I have an old Husqvarna , .270.
The Barrel is 20.5 inches. When i 1st got this rifle it shot great with some ammo i had on hand.
Awhile back i loaded up my standby 270 load 60 grains of H-4831 under a Hornady 130 and it was no fun to shoot, Muzzle blast was unpleasant, and accuracy was not good either.
I would like to get 2900 fps out of this rifle with a 130 grain , but don't want all that blast and noise, I am thinking back down 57.5 and also try some RL 19 and maybe H 414 ! about 2 and a half grains under max ! A good 130 grain bullet at 2900 is a very good deer bullet and this rifle is light and handles great. Real good for walking around with and Versatile too.
It has a Nikkon 2X7 scope that is decent enough, Any of you guys have experience with shorter .270s ? ...tj3006

A long time ago I had what appears to be the same rifle as you have only in 30-06. It was my favorite rifle that I stupidly sold off in a time of need. It killed a lot of game for me.

Like you said I didn't particularly care for the muzzle blast or the way it left my ears ringing with its short barrel but I loved the way it handled. A lightweight rifle is just the thing in the mountains where I hunt. I'd love to find another one though.

It's funny how much difference a couple inches more make for reducing the blast and noise.

quote:

Originally posted by tjroberts:
I have an old Husqvarna , .270.
The Barrel is 20.5 inches. When i 1st got this rifle it shot great with some ammo i had on hand.
Awhile back i loaded up my standby 270 load 60 grains of H-4831 under a Hornady 130 and it was no fun to shoot, Muzzle blast was unpleasant, and accuracy was not good either.
I would like to get 2900 fps out of this rifle with a 130 grain , but don't want all that blast and noise, I am thinking back down 57.5 and also try some RL 19 and maybe H 414 ! about 2 and a half grains under max ! A good 130 grain bullet at 2900 is a very good deer bullet and this rifle is light and handles great. Real good for walking around with and Versatile too.
It has a Nikkon 2X7 scope that is decent enough, Any of you guys have experience with shorter .270s ? ...tj3006

According to Quickload, 53 gr of Alliant Rl 17 will burn 100% of the propellant and still top 2900 fps in a 20.5" barrel. Most have experienced that Rl 17 lags about 2 grs in pressure/Mv from QL predictions. Even increasing the charge to 55 gr would still result in a complete burn and moderate chamber pressure. According to QL you could shorten the barrel to 19" and still get 100% burn with that charge of Rl 17.

Your Rl 19 load would still leave about 4% of the powder unburned in the 20.5" barrel.

My nephew has one of the older Win lt wt's in 270 with a 20" barrel.
He uses 130's and IMR 4350 and has never had a complaint.

my BIL has a chopped down MDL-70 Winchester 270 it wasn't so bad with RL-19.
we used to let the girls shoot it when they were about 10-11 or so and they thought it was an all day rifle.

I would use a faster poweder something like IMR 4350. I'm sure you can get a 130g bullet to 2900 fps and the muzzle blast and recoil would be less. The Hodgdon reloading site has load data for IMR and other powders as well as their own

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/

Thanks for the great responses !
I have lots of RL-17, so thats a good way to start ! IMR 4350 is a good Possibility too.
...tj3006

Powders like 4350 and RL-17 are stil pretty slow powders, I doubt the OP will like them either. He is really at cross purposes here, wanting both 2900 fps and low report. Won’t happen, its really one or the other with that short tube. If he can live with ~2800 fps then he will get muzzle blast relief from Varget, 4320 or 4895. The game won’t know the difference.


.

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:
Powders like 4350 and RL-17 are stil pretty slow powders, I doubt the OP will like them either. He is really at cross purposes here, wanting both 2900 fps and low report. Won’t happen, its really one or the other with that short tube. If he can live with ~2800 fps then he will get muzzle blast relief from Varget, 4320 or 4895. The game won’t know the difference.


.

Rl 17 is a faster burning powder than Rl 19 and a helluva lot faster than IMR 4350.

I'm using Rl 17 for a 7mm-08 with a 22" barrel and it works great. Getting 2900+ fps with 140 gr Ballistic Tips.

quote:

Originally posted by tjroberts:
Thanks for the great responses !
I have lots of RL-17, so thats a good way to start ! IMR 4350 is a good Possibility too.
...tj3006

I use only 2 powders these days for medium capacity for bore size non magnum cartridges.

Rl 17

7mm-08 with 140 gr bullets 22" barrel
30/40 Krag with 160 gr bullets 22" barrel
8X57 IS (loaded to Euro pressures)with 200 gr bullets 23 1/2" barrel


Norma MRP

280 Remington with 140 grain bullets 22" and 24" barrels
8mm-06 Ackley Improved with 26" barrel

The MRP does have significant flash and blast from the 280 with the shorter barrels.

i did not say i wanted lo report, just avarage will do fine.
I put together a box of ammo with RL 17. Agrain under max. i think it will work.
...tj3006

quote:

Originally posted by tjroberts:
i did not say i wanted lo report, just avarage will do fine.
I put together a box of ammo with RL 17. Agrain under max. i think it will work.
...tj3006

If you give me;

Your powder charge
The brand/weight/type bullet you are using
The H2O capacity of a fired case from your rifle (this is very important)
Case length
The COAL of your loaded cartridge

I can run the Quickload calculations. I am very familiar with the anomalies of QL with Rl 17 and can probably predict very closely what your Mv and pressure would be.

I found the 270 handles short barrels better than any other caliber Ive tried..Tje two carbine 270s Ive owned had 20 inch barrels and with old H4831 I didn't lose any velocity at all. With fast burning powders I lost considerably...????????? why? who cares!!

the worst that happens is you use a 150 and end up with a slightly smaller diameter version of the 7x57.

quote:

....Rl 17 is a faster burning powder than Rl 19 and a helluva lot faster than IMR 4350....

Very incorrect, Hodgdon places it slower than both IMR 4350 and H4350. I’ll accept your appology.

https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-con.../burn-rate-color.pdf


.

quote:

Originally posted by TX Nimrod:

quote:

....Rl 17 is a faster burning powder than Rl 19 and a helluva lot faster than IMR 4350....

Very incorrect, Hodgdon places it slower than both IMR 4350 and H4350. I’ll accept your appology.

https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-con.../burn-rate-color.pdf


.

Perhaps you should check Alliant's data instead.

I can't believe a powder company would list their powder as better, slower or faster than the other fellows like competition.,

well said!! They do that you know, especially in their loading books, best to own your own chronograph...

I found old WW2 H4831, very slow and it gets me the best velocity in several 20 inch carbines in 270 caliber and in other calibers also, I did the last test about 4 months ago..using RL-19, in a .270 carbine mod. 54 Win., and I have a can now of RL-17, but have not tested it as I no longe have a .270..It would be interested to test RL-17 in a short tube 270 to full max charges..Id use a white bed sheet out in front of the barrel, to see if all granules were burned, its just nice to know,not sure it makes any real difference as it hasn't as far as I can tell so far, but should relate to burn efficiency. but maybe not..