Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 270wsm/150ABLR

Maybe 4thpoint needed to run it using G7? 505 is all the room I've got to play, so someone else will have to take it from there....

Well there 16, if all holds firm..... you'll have to shoot a crow or two with that load.... and I'll table up to a big'ol plate....

table for two........

Hope there's still some ballistic pixie dust residue left on the remnants of crow..... cause it still defies conventional wisdom(?).

Have never used the G7 numbers although I know its supposed to be more accurate. G1 has worked so I haven't changed, although you guys make a good point. I should check those drops vs the G7.

The G1 numbers have worked with that T3 I mentioned earlier and the 140gr NAB, a 300 Win Mag and 200gr NAB, and another 300 Win with 200gr NAB. Not a big sampling, but three rifles with bullets that matched their advertised G1 at 800 yards.

I've had other rifle/bullet combos that match the advertised G1 out to 600 yards but I never shot them farther.

I was at the local sporting goods store and they had 2 boxes of 150 ABLR in-stock. Almost bought both boxes, but sold the BAR to a buddy and sold the T3 to get a 375 Ruger. No more 270's in the house!

I've been on the fence regarding another 270 Win or something smaller like a 6.5 Creedmoor or 260.

Shot a few this morning through a m700 XCR 270WSM, 68.3grs Retumbo gave 3025 fps and 1.8" 3 shot group @ 306 yards (little over half moa). Very impressive

This bullet turns the 270 into a new animal...especially for Elk size game !

I have to agree with others and will be trying to test the BC at 700 or 800 yards. Running some numbers through JBM for BC of .625,.590 and.560 shows only 1.5" difference in drop at 500. To me that is very tough to measure. Those same numbers at 700 show 4.8" difference and might be a bit easier to measure. For my main purpose which is hunting a 1.5" difference at 500 isnt going to mean anything. I will still be well within the vitals of my intended game. 5" at 700 might become a miss though.

I was driving through bend and stopped by nosler. They had a couple of bags of 7mm 168 ablr's on the shelf so I picked them up. I'll have to see how they shoot in my 7 wsm Montana. Too bad I just sold my 7 LRM. They might be decent in my 7-08 at about 2650.

Bb

Bb,

That's what I'm hoping to get out my 7-08 with the 168 ABLR. It shoots the 162 Amaxs lights out and hoping for the same with these.

Im sure you know this already but drop doesn't really mean much at long range because it is constant and clicks will adjust for that. The difference of .625 to .560 will be the big deal in wind drift that will make the difference.

I was referring to the difference in drop at the published BC and what the actual BC might be at longer ranges. Dialing is only accurate with a proven BC IMO.

gotcha

Was it insufficient for elk before? I didn't know that!

Just curious why some guys think the BC will not hold up?

I mean if you can build bullets in 6.5 and 7mm with BC's over .600 why is it not possible to build them in .277 that have the same characteristics?

It's absolutely possible to build them..... physics say it's not gonna be very likely that a 1/10" .277 will stabilize a bullet with a .600 BC. The 6.5s and 7s are typically 1/9".... that was my point earlier. Hornady recommends a 1/9" for the 162 with the same BC as Nosler lists the 150 .277 ABLR. Berger tried and tried to build a ballisticaly solid .277 bullet.... but .55 was the best they could do. I'm thinking if Berger couldn't make it happen.... there's no way, aside from pixie dust, that Nosler could beat Berger by 75 points. Furthermore, Nosler is notorious for bloating BC numbers.... sometimes to the tune of 10% or more.... see Varmint Hunter Mag for the article on that.

I was thinking that Nosler had been making bullets for quite some time and wondered why they are just now doing it. I guess they finally responded to the LR demand. Usually if it seems too good to be true, it is. I'd like to see results from others, especially way out there....

Then again "Nosler has been making bullets for quite some time", so why wouldn't it work, right???

This is not correct. The original 130-150 .270 bergers are lower than optimum as they designed them to work with some jump vs jammed in the lands as the .270 is primarily a hunting round (vs limited by 1/10 twist). The BC can be improved as noted by Eric Stecker below. I see they added a hybrid 130 option that increases BC from around .46 to .5. Maybe will see 140, 150 gr options someday.

This is what Eric Stecker wrote (AR) on another forum when Berger released the 130s:

"Since we knew the 270 cal bullet were going to be used mostly by hunters we adjusted the VLD design to be more magazine fed friendly. Also, a slightly shorter secant ogive tends to shoot well with a jump so you can take your round out of the chamber and not worry about sticking the bullet in the rifling (and getting an action full of powder in the middle of your hunt). We did everything we could to keep the hunter in mind. As time passes and interest grows for a higher BC 270 cal we can make some down the road"

Lou

We'll see...... I'd bet a box of'em that it's closer to .550 than it is to the listed .625....

Don't get me wrong... .550 is still good (and better than I roll out of the .260/123Amax)... but, it ain't .625.

You need 1/8 - 1/9 to spin .600+ in a 6.5....
You need 1/9ish to run .600+ in a 7...
So, it makes absolute sense that you can run a .600+ .277 in a 1/10?

dogshooter, dude there isn't enough information I have seen to make a conclusion that nosler is way off on the BC of the bullet. in fact we have one person that tested the bullets in this thread and they tracked spot on, granted the group is kinda big for the distance and its hard to tell with certainty what the POI is.

the reason the BC is lower on 270 bullets is because how many guys are putting together a short throated 270 win custom?? I have one but I am sure its the exception. most factory 270's have very long throats, in fact my factory 270 chamber there was no way the lands could be reached and still seat a bullet. so they needed a more conservative bullet design to shoot well in these types of chambers, the new hybrid design makes it such that the bullet can be designed even more aggressively than the best VLD designs of several years ago. I am surprised it took bullet makers so long to come up with the hybrid bullet shape.