But then I sometimes feel like I've been around for a hundred years so I shouldn't be surprised. 

I've always considered the .270 to be a flatter shooting round than the .30-06 and a terrific caliber for deer and antelope. I feel it's a bit light for elk, and that's based on the experiences of an excellent hunter I knew in Montana who said it often took two or three hits for him to anchor an elk with a .270. He felt the .270 didn't give you the margin of error you could expect from a .30-06 or one of the magnums but his .270 rifle had been passed on down to him from his grandfather and father and he had an emotional attachment to it that wouldn't let him hunt with anything else.

I think the .270 would be hard to beat for nearly any kind of deer hunting and for hunting anything else that can be reliably stopped with a 150 grain bullet. That said, in the limited amount of shooting I've done with a .270 I have seen the best accuracy from 130 grain bullets and would probably stick with those and switch to the .30-06 and a 170-180 grain bullet for larger critters.

Howsomever (I've been out West too long), when I pared down to one hunting rifle I kept a .30-06. It drives a 150 grain bullet close enough to the way a .270 handles a 130 grainer for my purposes. And, my wife shot several deer with this rifle using Remington's 120 grain reduced recoil ammunition. She preferred it too my .243 because she said the .243 kicked too hard... I kept 220 grain bear loads in it for Montana yard emergencies after I sold my elk rifle, a .340 Weatherby Magnum.