Anyone using IMR4064 with the 110 grain bullet in the 270 Winchester? I thought I'd toss a couple 110 Sierras down range before buying the TTSX. 4064 was well respected in a couple loading manuals,so I though I'd query the masses here for opinions.

I'd be on that list...

of course I get a lot of campfire ridicule for using it also...since it is real old style powder and not new and trendy..

but it still NEVER fails to yield a very accurate load... in about any rifle or caliber...

same with 3031 and IMR 4895...

I doubt if it will let you down...it never has let me down... including in the 270s....

Ridicule! That's just mean.

Back in the 1960's & 70's, 4064 was commonly used, and well regarded, in 270's. I used it under 90 gr Sierras for woodchucks back in that era, but it could/can push a 130gr bullet with good accuracy at reasonable velocities.
Like Seafire, I have a soft spot for the IMR powders as they have a very long history of consistent performance without the "surprises" that other powders sometimes provide. Surprises such as sudden pressure spikes.
It is one of these products that is easy to underestimate and is often discounted by those that have not actually used the stuff.

I've got some notes from 1992 where I used IMR 4064 and the 110 Sierra's. Nothing great accuracy wise in my Ruger 77. Groups with IMR 4350 seemed to be more consistent so that's the route I went. Not horrible accuracy but I was using the load for groundhogs so the more consistent, the better.

There's also a note about bedding problems with a question mark. At that time, the rifle would have been about 16 years old and shot a lot. Since then, the Leupold scope has been rebuilt and the rifle has a new barrel. So maybe I had some problems starting to show up and that's where my consistency problem came from???? Don't know on that. What I do know is that I'm currently using IMR 4320 and the 110's. The rifle likes that load and 4320 meters SO much better than 4064.

Not much to go on but I hope it helps.

Dale

Way back when, I played with 100-grain Sierras in my .280 using 4064. We had fierce jackrabbits in my locale. Unfortunately the recorded results data is long gone, but I got pretty good accuracy and would expect similar in the .270 with 110s.

Many years ago I bought a box of 110 grain Sierras for my pre 64 270. The first load I tried was 51 gr 4064. The three shots were touching at 100 yards, measuring .290 inch. Have had excellent results ever since. I bought some Hornady 110 gr hollow points, a fine looking bullet but could never get them to shoot less than 1.5 inches in my gun. YMMV.

Nothing to hate about warp speed 110 TTSX.

I loaded some RL16 using 56.5gr and 110gr TTSX barnes bullets win cases and WLR primers.
got 3368fps SD 19,6 with new Labradar. very accurate.

I hope to find a box of the 110 TTSX on a shelf tomorrow. The Tikka did well with the 110 Sierra in its preliminary testing. Max charge of 4064 went under MOA. If the TTSX shoots as well as other Barnes bullets have for me in the past,Ill be a happy camper. Provided the ballistic tables aren't full of chit. Ill confirm drops out to 400.

I settled on 4064 for light bullets in two .270's. Settled on 50.5 with a 110 TTSX. Can push it faster, and stay around 1", but 50.5 rings right for me. It's consistently sub-MOA. Nothing to dislike.

No, and the OP can find 3500+ FPS with RL-17 under 'em.

Sweet!