chronograph a .270 130 grain Remington?

[stagpanther]

and often-times what we think we know is based upon the limitations of our own experience.

ain't that the truth. : ) I know some of the best shooters and ballisticians assert that bullets can stabilize gyrations the further out they go; my limited experience is such that I've never been able to wrap my mind around that concept. That said--I have seen instances of the 150 gr bullets performing better out of my 270 at longer distances than faster 130's.

[jimbob86]

That said--I have seen instances of the 150 gr bullets performing better out of my 270 at longer distances than faster 130's.

My rifle shoots 150's better than 130's ..... could be that the throat is worn and the longer bullets have less of a jump to the rifling ..... the groups are beginning to open up, 1 1/4" at 100 now ..... a new barrel is probably in the future....

[Wyosmith]

I have owned 1 or more 270 Winchesters since 1968. I started loading for the 270 in the same year, and it was my first rifle and my first time reloading. Since then I have owned 8 different 270 Winchester rifles and one of them, my 2nd one, is now on it's 3rd barrel.
In my life I think I have fired about 100 rounds of factory ammo in my own 270s. ALL the rest have been with my own loads.
My 3 rifles that I still have in this caliber are a Mauser that I have had since I was 14 years old (on it's 3rd barrel) Which is the first rifle I ever made that was not a muzzleloader. Another Mauser that I made for myself about 18 years ago in classic style, and a Winchester M95 lever action I got about 20 years ago.

My early rifle shoots 130 grain bullets better then it does 150s so that what I use in it. I load 130 grain Nosler Partitions and also 130 grain Remington Core-Lokts in this rifle and both shoot under 1 MOA and chronograph at 3144 FPS with only a 9 FPS deviation. Both shoot under MOA, averaging about .600" for 3 shot groups. Sometimes a bit tighter but I can't do much better then .6" on demand with it. .6" is just fine however.

My Classic Mauser is zeroed for 150 grain Nosler partitions which I chronograph at 2988 FPS and the deviation is only 15 FPS. This one is super accurate with 150 grain bullets and shoots so tight I hesitate to say what I get from it, but it shoots way better then it has a right to. Not one time either, but many times I have made 3 shot groups that amazed me and others that saw me do it. But "Sub-MOA" is an understatement. I also use 160 grain Nosler partition with this rifle at times which shoot only about a bullet width wider at 100 yards.

My Winchester M95 is zeroed for a load with 150 grain Remington Round Nose Core-Lokts and I am almost out of these. I have 113 left and Remington in their infinite lack-of-wisdom has chosen to stop the sale of them to hand loaders. But they shoot about 1.5 MOA if all goes well. I am 64 years old and my eyes are not what they once were, but with a buck-horn and a 1/16" brass bead front sight, I think a 1.5 MOA groups most times is outstanding. My load from this gun measured 2912 FPS with the above mentioned Remington Bullet, with a 40 FPS deviation. When I run out of the old Core-Lokts I will change over to the 160 grain Nosler in this gun.

I have zeroed a number of factory rifles for customers with various factory loads in the last 30 years too, and one load that has proven to be exceptionally accurate in several rifles is the Hornady White Tail line. In a Tikka, one Savage and one Winchester rifle I have seen this ammo touch all the bullet at 100 yards. Because I have seen that in several 270 rifles made by different companies, I have to believe the ammo is some of the best available today for the 270 shooter who wants to kill deer or antelope. The ammo I shot was loaded with their 130 grain bullets and having used that bullet myself in the past (hand loaded) I can say it works very well on deer. I would not advise it's use on elk because it's penetration is a bit less that what I like for elk, but for any deer up to about 350 pounds it's just fine.

[stagpanther]

Great stuff Wyo. That's some real dedication. I don't think there's a problem with rummie's bullets--it's when they start swinging a hammer to put cartridges together that things go south.BTW I totally concur with your observations about Hornady's American white tail--I've found it to be extraordinarily difficult to duplicate their performance in a handload; all the more amazing when you consider they are "ho hum BC" interlocks. I've put their factory ammo to the test on labradar, and it typically shows stellar consistency and velocities VERY close to what they put on the box. I think Hornady is about the top of the game when it comes to consistency in mass- manufactured ammo.

[stagpanther]

This exercise is kinda fun--so I went out again today and put a few more factory 270 rounds downrange of comparable factory ammo. The main difference was that it was much colder and windier today; that may or may not have been a factor.

First up was Winchester's 130 gr extreme point. It delivered far better velocities and SD than the corelokts--but still wandered around a bit on impacts. Still, pretty impressive out of my 22" ruger American.

[stagpanther]

Next was Winchester's 150 gr powerpoint. It shot OK but tended to wander around on impact even more than the 130's--though it is more of a spire point than tipped bullet compared to the 130 extreme point. SD was good but velocity fair.

[stagpanther]

The big surprise for me was the fed soft point round nose power shoks. That shot faster than the Winchester stuff, and seemed to me to have noticeably less felt recoil to boot. In addition to that, they grouped much better--the one shot that hit the target I actually pulled a bit. Along with the American Whitetail this turned in about the best over-all performance out of my ruger American.

[Bart B.]

I know some of the best shooters and ballisticians assert that bullets can stabilize gyrations the further out they go; my limited experience is such that I've never been able to wrap my mind around that concept. That said--I have seen instances of the 150 gr bullets performing better out of my 270 at longer distances than faster 130's.

I doubt bullets are better stabilized the further downrange they go. Their spin rate is fastest as they leave the barrel and it slows down only 10 to 15% across the first 1000 yards of flight.

Test groups often start getting smaller the last 40% of a range band when slower velocity ones leave at higher angles to the LOS than faster ones. This happens when all bullets leave on the muzzle axis upswing near its peak. This situation is often thought to be caused by better bullet stabilization at the greater ranges.

[dvdcrr]

Any 270 shooter would do well to read and heed this excellent article. "Know Your Big Game Rifle", Jack O'Connor, Outdoor Life, Nov. 1965. Deer haven't changed, and a yard is still 3 feet, just as it was in 1965.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...w0YCERaj8I5RBp

[stagpanther]

Any 270 shooter would do well to read and heed this excellent article. "Know Your Big Game Rifle", Jack O'Connor, Outdoor Life, Nov. 1965. Deer haven't changed, and a yard is still 3 feet, just as it was in 1965.

Shooting today isn't as "manly" as it was back then.

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by reynolds357

Not extreme for a 270 win. They fall off horrendously from 24" to 22".

"Horrendous," for me, has been ~ 35 fps/in for the 130 gr., and ~ 25 fps/in on the 150's.

YMMV.

What powder do you load?


As for sight-in:

Used to use ole Jack O'Connor's +3"@100, and that works well for the Western hunts.

But for the mountains and woods I hunt more these days, 0@200, in@250 (given a 6" MPBR) takes care of most hunting, and is more precise in close.




Red