Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: .270WIN loads...

  1. #1
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default .270WIN loads...

    I picked up another .270 recently. It's been a long time since I fooled with a .270 very seriously but last time 59gr of H4831 under a 130gr Sierra was just the ticket...had a few other powders that would work but never got around to using any.

    Is there any reason to look any farther than that combo?

    Looking at factory data it seems everyone has decided to water the .270 down from 3150 to 3050fps with the 130gr....
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  2. #2
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southwest Nebraska
    Posts
    48

    Default

    I've been loading 60gr. of H4831 under a 130gr. Sierra Game King in WW brass with a CCI 200 primer for my .270's for many years. Very accurate load, and absolute quick death on all the deer, caribou, antelope and black bear that I have shot with them. Your load should work great for you. Just as an FYI, an old Hornady loading manual that I have shows a max. load of 61.0gr. of H4831 when using their 130 gr. interlock bullet.

  3. #3

    Default

    Those are all good loads in guns that like them.

    I've had it pounded into my head (or rather my bolt face) that a guy should still work up to those loads, rather than simply stuffing cases and plonking the rounds into the magazine. There's a little variations in throats between models and brands, sometimes forcing changes in seating depth as well as powder charge. Got a new 270 a few years back and simply grabbed a box of reloads off the shelf that were my standard load for another model. Locked up the bolt on the first boom. Pretty danged discouraging with a brand new rifle!

  4. #4
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hodgeman View Post
    I picked up another .270 recently. It's been a long time since I fooled with a .270 very seriously but last time 59gr of H4831 under a 130gr Sierra was just the ticket...
    Where was that load listed....somewhere in the middle? I still need to develop one as well and it just so happens that's the powder I use. Bought some Barnes Xs in 130gr.
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Delta Jct, Alaska
    Posts
    992

    Default

    Those loads are still the best I've found. I keep two 270s in the safe as I have friends that fly to AK and borrow my rifles. Both of those 270s shoot the 130 Barnes TSX over 59 grs H4831 very well. I would still work up to it as different bullets can develop different pressures.

  6. #6
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 4merguide View Post
    Where was that load listed....somewhere in the middle? I still need to develop one as well and it just so happens that's the powder I use. Bought some Barnes Xs in 130gr.
    59gr is max according to Nosler's latest data for their 130gr bullets and it's 1gr under on Hodgdon's data which shows 60gr as the max for both the Sierra 130 and the TSX 130.

    The weird thing is- Nosler data shows 100fps more than the Hodgdon data...which doesn't seem right.

    Like Bernie- I've seen several earlier manuals that show heavier charges.

    It just seems that 4831 and the 270 are like apple pie and ice cream... not much need to experiment.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  7. #7

    Default

    Just a whole lot of "evolution" in 4831 over the years. Without regard for differences in individual lot numbers, there have been so many variations produced, saying "4831" is kinda like saying "Chevy" when talking about cars. And ever blessed one of the 4831's is as different as car models within the Chevy line.

    Old manuals are especially suspect, because in my experience each successive "model" or year of 4831 is a little hotter than the last. The old original 4831 was the slowest of the whole bunch. I still have around 20# of that squirreled away for feeding favorite loads to my older rifles, but I've been using the newer versions for newer guns, just to kinda ween myself. I won't even talk about loads for the original 4831 any more, they're so different than today.

    I will say however, that I drop down a full 10% from my old loads when starting out to develop a load for the newer ones. Let's say ferinstance that my old favorite charge was 67 grains (anonymous caliber and bullet weight), my starting load for a new rifle in the same caliber was 60 grains. I worked all the way back up to 64 grains with the new powder before the loads started scaring me. Once my stash of original runs out, I think I'm going back through my old manuals and will black out all loads for 4831 just to keep someone who inherits my stuff from being stupid. And I'm not kidding!

  8. #8
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    Great info BrownBear! I know that 4831 has changed over the years as well as having both IMR and Hodgdon versions...as well as the new SC version.

    I'm not a brave reloader at all- I'll stick to modern powder and modern manuals for best safe results. A 130 at 3000 or 3100 or 3150 is still flat shooting and should be a good caribou round.

    There's so much info on the 270 floating around- reading a couple of O'Connors old pet loads would scare me to death using new powder.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hodgeman View Post
    ...reading a couple of O'Connors old pet loads would scare me to death using new powder.
    As well they should. And he was one of the more conservative ones! Hodgdon's Manual #23 reports only 48k psi with 60 grains under a 130 in the 270. Right in there with PO Ackley's "reloading manuals" on that one!

  10. #10

    Default

    I shot the 270 for years and H4831 and Remington Cls were magical for me. Sierra Game kings too. I loaded some for a friend a while back to used in an old Ruger 77 tang safety model that he had acquired. Not knowing the gun other than it had been around a while I loaded him 100 rounds with Hornady 130 grain spire points and only 55 grains of H4831sc. He didn't know anything about reloading and I didn't tell him that they were loaded light. It didn't matter he filled several doe tags out to 250 yards and the deer didn't seem to know that they were light loads either.

  11. #11
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elmerkeithclone View Post
    ... with Hornady 130 grain spire points and only 55 grains of H4831sc....and the deer didn't seem to know that they were light loads either.
    That would be like 130@2750fps.... that's about like an old 7x57... no flies on that!

    Since we're talking the .270.... what's the thought on the 150gr bullet? O'Connor wasn't a fan..said it was a "fine hunk of cheese for which there's no excuse."

    Not sure if that's O'Connor hyperbole or whether there's something to it.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    I used the 270 Win to take several moose using 150gr Speer bullets. My current load is 58grs H4831 in Win cases with the Speer 150GS and CCI std lg rifle primers. Velocity is 2840fps. This is a max load in my rifle and shoots well. Normal disclaimer, start low and work up. I shot one moose using a 130gr Hornady which penetrated both shoulders but stopped at the off side shoulder. The 150s make an exit hole.

  13. #13
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    The more I mess with the .270...the better I like it. Not so sure why I've ignored it most of my life. I'm thinking its my loss though.

    I've got a couple boxes of the Trophy Bonded Tipped that look pretty unstoppable on broadside shots.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    4,034

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hodgeman View Post
    The more I mess with the .270...the better I like it. Not so sure why I've ignored it most of my life. I'm thinking its my loss though.

    I've got a couple boxes of the Trophy Bonded Tipped that look pretty unstoppable on broadside shots.
    Because everyone knows you cannot kill a bear or moose with anything smaller than a .30 caliber of a magnum family!

    All kidding aside I've been playing with an old Remington 760 pump and I can't get it to shoot better than about 3 MOA but I really like the caliber, I'll be on the lookout for an old Ruger when I'm down south later this year!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •