I've been reading histories of the .270 Winchester and learned that when it originally came out the ammo produced 3130, or 3150, or 3160 fps (sources disagree). Then, the velocity was dropped to below 3000 fps for decades and now is usually around 3060 fps.

I want to load to 3160 fps like the originals but am not sure if that is possible to do, safely. I load 55.0 grains of IMR4350 which chronos at 2990 fps in my rifle. I see that Jack O'Connor had a load of 57.0 grains of IMR4350 that he had listed at 3130 fps but I'm not sure that that would be safe, nor do I have that much confidence in his chronograph.

So, has anyone reproduced the original factory load, or near it, with safety?

That velocity with a 130 grain bullet can be achieved or exceeded using Alliant powder. Check out Aliant's reloading site for specifics site.

The thing is, I don't trust the velocities given in reloading manuals. I want data from someone who has personally chronographed his handloads to achieve an actualy 3160 fps.

The trouble with someone without a means of accurately measuring pressure can get phenomenal velocities, by going by what they might consider pressure signs. Loading to 70,000 PSI and getting by is not unheard of.

How long is your barrel?

I was going to comment on what you can achieve at 70k psi lol ... I was Beat to the punch !

While I have some 270 Win’s, it’s fun to loaf 130s along at 3500-3600 in the Wby

Oh, that 3160 fps was reported for a 24 inch barrel. (My 270 is also 24 inches.)

Yeah, it's quite possible those early factory rounds were overloads. Winchester said they cut back to under 3000 fps because hunters were complaining about too much meat damage but the skeptic in me says it was because they were loading to dangerous levels. But I don't KNOW that.

If anyone has actually hit 3160 fps with a 24 inch barrel and no excessive pressure signs I'd like to know it and know what the load was. Then I could work up slowly to that load, using my own judgement on pressure signs in my rifle, and perhaps also have some of the rounds pressure tested.

Hodgdon shows a Hornady 130 grain SP at 3038 FPS from a charge of IMR-7977 and at 55,000 PSI....look it up as I won't risk mistyping it here.

Yes, it's a compressed load but one can improve on it by pouring the load in three batches.....roughly 20 grains per batch but if you compress the powder between each batch of loading you can actually get more in the case.....if you have a chronograph, you will know if it's working for you.....you could conceivably work up to three grains over the max listed by Hodgdon.....and possibly hit the 3150 mark.....oh yea.....one more thing.....it's not worth it!!!!!!

Just because a load may be safe in someone else's rifle does not mean it will be safe in yours. Every rifle is different, bore dimensions, chamber dimensions, how it is throated even if the barrels are the same length can give very different velocities and pressures in different rifles. You need to chronograph your rifle and work up a load specifically for it. You may get that velocity with safe pressures or you may not.

I get about 3050 - 3065 using a 130 TSX BT and 54 grs. H4350 in my 24" Cooper. Seems to be about a max load in my rifle.

Postoak, The Nosler book lists over 3100 fps with H4831sc and a 130gr bullet. That is consistent with my experience with that powder and barrel length. BTW, I think you'd be in overload territory with 57grs of IMR4350. So, take a look at H4831sc. My guess is that you should be able to reach at least 3100fps without torturing your rifle or brass. Good luck.

You aren't going to get anywhere near 3160 with IMR4350 while staying within the pressure guidelines of the cartridge. I suggest trying Alliant powders. I've personally gotten at least 3150 out out of 130's using R19, R22, R23, and R26.

Like a LOT of folks in those days, it seems 'ol Jack was running some pretty hot loads. Many of the published velocities were derived in a time when chronographs, and more importantly pressure barrels--were not as accurate as what we have today. 270W velocities were reduced when labs began using piezo pressure receivers and many of the published loads were found to be hot, too. The velocities you have listed are obviously for 130 grain bullets. With slow burning powders and 24" bbls 3000fps or more is easily achievable. 3100 fps is pushing it and most likely over pressure.

Alliant RL-26 load data with the 150 gr bullet is showing 3020+ fps. Three of my 22" bbl 270's are hitting 3000 fps with less than max charge of RL-26. Alliant doesn't have any pressure data for the 130 gr bullets because RL-26 is intended for heavy-for-caliber bullets in "overbore" cartridges. Of course, that hasn't stopped the rifle loonies from stuffing RL-26 into every centerfire cartridge every devised by humankind........and claiming fantastical velocities......

Go online and look at the powder manufacturers load data, and better yet buy a current load manual or two. If you have a chrono let that be a guide. In other words, don't exceed the published velocities.

Pretty sure Hodgdon has data for speeds over 3100 with a Barnes 130. That said, even 100 fps one way or the other is no big deal. Accuracy, safety, and bullet performance are. High B.C. bullets can make that velocity "shortfall" disappear downrange.

Reference Hornady volume # 2 you will see some hot loads. No pressure testing equipment was used.

saskfox -- do you have one in front of you? All I have is the 3rd edition and the loads aren't hot. Example, max IMR4350 load is 54.8 grains for 3000 fps. (Remember I am shooting 55.0 grains and getting 2990 fps average in my rifle. At least they don't seem to be exaggerating velocities by much.

You chron'ed those loads?

They have another loads over 3100 fps, the maximum being 3,144 which is good if accurate. That's with 55.5 grains of Hodgdon Hybrid H100V and a 130 grain Barnes TSX. I've have to see if I can get this powder.

I'm actually a pretty conservative reloader and don't try to exceed factory velocities. If I want to go over that I'll just get a larger cartridge. But 3160 fps is supposed to be factory velocity in the .270. Maybe I'll just wind up accepting the fact that the modern loads of 3060 fps are a reasonable goal.

I do 3200 fps IMR 4320 53.9 grains IMR 4350 57.6 grains H4831 61 grains N205 62.2 grains. May I ask why you are seeking a maximum load? Grandpa and Dad had good success with 53 grains 4350. I've had good success with 58 grains H 4831.

Just to see if hitting the old factory velocity is possible.

Yes. The R19 was the biggest surprise.

Just my $.02....

The old loading manuals from years ago can get you into trouble. Powders and bullets have likely (certainly?) changed over the years and some of the older manuals do not show loads that were actually pressure tested...just worked up to looking for the usual signs of pressure and in some rifles those signs may not show up until you have pushed 70,000+ psi. This is part of the reason some of the older loading manuals probably should not be trusted today. I think it prudent to use only the current manuals that show loads for the actual bullet you are using, not just by weight but also by maker and the exact version of their bullet you are loading. It can make a big difference.

Using loading info from other people can be a bit risky, especially if they are strangers 'met' online. Use caution and work up slowly and then only after cross referencing their info from the powder manufacturers web site or their current manuals.

As to the velocities published by the ammo manufacturers, especially those form many years ago, they can be wishful thinking as many would not show that speed in a production rifle, and many were tested in 26" barrels. Before chronographs became affordable and common a manufacturer could state anything they wanted and most people would be none the wiser. If you're a handloader, owning a chronograph is damn near an essential. Used properly it can keep both you and your rifle in one piece.

Also, if you are obsessing over the claimed 100 fps the original loading supposedly gave (3160) and todays loads that show 3060 fps there's not an animal walking that could tell you the difference and your trajectory out to any sensible range won't show a significant difference.

For 2 decades I ran 58-58.5 gr of H4831 and 150 gr NPt's chrono'ing 2875-2890 fps through several 22" bbls. Today the Nosler manual says 55 gr H4831 max and 2905 fps with a 24" bbl.

In 35+ years of chron'ing 270's and 150 gr bullets 55 gr of H4831 has NEVER come close to achieving 2900 fps with bbls up to 25".

The heaviest H4831 load with 130 gr bullets listed in any of the 5 current manuals I have is 59.2 grains--and that's in the Sierra manual. Sierra bullets tend to have thin/soft enough jackets they can tolerate a bit higher powder charges. I would not try that powder charge with a Partition........

The two powders that seem most promising are RL16 (according to Alliant) and Hodgdon Hybrid H100V (according to Hodgdon). I'm going to get some of both of these along with the bullets they used and start working up some loads and chronoing them.

4350 IMHO is too fast to achieve max velocity in the 270 with 130 gr bullets. For this application, H4831 is the perfect burn rate and has been for the last forty years. Although some of the new powders may also be suitable.

The last 270 I worked with required 61 gr H4831 to hit 3100 fps.

In the late 80s I had a book load that produced 3200fps with 130gr Nosler Solid Bases in my dads old 1952 M70. It was accurate and hammered white tails. At some point i decided that was more than necessary. I worked up an equally accurate load at 3050. My oldest son now has that rifle and uses that load. The deer cant tell the difference.

^^^^^ I agree. I’ve been loading 130s in 270 W since 1976. I also used JOC load of
***62 yds SURPLUS 4831 which was NOT Hodgdon produced. It did give 3100 + FPS and accuracy.

Someone mentioned Hod # 2 and over pressured loads. YES some were but not all.

H 4831, produced by Hodgdon had extreme Lot/Lot variation after the Surplus powder dried up.

Hence I switched to IMR 7828 years ago and with a compressed load it will give +/- 3100 FPS and accuracy. I’ve shot it for years in PUMPS and bolts with good case life.

My next 270 project is RL 26 come Spring.

Good Luck
Jerry

Absolutely ! ! !

Jerry

I don't use 130 gr bullets often but have chronographed the Hornady 130 gr SST at 3177fps using 59 gr of Reloder 23. Winchester brass, CCI 200 from a 24" barrel. SD of 3 and ES of 6. This is probably a max load even though there were no obvious pressure signs.

140 grains bullets are my top choice and have chronographed many loads using RL 23 and 26. 3100 fps is easily doable with both powders. 58 gr of RL 23 and 61 gr of RL 26. Both loads are under but near Max.

Bill V

I have always loaded 60.0 grains of H-4831 and a 130 grain bullet. Never once have I ever seen anything resembling too much pressure. Chronographed it once, and it was running around 2950 out of a 22 inch barrel. Accurate and killed stuff, so was good enough for me.

270 Wby
270 WSM
7mm Mag (any flavor)
6.5/264 Mag (almost any flavor)


Trying to get all a cartridge offers makes sense.
Fixation on 100fps in a smaller chamber in doesnt.

In the OP's defense, this seems to be a thought, not a "3160 or kaboom" mission.

What difference does another 100 fps make? You can kill something dead, not dead plus one or two.

My favorite load for the .270 with 130 grain bullets is 60.5 gr/H4831SC, Fed 210M, Nosler cases. This load has been my favorite for over 40 years (regular H4831 before short cut variety came out), giving superb accuracy in nine .270s over that time. Most often, the bullet has been the Nosler Partition. Velocity, however, averages 3025 fps in 24” barrels. My most accurate .270, a 1952 large ring Husqvarna, loves this load with the Nosler 130 gr Accubond. These loads are max n the three .270s I currently have. I don’t believe that the more traditional powders (Hodgdon, IMR) will give significantly more velocity with safe pressures.

However, my favorite .270 powder has changed to RE 26. I safely get well over 3000 fps with the 150 gr Nosler Partition (60.5 gr of powder), and fine accuracy. There may be other combinations that provide a boost to 130 grain bullets over the traditional powders, but for now I really don’t care. That old Husky still gets the old 130 gr load with H4831SC due to its sensational accuracy, but it’s the only one.

And as an aside, I’m getting right at 3000 fps from the Alliant book load of RE26 and 200 gr Nosler Accubonds with sub MOA accuracy in my pet custom 300WM M70.

My results this year with the 130 TTSX and RL 26. This should help the original poster ...

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/12838870/1

In my main hunting rifle, a 24 inch 700 I get 10 shot averages of the following with h4831. No pressure signs and long brass life...bu this gun has a longer throat than most.

62gr h4831 w/ 130 Sierra game king 3145 FPS avg
58gr h4831 w/ 150 Sierra game king 3005 FPS avg

59.0gr. R26 150LRAB,Nosler brass, Fed210M for 3010 FPS. Very accurate

I had a hard time duplicating R16's numbers according to Alliant's data. I didn't get anywhere near the speeds they claimed with the bullets they claimed to get those speeds with, and I didn't dare put anymore powder under those bullets.

Though I've not tried Hybrid 100V in the 270, I have tried it in a few cartridges that have roughly the same expansion ratio as the 270, and even in shorter barrels and cold temps it has produced the speeds (or close enough) claimed by Hodgdon. It's a good powder, often overlooked.

My new favorite powder in 270 (and a few other cartridges) is R26. I should keep my mouth shut...it's already hard to find, and the price on it keeps nudging upward. Regardless, it is the most accurate and highest-velocity powder I have tried in the 270 and 243, and it produces small velocity variations and those most accurate loads at the top end.

This.

It's easy with a 26" barrel. The .270 Win loves long barrels. A few inches makes a big difference with it.

Jack OConner used mil surp or data 4350 & 4831. Different than current versions and both were slower with data 4350 being almost like current 4831 and the 4831 is closer to MRP, R22 and 7828 than to the modern 4831's.

For an easy 3,150 fps get a longer barrel or a 270 Weatherby. Although several powders can get there safely. I also question running up to the same velocity in manuals based on universal recievers as these usually produce higher velocities than a rifle will.

I shoot 140gr bullets in my 270 Winchester. Powders that give the highest velocity are RL26,MRP, RL23,RL22, RL17,Magpro. Probably forgot some but thats a start.
One more Superformance works good also.

I’ve been running 55gr of imr 4350 under a variety of 130gr bullets since the late 60’s.
I don’t know what the actual pressure or velocity is with that load - always assumed 2900-3000.

It’s a very accurate load for me in my Rem 700 and 22” tube, especially with the Hornaday 130.
If I knew for a fact I was getting 2900+, I’d be doing my happy dance and never look back.

I always thought JO’C was pushing the envelope with his loads and chose not to try and duplicate them.
4831, in those days, came with too many variables to make me feel comfortable and imr 4350 was preferred.

I guess it’d be fun to find a load that would run with the original factory stated velocity, but I don’t think it’s worth the time or money to pursue......

I have done overload work ups on hundreds of bullet - powder - cartridge combinations.

I would have bet money I could not get as much velocity without pressures sign as a I did in 270 130 gr NBT Re17.

But after I have to reduce the load for a safety margin, with the safety margin designed with the temperature coefficients of the Re17 in mind, the velocity was quite low.

With heavy bullets RL26 gave the highest velocity in 257 Roberts, 270 Win, 30/06, 7mmMag. Did not use it much in 270WSM and 338win mag.
used Norma MRP in both of those. MRP was very good in 338 Win mag. Usually I was trying to download my 270WSM. 30/06 gave best accuracy
with RL26. In the other cal. RL23, MRP, H1000,and Retumbo gave better accuracy, for loose of about 50ftp second.

I am generally happy with 3000 fps and a 130 or 140 grain bullet or close to it. Plenty flat and fast for most hunting.

Some real good information coming in. I've already got the RL16 and Hybrid 100V on the way so will work with them first.

BTW, I am not really familiar with the Reloder series so just looked on the Alliant web site for info. Here's a summary of what they say about each one:

RL #

7 For small caliber varmint loads

10X Best choice for .222 Rem, .223 Rem, and .22-250

15 Best all around medium speed rifle powder

16 World class temperature stability. Speed similar to 4350 making it ideal choice for .270 and .30-06 class cartridges

17 Designed for short magnum size cartridges. Smooth metering.

19 Superb accuracy in most medium and heavy rifle loads. Suitable for .30-06 and .338.

22 Powder of choice for 7 mm mag and .300 mag

23 World class temperature stability. For long range magnum loads.

25 Ideal for overbore magnums

26 Produces extremely high velocities in magnum cartridges. Has high bulk density that allows for higher loads.

33 Designed for .338 Lapua

50 Designed for .50 BMG

I'm not too optimistic now about the RL16 as the thread that djb pointed to shows beretz noting that at 53.0 grains he got 3103 fps and had a primer fall out. The Alliant manual lists 55.3 grains as max!

As several have noted, RL 26 seems promising.

Winchester and Remington brass is much softer than back in the early 90sand earlier. The WW brass use to have a bluish hue around the head and a different solid head. Today's brass looks more like a polished door handle.

I believe litigation is the problem. Anyone who has dome much reloading will know when a load is at high pressure then an small increase in powder will make for a bigger jump in pressure than if the load is at lower pressure. Todays brass shows things like ejector marks at lower pressure (and velocity) than used to be the case.

postoak, not debating why you're looking for 3,160fps/mv, that's why some handload. I do not shoot the 130's in my .270, pretty much 150's and twice using NP 160's. So I've never go to 2925 mv. But, I am curious; why do YOU want 3,160? Really, just a question, no arguing from me. Thanks.

rifletom - just to see if it can be done safely. As someone said above, it is no big deal for me -- either it can be done or it can't.

I won't stay at those velocities anyway. If I wanted them, I'd just switch to my 7 mm RM. After all is done, I'll probably lower down to the new factory standard of 3060 fps. I think my current IMR4350 isn't a good powder for doing that so it's good for me to be trying new powders anyway.

Thanks postoak for clarity on that. Good luck and be safe.

I am using RL26 with the 130 grain Tipped TBBC in my 22" P64 Featherweight in WW cases, nets me an average of about 3145 the last time I checked.

Accurate MagPro shows 3234 fps with a 130g NBT @ 63,200 PSI from a 24" barrel.

An additional 70fps. is going to all things better and possibly on the edge of safety ? I'm no ballistician but I'd like to hear what the additional speed will give you in return.

Yes. In my custom-barreled FN Mauser 270 with 24" barrel 55 grains of H 4350 gives me 3,140 fps. I have owned other 270s with longer throats and which would take 56 grains with no problems. I have seen others in which 53 grains of IMR 4350 was too hot. I have used lots of IMR 4350 in my 270s because I had lots on hand. I always got a bit more velocity and the same accuracy using IMR 4831, but I used what I had on hand. I now stock up on H 4350 and will probably use it in my 270 for the same reason. For heavier bullets in the 270, you need a slower powder like H 4831 or one of the Reloder powders - RL 19, 22, or 26.

I own 3 270s at this time.
One is an iron sighted M95 Winchester lever action, one is the 1st rifle I ever made (when I was 12) which is on it's 3rd barrel and one is a classic Mauser. Every one of them is zeroed with the load it likes and only the old rifle with the 3rd barrel likes to run hot. It is zeroed for 130 grain bullets and a load of 59 grains of H4831. This is quite hot in this rifle because for one thing, it's chambered to a tight tolerance. It has a 25 inch barrel and chronographs that load at nearly 3200 FPS. That's the load it shoot best. I prefer the 150 and 160 grain weights, but this barrel just don't seem to like them as well as 130s. It is well under MOA with the 130s and only about 2.25 MOA with 150s

My M95 is zeroed for 150 grain round nose Remington Core-Lokts. I load 55.7 of H4831, I am down to only a few boxes of these left. I got a hung numebr of them back in the 70s and shot most of them up. It has proven to be an outstanding bullet. With the bead and buck horn sights I zero it 3" high at 100 yards and with my eyes now being older, I can't shoot ethically past 300 yards so I have no holdovers at all for deer, antelope of elk.
I can't see well enough to know how well this load shoots and having no scope, I don't think it matter mulch. It will hit a chicken egg at 100 yards every time and I have shot 8" gongs at 300 yards with it shooting 5 shots and getting 5 hits, so I call it "good enough". This load is not "hot" but it kills like lightning and in all the years I have used those old 150 gr RN bullets I have yet to recover one. Full penetration and good size wound channels.

My Classic Mauser is zeroed with 160 grain Nosler partitions (now) and it shoots them into about 3/4" to 7/8" at 100 yards. I have only recovered one 160 grain Nosler in my life, and that one went through an elk from about 10" in front of the hip and I found it under the skin on the off-side in the middle of the neck. That elk was also the longest shot I personally ever made on an elk, at about 400 yards. I use AC3100 powder in this rifle and it's close to the top listed load from the manual, but off the top of my head I can't remember the exact charge weight. I have run the load up a but and the groups opened up, so I put it back where it was.

But "performance" in this country seems to mean "speed" to most shooters, and that is a mistake. If load A shoots a bullet at 3300 FPS and load B shoots the same weight at 3200, we are told the 3300 FPS load "out-preformed" the 3200 FPS load.
Not necessary.
Speed for speed's sake is a mistake.

I judge target rifles only on one basis. Accuracy. Nothing else matters. Not speed, Not expansion. Not retained weight. not anything but accuracy.

Hunting rifles need other things to be considered when ammo is chosen. The least important thing to focus on for a hunting round is velocity. Sure, if you can have it with goods expansion without overly high weight loss on impact, then take it. But sacrificial bullet performance (meaning good expansion without loosing over 50% of the bullets weight) for speed is a poor trade. Very poor in fact!

I am 100% willing to give up target accuracy too when I am hunting, and the larger the game or the thicker the cover where I am hunting that game, the less accuracy I demand . I have hunted moose with a 62 cal smooth bore flintlock with total confidence. (no I didn't kill one that hunt, but it was not because of my weapon. I saw none, so nothing I had would have mattered) If I had seen the moose I was in an area where typical shots were under 50 yards and average shots were at 25 yards. I have also killed a LOT of deer, antelope elk bears and one buffalo all with iron sighted handguns and I have never lost one, and so far I have never needed 2 shots on any of them except one deer which I did shoot 2 times with a 45

So "performance" is a misused and misunderstood term in many if not most cases. I snicker at those that demand 1/4 MOA for moose hunting or for hunting deer for that matter. Any deer so small that I need to be able to hit a garden pea to kill it is not worth the cost of my bullet.

Shooting at ranges that such accuracy comes into an area of importance is not hunting in my opinion. Those that do it are going to continue to do it until they get tired of it, so for them I have no advice. I did it when I was a younger man, so I can't condemn them, but I grew up you might say.

But even at such long ranges, speed is still less important then many other factors. Speed is fine and it has a benefit of flattening out the trajectory a bit but at the rangers you need not hold over, the advantage of an extra 100 FPS only gains you about 40-60 yards as a rule. And once you need to start holding elevation, (either by dialing or holding) you have to start holding for elevation which means a few more clicks on your scope, or the amount of "air you hold" is not relevant at all. YOU STILL HAVE TO HOLD IT! That comes down 100% to the ability of the shooter, not the flatness of the trajectory once you start to hole over. If you had to hold 3" high or 10 inches high, YOU STILL HAVE TO HOLD IT!
If you can hold well enough to make a shot at that range the place you hold is not important. If you can't hold a killing shot at that range you are too far away, and if you have one once of ethics you'd hold your fire and get closer

So "performance" = speed is false.

My best advice for you is to get a bullet that holds together at least 50% and shoot it at what ever speed your guns seems to like. Then learn the trajectory and practice a lot until placing that bullet is easy for you. As I said at the top, I own three 270s now, and over my life I have owned 6 others. It's a very very good killer.
Don't worry about a few FPS and look for a load that will out-shoot you and then practice enough to be able to use it at any ethical range and you'll never have a problem.

Well I accomplished my goal with Hodgdon Hybrid 100. Hybrid 100 is a fine grained powder that measures well and is compact.

With 130 grain Sierra Game Kings, W-W cases, and Tula large rifle primers, and OAL of 3.255" I got these results.

51.0/2877

51.5/2911

52.0/2965

52.5/2977

53.0/2999

53.5/3021

54.0/3045

54.5/3088

55.0/3099

55.5/3129

56.0/3167

Pressure seemed okay until the 56.0 load when one of the three cases produced a little difficult bolt lift. accuracy was good with all the loads.d

Next I'll do the same workup with the RL16 I bought.

Have you considered a 270 WSM or a 270 Weatherby if you want to go that fast?

Today I tested the RL16, which is the powder Alliant, itself, recommended.

With 130 grain Sierra Game Kings, R-P cases, and Tula large rifle primers, and OAL of 3.255" I got these results.

50.0/2856

50.5/2903

51.0/2924

51.5/2977

52.0/3003

52.5/3025

53.0/3057

53.5/3090

54.0/3103

54.5/3146

55.0/3196

55.5/3223

Thanks for the RL-16 info.

So how was accuracy on these RL-16 loads?

With the RL16, I only did velocity readings.

I used to get very close to 3100 fps with 55 grains of IMR 4350.

I used to surpass 3100 fps (slightly) with 58 grains of RL 22.

Accuracy was good enough and both loads showed no signs of excessive pressure.

Rifles differ, with 55 grains IMR 4350 and 130 grain Sierra Game Kings, I only get 2990 fps.

Has anyone else tried Hodgdon Superperformance? Two people round here have tried it and got 200-300fps increase using 4831sc data as a starting point.

I used superformance with 140gr Accubonds got about 3040 fps using Win cases,WLR primers 3.340 OAL accurate load.
A more accurate load was using RL23 at about 3050 fps. with same 140gr Accubonds or 140gr Trophy Bonded Tipped.My current hunting load
uses RL23 if I,m using 140gr bullets. But if I,m using 150gr Nosler Partitions I use Norma MRP at about 3008 fps. Also a very accurate load.
I don,t use the superformance load any more because the pressure gets to high quickly.

Merry Christmas, folks. I use a .270 wcf and have for approaching 48 years now. I have always found it likes a full powder column . Have used war surplus powders in the past, newer copies of the war surplus stuff and the great new powders like RL 26...I will stick with the new developments.
The .270 wcf factory ammo and load data was dummied down , when new chamberings came into the marketplace. Just marketing.

Has anyone done chrono testing with 130 grain bullets and RL26 as I did above with Hybrid 100 and RL16?

Most that I've read say RL23 is better with the 130 class, but I haven't been able to test both yet

I cant really see you getting much more accurate info than this new data from Speer. 24 inch test barrel.

https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...iber-68mm_277_dia/270_Winchester_130.pdf

No one has mentioned IMR 4451, I have used it with Barnes TTSX 130 grains for several years with good results.
Current accuracy load is 55.2 grains at 3040-50 fps in my 24" Rem 700, but has potential for close to 3100 fps.
RL 16 was also an accurate load but not as fast, again a sample of one in my rifle.