.270 130 vs 150 grain
- Thread starter swinginberrys
- Start date
Have you lung shot deer with it, I'm curious if a heavy for caliber SST is still as destructive even when not hitting bone? I almost bought a box of those last week. And I take it you found them accurate?
Yep. My gun (Savage 111) loves 'em.
Doesn't seem to matter where you hit a deer with them, the wound channel is devastating. The bullets do shed weight as they penetrate though, so if you have an allergy to that then they are not for you.
Ya thanks. I shot a couple deer with 165 SST out of my 30-06 and they were definitely destructive. Was curious if they beefed up the jacket on the 270 150 SST making it a bit more stout , I've heard they sometimes do that on the heavier cup and core bullets. This bullet strikes me as a good economical alternative for a long range bullet if one didn't want to buck up for accubonds.
I use 130gr hornady interlocks at 2900ft out of a 22in Remington 7600 and shoot 1.5in at 200. I have yet to recover a slug and that's the way I like it. My father uses 150gr interlocks in a 22in BSA Majestic at 2980 and as killed deer at stupid long ranges. The 150's have better trajectory at long range (larger mass retains energy better). Longest shot I've made was 364 yards (Bushnell 1200 rangefinder from kill to vehicle parked where shot was taken). Both will work, try some and find out.
Plenty of people would argue the point, but I agree 100%.
BTW the 150 SST is on the stouter side (for a "standard" cup n' core) so for even better performance you can anneal them. They'll expand more readily at lower velocities (long range) and will also not fragment as readily at higher velocities, since they'll be less "brittle". Some good reading here: http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.270+Winchester.html
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
I have shot deer in the lungs with the SST.Not in .270 mind you.It was 7mm-08 139gr touching on 2900 ft/sec at the muzzle.Accuracy was very good.
Was a textbook lung shot on a running animal at about 150-175 yards.
Animal hit the dirt like a sack of spuds.
After I skinned it I found out why.
A portion of the fragments destroyed the loins and damaged the spine causing the immediate reaction.I don't like being punished for well placed shots.
The was the last time I used them on game animals.Not all times it was as devastating and sometimes was worse.
I switched to Swift SC II for my game loads and have have been more than pleased.
View my thread on my coyote and it will show results out of a 7mm WSM.
I do like them loaded in .270 as well.
Was a textbook lung shot on a running animal at about 150-175 yards.
Animal hit the dirt like a sack of spuds.
After I skinned it I found out why.
A portion of the fragments destroyed the loins and damaged the spine causing the immediate reaction.I don't like being punished for well placed shots.
The was the last time I used them on game animals.Not all times it was as devastating and sometimes was worse.
I switched to Swift SC II for my game loads and have have been more than pleased.
View my thread on my coyote and it will show results out of a 7mm WSM.
I do like them loaded in .270 as well.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Way I see it, if you want heavy bullets in your .270, you should be shooting a .280. If you want one of the flattest trajectories going (can equal .257 Weatherby, from a non-magnum) and quick "shock" kills, use the .270. I actually think it was ahead of its time, I'm presently loading the 110gr TTSX with mountain goat / sheep in mind.
Have a look at IMR 7828. Shot a .855" group at 215 yards. Need to retry to confirm...
freddyfour
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County, Ontario
Good luck finding any of these!
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Got my .270 loaded with 150gr Partitions over H4831. Will see how they perform on elk.
