The Accurate Reloading Forums
.270 Winchester Bullet thing. Last time I promise.

This topic can be found at:
https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3411043/m/290107574

05 May 2006, 20:02
300winnie
.270 Winchester Bullet thing. Last time I promise.
I promise, this is the last time I will ask on this topic. However, I have one more bullet to throw in the mix. As the 150 grain partition won by a small margin in the last poll, I did some research and studied the 160 grain partition some. Other than .007 thousands of an inch and a slight reduction in ballistic coefficient it appears to be a dead ringer for the 160 grain partition in the 7mm guise, which is pretty universally thought of as "elk medicine". Assuming elk to be on the menu out to 300 yards and a muzzle velocity of 2,800 fps from the 160 and 2900 fps from the 150 which one would you choose?150 grain Nosler Partition at 2900 fps160 grain Nosler Partition at 2800 fps
06 May 2006, 00:01
N E 450 No2
I voted for the 160 grain because elk are big and for shots at raking angles the more weight the better, in a properly constructed bullet of course.
I would test the 160 in your gun, if it shoots goot then it mis the one I would pick.


DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY
06 May 2006, 00:22
nordrseta
If 10 grains of bullet weight really matters then you are better off with a 150 gr X-bullet, Failsafe, A-frame, or Trophy Bonded bullet which will usually retain more than the 60% the Partition usually holds on to.
06 May 2006, 04:09
LBGuy
I've used the 150gr NPs in my 270 for 35 years. Based upon its past performance, I see absolutely no reason to change. I guess some other bullets work as well, but I seriously doubt they work "better". JMO.
06 May 2006, 17:46
Doubless
I see the difference as being very slight, due to the extremely close weights. But since energy is a function of mass, then retained energy should be a function of retained mass. I would opt for the 160.
06 May 2006, 21:27
DRS
160 grainer for me too! An Elk is a large animal and one needs all the weight possible to bring one to bag.


David
06 May 2006, 22:03
ACRecurve
Hmmm...seems to be a trend in these 270 bullet poll posts.


Good hunting,

Andy

-----------------------------
Thomas Jefferson: “To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

07 May 2006, 01:37
bigbulls
Elk aren't exactly wearing body armor in the woods these days. It's funny how the cartridges that have been killing animals like this for decades are now considered inferior even though they are capeable of greater velocities and the bullets used are ten times the bullets they were only ten or twenty years ago.

Any good heavily constructed bullet of 140 or 150 grains and even some 130 grains is more than enough bullet to anchor the largest elk.

I have taken five elk with my .270 and all have fallen to single 140 grain bullets of varous makes. TBBC, Ballistic tip, Failsafe, and partition.

Don't make such a big deal about it. Choose a well constructed bullet, make sure it goes where you want it to, and go kill an elk.


Of the two listed I'd opt for the 150.
07 May 2006, 21:41
465H&H
I have taken several bull elk with each of these bullets and any difference in killing power is in your mind. Both worked excellently!

465H&H