.270 Win./150 gr. Velocities...

Is there something "special" about > 2900 fps for the 150 gr. .277 bullet?

Both handloads (w/ IMR 4831 powder) and factory alike, out of my 22" Bbl'ed rifles, are ~ 2800 fps.

No complaints w/ NP's, or even the low BC Speer Grand Slam for that matter.

And while hits past 300 yards are pretty rare, have found generally good wound channels and complete pass-throughs.


But then I read where > 2900 fps for this cartridge/bullet weight is "magic".

Is there a problem w/ ~ 2200 fps/1500 ft-lbs/8" drop at 300 yards that I'm somehow missing?


Out of an 8.5 lb hunting rifle, it's a comfortable and accurate load to shoot for medium and large game.

... and don't plan on changing anytime soon.


Just curious is all.




GR

An early favorite of mine, the 150 grain Speer HC or the Partition going right at 2800fps. Special maybe not but capable yes.

Pass me the '26 and 3000fps + from a 22" bbl please.

I have done a lot of load development for the 270 Win over the past 40+ years. Actually started in 1975. Got a chronograph in around 1980 and my practice is to shoot everything for velocity. Have worked with at least 13 different rifles/barrels (actually more but I stopped counting). I have tried every suitable powder from IMR, Hodgdon, Alliant, and Norma but no Ramshot, MagPro, or VV.

In a 22” barrel with 150’s, I have never been able to exceed 2875 with anything other than R26. Interestingly, using R26 I have been able to get 3000 in every barrel I have tried it in. Also works very well with 160 N Partitions.

With 130’s I have had the best results for a combination of velocity and accuracy with either R17 or IMR4831. Those are my picks for testing a new 270. The Federal blue box 130’s will go around .750” in a good 270 and run around 3050.

For in-the-field results on lots and many plains game I prefer 130 monolithic bullets (including 130 AF) and the 160 Ptn.

If I was going brown bear hunting with my 270 I would pick the 160 N Ptn (maybe 150 AF) because I would be less concerned with having full penetration. For everything else my first pick would be mono or Swift AF 130’s.

I ran 3,000 with my pre 64 model 70 fwt using 150gr partitions. That was with a 22" barrel. But found a good accuracy node at 2,950 fps..

bsa,
My rifles also shot best with R26 loaded to 2950-2975. I could get more velocity but things got fussy.
Besides 2950 is “pleasing).

I agree Rick. It definitely fell out of the "node" going past 3,000. RL26 is great powder though. It does live up to its velocity claims in the old 270. A good 150gr pill at 2,950 will kill anything in NA quite handily, as you know. Great combination.

Out of 24 inch barrel Hornady 150 SP I'm getting 2836, 2868 and 2866 with H 4831. Nothing wrong with lower velocities, I experienced few bullet blow ups with 3000+ velocity under 100 yards. As long as you know the bullet drop at any given distance you should be fine. I use CDS dial so I don't care about losing 100 FPS and at least I won't get bullet blow up up close. But to each his own.

I have not seen difference on deer. Cannot comment on larger game. Several powders these days get over 2900 fps with 150s and 22”. Like RinB, I have messed around with lots of them. Unlike RinB MRP, RE22, Magpro, RL26 have done it for me using published charges. Not tried RL23 but it might too. However l mostly use 130:s or 140s and when I do try 150s these days I still generally try h4831 1st which normally ends up in the 2800ish range. I just tried rl16 last fall with 130 partitons in a kimber 84 select (24” barre) and it ran 3200, matching alliant published data so rl26 is not only new thing going for the 270:).

Lou

That’s a fact, right there is the reason I tell folks who ask what they should get for an elk rifle, I say a 270. Used to swoon the bigger 7 Rem. Factory 150 PTs or whatever work great, but the rifle will have a shorter barrel, weigh less and belt the shooter less on average. If they’re a hand loader it’s pretty easy to get the 2900 from a 150 grain bullet with numerous powders without alot of vudoo.

I think alot of us gloss over RL23, but it is the sweetheart of the bunch. I got a steady 2980 with 150's and accuracy was pretty good across the board. Supposed to be very temp stable as well. A tiny bit less speed overall, but with the consistency I saw with it, I wouldn't even sweat it.

I haven't tried 150 grain bullets for quite a while, but I'm getting 3100 fps with RL26 and 140 grain Accubonds. I used to use 150 grain ballistic tips with 58 grains of H4831 at 2850 fps.

I’ve only played little bit with 150gr BT.
I was Not really impressed and I think I was around 2900 with using Hunter
My favorite 270 load at this time is 140 SST at 3040-3050 fps and I’ve shoot it out to 600 yard with great results

I haven’t tried R23 with 150’s. Forgot about the old Norma 205 which will move the 150’s at around 3000 but it isn’t generally available. I have some but haven’t used it recently.

Would like to try R16 with 130’s but can’t find any. Found some Hunter which I will be shooting within a few days.

I like the 130 monos (TTSX and E-Tip) which will reliably penetrate 34-35” of Eland meat and bone. Would like to try the new 130 Hornady CX but haven’t seen any. For lead core I like the Swift products.

I’ve never had any issue killing game with a 150 in the 2,800 - 2,850 range.

Good post Rick, based squarely in experience and reality. I have little experience with the 270 by comparison, only going back to the 90’s, but I’ve never had any issue killing game with a 150 in the 2,800 - 2,850 range. I suppose the appeal of RL26 is that it “can” get you to 2,950 - 3,000fps… it’s a bit of a Siren’s Song, and I’m certainly one of those that have heeded it with various cartridges. Of course just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should do something. It definitely increases recoil, and mild recoil is one of the 270’s strengths.

Just some rambling thoughts on a blustery March evening…

My .270 is a 24" and gets 3000 and change with RL26 and 150 Partitions and into 3/4" or better. I don't remember the charge but it is a grain or so under the published maximum. RL23 did not work as well for me. Partition / RL26 is a great combo.

Scotty,
I was a lover of big 7’s and owned one of the first 7-300Win’s ever built…then I started shooting more game and reading fewer magazine articles and ballistic charts. I found the 270, even then, to be plenty good enough PLUS the rifle was handier lighter and shorter. Don’t own a big 7 currently.
The need for velocities over 3000 went away with the development of LRF’s. I still like 2900-3000 but more isn’t needed. Bullet technology, meaning monos, has changed many things as well.
Rick

I had pretty good luck with Hunter but ended up back with H4831 with 130s.

Brad,
I am heavy into the 270 Win & 375 H&H. I like the looks of both cartridges. A big plus to me is that they feed properly.
Now I need a Montana Bighorn tag so I can look for the perfect ram.
Rick

To me, those two cartridges are extremely close. I ran the numbers and for my rifles, there is a 2-foot-pound difference in recoil between my .270 (8.0 lbs, 150 @ 3000) and my 7mm (8.5 pounds, 160@3000). I'm getting the itch to go back to Namibia and if I do, will likely bring my 7mm because of .284 minimum over there. I need to get it out and shoot some stuff to get it warmed up!

My experience with RL-26 is that it can indeed get 3100 fps with published 150-grain charges, with good accuracy from a 22" barrel. It does this in my Jack O'Connor Commemorative M70--which weighs just about exactly the same as O'Connor's favorite custom pre-'64 Model 70 "Number Two." (Have weighed both.)

That said, have yet to see any difference in "killing power" between a 150 Partition at 2900 or so--which is what they get with around 58 grains of H4831, or various similar powders, such as RL-22--and a similar .270/7mm bullet at 3100 fps, This includes plenty of "tough" plains game in Africa, or North American game up through bull moose.

Have also yet to discern any difference in killing power between .270 bullets that put three shots an inch at 100 yards and those that group half an inch, on any size of big game out to 400+ yards.

DMD
Namibia regards the 270 Win as a 7 millimeter which is .275591 inches.
Rick

You’re just being sensible. Give me 20 years, maybe I’ll come around. Still love the 270 but I like a few others as well. I figure if a fella shoots enough it’s all just crazy speak really. We have too many choices these days.

Scotty,
On the subject of multiple choices…consider the harem.

I hear you Rick. You’ve already kicked the can down the road with the 7’s, 416’s, 375’s, etc…. I’m just catching my stride

I do have a pact with myself, if I had to get rid of everything my 270 Fewtherweight, 7 Mashburn and 338 would stay. Alllll the rest could take a hike. I’d be bitter but no less well off.

I've been handloading for 270's since the mid 70's, have been chronographing loads since the early 80's, and have probably 10k 270 rounds in my chrono data notebooks. I have a M700 in 270 that has roughly 3500 rounds through it. Set the bbl back a couple decades ago and rechambered it, but it is still getting a bit wore......

Prior to the "Extreme" designation I could get 2860-2875 with H4831 and 150g NPt's, NBT's, and Sierra's in a 22" bbl. But when the new Hodgdon Extreme H4831 arrived on the scene velocity decreased around 50 fps. With the exception of one batch, like RinB 's experience RL-26 shoots the most accurate in the 2950 range for me also with 150g NPt's and NBT's.

Two years ago I had two elk hunts where deep timber was going to be the norm, and decided to hoard my RL-26 and try IMR7977 with160g NPt's. Before I got to max powder charge I was almost at 2800fps and it was a very accurate load. Thing is, IMR7977 wasn't worth a hoot when I tried it with 150g bullets.

I have cold weather tested RL-26 in two 270's with 150 NPt's and two 243's with 100g NPt's, and lost 30-40 fps.

I have cold weather tested H4831 numerous times in a bunch of different 270's and in a couple 243's, and it has been very temp stable every time.

I had wondered if that were the case in that I believe a .270 is a true 7mm, but when using your logic above I asked the outfitter I've used the last few times, he said .284. Good to know.

Rick,

That was not the case when Eileen and I hunted Namibia in 1999--which was when both our PHs (a father and son) had 7mm Remington Magnums as their "light" rifles. (They were also both anti-.270, though why I don't know, since apparently neither had ever seen one in action.) Do you have any idea when it might have changed?

However, African customs people (and those from other countries) are often confused, or unconcerned, with the supposed regulations. Along with our rifles, we brought a 12-gauge Beretta over/under for wingshooting, and we both used it on birds from Namaqua sandgrouse to helmeted guinea fowl. But when we were leaving, the customs agent at the Windhoek airport said the serial numbers on the Beretta did not match those on the form filled out when entering the country. We were stalled until our PH showed up (after going to the restroom) and turned the shotgun right-side-up. The serial number was all 9s, 6s, and zeros, and that made everything all right.

Have also found what is supposedly hunting-legal in various African countries depends on how much U.S. currency you might donate to the local "cause"....

The outfitter I've used there has a really beat Musgrave 7x64, which is about as close to a .270 WCF as you can get but of course in .284.

22" LH Rem 700 270 Win

RP case CCI primer ,60 GR RL 26, 3054 FPS, 150 GR NP Seconds, 3 @ .30 " at 100 yards, Wow load reshoot

That 150gr sounds encouraging. I'm new to the 270 and getting ready to unleash it when bear season comes around pretty soon. Got a good amount of factory Federal blue box 130 gr and that Federal Trophy 130gr I picked up for amazingly cheap about 1 1/2 year ago. Like really cheap. After I shoot a few boxes I'll load up a few Noslers. I don't have RL26 but do have plenty 4350 and 4831.

In fact KK Alaska probably knows all about this Ruger 270

My favorite 270 load for hunting has always been 130gr Partitions with 58gr of H4831sc. CCI primers. The Accubonds are SLIGHTLY more accurate but the Partitions beat any bullet where it matters most. They just never fail.

John,
On the 270 in Namibia, before taking one I asked multiple outfitters(5 or 6) about the 7 millimeter bore diameter rule. Remember Namibia has had a close relationship with Germany. The Germans are very familiar with the metric system. In responding to my inquiry they all looked at me as if I knew nothing and said of course the bore diameter is at least 7mm. They mumbled “Dunkoff” e.g blockhead.

There is a lengthy discussion on AR about a wildcat made by necking the 375 H&H so as to shoot .423” bullets which the developer has named the .404/375 H&H. According to Krieger the barrel’s bore and groove measurements are .413”/.424”. I understand it is to duplicate original .404 Jeffery ballistics using the namesakes’ .423” bullets. Senseless. It should be called the .413/375 or the .423/375.
Rick

I have had no trouble getting 3000 fps+ with a 22" barrel and various 150's. And RL26
I think this is what makes it so commendable- in a 22" barrel. .
As a sheep hunter, I will not carry a long tubed rifle up in thr rocks and through heavy timber etc.
When I look back over the last 40 years and the .270 wcf, the greatest single improvement is not the advancement of propellants, but the awareness that bullets have improved radically.
Factory ammo had to keep up , it was underloaded prior, and often used the most frangible bullet available
Hence , elk hunters went big because the .338's etc mads a bigger hole and retained more bullet weight.
Look at the wide range of excellent bullets available for the .270 wcf, the rules have changed, imo
My little old opinion

I agree!

Here was my quick work with RL23 in a Tikka Superlight



150 Berger’s



150 Partitions





150 ABLR with 26







I also had great accuracy with 150 Ballistic Tips

The only bullet that rifle wouldn’t shoot for beans was the 150 Interbonds.





Wished I loved it as much as my P64 270, as it is a great shooting rifle.

I got velocity with Re17, but I am not proud of it.

2010, 22" barrel, 270, 130 gr and 57.7 gr Re17, Chrono measures 3129, 3228 fps

Guess my point is...

Why?

150 gr. NP at 400 yds. w/ a 200 zero:

2800 fps MV: (55 gr. IMR 4831)
18 ft-lbs of recoil (8.5 lb. rifle)
~ 22.5" drop.
~ 2070 fps.
~ 1425 ft-lbs.

3000 fps MV: (60 gr. RL 26)
21 ft-lbs of recoil (8.5 lb. rifle)
~ 19.2" drop.
~ 2235 fps.
~ 1665 ft-lbs.

Shoot the 2800 load quite a bit better, and all day long w/o a problem.

Easier on the rifle Bbl. as well.

Out to 400 yards?

Just askin'.




GR

Not to be a smart ass, but why not if it is within PSI's specs and accurate? Some folks want a fast car, some folks are fine with a Corolla. I think of it the same way myself.

Well...

One doesn't ride the bullet.

The bullet just needs to get there, and then do its job.


As for car performance - if I need to get somewhere a second sooner... I'll just leave a second earlier.

8>)




GR

Nothing wrong with having too many choices. Hell, I grew up using the 30-06, while my closest friend always had a 270. I'm a 30-06 guy at heart, but I have seen what a good 270 is capable of. The 7mm's are awesome too, even the little 7mm08 gets it done. Like Ricks says, the mono's have changed things a bit. With that being said, when I had my own 270 winchesters, I decided the old 150gr Nosler partition was the one bullet I'd load in them and call it good. That just makes it easy. Just the right amount of RL26, bullet seated .020" off the lands, a good primer (I see Scotty is cheating with BR2's, ha ha I do too) and case and you are in business.

Somehow, I knew you would say those 3...

The difference is right there in your figures. It easier to ride a fast horse slow than a slow horse fast. So there in lies your dilemma get the fast horse load or the std one but you have the option. You might as well get you a 7-08 so you have all those short stroke advantages too. I for one think the fast option with 150's and rl-26 is a neat deal....mb

WTF? It would not shoot the interlocks very well??? Good data though Scotty.. I tried 61gr RL26 in my pre 64 fwt and had to back it off for better accuracy. Ended up running 60gr's and the rifle was happy.

While have nothing against the 7-08 in particular, consider short action cartridges in general an automatic rifle solution, and an impediment to bolt rifles.


For me, 18 ft-lbs is easier to shoot well than 21 ft-lbs, and a known 3" greater drop at 400 is negligible for hunting.

Maybe a little extra windage is all.

But, given that - would 2235 fps/1665 ft-lbs make a practical difference w/ this bullet in the field, over the pokey factory load that shoots essentially like an expanding .30 M2 ball round?

Enough to put up w/ the additional recoil, blast, and wear/tear?

When accuracy/shot placement trumps most?

The way I see it, it just adds a hundred yards past where I'd ever shoot.


Does it kill quicker?

Does it destroy less meat?

Does the meat taste better?

8>)


Just askin'.




GR

Rick,

Thanks for that info. The father of the father-son hunting company we used was a dummkopf (the actual German word for blockhead) in several ways. In fact Eileen made some good money writing articles about her experiences with him, in particular one story in Gray's Sporting Journal.

John

John,
Thanks for educating me about the correct spelling of dumbkopf. Loud prolonged laughter here. You have validated the German fellow’s original point. More laughter.
Rick

PS Will have to tell you the saga of my most recent attempt to acquire the last most perfect ultimate 270.

If it means anything, if it shot well and it sounds like yours does I wouldn’t care too much myself. I do think if you’re stretching it out to 400-500 yard mark the extra FPS doesn’t hurt bullet expansion and such but probably no big deal.




Interbonds, hated them. I’ve never tried the Interlock in it. I’m sure it would’ve been fine judging from the others though.

Rick,

Yeah, I would be interested in the latest, most-perfect .270!

I have three 270 rifles, one a Ruger Tanger pushes 140 gr. partitions right at 3000fps. So sad I don't have any R26 or 150 gr. partitions. I'm really missing out right?

Which is one of my points. Have seen the .270 with 150 Partitions (not even monolithics!) drop big game up to 500-1000 pounds both in North America and Africa within 50 yards or, often, much less when the muzzle velocity was "only" around 2900 fps. Dunno what another 100 or even 200 fps would accomplish, partly because of seeing (and killing) quite a lot of big game with various bullets around 150 grains at similar velocities. Have yet to see vastly different AVERAGE results.

Craig Boddington wrote an article maybe 15 years or more ago called "The 270 Bull" in which he killed a bull elk at 400 yards with a .270 Winchester loaded with a 150 grain Nosler Partition at 2800 feet per second. He said it dropped as fast as any elk he'd ever shot with any caliber. Seemed to work for him.

Ron

Actually Craig wrote that the bull dropped FASTER than any elk he'd shot with a larger cartridge....

Thanks John, my memory stinks any more.

Ron

Mine does too, but I definitely remember that one--partly due to standing in the spot where Craig shot from a few years later, with the guy who guided him, Mike Ballew. Mike pointed out where the bull was standing!

But I also reread a lot of hunting stuff, partly to make sure I get quotes right--the reason some of my books have sticky notes on many pages....

Just to stir the pot a bit. Shoot a 140 grain partition out of the hated 6.5 Creedmoor at 2700 fps and at 400 yards it will be within 160 foot pounds of energy from the 270 150 at 2800. Shoot a 142 grain Accubond Long Range at 2700 and it will actually beat the .270 150 at 2800 in velocity and energy at 400 yards. Just food for thought.

Ron

I loaded a crap ton of 270 Win ammo with 150 npt's over RL-22 for 2900 fps in a pre-64 standard rifle with 24" barrel, same load runs 2840 ish in pre-64 featherweight rifle, 26 wasn't invented then, dont think i'm missing out on a thing.

Nah, I wouldn’t think you are at all. But if 26 were I’d bet you’d not have given back the 100-150 FPS either, knowing how you roll a smidge.



That’s the stuff right there that’ll get people yammering Ron. I kinda did a similar trick to myself using the plain old 06. I used the 212 ELDs at an easy 2700’ish.

When I ran the numbers with it then against the old standard of a 300 Win with a 180 Partition it didn’t take long for the olllllll 06 to look pretty good at distance.

LOL, yep, i'd have definitely given it a fair shake, if accuracy was there, extra speed is a bonus.

Some gun writer who has considerable field experience with both the .270 Winchester and various 6.5 cartridges that get "Creedmoor ballistics" (including the Creedmoor) has mentioned that here and there.

I’ve even quoted that guy a time or two on this subject.

Actually, the data from that one piece can cut either way, depending on what you want to prove.

If you have not tried it, IMR 7828 is magic in the 270. While most reach for H4831 or R#22, IMR 7828 is a real eye opener for speed with extreme accuracy.

Yep--but the main point is the 6.5s that approximate Creedmoor ballistics are as effective in the field as the .270 Winchester. And another 100 fps at the muzzle from a 150-grain .270 bullet doesn't change much either.

In 1988 I watched Eileen shoot a Shiras bull moose with a 150 Partition. The bull was quartering away at around 125 yards, and took about a step and a half before falling over dead. The muzzle velocity was around 2825 fps. Craig Boddington killed a 6-point bull elk at 400+ yards with a 150 Partition at around 2800, and the bull went down quicker than any elk he'd previously taken with a typical double-lung shot from larger cartridges. The Swedish survey of several thousand moose hunters didn't find a significant difference between how far moose traveled after being shot with cartridges from the 6.5x55 to much more powerful "magnums." Have seen plenty of other instances of much the same thing, which is why I remain skeptical about claims of how another 100-150 fps--whether gained with a new powder or "improving" the shoulder of a standard cartridge, makes a noticeable difference in "killing power."

But whatever....

I'm a "140gn guy" at heart in a 270Win. I've got a re-barreled Kimber Montana 1:8 22" 270Win that shoots the 150ABLR quite well @ 3050fps, but, shoots the 140gn Badlands SuperBullDozer even better @ 3075 with noticeably less recoil to-boot. While verifying my drop chart last fall the wind laid down for just a bit and I got 3 shots downrange quickly for a sub 2" 500yd group.

I've got a pair of M70 SS Classic Fwt's that shoot 140gn TSX's @ 3030fps, both are well under MOA rifles out to 600yds on steel and both have provided multiple sub 1" 200yd 3-shot groups on paper off of a bench. I prep the brass on a Forster press then fill them back up with a Dillon 550 using Ramshot Hunter powder and a Forster seater. I can grab 1 box of ammo, both rifles, and head anywhere knowing that they're both equally accurate and shoot the exact same ammo to the same speed POI/POA. I can hand either of those to pretty much anyone and they can shoot them well, although, it's a very small group of folks that I"ll let shoot those 2, I've got other rifles for "borrowing".

The M70 Fwt's and 140gn TSX combos are still what I have the most confidence in. I've seen them work from Antelope to bull elk. At ranges from <50yds to just shy of 600yds, they just work for me. I feel about that combo like many here seem to about the 150NP from 2800-3100fps.

Mule Deer
Some years ago, a well known and respected gun writer penned an article regarding a muzzle velocity of about 2700 fps being the ideal velocity for a couple of reasons.
It kind of surprised me to see it in print but at the time I was shooting a lot of deer, and had noticed that my 270 at 7/08 velocities seemed to kill better than my 7 magnum.
If you have ever heard of this article, perhaps you could reference it here for the benefit of posters.
I think he was from Montana somewhere… Pendroy? Gilman?

Coinkidinkly, the 160gr NP over W780 loads that have been a standby for me and mine are presumably running at about 2700.

Pretty good load. When I run out of them, there’s a bunch of 150s on hand.

Careful, you’re nibbling away at the foundations of the industry there…..😜

RinB seems to think that combo at 2800 is a giant killer. I have a bunch of them but haven't really ever done too much at all with them.

RinB probably gets shots at over 100 yards, so the extra fps evens things up.

As higher BC bullets for the 270 come available, another 150 fps can certainly change the trajectory, perhaps stopping a bullet from hitting the animal low in the brisket at some distance. Question is whether all our 10T barrels will be able to take advantage of the HIGH BC Bullets.

ON the other hand, I have found the 160g Nosler partition to be a VERY accurate bullet with IMR 7828 with a Fed 210 primer, Winchester brass.

Hmm. I might have to try to find him!

I'm late to this discussion, but Nathan Foster who is out of New Zealand and writes what he calls Terminal Ballistics Research has some interesting thoughts on this subject.

Probably so. I’d bet that’s just where his accuracy was where he wanted it.

I currently have two 270s and have always had at least one in the safe at all times. Personally, I consider it to be the best all around cartridge for deer size game, what most people in the US typically hunt. For me, I compromise and shoot 140s, as I could be convinced with 130s or 150s depending on my objective. What I find most interesting with the younger generation of shooters who came into the sport when the 6.5 Creedmoor was just getting traction is how much the dismiss the 270W, thinking it's outdated and for non-woke hunters/shooters, even if it keeps step with the 6.5r PRC out to reasonable hunting ranges. I've owned and loaded for the various 6.5s including the 260 Rem, 6.5x55, 6.5 CM, 6.5-06 and 264 WM and decided owning a 270 W does the same thing and keeps life simple, which I strive for these days. My current models are a 1990s M70, Shilen barrel at 24" and a McMillan Featherweight stock and a Christensen Ridgeline in a McMillan Game Warden, like them both for different reasons.

While appreciate his research and experience - he is one of the velocity "drum-beaters" on this subject.

Although he appears to have a velocity-favored opinion generally.


As for powder, as long as desired 150 gr. velocities are in the ~ >2800 fps range, IMR 4831 is a very good burn-rate match w/r/t case volume/pressure/complete burn from 22" Bbl's.

Would like to see them "temp stabilize" it, like the H variety, but it still suffices as a field powder none the less, and produces very good and consistent groups from my rifles.


And while velocity may be the "song of the Sirens," can't recall a shot that I've made where I thought more would have made any difference.

Enough so that it supported the decision to acquire a Ruger African 6.5x55mm, and 140 gr. bullets, loaded to ~ the same velocity.




GR

Or Kohlkopf( cabbage head) ...it just suits my particular style of head and my Grandmother's special term of endearment .
Maybe Eileen could factor that in somewhere...it is a food

MD - not to change the topic, but how far up the cartridge ladder would you need to go to get a "real" difference in killing power? 30-06 with 180s or 200s? 35 Whelen with 250s? 375 H&H with 270s?
It seems we all try awful hard to make this cartridge better than that one, when really most all of the .25 - .30 centerfire cartridges work about the same :-)

Generally around .35 caliber with 250-grain bullets, at least in my experience.

TAG

"Some years ago, a well known and respected gun writer penned an article regarding a muzzle velocity of about 2700 fps being the ideal velocity for a couple of reasons."

Seems to me I remember reading something along those line a long time ago. Dunno why, but I think it might have been Jack O'Connor who said it. That's probably just because I was reading a lot of his stuff back in the 60's and 70's. Made sense when I think of how bullets worked back then. I never try to push 180 gr. bullets from my 30-06 to more than 2700 FPS back then. In fact, I learned the loads were only doing 2600 FPS and change when I finally got a chronograph.

My preference in bullets for the .270 are the 150 gr. types. My 270s seem to prefer the Sierra game King and Nosler Partition over a charge of the long gone Winchester WMR power. Not a problem as I have a lifetime supply. Average velocity fro three 24" barrels is 2880 FPS and average accuracy about .75" at 100 yards. I use the Sierras for deer sized game and the Noslers for elk. The Ruger #1A 22" barrel does 2750 FPS and groups run 1.25" which is about the best I've been able to get from that rifle.
Paul B.

John,
I concur with your assessment that the .358/250gr is where noticeable differences are evident. Using 250’s or heavier, the 35 Whelen and the 9.3-62 give at lot of punch with pretty moderate recoil.
Rick

IMR Enduron 4955 is a close as you'll get.

^^^^this^^^^^

Imr-7828ssc that is. Haven't done anything with standard 7828. Works well for 160gr plus in a 280. It would definitely be on my list to try in a barrel 0.007" smaller

7828ssc users….
Please share your data

comerade,
My grandma and my dad frequently said “ditto cabbage head” to me. Your comment makes me miss them.
Rick

Could Finn Aaguard (sp) have made such a statement, he was a proponent of moderate velocity's in large capacity rifles case.

I might also mention that the 150-grain .270 Partition loses about 100 fps within 50 yards of the muzzle, and 200 fps at 100 yards. Exactly how much depends, of course, on atmospheric variables.

Also, the difference in retained velocity at 400 yards between 2800 and 3000 at 400 yards is down to around 170 fps, 2092 fps vs.2260 fps. This results in a difference of 244 foot-pounds of energy--about 2/3 of the muzzle energy of the standard 40-grain .22 Winchester Rimfire Magnum load at the muzzle.

Of course, this is primarily for those hunters who firmly believe that foot-pounds are the major factor in "killing power."

Actually, it was Mule Deer that wrote the article I was referring to, and it might have been 2800 fps.

Actually, it was 2700....

Very enjoyable thread. Thanks to all the posters. Many of you I have developed respect over time and many of your posts and appreciate the knowledge you impart.

In these crazy times it is nice to read a bit in the evening and get reassurance I haven’t been loading and shooting too wrong all these years! Thanks for the respectful and civil entertainment. Appreciate you guys, and MD for certain.

While recently working up loads for the 150 partition and Rl-26 in my 70's era Remington 700, I chronographed some old rounds I loaded in the late 1970's. The loads were 58.5 grns of the surplus H4831 in Remington cases, with the 150 partition. They averaged 2736 fps out of the 22" barrel.

I loaded and hunted with those rounds before I owned a chronograph or a laser rangefinder, but the elk and mule deer I killed never knew the load was going 2736 instead of the "book" 2850 fps. I killed my first animals with my first reloaded ammunition using that load, both elk and mule deer.

I ended up around 2950 fps with the new rl-26 150 partition load, as others have mentioned, accuracy was better there than higher fps in my rifle.

I like the .270 Winchester. Ive bought all 5 of my kids a .270, and my oldest grandson. Some shoot 110 ttsx's @ 3250 fps (because they live where they have to use copper) but the balance use 150 partitions. Both loads work pretty well.

Manny

There’s never a bad time to repost this gem. Certainly not the last word on the 270, but it easily could have been.

For anyone that has not read it:

Always a good read.

In my Nosler #5, listed is 57.5 grs of Imr-7828 with all three 150gr. Nosler bullet types. This same load is also list on the website. https://www.nosler.com/270-winchester for 2862 fps. Imr-7828ssc packs tighter for more case volume and judicious loading. The Lyman manual shows the test pressures and Imr-7828 had the least pressure shown, well below 52,000 cup

Gaschekt
I am interested in your results. Am familiar with the Nosler data.

Some of the quickest kills I've had with both the 270 and 6.5 swede in the last 5 years have been around 300 yds. The only explanation I could come up with is that some bullets perform better in a slower velocity window. I used 130 accubonds in the swede and 150 partitions in the 270. I always figured for sure cup and core bullets performed better at slower velocities but really hadn't figured that premiums would as well. It's not a large sample but enouph that I am taking some notes


Trystan

I wish I knew how to post videos, my daughter couple years ago shot a moose with her 270 Winchester using 150 partitions. 389yds and one dead moose.

That would be awesome. I'd like to see it.

In the mid-sixties, my dad built himself a chronograph and started chronographing anything he had. One of the rifles was his Schulz&Larsen in 7mm Rem Mag. Another was a Cooey (a cheap Canadian Winchester) in 270 Win. Now, Dad was never one to conserve powder and if the primer stayed in the case, he considered the load to be a good one. As I recall, he had 150 Sierras coming out of the Cooey at just over 3050fps. His load was 60+ grains of surplus 4831. I imagine the pressure was a bit over SAAMI but the primers stayed in! He was only able to get about 100 fps more out of his 7 Mag before the bolt got sticky and it kind of spoiled the 7mm for him. When I suggested the 270 loads might be too hot, he told me, if they were too hot, the brass would fail. I'm probably lucky I didn't entirely believe him.
Many years later, I chambered a barrel for the 270 Win., the270AI, the 270 Gibbs, and, after setting the barrel back a couple threads, the 270 Weatherby. We loaded nothing but H4831 and the standard 270 did 2960 from the 24 inch barrel and it shot real well. The other cartridges went faster but, regardless of the chambering, the best accuracy was always around the 2960 mark. Just that barrel's preference, I suppose. GD

Or, is it > 2200 fps impact velocity that's important, driving higher muzzle velocities...





Just askin'.



GR

That's pretty cool stuff GD.



Just my thoughts on it, but I look at the part of the ballistic chart where the cartridge is at or around 2000 for most bullets, so maybe that's why I'd like to have the extra up front, since it gives me a little extra margin on the fringes. Not saying it has mattered but we all do what we want. No one on here or any other part of the WWW will change most of our minds.

Some guys want 3000+ out of their cartridges from the start, just the way they are. Some guys want all the BC they can get, there is no wrong answer. Some of us just wanna try different stuff. Fun to read about stuff, but it is even better to hit the range and ultimately the field with said combo and give it a go.

Someone asked the question years ago, and it struck my interest, in something to test out....Velocity max potential in a 270 with 160 Nosler partition..

Looking at some reload manuals, I was noticing the pressures where not that close to max, for a 270, when using H4831SC...So I worked that up.

Had talked to "Mike" on the phone over at Nosler who was listed as their chief bullet "ballistician"...at the time.

Just like the conversation we had had, on the 30/06... he told me you couldn't get enough of the 4831SC, into an 06 case to exceed SAAMI specs...even with a 220 gr RN.
the 220 RNs and the 220 Partition are my most preferred bullet in an 06 as a "do anything" load for here in the lower 48... So of course, the 160 SMP Partition is my favorite bullet to do anything, with a 270.

Same held true with 4831SC, in the 270, with the 160 Partition...couldn't get enough in the case to exceed SAAMI pressures...

Had to crimp the load, that is how much 4831SC, you could get in the case.... don't use it that often... but when I pull out the 270, I have two loads..
the 160 SMP with 4831SC... and the 140 Ballistic Tip with 4064...

they don't see a lot of action as I tend to pull out the 6.5 calibers much more often than bigger cartridges.... I hunt Oregon... I'm not going elsewhere after Bigger Game than you can find around here...

Don't recall the velocity of the loads, as I don't use them often enough... but I certainly know, that you can exceed load manuals velocities with 4831SC, and still be under SAAMI specs... that is all I need to know... and I can pull out the Chronograph if I need to know what those numbers are.... but in most cases, anything I would go after presents itself, closer than 300 to 400 yds....

I don't think ol Mike at Nosler was steering me wrong...

To the point.

Factory Federal Premium 150 gr. NP, as well as my IMR 4831 handloads, cross that threshold at just about 450 yds.

... which is at least 100 yards past my longest hit, and a good 50 past what I personally would consider reasonable.

Even the ballistically challenged Speer Grand Slam hits that mark at 350 yards.


So, again, why?




GR

It’s been answered by myself and others… “because you can” is the long and the short of it. It’s the American Way. I think you know that, and am really not sure why you persist with your question.

For anyone else that cares, SPS has .277/150 NP’s available right now for $25.95…

And the velocity "argument" mostly started when affordable chronographs started appearing. I bought my first in 1979, when so few "average" shooters had 'em that mine was the first (and only) chronograph at the local range for several years. Have mentioned this in several places, but when other guys asked to "run a few rounds" over my chronograph, they were always disappointed, because the actual velocity never matched their optimistic dreams.

Will also mention my good friend John Haviland, who before acquiring his first chronograph believed his 7mm Remington Magnum got around 3000 fps with 160-grain bullets, partly because that's what the loading manual published by the bullet maker suggested, and partly because it killed anything from deer to big black bears to big elk quite handily. When he finally got a chronograph (slightly later than I did) it turned out the load was actually getting around 2700 fps--about like a warmly-loaded 7x57.

This didn't surprise me--and it also hasn't surprised me when my 7x57s killed big game from wildebeest in Africa to 1000 pound Canadian bull moose quite handily, using similar loads

As an added note, two years ago I killed bulls in Utah and Colorado. Where I hunted was mostly spruce/fir/quakie elk jungles and the odds were good shots would be at hair burning range or thereabouts. So I decided to break out a bag of 160g Partitions and work up loads in a couple of my 270's. I had ever loaded for 160's before so I was starting mostly from scratch. IMR7977 worked great for me.

When I drop tested those bullets they consistently shot flatter than any of the ballistic calculators predicted. At almost 2800fps at 400yds they were less than two inches lower than 150g Partitions, which I have shot a lot at 400 yards. I was skeptical the first time but the second time I got the same results. Makes me wonder if the 160g NPt has a better BC than advertised.

Sometimes bullets do--partly because many BCs have been calculated in the past by chronographing them at the muzzle and 100 yards, or at most 200.

BC changes over longer ranges, due to how it changes with velocity. Which is why I depend on Bryan Litz's BC numbers over various ranges far more than anybody's before starting to test bullets at longer ranger. www.appliedballisticsllc.com

I have mentioned before when I bought my Custom Chronograph in the early 80's I was apparently the only guy in the valley with a chrono. When at the range it wasn't uncommon for guys to come over and ask if I would shoot a round or two from their rifle over the chronograph. I had a couple guys get downright pizzed and question the ancestry of my chronograph. I quickly learned--especially with 7RM owners--to first caution them that advertised velocities were a bit inflated.

It happened with me quite a bit with .357/.44 Magnum revolver guys as well...

Yeah, I know BC changes with velocity. After thinking about I decided the BC's of the 150 vs the 160 Partitions weren't all that different to begin with, so I shouldn't expect trajectory to be much different either.

My Rem 700's with 26" do get 3100 with 160-168g bullets, Retumbo with Fed 215's, I have an Ohler 35P. Accuracy is outstanding.

Another good choice for the .270WCF with 150gr bullet's is Norma's MRP, which I don't see mentioned here very often.

It is my powder of choice when shooting the Hornady IL, with which I get 2,970 fps (24") and very good accuracy.

This is may favourite load with 150gr, and is closely followed by Sp12, powder manufactured in Belgium and marketed in the US as Ramshot Magnum.

Here is Norma's reloading data, straight from their web site.

The question is more rhetorical.

... as in, "Why should one?"

When a flatter trajectory made a difference, sure.

Lighter and faster was an advantage.


Just seems to me, w/ all the .270 Win bashing, both from the "Creedmoor" left and the "Magnum" right, that from a 22" Bbl., 18 ft-lb of recoil that does the work at 400 yards is a solid cartridge.

And does more really change that?


P.S. SPS?

$25.95/50 box is a good price.




GR

SPS=Shooters Pro Shop. Nosler's online store.
I believe the price quoted is for factory seconds.

I think the positives and negatives of more speed would be:

More Speed Pro's:

*Potentially (maybe) more immediate reaction on game due to more violent impact and tissue disruption.
*Flatter trajectory extends PBR for non BDC and turret scopes.
*Potentially better accuracy.
*Opens monolithic bullets further out.
*Turns a 270 into a 7em-em

More Speed Con's:

*Heavier recoil - especially noticeable in lighter rifles.
*Powder scarcity of "high speed" powders.
*Potentially poorer accuracy.
*Shorter barrel life (maybe).
*Less consistent performance over a wide range of temperatures (RL26).
*Turns a 270 into a 7em-em

Lol…….

Brad,

One of the things I noticed while experimenting with RL-26 and 150 Partitions in my primary .270 (one of the limited-production Jack O'Connor Commemorative Model 70s produced a few years ago) is that when muzzle velocity got to 3100 it recoiled more like a "7em-em." (This .270, by the way, weighs just about exactly what O'Connor's favorite Biesen-stock Model 70 weighs, 8 pounds scoped.) That velocity, by the way, was with a charge exceeding Alliant's listed by 1.2 grains--and there were zero signs of "excessive" pressure. With their max charge of 60.8 grains the load got a little over 3000 fps.

With 58.5 grains of H4831SC the rifle gets a little over 2900 fps, but it's noticeably more consistent at different temperatures than the RL-26 load, both in velocity and accuracy. Unlike H4831SC, RL-26 was not designed as a temp-resistant powder, though it accidentally turned out to be pretty good that way--but not as good, in my experience, as Hodgdon's Extremes or the IMR Endurons.

I'll take 100 fps less velocity for more consistent performance over a wide range of temperatures.

Everyone has their own recoil tolerance and what ranges they prefer to shoot game, but for the life of me I can't see ANY load fired from a 7-8 pound 270 being anywhere near hard to handle or too much for the average hunter. Guess I've been shooting big bores and other hard kickers for way too long but having owned numerous 270s over the past 50 years I've always considered them easy to shoot, light recoiling rifles. And in all of them the best accuracy I've observed was always with loads at or near the top of the velocity spectrum.And those loads typically have the lowest ES. Like others who've mentioned R26, I found it inconsistent in both accuracy and speed from one session to the next while R23 has been great, just like the old standby H4831.

For you guys loading the 150 partition using rl-26 in the 270, what cartridge overall length are you using, and how far off the lands are you?

Ive found that in my 70's era Remington 700, when seated at "book" length, I am .25" off the lands! Obviously, when I seat out longer to get closer to the lands to tune for accuracy, I lose fps using the listed book loads. So the longer I seat I have to add powder to keep my accuracy node.

Regards,
Manny

You guys are going to make me dig my old pre-64 featherweight out and hunt it this fall, 150 partitions at 2860, old, still very clear gloss 2-7 in weavers, the thing is like carrying a switch around, light, handy and accurate.

Me too John - and I have a lifetime supply of H4831.

I'll add your point to the list!

It's the reason I keep eyeballin' the H powder, but where I hunt doesn't really require it.

The IMR variety runs the 6.5x55/140 gr. as well.


How does the %burn work out w/ H4831 and a 22" Bbl.?




GR

GR,

Yeah, temp-stability isn't really much of a virtue in many areas. Have generally found that ANY smokeless rifle powder will be pretty consistent from about 25-80 degrees. Beyond those parameters things can get interesting--and even the powders advertised as temp-stable will increase in velocity (and hence pressure) from about 85 on up. But they'll be less affected than other powders.

The older IMR powders, including IMR4831, also aren't all that temp-sensitive, especially if the load is somewhat compressed.

Have a list that shows 1.10 fps/°F.

So, (+/-) 25 fps isn't all that concerning at hunting ranges.

And they are precise and consistent loads. (and the powder is easy to come by)

Would imagine your neck of the woods has temps w/ a fair amount more impact.




GR

H4831 continues to be the most temp stable powder in my 270's, 243's, and 06's, and 7RM's, of any powder I have cold weather tested, and I've been testing 270 loads in cold weather since the 80's.

It appears to be an extremely temp stable powder, and a very good burn-rate match for the heavy .270 Win loads.

May be the best single base powder out there for it.


But IMR, being a little quicker, works good for both 22" Bbl'ed heavy-for-caliber .270's and the 24" Bbl'ed 6.5x55, my primary cartridges.

And most of my hunting is either in the South-West or Deep South, so temp isn't all that much of an issue.




GR

Also have been tempted, from time to time, to move up from the 150 gr. to the 160 gr. Partition at ~ 2740 fps, w/ the same IMR 4831 powder.

MPBR's(6") are ~ 270 and 280 yds. respectively.

Energy and BC favor the 150, SD the 160.

Both would perform well w/in my 400 yd. limit.


You thoughts.




GR

The 160 Partition does tend to penetrate a little more. Have seen some 150s end up under the hide on the far side of an elk's chest, but can't remember a 160 not exiting from pretty much broadside shots. But in general they work very similarly.

The 150 that Eileen used on her Shiras bull moose (which was as large-bodied as any bull elk I've seen on the ground) entered the left side of the chest, maybe a foot from the rear of the ribcage. We found it under the hide of the right shoulder during butchering, so it penetrated 3+ feet.

The 130 Partition works pretty well too. A buddy shot a 6-point bull with one at around 200 yards, as the elk was running away near the top of a ridge. The elk visible stumbled as it went over the ridge, and was lying just over the crest. The bullet had entered the rear of the ribcage on the right side, and ended up under the skin on the left side of the neck.

I switched to 140 grain bullets in my Browning BBR 270 and I like the bullet weight and the BBR action seems to take some pretty good loads, very accurate,
Took loads up over book max and it seemed it would go higher, but I throttled it down some.
I have started running lighter than standard weights in all my rifles, seems to work, only run heavies in my 300 win mag and my 375 H&H.

This is pure gold for my 270win future. I'm so happy I've got an good supply of bullets and H4350 and H4831.

Thanks MD.

Sounds like a good swamp and thicket bullet.

Will look into some.


RE: IMR 4831 - it seems to be one of the few powders that fills the case (> 90%), gives good velocity (> 2800 fps/150 gr.), and complete burn from a 22" Bbl.

Like that efficiency, and don't miss the additional muzzle blast of the slower powders.




GR

I know you mentioned that early on you used an 30-06 with 200gr Partitions in thicker timbered areas for elk, maybe less than ideal shot presentations. I live in that type of location you used to hunt. Would you say the 270 and it's Partitions offer similar performance to that hefty 30-06 load, at least in the ability to drive a bullet thru in imperfect angles?

I ask this because I've never used my 270win yet. About the closest thing I've had once upon a time was an 25-06 using Core-Lokt.

Great read.
Thanks to all you Gents who helped with this thread.

The 270 Winchester is a great round. I hope it's around forever.

Take care

Theoldpinecricker,

In my experience with game the 200-grain .30 Partition tends to penetrate deeper, but have never shot any .270 Partitions into the same test media as a .200 .30. Might have to try that sometime!

If you're interested, I'll send you some current production Speer Grand Slam .277/150's to test as well.

For a cup-n-core, along w/ the .264/140's, they seem to work very well - as long as you don't push'em too hard.

They are my $0.22/pop, 2800 fps GP bullet.




GR

GR,

Thanks, but I've already tested the present GSs. Put 5 of the 200-grain .30s into my standard "tough" test media, a stack of dry newspaper. Two of the five lost their cores--but they would probably hold up OK on game at 2800, as you suggest.

The second generation of GSs performed very much like Nosler Partitions....

Rate'em as better than a Core-Lokt.

Wouldn't expect them to handle heavy bone very well.

They do fine on ribs, and hog shoulder shields.




GR

Bear season is opening soon and I have a 270win and some Partitions loaded and then some Federal factory premium trophy and the blue box stuff in hand. Usually I come across spring bears so it will be a good time to try a 270 partition. For that matter my first 270win attempt. Oddly enough I can remember as a kid hearing that everyone had an 270 or 30-06 back in the 70's and 80's. I guess it was hot stuff back then.

GR,

Yeah, I'd probably rate GSs as better than Pointed Soft-Point CLs since around 1990. That's when Remington did away with the "heavy sidewall" jackets that made original CLs pretty reliable bullets--at least for cup-and-cores. But they retained the heavy jackets in the round-nose CLs for some years after that--probably because they didn't sell many, so didn't have to replace the forming dies very often--if ever.

Moved to the .270 Win/150 gr. as a lad in the '70's, after a Season of never quite gettin' comfortable w/ my new .30-06 and 180 gr. ammo.

... never looked back.

Near as can figure, the .270 Win. has gone from obscure, to interesting, fascinating, exciting, devastating... then destructive, mediocre, anemic, gay... then inefficient, short legged, punishing, antiquated... to finally... Classic.

Great cartridge.




GR

My favorite 270/150 NP kill... per biologist, 10 - 11 yo bull.

2,850 fps was enough

Danged nice!

Very nice.

What range?




GR

Some of the testing results are in. The only thing I have on hand is a 280 mountain rifle with a skinny 22" barrel, and a supply of .284 Sierra 160gr Gamekings. Figured if I could get 2900 fps with a 160gr in a 280 rem, then the 270 can do it with 150's. True to my nature (though not always recommended) I started hot and worked down. Wouldn't you believe it. The nosler #5 manual has the best recipe. Finally arrived at book maximum of 58.5 grs of Imr-7828ssc and said 160gr Sierras for an average 2875 fps. This load cut a very nice 3/4" 5 shot group at 100 yds. Had the chronograph going the entire time. Slowest was 2869fps, fastest was 2886fps. Hotter loads were tried but aren't recommended in my case cuz accuracy went down hill, or velocity SD widened. Yes 59.0grs clocked 2909fps, but didn't group half as well, and the half grain extra powder isn't worth it. I could tell from this test that 58.5grs Imr-7828ssc with the 160gr Sierra is a good shooting load that's easy on the brass. Nice rounded primers and no extractor marks during extraction.

I may borrow a buddy's 270 for further testing. More results to follow though it'll be a few weeks before I can get back out to the range

I'm a fan of the 150 partition at 3000 fps in my tikka T3
I originally tried RL 26 and was unhappy with the accuracy! Turned out my scope was giving up. A new scope sorted it out rather nicely. If I can't kill it with this combo I should probably go home and give it all up

I found "special" was a 150gr Nosler Partition at 2850fps.

Had a range session w/ chronograph this past Friday. Had previously shot 55.0 & 56.0 gr IMR-7828 with the 150 Partition Gold.

Loaded up 56.0 and 57.0.

56.0 gave 2,965 fps. I was hoping for 2,900 + fps.

Against my better judgement, I tried one at 57.0 and got 2,998 and some blowby around the primer. Pulled the other one.

Going back to 55.0 which should get ~ 2,930 fps.

It'll be interesting when I get my hands on some pixie dust (RL-26)

MD, I just picked up some 150gr Grand Slams. In your mind what velocity would be Ideal for these.

Thanks

Around 2800.

Gaschekt,
The best 150’s will do in a 22” barrel 270 will be mid 2800’s with Nosler’s, Sierras, Hornadys, and a few others. NPt’s will be a bit slower. I’ve tried most if not all the appropriate powders and commonly available brass over the years. RL26 is the notable exception.

I'm a little surprised with this result for two reasons. 1.book maximum for this bullet from the Nosler manual is 57.5grs, so 57.0 shouldn't be a hot load, and so it'd be within good judgment to try it. 2. These velocities are very high. What length of barrel is used again? From the manual 57.5grs of Imr-7828ssc should run 2862fps. I'd be checking out the rig for other reasons that may cause higher pressures. Clean barrels that aren't copper fouled, as well as premium brass with the largest internal volume all help reduce pressure

When I first developed a load (150 Partitions) for my wife’s now retired Ruger Model 77 ( vintage 1975)……we were getting 2950 fps my. memtb

I tried IMR 7828ssc with 150’s in multiple 270 rifles. I couldn’t exceed 2800 or so without excess pressures.
In a 22” barrel I have never been able to exceed around 2850 until I tried R26. Never ever. Well except the old Norma 205 would get to 2900+.

Some of the high velocities may be the caused by an inaccurate chronograph.

It's 24" Kimber Montana. I always look a multiple sources of load data and I figured 57.5 was a good working max. The Partition Gold is a different beast with a steel cup in the rear section. Could be harder to obturate.

Same gun, same day, same range session: 60.0 gr of H4831sc + 130 TTSX yielded 3,105 fps. I don't think it's the gun.

Thanks!

I think that often accounts for the different velocities we read about.

They are a reasonably stout bullet:






GR

But not nearly as stout as the "second generation" Grand Slams--which had the two-part core, with the rear's lead alloy a lot harder than the front core. They also had an inner semi-partition, much like the Hornady Interlock ring but heavier.

You might be right. It was kind of cold that day:


It didn't have an issue reading my 338wm loads:


However, RL26 gets those velocities with the 150gr partition, even in a short featherweight barrel. That's not where I found the best accuracy though. Had to back it down to around 2,950, but that seems common place. No pressure signs at that speed either. This was in a pre 64 model 70. If you can safely run that speed and it's accurate in that rifle, why not?

BSA,

Because RL-26 isn't as temp-resistant as other powders that can get 2900 from a 22" barrel--and hence not as consistent. If somebody doesn't hunt at widely different temperatures that doesn't matter, but as I already pointed out in this thread H4831SC gets 2900+ from my 22" barreled Model 70 with fine accuracy--whether at zero F. or "normal" temperatures. RL-26 does not.

MD,

Would the H4831 do just as well with varying temps as the H4831SC?

I normally use the SC variety, but with the shortage, I picked up a couple lbs of the long cut stuff.

I'm glad I bought 3 pounds of it today. I load for a buddies 270 and that is what we have settled on. Its great powder and like you already know, it works great in the 30-06 with the heavies as well. Agreed on powders that are not as temp stable. One reason I slowly made the switch from IMR4350 to H4350.

Both the present "long cut" H4831 and H4831SC are very temp-stable. And in fact my present lots of both get just about exactly the same velocity, when the same powder charge is loaded in the same cartridge with the same bullet. That's less usual than many handloaders believe...

MD

Everything I have read on rl26 seems to indicate it is temp stable even at low temps. I just did several google searches and any test results I have found show no or small delta between low/high temps, at least to 85. However I have seen several instances where folks have pressure issues at really high temps. So when you say not as temp resistant as other powders have you seen a velocity drop? I am curious as know you do more scientific testing than most.

Lou

I believe it. I haven't noticed a difference between the two, until I'm dropping it from the powder measure. Then you can tell the difference. I'd buy H4831 all day long, if that's all they had on the shelf, but if you had the SC version next to it, I'd grab the SC instead. I noticed the other day that Midsouth had both powders in stock. Probably not for very long, but they were both available.

Agree.

Not a premium bullet - but a very good and accurate general purpose cup-n-core... as long as the velocity is < ~ 2800 fps.

$0.22/pop for both range and most field applications is tough to beat.

Shoot a lot of'em.




GR

Thanks for confirming that. Much appreciated.

How does H4831 perform when downloaded to 2800 fps for a 150 gr. bullet/22" Bbl.?




GR

That doesn’t sound like much of a “download “. It sounds like a powerful all around load. You’d have to try it to determine if it is precise 😁 in your rifle.

That's pretty much a max load with H 4831 in a 22" barrel.

Several years ago I was working with a 24” 270 and H-4831 and H-4831SC behind 150 Ballistic Tips. I was looking for an accurate, reasonably fast load and had previously only gone up to 56.0 grs which gave 2905 fps and 1 1/4” group. Later, to fine tune the load, here’s what I got on 2, 4shot groups with a mild load of 53.0 grs with both powders:

H4831
1st group: 2745 fps, ES 27, 0.6 “ group, + 3/4”
2nd group:. 2740 fps, ES 38, 0.5” group, + 1”

H4831 SC
1st group: 2742 fps, ES 32, 1.8” group, + 1 1/2”
2nd group: 2740 fps, ES 14, 2.0” group, + 1.0”

So practically identical velocities, very similar extreme spreads, very slightly different POI’s but much better accuracy with H4831 vs H4831 SC. Go figure. You never know. YMMV

In my experience it depends on the particular barrel, and the specific batch of H4831.

Have handloaded for 15 .270s, around a dozen of those with 22" barrels. Some have barely gotten 2800 with 150s, and others around 2950--using the same charge of the same batch of H4831 with different bullets.

But my main point in my previous posts on this thread is that none of the variations mattered in "killing power."

Appears that a book load of H4831 does about the same thing as IMR 4831 out of a 24" Bbl., ~ 2850 fps., albeit w/ 2-3 gr. more powder and increased temp stability.

And would assume, bein' a little quicker, that the IMR 4831 would be a little more efficient out of a 22" Bbl, and it burns at a cooler temp. than the H4831.




GR

Why would it be cooler burning than H4831? They're both single-based powders.

Does "more efficient" means a slightly lighter powder charge?

As for burn temp - got that off a Chart.

Says IMR 4831 burns ~ 4% cooler than H4831.

As for efficiency - more a/o complete powder burn in the shorter Bbl., resulting in less muzzle blast.

Probably academic.




GR

In my younger days I used a CCI 250 primer under 57.0 grains of H4831 and either a 150 grain Speer or Nosler as that 270's all purpose load. Worked great before I started reading the Campfire threads. Shoulda stuck with the 270 and the 30-06 and I wouldn't have footroom issues with all the rifles in the fuggin gun room. Or a vast number of bullets and brass.

Garandanimal,

Thanks for the link, but it doesn't mention where the information about burn temperature is from.

You're mistaken about "more complete powder burn in the shorter barrel." (Do not know what the a/o means.) Ever since Homer Powley's days it has been proven that all the progressive-type powder that's going to burn, burns in the first 2-3 inches in front of the chamber--IF that powder/bullet combo produces the pressure the powder's designed for. In other words, if the load doesn't produce 60,000 PSI with either IMR4831 or H4831, then some powder might not burn.

After the powder burns, what's actually happening is the expansion of the hot gas produced by the burned powder--which may or may not affect muzzle blast. In general, more powder does increase muzzle blast--but I sincerely doubt the decibel-difference between the two powders would be measurable.

I put the 150 Partition in front of 65staball for my 24' Weatherby Vanguard. I have not chronographed it yet.

One deer I shot at 300 yards behind the shoulder ran 50 yards then fell over.

Another deer at 165 yards dropped at the shot. Hit right between the eyes.

Good deal! How’s the accuracy you’re getting?

"% burn" is something I picked up from QuickLOAD, and assumed that it was Bbl. length driven.


Muzzle pressure, w/r/t powder burn rate, is an issue RE: the M1 Rifle.

Assuming the same MAP, slower burn-rate powder, w/ their associate higher charge wts. and "area under the curve", produce higher than spec port pressures at the muzzle.

P.S. "a/o" and/or.




GR

GR,

Thanks for the clarifications.

I'm very aware of the potential muzzle pressure problem with the M1, but don't see what it has to do with IMR4831/H4831, especially since they're very close in burn rate.

Have just noticed that on QuickLOAD, for near max loads w/ 150 gr., the IMR 4831 logs a complete burn, where the H4831 does not.

For whatever that's worth.


But 2-3 grains of additional powder, for a given MAP, while not a ton, is not nothing, either.

Call it 4.5% for argument.

If the powder is long burnt at the start of the Bbl., then an expanding gas bubble increase of 4.5% would be inconsequential at the muzzle.

So, it would simply be area under the curve force, accelerating the bullet.

Where slower powders, for a given MAP, would allow more powder and have more area under the curve, resulting in a longer sustained push.




GR

GR,

You're losing me, partly because of QL, which I gave up on long ago after using for several years--and finding out through actual testing (both mine and that of several professional pressure labs) that a computer simulation does not always work. Can provide plenty of real-world examples.

Am also kinda baffled by this:

"But 2-3 grains of additional powder, for a given MAP, while not a ton, is not nothing, either. Call it 4.5% for argument. If the powder is long burnt at the start of the Bbl., then an expanding gas bubble increase of 4.5% would be inconsequential at the muzzle."

You seem to be contradicting yourself in those statements.

Just averaged 3050 with 150 ABLR and R26 (59) 24" barrel, Nosler brass.

Holy Dyslexia, Batman!! That must have been an entertaining experience...

I'm wondering about the utility of these loads as well, given the sweet-shooting and game-killing qualities of a 270 loaded with 130's at regular velocities. I'm not knocking it, if that's your thing, but when I go up from deer/elk size critters to bigger/toothier critters, I tend to go up in rifle/caliber rather than try to make my 270 do the job.

In my experience it's difficult NOT to have a .270 do "the job"....

QuickLOAD - is not something I use.

Just noticed it in passing when doing load development research.


As for the contradiction - it is more a case of incomplete explanation.

A 4.5% increase in powder charge is significant.

A 4.5% increase in residual gas pressure at the muzzle - is not.




GR

A 150 gr. bullet, w/ a BC of .400 and a MV of 2800 fps - is also the M2 ball round.

Few consider that one weak.

The .270 Win./150 gr. gives me pass-throughs and dead animals.

And since I'll be cookin' it later anyway, the bullet doesn't need to.

8>)




GR

John, you took the words right out of my mouth.

While I have no interest in shooting a Grizzly or Brown Bear, I'd not feel under-gunned with a 270 loaded with a 150 Partition.

Brad,

Yep, have seen that combo work on animals up to bull elk and moose in North America, and the 500-700 pound plains game animals considered equally tough (or even more so) in North America.

Though Phil Shoemaker doesn't post here much anymore (and I don't blame him), he's also OK with a brown bear client bringing a .270 with 150 Partitions.

You should re-post your Finn Aagaard On The 270 Win. article, Brad.


This from Ross Seyfried:

"...The most successful African Safari I ever guided was shot with a .270 Winchester loaded with 150 grain Nosler Partition bullets. The rifle was ancient and worn, a pre-war Model 70. The “driver” was past 70 years old and this was his only rifle; a rifle that he has used for many decades in most of the hunting grounds of the world. He shot two extremely tough animals, a zebra and a wildebeest, first. Each fell to a single shot, as did a huge lion. He broke a sitatunga’s neck (that was the only target) offhand, in the wind, at 300 yards. An elk-sized kudu bull tumbled when the bullet hit the point of his shoulders. There was no real magic; just a great rifle, fine bullet and unimaginable skill on the part of the rifleman..."




GR

You gotta wonder if Ross would have mentioned a rich young
guy who brought 5 guns, starting with a 375 and going up, shooting
even the 460 and 505 like the 243 that everyone shoots perfectly.


That, despite the gun selection representing us looneys, wouldn't
fit the popular image. One gun, moderate chambering, old,
old bastard shooting it.....

I really am not following the point of your post... why should I re-read Finn's article?

Me too.

Me three! 59gr of RL26 seemed to be about all my rifle could take with 150’s. A 150gr. ABLR (or Accubond or Partition) at 3050fps would be a wicked killer! However a 130gr. TBT at just over 3200fps is much more accurate with 61gr of RL26 in my Weatherby!

How is the stability of the 150 gr. ABLR from what I assume is a std. 1:10 twist rate.

This is one of the few bullets I would consider pushing the MV on, for really long range work.

... IF it was precise and stable at > 400 yards.





GR

Garandanimal.

Why wouldn't it be stable at >400 yards?

I beat on the flowers and rocks that grow on the ridge 1100 yards out. Seems to stay moa at worst if I do everything correctly.

Have heard from friends that have tried'em... with poor results out of 1:10 twist Bbl's.

Appears to be hit/miss.



That's what I'd be lookin' for.

Was considering a 1:8 twist .270 Win. Bbl. to facilitate it.




GR

Apparently you believe in the same misconception that many do--that bullets started to "destabilize" at longer ranges due to reduced velocity.
This is exactly the opposite of what happens, as there are two forces at work in bullet stabilization: Air pressure on the front of the bullet, which tends to destabilize the bullet, and gyroscopic spin, which stabilizes the bullet.

Air pressure comes from velocity, which decreases far faster than bullet spin. This is why bullets become MORE stable as range increases, until they drop to around the speed of sound--which is far below the velocity of higher-BC hunting bullets drop to at ranges out to 800+ yards.

Have gotten excellent accuracy with 150-grain .270 ABLR's, but as with many newer high-BC bullets, they "liked" being seated deeper.

You might also try JBM's stability program, which unlike others provides an input for plastic-tip length. The late Don Miller, the guy who developed the stability formula most programs are based on these days, eventually found that plastic tips were so light (and sharp) that they had little affect on bullet stability. The JBM program gives the 150 ABLR an SG of 1.375 even at "standard atmospheric conditions" of 59 F. at sea level in a 1-10 twist, which is more than enough to stabilize them. Around here, in typical hunting-season conditions, the SG is over 1.5.

The big reason even well-stabilized bullets tend to shoot larger groups at longer ranges is wind, which as I pointed out in another thread increases at about twice the rate of range.

There’s a video, and I think it’s on You Tube, about some guys shooting pistol bullets into ice at an angle where the bullets bounce back out onto the ice. They keep spinning like crazy for a long time. It’s amazing how powerful that spin is.

Just going by anecdotal data - from reloaders who have tried the bullet in otherwise precise 1:10" rifles for that bullet weight... and, as a group, can't get'em to shoot well.

... except from higher twist-rate Bbl's.




GR

Haven't experienced that in at least three .270's--all factory rifles with 1-10 twists. But I did experiment some with seating depth, which I've found tends to help considerably with ABLRs in other calibers and weights.

For example, my custom 6.5 PRC regularly groups 5 handloads with 129 ABLRs into half an inch or less, even though it only weighs around 7-1/2 pounds scoped. But it didn't do that until I seated them about .1 inch off the lands.

Seen the same thing. .075 to .125 and they seem to run great. But then again in a few other 270’s nothing could make them shoot well. Life’s too short to dote on a single bullet anyhow.

Yeah, I suspect a lot of it depends not only on the chamber throats in various rifles, but the particular batch of bullets.

By the way I just got done putting together the load data from the 15 .270 Winchesters I've handloaded for over the decades, for my upcoming LITTLE BOOK OF RIFLE HANDLOADS THAT WORK. It's a collection of handloads that have worked well in more rifles (or even most rifles) in a certain chambering, along with brief observations about the cartridges and loads. That's how I know the 150 ABLR has shot well in more than one rifle, along with the info on seating depth. We're planning on having the book out by early fall, but that always depends on variables, just like handloading!

For sure. I’ve had a few rifles just balk at them and others be somewhat easy. Concentric rounds and all that haven’t mattered, they just wouldn’t do it. The next gun eats them alive. Same as the Interbonds and Sciroccos. When they work they make you smile. When they won’t they make you wanna buy Federal Blue Box.

Yep!

Would also add that I've encountered rifles that wouldn't shoot Bergers, but they've usually had extra-long throats--especially Weatherby Magnums, even though they'd shoot other bullets (in particular monolithics) very well. But one of the reasons many of us are compulsive experimenters is rifles are always "interesting"...

That’s what I saw. My biggest frustration to date was a MK5 300 Wby and 210 ABLRs. I was ready to throw in the towel. Switched to Partitions and it thought it was a tuned 223.

Thanks for the info! But am not surprised....

For a .270 that will be used in varied terrain and from deer to elk would you guys prefer a 22 or 24 inch barrel?

Never seen a problem with a 22” barrel on a 270 myself.

I have the rifle that shoots a junk 277/130 btsp speer into. 6 for 5 shots and the 150 lrab into 2". Knowing this is a very accurate rifle, I contacted Nosler and spoke to the balasticians about the lrab.

I was told the lrab uses a different copper and it can have issues in rifles with sharp leades as it can "stall" or dwell in the throat as pressure increases from the burn event. If using slow powders, mag primers, short jumps and sharp bores.....it's all working against that bullet.

Like Mule Deer, I seated deeper and used a lee FC die and it was an instant change of over an inch.

Nosler mentioned using magpro powder as it tends to "self lubricate" according to the balistician I spoke with, or at least that's what I heard from his description.

I had initially thought my rifle would not stabilize the 150 based on groups, but all holes were dead round and so I turned to the rock bluff 1200 yards out and even though I was shooting 2" at 100 I was still very close to if not inside moa at the wall....which made me want to make this bullet work.

It can be a fickle beast, but does fly very well and the 3 I've sent into bulls did what they're supposed to.

I saw where you use a crimp, I also wonder if you couldn't increase neck tension a thou or so to get the same effect? Never thought of trying that in problem rifles when the ABLR isn't responding well.

I tried increasing neck tension but ended up with seating inconsistencies.

I was afraid of that. Makes sense.

Informative and encouraging.

Thanks y'all.

This is one bullet I really wanted in the bag for the .270 Win.


Look forward to the new book, JB.




GR

Unless you want max velocity from a full charge of slow powder...?

As the .270 Win. is already a high pressure cartridge, a 22" Bbl. works fine, and is a bit easier to handle in the field.




GR

That's my general experience with increasing neck-tension by sizing necks down more--and have done enough experimenting to be pretty well convinced the reason is harder seating, which tends to increase bullet run-out.

Which is why I suspect the Lee "factory crimp die" tends to work a lot of the time: It results in more consistent bullet-pull, without changing run-out, even in necks that aren't super-consistent in thickness.

If you believe that the (maybe) 50-75 fps you might gain by going to a 2" longer barrel is going to make a noticeable difference in the field or on game then you might be better served with one of the super fast magnums.

Yep!

One of the realities of big game rifles/cartridges is that most bullets lose 200-300 fps in the first 100 yards, depending on whether they're flat-based spitzer or high-BC bullets.

I was using a Sako A7 1:10 twist and testing varying loads of Re26, the (59) grain was the most accurate shooting at 300 yds.

[quote=Mule Deer][quote=high_country_]

Makes sense. Do you think the LFC die will replace “jump” to some extent?

my current 270 is 22 inches but I've noticed many new rifles now are 24 and 22 is getting less common. I don't see the need for it and wonder why it's changed.

even Kimbers are 24 in a 270

Because of chronograph envy.

Off the wall question.........if a 24 inch 270 barrel will push a 150 grain bullet 75 fps faster does that mean the recoil is more than one with a 22 inch barrel with the exact same load?

Yes, but whether if its enough to matter to you is another question.

The other question is whether another 75 (or even 150) fps results in greater "killing power."

My std. .270 Win. workhorse load is a 150 gr. Speer GS on top of 55 gr. of IMR 4831/CCI 200, for ~ 2800 fps from a 22" Bbl'ed 8.5 lb. all up rifle.

This rig produces right ~ 18 ft-lbs of recoil, and 1500 ft-lbs and a little over 8" drop at 300 yards (200 yd zero).

IF - one simply adds 75 fps at the muzzle?

... recoil goes to 18.6 ft-lbs, and energy/drop at 300 yds is 1590 ft-lbs and a little under 8" respectively.


Call it 3.3% recoil, and 6% and a 1/2" ballistics.


Not worth it to me.

YMMV




GR