270win 130gr sp.data list 62 gr max of h4831 on hornandy reloading page.

so?? it is a max load but good luck fitting 62 grains in the case

My best 270/130 gr. load was 59.5 gr. powder. Compressed the powder. Tried 62 gr, had to reduce the expander to keep the occasional bullet from creeping forward.

Dave

Rifles vary. Sixty-two grains of H4831 would blow the primers in my Sako .270. Just be cautious when working up loads in a .270 or any rifle.

Just about 60 130g Speers over 55g IMR 4831.
Not H4831 and not a max load, but there isn't much room left in the case.


59g of H4831 is about all I'd go for.

Just my humble opinion but I really think you could be using a more appropriate powder for that cartridge and bullet weight.
roger

130'S 54.5 grains of IMR4350

I have to go along with Roger on this AND his adage, and bite my tongue before I say much more other than(some of) the "newer" generations think the 'net is a panacea for being lazy and NOT working up their own rifle data. If they did what wonders they would learn.

Of course..."egos must be protected at all costs"...who cares what happens later on.

Good Hunting

I tried several different slower burning powders and finally settled on the faster burning IMR4320 (49.5 grains) with 130 grain bullits in my .270. Best accuracy and 2900 fps. I don't need them to go any faster than that. For me, it's accuracy first.

Some peoples children..62 grs of "todays" 4831 is not a proper load in most of todays .270s or 30-06s, fact is even if you can phyically cram 62 grs in your case, one you have a too big a chamber in your gun, two, the bullets will work forward overnight in many cases and create jams....

The problem is Jack O'Connor wrote of and used 62 grs of 4831 in his .270, and 30-06 so now the young nerds at Horndady are quoting Jack loads, guess he's been gone to long for the youngsters to know the facts...

Now here is the kicker, Jack and I both use 62 grs. of 4831, but its old WW2 4831 sometimes known by a few of us as 4350 DATA (4831), and it will give you 3200 fps plus depending on your rifle, along with very low pressure, and was the powder made in heaven for the .270, its only downside is damn it meters crappy so RL-22 may be todays best powder..I still have 40 lbs to shoot up before I go to RL-22 in the 270 and 30-06..

Fortunately you cannot get enough of yestredays H4831 to blow up a gun, and probably the same applies to todays and H4831, IMR-4831 todays powder. WITH 130 gr. BULLETS...BEWARE WITH 150, 160 GR. HOWEVER, IVE BLOWN PRIMER WITH THE HEAVY BULLETS WITH 58 TO 60 GRS OF 4831 with both.

With todays powder one should use a max load of 59 grs of either. with a 130 gr. bullet. Most use no more than 58 grs, and that's a nice accurate load with substantial velocity.

Jack said, that any .270 that wouldn't shoot great with 49 grs of IMR-4064 had a bad barrel, or bad inletting or it was just plain stupid or something like that!

Hell all us old bastard have known this for years.

I've never used it but does an equal weight of IMR7828 short cut take up the same space in a case as the regular long cut? Or does it compact a little better?

ImR-7828 will take more powder, and its a very slow powder..Ive only used it in the 300 Wby,and it shines there, not sure what if does in the .270 or 30-06..I suspect it will hold more powder in the .270, but will it get you additional velocity?? I have no idea, but its worth looking into..

What I am sure of from a lot of testing recently is the best powder IMO in the 270 is RL-22 with any bullet and RL-22 and H414 is best in a 30-06..Only one problem is I have all this old ww2 beautiful 8431 and I can't possibly live long enough to shoot it up..

I've never liked H-4831 in my 270 Win simply because I found it took up too much room in the case. The loads were IMO too compressed. I've gotten great accuracy and velocity with much less compression using IMR 4831.

Both IMR and H 4831 are too compressed with max loads and the heavier bullets, better is RL-22, Rl-19 and H414. However the old WW2 milsurp 4831 was less compressed and held more powder at less pressure. Good stuff but doesn't go thu a powder measure well and one needs to weigh each charge, that is a real pain IMO.

For years I have used Re22 with 130 gr. bullets in my M70 ( XTR s.s. featherweight). Velocity is good, >3100 fps, but the rifle’s accuracy with any bullet has never been better than just o.k.. My favorite load uses 130 Nosler ballistic tips. This winter I decided to give the newer Re23 a try. It is supposed to be more temperature stable, more uniform ballistics, etc., etc. Surprisingly Alliant didn’t list this powder with 130 gr. bullets so I started a few grains lower than my normal Re22 load and worked up from there. The first thing noticed was the shot-shot velocity uniformity; less than 30 fps for a 5 shot string seems the norm with some as low as 7 fps. Next is the accuracy; bullets that had given me 2.5” groups @100y started giving 1-1.5” groups. The rifle seems happiest with most 130 gr. and Re23 at about 3175 fps. The Nosler partitions are now giving me about 1” 5-shot groups and some old Hornady 130 Interbonds are running closer to .5”. This powder seems to be a bit faster than the older Re22 , which to me is just right for the .270 Win. case. Some bullets still don’t work in this rifle, 130 gr. TTSXs and 140 gr. Accubonds still suck. Next up I am going to try some 150 gr. bullets with this powder and see how they do.
C.G.B.

quote:

208-731-4120

Thanks for the update on RL-23, however my two 270s work really well with RL-22, accuracy wise at sub 1/2 inch groups. and 3080 FPS, but my load of RL-22 is a grain heavier than most books, and both guns like the 160 gr. partitions. but Im sure going to give RL-23 a try..Same with the 130 Accubonds and Hornadays, Im a grain or two over book max with the RL-22 and no sign of pressure at all, Reloads in my guns last 10 to 14 reloads, I keep them trimmed, and seated out to fit the long magazines.