270 elk bullets

[USAF Ret]

Looking hard at bullets for 270 for elk. I like 140 grainers, with a little heavier weight, but seems they are a bit hard to find in certain bullets.

Would 130 grain Nosler Partition do the trick? 150s are hard to find and expensive as crap. Accubonds are like finding a needle in a haystack.

Also seeing good stuff on the Norma Oryx. Also love Norma Tipstrikes, but they are supposed to be more of a deer cartridge.

Lot's of copper choices, but I hear mixed reviews.

Thoughts?

[FrankenMauser]

Partitions do well. I prefer 140s, just because.

Oryx should perform nicely, too.
Vulkan is a little softer, but they gave me fully penetration in several antelope with no indication of inadequacy on elk.

[jmr40]

I think I'd slightly prefer a 140 or 150 for elk. But the 130's, especially a premium 130 gr bullet like Partition, should be fine.

The Barnes and other solid copper bullets are known for deep penetration, even in the lighter bullet weights.

To my knowledge Berger doesn't make a SOLID copper bullet. I too have heard mixed reports on those. Some overexpand and don't give enough penetration. The Bergers tend to penetrate 3-4" and basically explode inside the animal. If the bullet hits the lungs or chest cavity kills are said to be impressive. But it isn't a bullet you want to shoot from bad angles and try to reach the internal organs.

I've experimented a little with Barnes bullets in 30 caliber. I'd not hesitate to use them on game, but I've just gotten a little better accuracy from conventional bullets, so I've never shot anything with one yet.

Any bullet now is going to be expensive. It's just something we will have to deal with.

[USAF Ret]

Much appreciated. 130 grain Partitions are all over creation. Harder to find the 150s. Plus, nice to have a little more velocity for longer shots.

[USAF Ret]

Keeping my eye out for the Partitions and Accubonds.

[taylorce1]

I'll see what I can dig up for you. I'd not shy away from a 130 grain Partition or Monolithic bullet for elk. The important thing is if it's accurate for you.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by taylorce1

I'll see what I can dig up for you. I'd not shy away from a 130 grain Partition or Monolithic bullet for elk. The important thing is if it's accurate for you.

Thank you sir!

[Shadow9mm]

Swift Sirocco and federal terminal ascent are both good choices as well, if a touch expensive. But they hold together similarly well to the "A" frame or partitions and have better BCs, aerodynamics.

[hammie]

@USAF: I lived in Arizona for 35 years and a friend in our deer hunting group always used a nosler partition, 140 bullet in his winchester featherweight, .270. He chose that weight as a compromise that he could use for both elk and mule deer, without developing a new load or re-zeroing his scope for either hunt. (Mule deer can get pretty big in Arizona.) The noslet 140 grain weight worked well, although, as you said, nosler partitions seem to be unavailable right now. I did find available, from some on-line sources, Hornady 140 grain Interlocks. And they weren't too expensive. However, if you were going to use this load exclusively for elk, then I would try to find some 150 grain controlled expansion bullet... Interlocks, grand slams, etc. The last elk I saw close-up was BIG. I know they are costly, but the bullet is one of the least expensive components of a hunting trip.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by Shadow9mm

Swift Sirocco and federal terminal ascent are both good choices as well, if a touch expensive. But they hold together similarly well to the "A" frame or partitions and have better BCs, aerodynamics.

Thank you sir.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by hammie

@USAF: I lived in Arizona for 35 years and a friend in our deer hunting group always used a nosler partition, 140 bullet in his winchester featherweight, .270. He chose that weight as a compromise that he could use for both elk and mule deer, without developing a new load or re-zeroing his scope for either hunt. (Mule deer can get pretty big in Arizona.) The noslet 140 grain weight worked well, although, as you said, nosler partitions seem to be unavailable right now. I did find available, from some on-line sources, Hornady 140 grain Interlocks. And they weren't too expensive. However, if you were going to use this load exclusively for elk, then I would try to find some 150 grain controlled expansion bullet... Interlocks, grand slams, etc. The last elk I saw close-up was BIG. I know they are costly, but the bullet is one of the least expensive components of a hunting trip.

I have a box of 140 grain Interlocks for reloading. Just heard that they are great for deer and expansion. Was not sure about penetration on an elk.

[hooligan1]

Check with Shooters Pro Shop... Thats the only place I buy Nosler bullets... The blems kill deer fast as any bullet... But they also have overruns...

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by hooligan1

Check with Shooters Pro Shop... Thats the only place I buy Nosler bullets... The blems kill deer fast as any bullet... But they also have overruns...

Will do!

[Red Devil]

- Nosler Partition/150 gr.
- Barnes TSX/140 gr.

Bulk bullet - Speer Grand Slam/150 gr.




Red

[taylorce1]

A lot of elk are killed yearly with old bullet technology (cup-n-core), and they kill elk the same way they always have. Premium bullets do offer up more shooting opportunities, when a game animals are giving you less than ideal shot presentations. They'll hold together better going through heavier bones like front shoulders, or allow for deeper penetration when the vitals are further away due to angles. So while I do agree premium bullets are better, I'm still hunting elk if all I can find is Game Kings, SST, Hot Cores, Core Lokt, or Power Points to hunt with. I'll just have to be more selective with my shots, and understand I may not get a shot.

I would reach out to some of the hunters who have done the type of hunt you're applying for. Talk with them and get a feel for how the hunt will go for your situation. Just pick their brains, they'll enjoy reliving the hunt with you. They'll help you better prepare than anything we can suggest.

I'd also work with that Christensen .308 you told me about. Pick a good bullet between 150-168 grains and see how you feel about it when the time comes. I used 130 grain TTSX in my .308 on my last elk and it worked, but I do think it was a little on the light side. However there is a huge difference on how a 130 performs out of a .308 vs. .270.

From the premium bullets I found online there was the 129 grain Barnes LRX available and that would be the first monlithic bullet I'd try. The LRX has a lager velocity window, it's rated down to 1600 fps for expansion for longer range shots. The BC and SD is similar to a 165 grain .308 BT bullet, but you'll have 200-400 fps at the muzzle more than most .308 Winchester rifles can push a 165.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by taylorce1

A lot of elk are killed yearly with old bullet technology (cup-n-core), and they kill elk the same way they always have. Premium bullets do offer up more shooting opportunities, when a game animals are giving you less than ideal shot presentations. They'll hold together better going through heavier bones like front shoulders, or allow for deeper penetration when the vitals are further away due to angles. So while I do agree premium bullets are better, I'm still hunting elk if all I can find is Game Kings, SST, Hot Cores, Core Lokt, or Power Points to hunt with. I'll just have to be more selective with my shots, and understand I may not get a shot.

I would reach out to some of the hunters who have done the type of hunt you're applying for. Talk with them and get a feel for how the hunt will go for your situation. Just pick their brains, they'll enjoy reliving the hunt with you. They'll help you better prepare than anything we can suggest.

I'd also work with that Christensen .308 you told me about. Pick a good bullet between 150-168 grains and see how you feel about it when the time comes. I used 130 grain TTSX in my .308 on my last elk and it worked, but I do think it was a little on the light side. However there is a huge difference on how a 130 performs out of a .308 vs. .270.

From the premium bullets I found online there was the 129 grain Barnes LRX available and that would be the first monlithic bullet I'd try. The LRX has a lager velocity window, it's rated down to 1600 fps for expansion for longer range shots. The BC and SD is similar to a 165 grain .308 BT bullet, but you'll have 200-400 fps at the muzzle more than most .308 Winchester rifles can push a 165.

Thank you for the input. Wealth of information. I like the idea of the Barnes LRX and having the damage capability with a lighter bullet. That just might punch the ticket.

I do have three boxes of 168 grain Accubond for the 308 as well. Ran into a problem though with the last batch I had and sent in to be replaced. you could not close the bolt and tried it in two different rifles.

Also, thinking with the push on federal land for the lead restriction. might be good to go with an all copper. I will reach out to our mutual friend for more information.

[USAF Ret]

@taylorce1 Quick question, from what you said and what I have read, that backing down on normal bullet weight for copper is standard procedure. So, if I use the 308 for backup with a Barnes TSX, would the 150 grain be the best way to go?

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by jmr40

I think I'd slightly prefer a 140 or 150 for elk. But the 130's, especially a premium 130 gr bullet like Partition, should be fine.

The Barnes and other solid copper bullets are known for deep penetration, even in the lighter bullet weights.

To my knowledge Berger doesn't make a SOLID copper bullet. I too have heard mixed reports on those. Some overexpand and don't give enough penetration. The Bergers tend to penetrate 3-4" and basically explode inside the animal. If the bullet hits the lungs or chest cavity kills are said to be impressive. But it isn't a bullet you want to shoot from bad angles and try to reach the internal organs.

I've experimented a little with Barnes bullets in 30 caliber. I'd not hesitate to use them on game, but I've just gotten a little better accuracy from conventional bullets, so I've never shot anything with one yet.

Any bullet now is going to be expensive. It's just something we will have to deal with.

I hunt with Berger 130 VLD hunting in a 6.5x 284.;Game looks like a bomb went off inside. Never seen an exit wound on deer or hog. The animals are usually DRT. If not, the kicker is they usually run 40 to 60 yds before they bleed. Then, blood like a river all the way to the animal.

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by USAF Ret

So, if I use the 308 for backup with a Barnes TSX, would the 150 grain be the best way to go?

Not necessarily here is the minimum impact velocites in FPS I have on .308 caliber Barnes TTSX and LRX bullets.

130 TTSX = 1800
150 TTSX = 2000
165 TTSX = 1800
168 TTSX = 1500
175 LRX = 1600
180 TTSX= 1500

The 0.308" 165gr TTSX is a shorter ogive than the 0.308" 168gr TTSX. We offer both for different cartridges to work within SAAMI COAL limits. The 308 168gr works well in the 308 WIN and 30-06 which allow more exposed bullet to be seated out further.

The 165gr was designed for cartridges more like the 300 WIN MAG which require a shorter ogive to work within SAAMI limits. When handloading, you can use either in a 300 WIN MAG just realize with the 168/175gr that you will need to seat it out a little further that the SAAMI max COAL and check proper fit and function in your particular firearm.

They all function to similar velocities. The 168gr and 175gr LRX will open up at a lower velocity (around 1600 ft/s) than the 165gr (around 1800 ft/s). For best performance we recommend keeping impact velocity a few hundred feet above this minimum.

Thanks

Greggory Sloan | Ballistics Lab Supervisor
Barnes Bullets, LLC

This is not an email I've received, but one I found posted online. Same for the minimum impact velocites of the bullets posted. So I can't answer with 100% certainty that the 150's is that high.

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by taylorce1

Not necessarily here is the minimum impact velocites in FPS I have on .308 caliber Barnes TTSX and LRX bullets.

130 TTSX = 1800
150 TTSX = 2000
165 TTSX = 1800
168 TTSX = 1500
175 LRX = 1600
180 TTSX= 1500



This is not an email I've received, but one I found posted online. Same for the minimum impact velocites of the bullets posted. So I can't answer with 100% certainty that the 150's is that high.

My experience with Barnes, and I have been using them since the Orig X, is that you better drive them fast. If you don't drive them fast, they perform like a FMJ. They used to have a chart that showed expansion at velocities. What they call "expansion" at minimum velocity, I call minor tip deformation.
My son was shooting 110 Ttsx in his 7-08. He kept our deer dog busy. I finally told him to go kill rocks with those bullets and swapped him over to GameKings. But That same 110 Ttsx bullet in the 7WSM hits like a RPG.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by taylorce1

Not necessarily here is the minimum impact velocites in FPS I have on .308 caliber Barnes TTSX and LRX bullets.

130 TTSX = 1800
150 TTSX = 2000
165 TTSX = 1800
168 TTSX = 1500
175 LRX = 1600
180 TTSX= 1500



This is not an email I've received, but one I found posted online. Same for the minimum impact velocites of the bullets posted. So I can't answer with 100% certainty that the 150's is that high.

Thanks buddy. That is exactly the information I needed. 168 grain is the way to go.
For the 270, I ordered the 129 grain LRX bullets to give them a try and the 150 grain partitions a buddy is sending to me.

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by USAF Ret

Thanks buddy. That is exactly the information I needed. For the 270, I ordered the 129 grain LRX bullets to give them a try and the 150 grain partitions a buddy is sending to me.

The 130 Scirocco 2 would be my choice for elk in 270. It's nasty.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by reynolds357

The 130 Scirocco 2 would be my choice for elk in 270. It's nasty.

Will take a look. Thank you.

[taylorce1]

the 150 grain partitions a buddy is sending to me.

They arent Partitions, they're 150 grain Accubond Long Range.

[USAF Ret]

Originally Posted by taylorce1

They arent Partitions, they're 150 grain Accubond Long Range.

Sorry buddy, can't remember what I ate for breakfast these days. Thank you.