Boy, I guess I started a doozy of a post. Well to add confusion, I found a used Mark V in 7mm Weatherby. It looks to be about 95% and has a Leupold VarXII 3-9. I don't know what year the rifle was made but it has a synthetic weatherby stock with montecarlo cheekpiece.
Anyone with experience on handloading this caliber with 160 or 175 grain bullets? Can you handload up to Weatherby factory ammo FPS? The loads do seem pretty hot compaired to loading manuals!

Westernmassman,

I've been using IMR7828 in My 7mm Weatherby Mag and surpassing Weatherby's ballistics w/ max loads and no pressure signs while using 140 grain bullets. 3390fps @ 15' from muzzle w/ 140 BarnesXXX over 74 grains of IMR7828. That's quite a smokin' load and like a Laser beam as far as trajectory is concerned.

I did try out several Sierra 160s w/ R22 but just couldn't get the accuracy I wanted. Didn't chrono those loads.

Check out this data right here:

http://www.imrpowder.com/data/rifle/7mmwthbymag-2005apr03.php

Have a Good One,

Reloader

For me it would probably come down to the gun more than the cartridge itself.

I own both and I like both of them very much. My Weatherby ss/syn has less felt recoil than my Ruger mkII. The Wthby can do really do 3400 with a 130 bullet, the win has to push just as hard to hit 3100 with the 22 inch barrel. Like I said I like them both, they are as different as my standard 30 cals and my 30 cal mags. Carry what you feel like, I do. Oh, when your comparing down range drops it's not really honest to compare hand loaded sierra game kings in a mystical 26 inch barrelled win to Hornady interlock flat bases in the wthby.

quote:

Originally posted by Rogue6:
..... Oh, when your comparing down range drops it's not really honest to compare hand loaded sierra game kings in a mystical 26 inch barrelled win to Hornady interlock flat bases in the wthby.

270 reload on page 1 is not mysical and neither is rifle - Its very true!

If your gunna go the magnum road why not get the 7mm Rem.if youre not going to reload,Here is arundown of factory ammo avilable.

Winchester
140,160 failsafe,140,160 accubond,140,150 ballistic tip,150,175 powerpoint
Remington
140,150,175 coreloct,150 sirroco,140,160 coreloct ultrabond,160 aframe,150accutip,140 coreloct reduced recoil
Federal
140,160accubond 150,165 gameking,140,160 partotion,140,150 bt,160xtrpileshock,150solidbase,160,175TBBC,150,175 powershock
PMC
140,160 XLC,140,160 spbt. 140,160,175psp
Hornady
139,154 interbond. 139HE Interbond 139SST Moly,154sp,162btsp
44 factory loadings above,and that does not include Norma or RWS loadings. Conley Precision Cartridge also does a whole array (38 loadings)

so, 44+38+Norma,Rws. close to 90 loadings overall.

quote:

and I don't call 300 fps " a little" better performance.

Neither do I....however the Weatherby with 2" longer barrel will only cough up 100'/sec more velocity with 130 grain bullets over the .270 Winchester. That truly ranks as "little".

Vapodog, It's quite a bit more than 100fps on 130s at least in the rifles I've dealt w/. More like 200-300.

They are just not a good comparison, the Weatherby is clearly much faster and that's a fact. A 270 WSM compared to the Weatherby would be a better comparison w/ the Weatherby edging that race as well.

A 270 win being compared to a 270 Weatherby is like comparing a 30-06 to a 300 Win Mag, a proven difference in both races.

It just boils down to how much speed, sound, recoil, and weight that you want in a rifle.

Reloader

quote:

Vapodog, It's quite a bit more than 100fps on 130s at least in the rifles I've dealt w/. More like 200-300.

I checked loading manuals and got the following results
Hodgdon: 260'/sec advantage with the Weatherby but they use a 2" longer barrel

Alliant: 240'/sec advantage and again 2" greater barrel length

IMR...weatherby not listed

Hornady manual: 100'/sec advantage for the Weatherby and 2" longer barrel on the Magnum.

OK....I concede.....adjusted for barrel length (25'/sec/inch) The Weatherby seems 200'/sec better than the .270 Winchester.

I have had the 270 Wby and have had many 270 Win barrels at 26 inches on bench style rifles.

With single base powders the 270 tops out at around the 2950 to 2980 with 150 grainers and 3180 with 130 grainers. The 270 Wby is close to 3250 with 150 grainers and 3450 with 130 grainers.

So about 250 f/s difference in 26 inch barrels.

I think the main advantage of the 270 Wby (and also 7mm Rem) is that the shooter is probably more inclined to use heavier bullets because the velocity is well over 3000 f/s.

I have also had the 308 Norma necked to 270 and velocities and loads were virtually identical to the 270 Wby. The slightly greater case capacity of the 308 Norma/270 being offset by the freebore in the 270 Wby.

Mike

I hear you all, and respect your opinions, however, how much practical difference does it make in the field?

In addition to that, I've just spent a day at the range with some VERY experienced (and some not so experienced) hunters... (minimum calibre was 270) with some very interesting results...

Every single person with a whizz bang magnum shot OK, but my son (14), myself, and ALL of the competitors using 'standard chamberings' outshot ALL of the 'whizz bang' competitors... these are people who claim to be 'accurate hunters'... I've never seen so many people flinch, and fail to hit the target!! I wouldn't hunt with any of them!!

however, how much practical difference does it make in the field?

None

But as I said above depending on the shooters mental approach it can make a difference in that some shooters will be more likely to use 150 grain bullets in the 270 magnum or 7mm magnum as compared to the 270 Win. 2900 "something" does not have the same ring to it as 3200 "something"

Another point is that the 270 magnum will equal top 270 Winchester ballistics with low pressure and a wide range of powders and loading parameters. Of course the same can be applied to the 270 Winchester if you load it to say 270/308 or 270/300 Savage top ballistics.

But it is all a mind game like accuracy. If someone has a sporting rifle that shoots consistently at .75" they post up what a great rifle they have. If the rifle groups 1.25" they post up questions about what can be done to fix the rifle

Mike

quote:

however, how much practical difference does it make in the field?

None Big Grin

Yup and that's my point as well.....or in other words.....SO WHAT?????

If you can't do it with the .270 Winchester maybe one should be looking at the .338 Magnum.....

There's only a few Weatherby cartridges that truly offer a lot more and that's the .378, .416 and .460 and I already know I can't handle that kind of recoil.....so it don't do much for me anyway.

I love the 270, but some part of me has always wanted a 270 Weatherby. I too get 3000 fps with 150g Partitions out of my 270 WCF. Matrix has come out with some 165g VLD bullets with a .718 BC. A 270 Weatherby might be just the ticket. Now if Nosler would only come out with a .277 165g Accubond!

I get 915 m/sec with Woodleighs 180grain PP bullets. Thats over 3000 ft/sec and close to 3600 Ft/ibs of energy from a .270Wea. Doing 3300 Ft/sec with a 150grain is no sweat. The WIn is a popstar, the Wea is a rockstar!.

I bought a lefty 270 Weatherby Mk. 5 some time ago. I am ashamed of myself; it sits unused in the safe. I don't know when I will get to it. It's probably a good rifle. I have a RH Rem SS 700 in 280 in a custom LH stock. I love it. It's comfortable to shoot, and extremely accurate. I'll probably continue to use it. But, I have NO idea what I'll do with the Weatherby. So, if anyone has an urge to talk me out of it ...... proceed.

Interesting how things can change....this is a seven year old thread and lately I've been made aware of a 180 Woodleigh for the .270 Weatherby.

This big bullet can make use of the .270 Weatherby's extra boiler room and as a long range elk round seems to be significantly more than the .270 Winchester as there is some evidence that the velocity achievable from the smaller Winchester case is marginal in stabilizing the bullet.

I haven't tried this yet and would like to hear more reports about the use of the .277 diameter 180 grain woodleigh.....but this just might be the .270 Weatherby's chance to shine.

On another thread here it was reported that 3,000 FPS was achieved with the Weatherby and the 180 Woodleigh.....quite impressive.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The .270 Wby is one of the flatest shooting caliber in existence, but flat shooting rifles are on paper and under hunting conditions those extra few inches are abandoned in wiggles, wobbles and heavy breathing..so I'll take the .270 Win.

I fully agree with Ray and will add that if you get the Ultralight in 270 Bee, you will get the heavier 9-lug action, but if you go with the 270 Win, you'll get the lighter 6-lug action.

I've never been a real big fan of the .270 Win. even though I do own four of them. Hey! What can I say? The prices were right. The first as bought in 1973 IIRC fo a whole rip snortin' $75. A commecial FN Mauser with a soda straw 24" barrel that barely breaks 7 pounds with a scope, sling and a full magazine. Accurate as hell and gives the highest velocity of the four. Average for five shots was 2999 FPS with the 150 gr. Nosler partition. I first used some 130 gr. bullets in 130 gr. weight but felt they were too destructive of good eating meat so went to 150 gr. bullets at the suggestion of a friend. I've never looked back. I've since found another commercial FN with the date stamp 1951 but it weighs a ton. About 9.5 pounds with scope, sling and a full magazine. Next one is a Ruger #1A which I bought to add to my small collection of Ruger #1 rifles. It's sufficiently accurate to hunt with but I haven't played with it much. (1.0" to 1.25" with 150 gr. Sierra Game Kings) The last was kind of a fluke. it's a Winchester M70 XTR push feed gun with what looks like a factory installed McMillan stock in the Featherweight configuration. It was sitting on a table at a gun show with a 3x9 Leupold scope for all of $400. I thought it was a Featherweight someone had put the McMillan stock on so I bought it. When I got home and gave it a really close look over I found that it too had a 24" barrel. The butt plate said Winchester. On the way home I bought a box of Wincester 150 gr. Power point loads to check the gun out along with my pet 150 gr. Sierra accuracy load and the first group with the factory ammo was exactly .50" for three shots. Two more shots opened it up to .75" Methinks it's a keeper. My accuracy load was just as good in the gun and was the load I used on an antelope in New Mexico in 2009.
Personally, when it comes to anything Weatherby, well I have no use for them. I've shot a few, a .300 several times a .340 once, and two rounds from a .460. (That was fun. )I do shoot a .404 Jeffery and .416 rigby on occasion so I'm no stranger to recoil. For me it's just the whole Weatherby thing. I just don't like them. Nothing personal to those that do. Just a matter of preference.
Paul B.

The 270 Weatherby is very hard to beat. Great penatration, defies the wind, very easy to shoot as it lacks both recoil and any real noise, easy to load as if reloader 22 was made specifically for it, cases seem to last forever, and the ultralight or accumark will group better than 98% of the shooters shooting it. It's not about can the Win do what the Wby can do, but with what ease and confidence. If I had to pick one rifle to carry the rest of the way, it would be in 270Wby.

I'm going to have to buy a 270 Weatherby. I love the 270 caliber. I've been shooting 150g Nosler Partitions at 3000 fps out of my BDL in 270 forever. A 165g Matrix VLD out of a 270 Weatherby at 3100 fps for deer and elk or a 90g Sierra HPBT at 3700 fps for varmints seem like too much fun to pass up.

I own 270 Wea ultralight and multiple 270's.
Chrono;
1) 270 Win; 130 gr 3200-3250 FPS
2) 270 Wea; 130 TTSX; 3400-3450 FPS

Typically 200 FPS is a 100 yard stronger cartridge.
For most of my hunting the 270 is fine. If I were to hunt speed goats or mulies on the plains of eastern Colorado I would probably take the Weatherby. My Weatherby was finicky with loads but finally found one that works. The ultralight Mark V with a Swar AV is a lightweight production winner.

My .270 WSM's do the same ballistics as eezridr's Weatherby. They amaze me more every time I shoot them. Good shooting.

I went through this process a few years back. Went with a .270. I am not a hand loader and felt that the 150fps was negligible on a mule deer under 400 yds. (or elk for that matter). You can always juice a handload, but I figured that if I needed a 150gr pill at 3200fps I would step up to a 300 WSM.

Plus I can stop off at wally world and grad a box of core-lokt for ~$16.

You can stop by any local corner gas station and fill up your Toyota Corolla and drive for a real long time without spending a whole bunch of money. Never saw that as a good argument against driving a Corvette if you want a bit more thrill

quote:

Originally posted by MileHighShooter:
You can stop by any local corner gas station and fill up your Toyota Corolla and drive for a real long time without spending a whole bunch of money. Never saw that as a good argument against driving a Corvette if you want a bit more thrill

200FPS and a addition $30/box is your thrill while hunting mule deer? Dude, I totally understand you fascination with a 'vette. Totally!

What I'm saying is, not every hunter breaks down their choice of chambering based on being able to get the 16$ box of Cor-lokts from Wal-Mart.

Life is too damn short, buy the guns you want to shoot and hunt with em. Hunting these days is a luxury, period. Most hunters aren't burning through a case per season, so what is an extra 30$ when you consider fuel, time off work, time away from the family, cost of tags, cost of the rifle, cost of the scope, cost of all the gear....

+1 Great post!

I guess if you’re a 1 box a year deer slayer, have at it. My point is that 200 FPS is negligible for the increased expense, negligible for hunting. BUT if that’s makes you a better hunter, please keep shooting it. In Fact, rub the head of a leprechaun, don’t change your underwear, walk backwards, what ever it takes.

If you are a Weatherby soldier, great. If you must have a Weatherby caliber, that’s fantastic. However, if your argument is based on the thrill of speed, you should eat crow and bump up another 100FPS with a 270WSM. Better ammunition selection, better rifle selection.

Just for the record, I like Weatherby rifles, I own one, its my go to (270 UL). However, there is a reason Weatherby doesn’t chamber in WSM.

My son has a could of WSM's (300 & 270). They shoot well but they are not the best feeding cartridges with the sharp shoulder and fat body. I think they would make great cartridges for a Ruger #1 or Browning falling block.
We get this argument a lot about the perceived disparity between the amount of powder it takes to make little gains in velocity (std cartridges vs magnum cartridges). In actuality it is on target. Powder is stored energy and the gains you may see in velocity (say 5-10%) actually equate to significant energy levels, probably close in % to the powder increase.
Compare apples to apples.
If you have an accurate flat shooting gun that does not weigh a ton and have access to a chrono where you can accurately determine its velocity capabilities; keep it! Confidence makes all the difference in the world in hunting.
Everyone has an "opinion" including myself. I personally like higher velocity rifles with todays super bullets. Taking the guess work out shooting in hunting which is likely to take place in an instant makes since to me. I do not like lugging a 10 lb gun and do not care for all the "clutter" in modern rifle scopes. Give me a flat shooting gun, reasonably weighted gun that I can hit something with little fanfare to 400 yards and that fits my bill. A 270 win does a pretty good job at that (with tailored handloads). a 270 Weatherby does a better job.

IMO, there really is no need for another cartridge in the .277 diameter other than the .270 Winchester. It is flat-shooting, doesn't kick you to death or hurt your ears, and it hits hard. If you need more than a .270 than you would be better off skipping over everything below .338 and get a .338 Win mag or .340 Weatherby. Besides, the .270 has a plethora of factory offerings, very affordable brass, and doesn't need a thousand grains of powder to achieve 3100 FPS with the 130.


I mean if you want to pay 10 more $ a box for that puny 200 FPS I guess that makes sense. NOT! And forget about the .270 Wby if you're concerned about ammo & brass prices!

I am a huge fan of the 270 and 338. Been shooting both since 1975. I don't need anything more.

I have lots more, , I am a gun looney. to me it is much more about the rifle than a particular cartridge. I just picked up a sweet M70 270 wsm -custom shop stainless w/laminated Featherweight stock. Its the gun that I wanted ,I would have been just as happy with it in 270 Win , 308, or 284 win.

SSR

I really see no need for the 270 Weatherby. If I need to shoot past 400 yards I'm going to use something heavier than a .277 anyway. Wind is the enemy, not gravity.

I have both a 270Win and 270WM. I can attest to factory ammo shooting faster than published data, I chrono'd 130gr AB's (factory) right at 3500fps, 140gr AB's right on 3360fps and 150gr PT's at 3280fps.
Now, the velocity factor over one from the other is insignificant, BUT, having a cartridge that CAN and WILL shoot 150gr/160gr pills at the same velocity as 130gr pills makes a BIG difference in a long shot, the heavier bullets hang onto their velocity/trajectory better making those shots somewhat easier.

I also have to add, that I have never been able to match published velocities out of my 270 with a 22" barrel, no matter what powder or loading manual I tried. Factory loads did NOT hold up to published velocities either, they were 80-100fps slower over my chronograph.

I like either cartridge, but must lean towards the 270WM for those long shots, and yes, it is a very specialised cartridge when you take into consideration the amount of powder used and the cost of the brass for a 5% increase in velocity.

Cheers.
416.

I am so close to buying a used 270 Weatherby Mark V with a 26" barrel, maybe this weekend. Haggling ...

quote:

If you are a Weatherby soldier, great. If you must have a Weatherby caliber, that’s fantastic. However, if your argument is based on the thrill of speed, you should eat crow and bump up another 100FPS with a 270WSM.

Are you trying to tell the world via the net that the .270 WSM gets 100 FPS over a .270 Weatherby?

Because if I'm reading that right I am going to have to call a major on that one. The Weatherby has got more case capacity it launches bullets especially heavier bullets faster. Enough to make a difference on game HELL NO! But the WSM doesn't beat a Weatherby in the velocity department.

I keep reading people say the .270win is only 200Ft slower than the weatherby round.

Most loads I compare these two great cartridges with actually gives the weatherby a 300 ft/sec edge in most bulletsweights.

180grain woodleigh) 2800ft/sec Winchester.
3000ft/sec Weatherby.

150grain any bullet) 3080 ft/sec Wincehster
3280 ft/sec Weatherby

130 grain any bullet)3250ft/sec winchester
3450ft/sec Weatherby

Are these figures right for the Winchester??. I know for the Weatherby part its correct.

quote:

Originally posted by jens poulsen:
I keep reading people say the .270win is only 200Ft slower than the weatherby round.

Most loads I compare these two great cartridges with actually gives the weatherby a 300 ft/sec edge in most bulletsweights.

180grain woodleigh) 2800ft/sec Winchester.
3000ft/sec Weatherby.

150grain any bullet) 3080 ft/sec Wincehster
3280 ft/sec Weatherby

130 grain any bullet)3250ft/sec winchester
3450ft/sec Weatherby

Are these figures right for the Winchester??. I know for the Weatherby part its correct.

For the .270 Winchester, typical speeds observed with careful handloads of lead core bullets in 22-24" barrels would be:

150 gr. about 2950 - 3000 fps
130 gr. about 3050 - 3150 fps

Don't know about the 180 gr. bullets

friar

Agree, I get 3000 fps with 150g Partitions out of my 270 but it's a neck sized only MAX load using Federal 215 primers. I think 300 fps difference between the 270 Win and 270 Wby is closer to right.

Back to the original post about now needing two separate rifles for deer and Elk. Either the 270 or 270Wby would have no problem taking an elk at NORMAL shooting distances. My wife has killed a number of elk with her little 7x57 which gives up several 100fps to either of the 270s.