New Rifle what Caliber?

I like the idea toward a larger bullet in case you want to hunt elk (or bear) with your new rifle. Instead of the 270 tho......I'd have a look at the 280 Remington cartridge. You can get a far wider selection of bullets with the 280 even tho the bullet diameters are so close to one another. BUT the biggest reason I prefer the 280 is that the chamber dimentions and bullet jump is generally less than with any other caliber. Its one of the few chambers that has not been bastardized by having super heavy bullets offered.....which alters how large of leade is required to chamber the rounds (if that makes sense?).

Anyway.....I am a big fan of the 280 Rem for western hunting. The 270 is good too as an all-around western big game gun........and the ammo is more readilly avaialbe if your not a reloader.

My 280 (in a Remington Mountain Rifle) has killed whitetails, mulies, coyotes, bears, antelope, elk, and more.    Always gets the job done.....and is lieghtwieght and compact for carry.    

I don't know if you can consider a cartridge that is now 111 years old as a "modern caliber", and I'm sure it isn't as "sexy" as some of the rounds that came after it or were derived from it(.270/.280), but it is pretty hard to beat the versatility and availability of the .30-06 Springfield. Talk all you want about this and that, the old '06 still sits at the top of the non-belted magnum ladder when it comes to performance and sheer number of offerings of cartridge choices that cover everything from varmints to moose.

^^^ THIS is paramount when western hunting....especially in the mountains.    Any extra weight will soon be discarded in favor of a lighter alternative if you have any altitudes to climb.   I laugh when I see guys that start their week with all kinds of gear in a back-pack.....only to end the week with a few essential items stuffed into their pockets.    Happens all the time.   

You will have trade-offs with rifle calibers vs weight.    Gotta have some power and smash on big critters.....but not carry excessive gun weight (worse than the pack example above).    Thats why a good 7mm is kinda the gold standard in western guns.    Enough bullets to get it done and flat enough trajectory to shoot a long ranges.....all wrapped into a lightweight package.      

There are others.....I owned a good 7STW chambered Sako for a few years....but it proved to be promlematic in holding a zero.   Still that was one flat shooting SOB....and I killed some stuff at long ranges.    Another good alternative is a 7mm Mag.    

I also own a Kimber Montanna in 300 short mag.   Its on permanent loan to my son-in-law (unless I go elk hunting or moose hunting again).    Great accuracy and plenty of punch on anything I care to shoot.....all in a modest recoiling, lightweight gun.    Recoil is not to big of a factor in those Kimber's either.....I think the stock design has allot to do with it (I believe it's a Brown stock IIRC??). 

When you get guns that weigh less than say 8 lbs.......the rubber meets the road.   You NEED a great trigger and good accuracy for shots at 300 yards and more.     Choose wisely!  

I would highly recommend a Muzzy 100 grain 3 blade.

I have the 6.5 Creedmore, a 308, 243, 30-06.

I like the 308, and 30-06 for everything.

I love my .270! Have since I bought it in 1985. I've taken a lot of whitetails, mulies and bear with it, but for larger game I would definitely move to a caliber with more bullet weight options. I think my next rifle will be a .308 just 'cuz. Best advise I have is practice, practice, practice, if you plan on shooting longer distances. From what I've seen, 90% of the guys out there should not be shooting over 200 yards, and that is stretching it for a lot of them. This "I can hit a plate at 100 yards, good enough" shit doesn't accomplish anything but wounding animals.