View Single Post
Old January 23, 2019, 04:51 AM   #66
bamaranger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 6,737
spread sheets and the weak link

ndking,

The weak link in your process as I see it, is using published velocities as a base line for your calculations. Individual rifles can vary widely in the velocities they generate, even using the same barrel length with the same ammo.

In recent years I finally acquired a chronograph, it has has been an eye opening experience. Most of my loads do NOT make the velocities I was expecting as derived from loading tables, and certainly from published data. As a classic example, most mfg's will state that their .270/130 combinations will make 3000 fps +. Well, ....not my .270. Admittedly, handicapped with a 22" bbl, it is not optimum, but will serve as an example.

From a practical standpoint, I'd avoid .270 WSM as the WSM's are on their last legs already. Feeding the rifle could be a real problem. Since velocity and numbers matter to you, I'd only select a 24" bbl rifle, as the longer tube should boost velocity if all holds to form. A .280 splits the difference with .270/.30 on paper should be the answer. Again though, .280 is not a common cartridge off the shelf in a lot of stores. Modern premium bullets supposedly can take the .270 into another dimension for bigger game like elk, but I've never shot an elk, or likely ever will.
bamaranger is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03348 seconds with 8 queries