Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles I have the urge....

Sounds like a good bullet, Dog.

The last 270 I had was sold to a buddy at work... a nice BAR MKii. It shot the 140gr NAB handloads under 1". Since my bud doesn't reload, I told him to get one box each of 130gr and 150gr Core-Lokts. We shot the 130gr CL first... basically one hole! Then, we shot the 150gr CL... they went into the same hole!

I've heard the same thing from others... its not uncommon for 130gr and 150gr bullets to have the same POI from a 270.

Jason

Jason, not John but MVs of 2900+ fps are possible with 150's and H4831, RL22, or 7828 from 22" barrels IME.

I got 2846 FPS with 58gr of 4831SC and 150 ABLRs in a 22" tube. She's pretty compressed for sure. Shot well...

Jason,

My experience is the same as Bob's: 2900 with a 150 is pretty easily doable from a 22" .270 barrel.

Thanks for the info John, 16b, and Bob.

I was getting ~2900-2950 with the 140 NAB depending on rifle. And similar with the 140 BTSP but primers looked flatter. I measured the BTSP and it was a freckly larger in o.d. Same rifle(s), cases, primers, charge, etc. Both loads had the same zero and poi... BTSP was much more affordable though.

Jason

Was seeing around 2950 with 140 ABs as well, again with 4831SC. Have some '19 I may try. 110TTSX, 129LRX, 135SMK, 140NAB, and 150 ABLRs have all shot well in my rig. Not a shocker though...

Pretty interesting info! Aside from the obvious marketing hoopla, I don't understand why manufacturers inflate BC's. Guys that shoot at distance will soon see the difference.

A guy mentioned the question in the link you posted, but I would assume Litz isn't "friendly" with other bullet manufacturers. His data has been spot on when I use it.

[bleep] me running, now I want a 270 again. I do wish I had the FN I had, that rifle was scary accurate.

As I age I find I like to have rifles that I can easily buy a box or 10 of ammo for.

I know of a few.....

Funny what twist will do for things too, ain't it.

My understanding is it's not so much that manufacturers are inflating their BCs as it is not testing them over a long enough distance to get a really accurate number, or using a computer model to predict the BC without real world testing.

It's very interesting how Litz is finding different twist rates change the BC numbers. No wonder estimated BC numbers are all over the map, and it just goes to show that each individual rifle will show slightly different numbers.

I get a kick outta this schit,in how "numbers don't matter"...then the same Clueless [bleep] who espouse that,go on to try and talk numbers. Funny schit!

Also get a kick outta the faction which has a whole bunch different boolits/loads for a given chambering/rifle,then shoots schit boolits in other chamberings/rifles,so as to bask in the glow of the "benefits" of all of their schit,being schitty. THAT is [bleep] awesome! Wow.

Now contrary to the mantra of Window Lickers everywhere,it is in fact very EASY to simply opt a great boolit and shoot the [bleep] outta it for everything. I realize that is gonna really steal some thunder and I'm fairly certain,that constant adds more than a little humor to the equation. Must be nice to do so little,so as to opine twist rates and numerical designators slated the projectile(s) proper are "moot". I've never been "lucky" enough to shoot that little. Laffin'!

Cracks me the [bleep] up,how so many spend sooooooooo much time,finding reasons not to shoot and then offer them "findings" like they are "something". There's seemingly no end to the lengths The Paper Hat Brigade will go,to flaunt their Imagination and Pretend. It'd be funnier than [bleep] to see the pile of primers expended by these cross-eyed drooling dumbfhuqqs in a year's time,along with a pic of their mug...if only to have instant belly laughs readily categorized and easily accessed for humor.

Simply [bleep] amazing,how stupid most [bleep] are.(understatement)

I've said long,loud and often from Day One,that the Terminal Effects Impetus chart is as follows:

1) Placement
2) Projectile selection
3) Headstamp

Yet Buffoons are lined up for [bleep] miles on end,to hastily put the cart in front of the horse and extoll upon those "virtues".

Thank God for the internet,if only for the [bleep] laughs.

WOW +P+.

That why you shoot your mouth off about how awesome the 150 LRAB is in the .270... every time it's on the ropes vs. the 6.5s/7s? Didn't realize it was due to so much 'real world experience'...

There isn't a (T)TSX in .270 I wouldn't point at the biggest ungulate you could find.... if I could get it out of my rainbow colored Eberlestock in time.

That�s funny, because I don�t remember mentioning any experience with the 150 ABLR. I will say that it will very likely perform just like a bunch of other bullets, regardless of caliber. This killing stuff just isn�t that hard. You can spout all the BS numbers you want about the supposed superiority of your chosen rounds, but it just isn�t seen in the hunting field.

You didn't mention experience.... until you mentioned it as requesit from someone else to establish their assertion as valid. I ask, are you doing the same?

You've soaked the 150 LRAB's cork on numerous posts .... 'Quoting numbers'.... yet, you admittedly have zero experience. But somehow.... you're also the guy with all the 'experience' that trumps everyone else's experience. That's almost democrat level hypocracy.... or, does it only apply to the rest of us?

Back to the 'experience' part.....

The 140 Accubond was great in a pards .270 WSM, clobbering multiple bears and blacktail deer at ranges from treestand to a 1/4 mile plus. Of the close to a dozen head of big game, all bullets exited. If I were forced to slum a .270.... it'd be set-up like 'bore's... and flinging the 140 Abond at 2900-3000. I'm pretty certain it'd do good work...

You�re right, I should refrain from talking up bullets I haven�t personally used on game. I did buy some 150 ABLRs, they shoot fine in a pre 64 Model 70 at 2900 fps. Overall though, I�m pretty happy with 140 Accubonds, from what I�ve seen. They shoot well and kill well.

I concur.... still probably the best all-around option in a .270 pill.

I'm curious how the 150s pan out.... my guess from the get-go was .550 as an average BC. Looks like I might get to cough-up a little of the crow I ate last year on said subject.

The difference between Brian's number and Noslers is 1-1/2" of drop at 500 yards, which is only as far as I've ever shot them. The center of my group was right at 48", but I could see where it could be lower. Curious to see what fellas are finding at longer ranges....

Hard to say what'll happen past 500y, 16B. Let us know what you find out.

I had some weird results with the 140 BTSP... it was a good 18" low at 800y vs JBM. At 500y, the 140 BTSP and NAB were dead-nutz with the same zero. Basically the same velocity and similar BC. I fiddled with the numbers (BC, velocity, etc.) but couldn't account for the extra drop with the BTSP.

At the time I was thinking that the BTSP was less stable and shedding more velocity beyond 500y. I just used those bullets for cheap target practice out to 500y and used the NAB for longer distances and hunting. After those BTSP were consumed I just stuck with the NAB for everything and didn't bother with the Hornys anymore.

Jason

That's gonna have to be someone else's chore. The three shots you see on the right were shot at the same setting, the other 2 the night before of I remember correctly. Can't be for sure.

500 is all I play.....