130gn vs 150gn

I always found the sweet spot for the 270s to be right at 130. As a one hell of a lot younger dogleg the 270 Win was my main rifle, and for a long time to be honest my only rifle There were a lit if them thiugh. 130s always seemed to be just fine and we used to joke that there wasn’t a bad bullet 130 for a .270 Win.
 
Dogleg said:
I always found the sweet spot for the 270s to be right at 130. As a one hell of a lot younger dogleg the 270 Win was my main rifle, and for a long time to be honest my only rifle There were a lit if them thiugh. 130s always seemed to be just fine and we used to joke that there wasn’t a bad bullet 130 for a .270 Win.
Click to expand...

What’s made the .270 a century long performance benchmark is it was one of the initial three mainstream cartridges along with the .300 H&H, both after the .250-3000, to realize speed’s importance in terminal ballistics rather than SD and bullet weight alone.

Agreed she’s at her best with a 130, as designed.
 
Ardent said:
What’s made the .270 a century long performance benchmark is it was one of the initial three mainstream cartridges along with the .300 H&H, both after the .250-3000, to realize speed’s importance in terminal ballistics rather than SD and bullet weight alone.

Agreed she’s at her best with a 130, as designed.
Click to expand...

The .270 Wn was the common man’s first good look at what 3000 plus velocities actually did; if you don’t
count the 250-3000 . That one was a bit of a hard sell to a market that had their eyes permantly focused on 30 cal; even a 30-30 guy could tell at a glance that that tiny pill simply couldn’t kill anything. ;)

Of course if the common man ever got around to checking out what 35-3600 with a bullet between say 7 and 7.62mm their world view would be shaken. Story for another day. :)
 
Last edited:
Liptugger said:
So shooting a 270, usually always shoot 130gn, but going on a hunt and the deer are bigger and may have opportunity for elk so thought 150gn may be better.
Comparing the same ammo side by side the 150gn is slower and produces less energy and drops more. What if any are the advantages for stepping up to 150gn?
Thank you for your input.
Click to expand...

spent some time with 270, i always tell dudes with a 270 going after Sambar (elk sized) to use the 150gr SP if they are using cup an core stuff , corelokt, super x etc......

premium stuff you can get away with the 130gr, bonded stuff......

i found the 140gr Accubond to be the best.
 
Liptugger said:
So shooting a 270, usually always shoot 130gn, but going on a hunt and the deer are bigger and may have opportunity for elk so thought 150gn may be better.
Comparing the same ammo side by side the 150gn is slower and produces less energy and drops more. What if any are the advantages for stepping up to 150gn?
Thank you for your input.
Click to expand...

I would go with a 130grn Barnes Bullet over the 150grn anything...
But, if it is this hunting season you are trying to develop a load for my rifle ..... I would shoot what I know the current limitations are and be ready for the follow up shot(s).
I did shoot 140grn ballistic tips to very good accuracy in my 270 Remington Mnt rifle back in the day before stepping up to my do all 300 WinMag A-bolt.
Now I have a 7x57 and a 6.5Cm so take my opinion for what it is worth.
Rob
 
130gr. Don't over-think it.

Liptugger said:
So shooting a 270, usually always shoot 130gn, but going on a hunt and the deer are bigger and may have opportunity for elk so thought 150gn may be better.
Comparing the same ammo side by side the 150gn is slower and produces less energy and drops more. What if any are the advantages for stepping up to 150gn?
Thank you for your input.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom