THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MEDIUM BORE RIFLE FORUM

Page 1 2 

Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Heavy bullets & 270 Win.
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
posted
Can someone enlighten me on why in factory ammo, the 270 Win. tops out at 150 gr.? I see in "Ammo & Ballistics 5" that there is just one load over that, the Norma Vulcan 156 gr.

The 6.5 caliber seems to top out at 160 gr. on many articles I've read on the old 264 caliber rounds.

If the 6.5 was factory loaded to 160 gr., it seems to me that the 270 should also be offered in 160 gr., if not a little more, as it's a larger caliber. I'd think at least a 160 gr. would appeal to elk hunters. Couldn't some ammo company make a lot of money by offering this round to elk/moose/bear hunters?

In 280 Rem., the highest factory loads go up to 170 gr. In 7mm Rem Mag, it goes up to 175 gr. and the 7mm WSM goes up to 180.

The 270 Weatherby Mag & 270 WSM both only go up to 150 gr.

What gives here?
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
270 twist rate of 1 in 10 normally will not stabilize a bullet heavier or actually longer than a 150.


velocity is like a new car, always losing value.
BC is like diamonds, holding value forever.
 
Posts: 1650 | Location: , texas | Registered: 01 August 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I have shot 180grain woodleigh in my .270Wea which turns out fine. I have 1:10 twist(Lilja barrel).
VO= 912 m/sek.

Here at 200 meters:




DRSS: HQ Scandinavia. Chapters in Sweden & Norway
 
Posts: 2805 | Location: Denmark | Registered: 09 June 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I believe that swampshooter is correct...even 150gr. Tipped Trophy Bonded Bearclaw 150gr. bullets start to keyhole in my Sako A7 at 200yds.....I know of no other explaination....regards....bearit....
 
Posts: 54 | Registered: 09 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
What the above members say about twist rate. The 7mm's just do heavier bullets BETTER not because they are, what, .007" larger but because of twist rate.

Same reason, back in the day, that 243 Winchester was better than 244 Remington with heavier bullets.

Twist rate.
 
Posts: 6823 | Location: United Kingdom | Registered: 18 November 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Nosler makes a 160 grain partition for the 270. Very accurate in my 10" twist 270 WCF.
 
Posts: 1416 | Location: Texas | Registered: 02 May 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
If you handload, A while back, Speer produced 170 gr. round nose bullets for the 270. Some are still around on the secondary market. I don't believe that any were ever load and offered by the ammo manufacturers.

I used these on caribou in Alaska with good results.


Shooter
 
Posts: 623 | Location: Mossyrock, WA | Registered: 25 April 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
I hear the Matrix 165 bullets stabilize fine in a 270 Win. Though the new 150g Accubond LR bullets have great BCs. I've got a bunch I have to load up. Anyone tried them on game?


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4796 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
None on game, but Litz has the BC at .543 in a 1:10. Not .625

They shoot well enough though.
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Wstrnhuntr
posted Hide Post
A bullet with more bearing surface contact, like a round nose, will stabilize at a heavier weight then one with less bearing surface like a spitzer Boat tail of the same weight.



AK-47
The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like.
 
Posts: 10186 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by geoff:
If you handload, A while back, Speer produced 170 gr. round nose bullets for the 270. Some are still around on the secondary market. I don't believe that any were ever load and offered by the ammo manufacturers.

I used these on caribou in Alaska with good results.


Back in the day, I shot these in my Pre-64 Mod. 70. Then, it was the most accurate bullet my rifle saw. I still have 20 or so of them.

That rifle shoots 160 NPs very accurately and 110 Sierras equally well.
 
Posts: 939 | Location: Grants Pass, OR | Registered: 24 September 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
A bullet with more bearing surface contact, like a round nose, will stabilize at a heavier weight then one with less bearing surface like a spitzer Boat tail of the same weight.


It has nothing to do with bearing surface and everything to do with length. The spitzer will inevitably be longer than the round nose of the same weight.

The .277 160 gr. Nosler Partition was made in semi-spitzer (rounded and shortened nose) in order to assure that it would stabilize in the standard 1-10" barrel of most .270's.

But why would anyone want anything other than the good old stand-by 130 grainer in a .270? Jack O'connor, the unrivaled .270 expert, often took elk with a 130 grainer in his .270's, commenting that it seemed to put them down a little faster than 150's. I'm sure this was true with broadsides into the vitals where the faster and more quickly-expanding 130's would inflict more trauma than a slower, lesser expanding 150.
 
Posts: 13256 | Location: Henly, TX, USA | Registered: 04 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
On a broadside shot at an elk, I'm sure the 130 gr. will work. If I were to shoot an elk at 300-400 yds., on a sharp quartering away presentation, I would simply prefer the heaviest bullet I could get.

If the .277 160 NP was designed to stabilize in the 1/10 twist of the 270, why is it do you suppose, that no ammo company loads this bullet in factory ammo?

And I have stated here before on AR, that I hunt elk with either a 338WM or a 35 Whelen, both with 250 gr. bullets. I use this for the reason stated above. And yes, I agree that elk can and are killed with much less power. I have two female friends that hunt their elk every year with a 257 Roberts and a 25.06. They are very small women (less than 100 lbs.), and they prefer the reduced recoil these cartridges offer. And they are successful. But they take broadside shots and get very close.

So, I would certainly not discredit anyone's choice of caliber or bullet weight. But I do have my own preferences. Since I hunt elk in the Colorado mountains, I do not cherish tracking shot elk over mountain ranges and worse, having to haul them back to the truck. I used to do that when I was younger. I am simply too old/lazy to do that anymore. I am 63 years old. I hedge my bets with large caliber/heavy bullets. I want to take any reasonable shot (presentation) at any reasonable distance (for me, and my skills, that is 400 yds max). I also like exit wounds. At that maximum distance, I want the bullet to be able to enter the far end of an elk, pass through the vitals, and exit out the front. With energy to spare. But that's just me
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
If the .277 160 NP was designed to stabilize in the 1/10 twist of the 270, why is it do you suppose, that no ammo company loads this bullet in factory ammo?
It could be because they don't think they would sell enough of them to be profitable. Could be because who would buy a blunt looking bullet in the long range .270 cartridge. Unless you are an ammunition manufacturer, it is dangerous to "suppose" why they do anything.......



.
 
Posts: 677 | Location: Arizona USA | Registered: 22 January 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of tarbe
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:

If the .277 160 NP was designed to stabilize in the 1/10 twist of the 270, why is it do you suppose, that no ammo company loads this bullet in factory ammo?



http://www.doubletapammo.net/i...3_312&product_id=284


0351 USMC
 
Posts: 1536 | Location: Romance, Missouri | Registered: 04 March 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
There are a lot of bullets not offered in factory rounds.
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I have been playing with both the 160gr NP and 180gr Woodleigh.

I have not had any issues with either bullet.
Multiple loads with the 160 that shoot into an inch or less.

The 180's have been a little more finicky. Will play with the 180's some more after hunting season.
 
Posts: 2034 | Location: Black Mining Hills of Dakota | Registered: 22 June 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Tarbe: You just made my day. Thanks!!! I appreciate the information. Smiler
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I know of several people who use the 180 Woodleigh in standard 270's with no problem.

I much preffer the 140 over the 130 grain bullets in the 270. They shot near as flat but hit a tad harde and give better penetration.
 
Posts: 492 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Registered: 26 August 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I have shot 160 grain Nosler Partitions for years with my four .270 WSM's. It is my go to load when I am after Elk and not using my larger rifles. At 2900 to 2950 fps I consider them excellent performers. I use the 130 grain Nosler Solidbase blems and 140 grain Ballistic Tips and Accubonds for Deer and will hunt Wolves with the Ballistic Tips in January in British Columbia. Good shooting.


phurley
 
Posts: 2366 | Location: KY | Registered: 22 September 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Is that topped out in the WSM? Considering trying that bullet in my Montana
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
So, after I looked up DT's website, I see that they also offer a 180 Woodleigh as well as the 160 NP. I'm going to order one box of each and see how they perform in my rifle.

Thanks again tarbe!!
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Their numbers for 160 NPT are a tad off compared to JBM:

DT-500yds - 41.7" low 2035fps / 1472ft/lbs
JBM-500yds --45.0"low 1877fps / 1251 FPE

2,850 seems smoking out of a 270 WIN for 160's
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Thanks 16Bore. I'll keep that in mind. Still, the weight of the bullet will cover a few velocity sins I suppose.

I looked up the sectional density of the two bullets:
160--.299
180--.335

This is what I was looking for in 270. Again, I'm not saying lighter bullets won't work on elk, etc. I just have my preferences.

I am thinking of taking my 270 Win. to Africa some day as my light rifle. I usually take three rifles and a shotgun, as I always hunt with my wife, so we take two 2-rifle cases.

Of course, some of you are thinking, 'if a 140 gr. .277 bullet is too light, isn't that why you took along a medium bore?' Very true, however, I also take a few rounds of heavy bullets to replace the next higher rifle in case of loss/theft/breakage, etc.

This past summer hunting in Zambia, I hunted Buffalo and plainsgame, and for the first time, we only took two firearms: 404J and 338WM. In case the 404 went down, I packed some 275 gr. SAF for the 338 for Buffalo. So, if my medium goes down some day, and I am left with a 270 Win. and the heavy rifle, I want the 270 to step up and replace the medium.

I think these two heavy 270 bullets are just what I was looking for.

Thanks everyone for your contributions to this thread. I've learned a lot. wave
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I'd never considered the 160's before this thread. As for the numbers, I take them ALL with a grain of salt. Sometimes the whole damn salt shaker. Monkey with twist, altitude, yada, yada and they change anyway.

Proof is on paper and fur.
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
and no one mentioned the king of .270 bullets?......it's the 150 grain A-Frame.....
just load them up and go elk hunting....


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I rekon the 140gr Projectile is the Ducks Nutz in the .270 Winchester.

I do however see the advantage of being able to load 160s or so for larger game at moderate distances..

but I bought a 308 aswell

WL
 
Posts: 63 | Location: N.E Vic- Awwstraya | Registered: 24 October 2014Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of RaySendero
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
So, after I looked up DT's website, I see that they also offer a 180 Woodleigh as well as the 160 NP. I'm going to order one box of each and see how they perform in my rifle.

Thanks again tarbe!!


sf7, Please post/mic length of those bullets.


________
Ray
 
Posts: 1786 | Registered: 10 November 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
I've been shooting only 150g Partitions out of our 270s for all big game, from javelina to elk. I used to squeeze just over 3000 fps out of my BDL with a 22" barrel, now that I load for my sons I've detuned the load to 2900 fps. They both shoot well under 1 MOA and are deadly on elk.


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4796 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of bartsche
posted Hide Post
oldThere isn't an absolute need for heavy for caliber bullets in the .270 or 25 caliber for that matter. This scenario does, however, facilitate greater versatility especially if it is done with tungsten inserts in the rear of the bullet and lead alloy in front. This construction yields a "shorter" bullet per any weight than the standard Cup & Core or partition bullet, allowing stability with standard twists and use in standard length magazines. It also permits bullets being seated without violation of powder room.
oldI came up with a a design program in Excel in 1995 for such a construction and will be glad to E-Mail it to anyone interested.May not be perfect but I was just learning how to use a computer back than. beer roger


Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
 
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Well, the ammo arrived the other day from Double Tap. I decided to first just try the 160NP. If my rifle didn't stabilize the bullet, I figured there was no sense ordering the 180s.

I went to the range yesterday and fired just six rounds, two three-round targets. The range was 100 meters, sunny day, no wind, 60 degrees. Rifle was a 270 Win., 22" barrel, Ruger Express. Bullet holes were perfectly round at this distance.

The best group, after the barrel was fouled, was 1.6". I wanted to go to the 200m range next but it was full. I will try more rounds and longer distance next time out.

Ray, I will pull a bullet and try to get it measured. I will get back to you after I do, unless someone here already has some of these bullets and the info Ray needs.
 
Posts: 2634 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
Always good to experiment. You should have no problem stabilizing 160 NPs with a 1 in 10 twist. Now the monolithic boat tail Matrix 165g bullets, they may be a problem. If I was going to use my 270 Weatherby for long range shooting, I would rebarrel it with a heavier 1 in 9" twist barrel barrel and a lighter synthetic stock


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4796 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
f I was going to use my 270 Weatherby for long range shooting, I would rebarrel it with a heavier 1 in 9" twist barrel barrel and a lighter synthetic stock


Regards,

Chuck

Chuck, or buy a 300 Wby! :-)
 
Posts: 20170 | Location: Very NW NJ up in the Mountains | Registered: 14 June 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
That too!


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4796 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
...You should have no problem stabilizing 160 NPs with a 1 in 10 twist....
Guys, it isn't the weight of the bullets, it's the length. The Nosler 160 is semi-pointed making it shorter. A 160-grain VLD bullet would probably not stabilize even though it is the same weight - it would be a lot longer.

Higher velocity also helps, that may help to explain why the earlier poster was able to stabilize 180s in a custom 1:10 .270 Weatherby barrel. Too, just because it says the twist is supposed to be 1:10 does not mean that it is.


,
 
Posts: 677 | Location: Arizona USA | Registered: 22 January 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
130 NPT / 110 TTSX, 160NPT / 129 LRX, for conversation.
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of friarmeier
posted Hide Post
With the exception of the Barnes, I think I've shot all of the bullets mentioned in this thread, and even quite a few others, too.

I got 2850 (chronied) with RL 22 in a 22" post-70 winchester. Accuracy was good - say an inch or an inch and a quarter - at 100 yards. That was the summer of 2005, I believe.

I decided instead to load 150 gr. A-Frames over a stiff (in hindsight, too stiff) load of RL 22. Accuracy was a little less than an inch; terminal performance on moose was very good!

I think these two bullets, along with the 150 gr. partition, are the best heavies in the .270. I think the Win PP would probably be just as good.

With as much as bullets have advanced in the last 25 years, I think you could use almost any sensible bullet on elk or moose and have good results (in sensible shooting situations). I just had a new barrel put on the rifle (24"), but am going to stick with JUST ONE LOAD when I get dialed in...probably the 150 gr. Partition.

I'm tired of burning out barrels and the headache that goes along with it!

friar


Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain.
 
Posts: 1222 | Location: A place once called heaven | Registered: 11 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Always liked the idea of a one-load-wonder, but alas you see 4 different bullets in that picture, and nary a one down the tube yet....
 
Posts: 1168 | Registered: 08 February 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
In a book wrote by Jack O'Conner late in his career he wrote that he was tending to use the 150 Nosler Partition exclusively for all his hunting.


velocity is like a new car, always losing value.
BC is like diamonds, holding value forever.
 
Posts: 1650 | Location: , texas | Registered: 01 August 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
We've (myself and my two sons) been using the 150g Partition in our 270s for everything except varmints since 1968 (for me) and 2000 (for my two sons) except my brown bear. Probably would've worked on that as well.


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4796 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia