The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Reloading Win 270 loadsGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Win 270 loads | Login/Join |
one of us |
I have a Win 270 on the way and would like to see if anyone has some loads that they would like to share using any of the following powders that I have good stock of. I know that there are lots of other powders out there but am looking to use what I already have. Will start with 130 gr TTSX as this will be used on 125 lb deer. I have good stock of: H4895 IMR4320 IMR4831 RL 15 RL 19 RL 22 RL25 Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Have gun- Will travel The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition. Robert Ruark | ||
|
one of us |
I've loaded for a number of 270s. They all liked 4831. However, I never used a Barnes. Another option would be RL22. As usual just my $.02 Paul K | |||
|
One of Us |
I was just about to post on this exact same setup! However I have been using H4350...only other powder I have in quantity is Rl15. The TTSx is longer than the TSX and also has an extra band so the loads on the website I don't think will be exactly on. I loaded up 54, 55, 55.5 and 56 grains at 3.305 OAL (.050 off lands for my rifle) and have yet to see a pressure sign. At the book max of 55 grains of H4350, primers were still rounded, easy extraction etc. 56 grains on showed a teeny bit of flattening you have to look hard for. I think the combination on the TTSx being a tad longer (almost .100) and having an extra band, make this a different beast than the TSX. The necks are slightly sooty (I neck size FYI) and am thinking this will handle more pressure easily, just not sure where I'll go with the OAL, if anywhere. I am getting 'hunting' accuracy, from about 1" to 1 1/4", but I know the thing will do better and I just don't think I've hit the sweet spot with this combo. I talked to Barnes and Ty said they were developing loads for the TTSx's as they were finding out some were quite different than the TSX counterpart. I think the 130 TTSX falls into this category. I'll post more if I figure it all out. Would also like to hear other people's experience with the 270/130 TTSX. | |||
|
| one of us |
I only use 150 gr. bullets in my .270 Win. and those are Partitions. Have never used a Barnes. My standard load is 57.0 gr. of Rldr-22 and bullets are seated to 0/010" off the lands. This charge is1 grain under max. as listed in the books I've seen and yields 2930 fps and consistent 1" groups. This load has worked for me for years, no need to change now. Bear in Fairbanks Unless you're the lead dog, the scenery never changes. I never thought that I'd live to see a President worse than Jimmy Carter. Well, I have. Gun control means using two hands. | |||
|
| one of us |
H4831sc works for me with the 130 TTSX seated at 3.365 in my rifle which is close to the lands with this long bullet. Load is 61.5 gr and is close to max if not pushing it so start low and work up as usual. I stopped at 60.0 H4831 with the 130 TSX before moving on to the TTSX. | |||
|
| One of Us |
the old jack oconner load of 60 gr 4831 and the 130 bullet has always worked well for me | |||
|
| one of us |
the powders you have, i also use 4831 & RL-19 i also used alot of any 4350s | |||
|
One of Us |
This is what I use also ________________________________________________ Maker of The Frankenstud Sling Keeper Proudly made in the USA Acepting all forms of payment | |||
|
| one of us |
I've never seen a .270 in which the "Jack O'Connor" load of 60 grains of HODGDON 4831 under a 130 grain bullet did not generate excessive pressures. My primary .270 tops out at 58.5 grains of original surplus H-4831, yielding 3200 honest, chronographed FPS. I know that rifles vary, and this one may be exceptional to some extent, but I've just never loaded for one which would accept 60 grains with sustainable pressures. Some recent literature makes the case that O'Connor's reloading scale weighed heavy and he was actually using less powder than he thought he was. Also remember that O'Connor was using surplus 4831, which is an entirely different powder to those currently available with that number designation. Of course, if you just want to use the brass once then discard it, you can load even more! IMR-4831 is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than H-4831, and is a bit too fast for optimal velocities with 130+ grain bullets. The same is true of the rest of the powders you list, other than the RL's from RL-19 up. RL-22 or RL-25 are good bets. I'd advise concentrating on RL-22 until and unless it proves unsatisfactory. Not hunting in a lead-restricted area I don't have to mess with monometal bullets, but since you are in California you may have no choice. The monometals work under a different set of rules, but in general, seat the off of the lands and remember that since they are longer weight for weight than lead core bullets they effectively reduce the size of the pressure vessel (the chamber). You will generally need to drop powder charges by a few percent relative to lead bullet loads. If you don't hunt in a lead-restricted area do yourself a favor and pick up a box of cup and core bullets for fewer headaches and more certain performance. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have always used IMR-4064 with 130 grain bullets. Tried testing 140s but didn't like them. | |||
|
One of Us |
Barnes just improved the BC on the bullet with a new 129 grain LRX in .277". I would try those. I use R-17 with both 110 TTSX and older 130 TSX. I would look for an accuracy node somewhere between 54 and 56 grains R17 and the 129TTSX. For blacktailer, I got to walk around D7 three years ago. Saw a bunch of does. Don't know if I'll make it this year. Of the powders on your list, the only ones that are normally recommended for 270 hunting loads are IMR4831, Rel 19 and Rel 22. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| one of us |
Thanks for the recommendations. I'm starting to see a few bucks around the place so I have a lot of inspiration. Have gun- Will travel The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition. Robert Ruark | |||
|
| new member |
Hi Stonecreek. I note you qualified the above by saying JOC used mil surp H4831 so my comments below might be a little wide of the mark, but interested what people think of the following: I use AR2213sc/H4831sc in my 24 in bbl 270, using 130g Hotcors, Interlocks and SSTs. Damned if I can break 3000fps with anything less than 60.5g. Jamming 61.0g in there gets me to 3030fps. There's nil to indicate anything hot, easy bolt lift, primers are snug after 8 reloads, primers look rounded on the shoulders. Don't get me wrong 3030fps is plenty for hunting. But to make that 3100fps benchmark for the 130s I needed to go to H4350. This too was a mild load but at 56.5g more than 2 grains over book max. Anyone got any ideas why my 4831 loads require so much wood on the fire? I would put 62g in there to see how that goes but it won't fit without a fair bit of stuffing around. I am thinking I might just have a "loose-ish" barrel, though it is damn accurate. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It's always an interesting problem trying to figure out an individual rifle. First of all your cases sound like they are good and under 65000psi. The fact that both H4350 and H4831 produce slow velocities makes me look to the rifle rather than the batch of powder for the answer. Good accuracy means that the problem is worth solving and probably not caused by an overbore or a roughcut barrel. Have you been measuring your cases at the case head, shoulder and case length? I wouldn't be surprised to find out that your chamber has been cut a little bit large, so that you are shooting a kind of "improved" cartridge that needs an extra grain or two to match other chambers. If the chamber theory is correct, then you should be able to measure some differences from diagrams. Once fired brass will measure noticeably larger (+.002"?) at the head and or shoulder than expected (.470",.441"). If a friend has a .270, your fired cases would probably cause difficulty in chambering and closing a bolt. Following up on the 'large chamber' theory, I would also assume that you are either neck-sizing and keeping the brass consistent with your chamber, or if full-length resizing you find that your cases need trimming and grow .010+" after every resizing. The second theory to check out is that your rifle has a custom freebore, maybe .3"-.5" inches. By the way, 56.5 grains of H4350 for 3100fps with 130 grain bullets sounds reasonable. Some of the reloading manuals have tight, minimal chambers that produce maximum loads at lesser powder levels. Needless to say, be careful and measure your cases' casehead pressure-growth as well as adapting to the chamber. You don't want brass growing an extra .0010" over milder loads. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I probably have a fast barrel, and I know it has a long throat as well, but for years I shot 59 grains of IMR 4831 lit by a CCI-200, pushing a Speer 130-grain Grand Slam loaded to .010" off the lands. That load chronographed 3150 as steadily as the sun coming up in the east every morning. I subsequently went to Accurate Arms powder, and based on their recommendation, went to 60 grains of AA 3100. I was told their powder was the same formulation as IMR 4831, but one grain slower because they used nitro-cotton, not nitrocellulose. For whatever reason, the loads were interchangeable; either would clover leaf at 100 yards. Now that AA has discontinued their 3100, I may have to go back to IMR 4831. It shouldn't matter. Either one is a wonderful load in my 22" BDL... | |||
|
| new member |
Bobnob, I acually do not get hi velocity with h4831sc either. I have used a lot of it and I still do. The most I have ever used was 61 grains for just under 3000 fps. However,even though velocity is perhaps lower than you would expect accuracy is terrific. The speed king in my rifle is IMR-4831. That is true for all bullet weights in my rifle. 57 grains will run any 130 bullet over 3000 from my 22 inch barrel. For hunting only I will load at or near 3100.Depending on powder lot to lot differences I usually end up between 58 to 58.5. 59 grains will go well over 3100. I use a lot of cci-200 primers with rem cases. When I use ww cases I will often switch to ww primers as well. Basically my experience is that IMR-4831 will do anything H4831 will do with three grains less powder. I just ran out of IMR-4831. I have four empty bottles on the shelve. I shot it all up in the last two years. Dang it | |||
|
| new member |
Thanks for the info guys. 416 you might be onto something. My fired cases have - depending on brand - between 69.3 and 69.8g of water capacity which I believe is over spec. Also I am getting measurements of .445 and .474 at the neck and just in front of the web on the case. Does this gel with what you are saying? I am not sure what value a photo here is, but I will try to post a pic of one of my fired Win cases along with an unfired Win factory round...  Sorry for the thread hijack. Maybe I should have started another one. I really appreciate the help though. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, that is what I was talking about. You may need to compare fired brass velocities from new brass velocities in the future, and you will need to keep track of neck-sized vs. full-length-sized brass in your records, at least until you've worked out this angle. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| one of us |
Bobnob, I don't think you've hijacked the thread, just expanded it. What can we say? Rifles vary, and each is an individual. The differences in chamber size, throat length (freebore), bore size, bore finish, twist rate, and maybe a couple of other minor factors can all add up to a significant difference in how a given load will perform compared to another barrel. It is also possible that two chronographs, both of which appear to be accurate and consistent, may report velocities differently to one another. My experience is naturally limited to the four or so .270s that I've worked with, and none of them would come close to digesting the loads that your rifle takes with apparent ease (and corresponding lower velocities). It just goes to show that each rifle is a rule unto itself and only individual trial and experimentation will reveal the optimal loads for it. | |||
|
| one of us |
Of the powders you have, I would recommend trying RL22, IMR-4831, and RL-19 ... in that order. These are all excellent 270 powders and give great velocity and accuracy with 130s in the .270. Interesting comments on H4831/270 O'Connor load. To correct a few things, the O'Connor load was 62 Gr of Military Surplus H4831 and 130 bullets, normally a Nosler Partition or Winchester Silvertip. O'Connor reported getting 3140 fps in a 22" barrel. O'Connor said that he used WW brass and he got the same velocity/powder with 1-2 gr less powder in Remington brass so maybe that is where 60gr came from. O'Connor had this load tested at the pressure labs and it was within spec (54k Cup at the time). Apparently the old Military 4831 was a bit slower than modern 4831 as most books, except Hornady stop at 59-60 gr. There have been at least 2 revisions of H-4831 since the mil surplus version as new suppliers needed. I have an old Handloader's Digest witn an article by Jack O'Connor on loading the .270 and he points out his 270/130/4831 load is based on the Mil surplus powder and newer versions, particularly Dupont (IMR) is faster than what he used and loads may need adjusted accordingly. O'Connor said he still had a supply of the mil powder and had no reason to change/try the newer versions. All that being said, I've loaded for at least a dozen 270s and have 6 currently and have only had one that would not digest 60 gr of current H4831 with most 130 bullets (caveat that some monos and bonded bullets are long). The one 270 is custom and tight chambered and I don't get pressure signs but get over 3100 fps with 58 gr and that is good enough for me. H4831sc is a great powder for the .270 and still my favorite, but several newer powders like RL22, Magpro to name a couple give higher velocity. Lou | |||
|
| new member |
A couple of things I meant to add re my 270. With most bullets there is about 0.08 free bore between the lands and the ogive when seated out to mag length, so there is a bit of space for the bullet to get a move on before it hits the rifling. I am sure this contributes. Also mean to add that I probably shoot more 150g bullets in it than 130s - mainly 150g SSTs. I also shoot 160g Partitions. The 150g SST shoots mild and accurate at 59g of H4831SC. This is a good bit more powder than I have seen recommended anywhere really. It chronies in around 2925-2950fps. The 160 NPTs use 58.5g of H4831SC for ave 2810fps. Though all these charge weights are higher than what most load, having shot getting to towards 1000 rounds through this rifle since new at those levels and keeping a close eye on the chrony, brass, rifle and accuracy, I am not concerned about pressures. I have wondered a lot about it though and I have gained some insight on this site and thread, so thanks. | |||
|
| one of us |
I also appreciate the info so no problem with the hijack. I'm hoping to get a good load not using IMR4831 because it meters so poor that it is the only powder that I throw light and trickle up every charge. Haven't gotten around to trying the sc versions but maybe I will when the current madness is over. Again, thanks AR braintrust  Have gun- Will travel The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition. Robert Ruark | |||
|
| one of us |
Please don't make the mistake of conflating IMR-4831 with any other powder. There is no "short cut" version of it. There are/have been a total of five powders which use the number "4831" as their designation. All but two of them are totally different powders. The two which are closely related are the current version of H4831, made by ADI (or its successor) in Australia, and the powder of very similar burning characteristics also made by ADI, H-4831 SSC (super short cut). The original 4831 was a war surplus powder formulated for the 20mm gun. It was sold as "Hodgdon 4831", or "H-4831" until the vast surplus stock of it was sold out by the early 1970's. As supplies dwindled, Hodgdon, its wholesaler, contracted with ICI Nobel, which made a "New H-4831" for Hodgdon in Scotland. After that contract ended, Hodgdon contracted with ADI for the two powders currently labeled "H-4831". It appears that the current "H-4831" (in either regular or SSC version) in most applications is actually a bit slower than the surplus powder it was designed to replace (which may explain why so many .270 shooters find their guns will safely digest the "O'Connor" load.) In the late 1960's, DuPont, which at the time produced the IMR series of powders, chose to introduce a powder marginally slower than its popular IMR-4350, which it called "IMR-4831". DuPont apparently didn't want Hodgdon to be the only powder distributor to capitalize on the popularity of the cheap, dependable, and versatile 4831. The DuPont formulation of IMR-4831 was significantly faster than the "4831" reloaders had known for years, and at first DuPont insisted that it was the same spec as the old powder. They explained that the old powder had just "gotten slower" with age. This was hogwash and soon DuPont dropped this claim; the surplus 4831 had changed not a whit over its existence (however, as with any powder, some batches stored improperly had chemically deteriorated.) At any rate, DuPont stuck with its formulation of "IMR-4831", which is only a tad slower than IMR-4350 (and is not generally as useful as IMR-4350 nor does it typically achieve as favorable pressure-velocity ratios.) Bottom line: Be sure which powder you mean when you toss out the numbers "4831". Substituting one for another can be either disappointing, or sometimes even damaging. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Of the four 270 Winchesters that I have owned and loaded for, all were at their best with either H or IMR 4350. All would push a 130 gr. bullet over 3050 to 3150 fps. One actually launches original Win. 130 gr. Silvertips at over 3200 fps. with H-4350. RL 19, H-4831 and RL-22 can give great accuracy but generally, again I said generally, they won't give the acclaimed velocities, at least not in my rifles. Having stated that, my latest 270 Win., with a custom barrel, is pushing 140 gr. Accubonds at appox. 3025 fps. with 57 gr. of AA-4350 which is 1-1/2 grains more than what I can get away with using H-4350. This probably puts "my" canister of AA-4350 somewhere in the burn rate of RL-19 or IMR-4831. I have never had any brass-life issues as long as I partial-length resized or neck sized. Powders can vary so much these days from lot to lot, but I would start with RL-19 then move on to IMR4831 then on to RL-22 until I got what I was after. That is if I couldn't find any H-4350. "The right to bear arms" insures your right to freedom, free speech, religion, your choice of doctors, etc. ....etc. ....etc.... -----------------------------------one trillion seconds = 31,709 years------------------- | |||
|
One of Us |
I've been loading 60gr H4831sc behind 130gr Sierra GameKings with a chronographed velocoty of 3050fps+/- @ 15' from the muzzle (22" barrel). No sticky bolt lift, no flattened/cratered primers & no measurable case web expansion. I note Hodgdon themselves are still happy to list 60gr as the maximum load in these days of product liability litigation. | |||
|
| one of us |
Good to know. I didn't list it but I have a pound of H4350. I'll have to dust it off and give it a try. Have gun- Will travel The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition. Robert Ruark | |||
|
| one of us |
"Hodgdon contracted with ADI for the two powders currently labeled "H-4831". It appears that the current "H-4831" (in either regular or SSC version) in most applications is actually a bit slower than the surplus powder it was designed to replace (which may explain why so many .270 shooters find their guns will safely digest the "O'Connor" load.)" | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia