|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,885 Likes: 10
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,885 Likes: 10 |
Congrats on finding a good load that suits you.
If it were me, however, I'd try tilting the muzzle down, and then raising it to fire. Then I'd repeat with the muzzle pointed up, then lower to shoot. In other words, does powder position affects results. With that much air in the case, I'd wonder if it could be a problem. With nearly fifty grains of long stick 4064 in a case that size I doubt there is enough air space to present any real problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,191 Likes: 22
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,191 Likes: 22 |
Yep, 50 grains of IMR4064 is a pretty good fill in the .270.
Years ago I handloaded ammo for some family members and friends to make a little extra cash. Used IMR4064 some not just in the .270 but ,.243 Winchester and .30-06, and it always resulted in more than sufficient accuracy. However, eventually I switched to IMR4895 for the same cartridge/bullet combos and it shot just as well--and worked far more easily in a powder measure. Still keep some IMR4064 in my inventory of rifle powders, for the occasions when a data-check finds it should be among the best for certain combinations, but it has been a long time since I killed anything other than paper with it.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,195 Likes: 19
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,195 Likes: 19 |
That’s pretty danged cool. I wouldn’t mind giving that a shot myself. It almost looks like if you seated a skosh deeper you’d pull in some of the 2-1’s but either way it’s pretty danged good. What did the article show for speed with that load? 2950’ish or so?
May have to give that a shot in one of my 270’s just for grins. It’d make a very inexpensive practice load as well. Especially with something like the Hornady or Speers.
Not much out there that load wouldn’t work fine on. Nice shooting. Cool rifle. I'm thinking you would do things a bit differently. I know myself, I'd find the lands and back said bullet off the lands a certain amount, not just be satisfied with an OAL of the same thing for every bullet. As we both know, bullets from different manufactures are going to need a different OAL. This is because of the varying ogive location. I think people who are not aware of where the bullet is in relation to the lands are wasting components, or just plinking and not attaining the most information they can about the loads they are working on. Recently I loaded up some el-cheapo 130gr midway bullets for my buddies 270 winchester and went with an oldschool recipe of 60.5 grains oh H4831 and that load was bug holing groups (5 shot sub 3/4 moa, in fact). Of course, I knew where the bullet was in relation to the lands, and I knew that's where his rifle likes them. I will say this, the OP's rifle is shooting pretty dang good for a ranger...
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 1,057 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 1,057 Likes: 1 |
That’s pretty danged cool. I wouldn’t mind giving that a shot myself. It almost looks like if you seated a skosh deeper you’d pull in some of the 2-1’s but either way it’s pretty danged good. What did the article show for speed with that load? 2950’ish or so?
May have to give that a shot in one of my 270’s just for grins. It’d make a very inexpensive practice load as well. Especially with something like the Hornady or Speers.
Not much out there that load wouldn’t work fine on. Nice shooting. Cool rifle. I'm thinking you would do things a bit differently. I know myself, I'd find the lands and back said bullet off the lands a certain amount, not just be satisfied with an OAL of the same thing for every bullet. As we both know, bullets from different manufactures are going to need a different OAL. This is because of the varying ogive location. I think people who are not aware of where the bullet is in relation to the lands are wasting components, or just plinking and not attaining the most information they can about the loads they are working on. Recently I loaded up some el-cheapo 130gr midway bullets for my buddies 270 winchester and went with an oldschool recipe of 60.5 grains oh H4831 and that load was bug holing groups (5 shot sub 3/4 moa, in fact). Of course, I knew where the bullet was in relation to the lands, and I knew that's where his rifle likes them. I will say this, the OP's rifle is shooting pretty dang good for a ranger... Chasing the lands is the most over hyped practice there is in reloading. I know where the lands is. If it was a target rifle, I'd be a lot more worried about it. I don't need to chase the lands for it to be a very reliable and accurate hunting rifle for my wife. Does lands depth effect accuracy?... Absolutely. Do I need a 1/2 MOA rifle to have a nice hunting rifle. Not hardly. Todd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,349 Likes: 8
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,349 Likes: 8 |
That’s pretty danged cool. I wouldn’t mind giving that a shot myself. It almost looks like if you seated a skosh deeper you’d pull in some of the 2-1’s but either way it’s pretty danged good. What did the article show for speed with that load? 2950’ish or so?
May have to give that a shot in one of my 270’s just for grins. It’d make a very inexpensive practice load as well. Especially with something like the Hornady or Speers.
Not much out there that load wouldn’t work fine on. Nice shooting. Cool rifle. I'm thinking you would do things a bit differently. I know myself, I'd find the lands and back said bullet off the lands a certain amount, not just be satisfied with an OAL of the same thing for every bullet. As we both know, bullets from different manufactures are going to need a different OAL. This is because of the varying ogive location. I think people who are not aware of where the bullet is in relation to the lands are wasting components, or just plinking and not attaining the most information they can about the loads they are working on. Recently I loaded up some el-cheapo 130gr midway bullets for my buddies 270 winchester and went with an oldschool recipe of 60.5 grains oh H4831 and that load was bug holing groups (5 shot sub 3/4 moa, in fact). Of course, I knew where the bullet was in relation to the lands, and I knew that's where his rifle likes them. I will say this, the OP's rifle is shooting pretty dang good for a ranger... Chasing the lands is the most over hyped practice there is in reloading. I know where the lands is. If it was a target rifle, I'd be a lot more worried about it. I don't need to chase the lands for it to be a very reliable and accurate hunting rifle for my wife. Does lands depth effect accuracy?... Absolutely. Do I need a 1/2 MOA rifle to have a nice hunting rifle. Not hardly. Todd Agree with both of you. Some bullets are much more sensitive and ill seek to put them a certain distance from the lands but I have a few rifles that don’t matter where the darned lands are at, I can’t get close enough for them to function through the magazine so they get loaded at mag length and I work from there. JAH, it’s a great shooting load. Cannot begin to argue with the results you’ve been having.
Semper Fi
|
|
|
|
|
381 members (163bc, 06hunter59, 17CalFan, 160user, 12344mag, 01Foreman400, 38 invisible),
2,041
guests, and
1,063
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,559
Posts18,510,597
Members74,002
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
