read "Jack O'Connor" and probably
#despite your bull-crap never did use the .270 either, at least not on
#big game.
What was actually written:
"I like O'Connor's writing a lot and I have read just about everything
he wrote."
This is the exact opposite of what you claim. How about a citation for
the first article so we can make up our own minds?
#...it is surprising Towsely did not go all
#the way with his "verbatim quotes" and further state that the .270 is
#also noted for occasionally bouncing off of big game animals. Now
#some people dispute wither old Elmer really ever said this but he
#certainly implied it and Jack O'Connor gave the strong impression that
#Elmer did indeed say it.
Let me get this straight. You're trying to blame TOWSLEY for something
Elmer Keith probably never said. How about confining your criticism to
what he wrote rather than making up stuff he didn't say?
#Towsley ... states that the .270 is
#just barely adequate for "deer size" game.
Actually he states that it is quite adequate for deer size game.
"I'll keep hunting with my 270 Winchester, but limit my game to
nothing much BIGGER than deer."
He does express some reservations about it's use on game LARGER than
deer. In the US that pretty much means elk. Please note that the two
shots he is disappointed in were both *shoulder* shots on deer. If you
plan on taking shoulder shots on elk with a 270 you should choose your
bullet *very* carefully indeed.
"The key to success with any hunting cartridge is in the bullet. I
think this is particulary true with the 270 Win."
Makes perfect sense to me.
You are outraged about how Towsley supposedly "flamed" O'Connor, but
have no problem flaming Keith. They've both been dead for over 20
years, how about giving them BOTH some respect?
It's too bad you didn't follow Towsley's advice in the first
paragraph:
"..if you can't stand the pain of a little honest criticism - and
praise - for the 270 Win., you might want to turn the page. "
J Buck
NO, I don't have a cite; just remember reading an anecdote or 2 over the
years) I think it's pretty safe to say they forgot more about shooting
and guns than most here will ever know. Flame away LoL