270 130gr Accubond load

billyc

billyc

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
Rating - 89.6%
40   5   3
Location
Mid-Western Ontario, Bruce County
I have 3 powders I would like to use. Rl19, 8208xbr, and H4350. Have all 3 of these on hand but none of them are listed in Noslers reloading guide for the 130gr accubond. I was getting 3/4" groups using 57gr of RL19 and 130gr Ballistic tips but i want to shoot the Accubonds. I imagine these bullets will perform very similar. Also got some 1 inch groups from H4350 and 140gr TSX but I'd really like to see if I can get some 1/2 inch groups from the accubonds. Any load info would be greatly appreciated.

Bill
 
Myself and a few friends consistantly work up loads with BT's and then switch to AB's with just about identical results. I don't know if this is the norm but it works for us(cheaper to shoot the BT's at targets!) I bought some 130 AB's myself for 270 but have not got to reloading for it yet.

-Chad
 
GRiNGo said:
Myself and a few friends consistantly work up loads with BT's and then switch to AB's with just about identical results. I don't know if this is the norm but it works for us(cheaper to shoot the BT's at targets!) I bought some 130 AB's myself for 270 but have not got to reloading for it yet.

-Chad
Click to expand...

I was wondering if you could just switch from BT's to Accubonds
 
Since both the Accubonds and the BTs are of the same weight and profile, and if you seat them to the same length, your rifle will never know the difference if you load them both with the same powder charge. The .270 shines with slower burning powder and I think R-19 should be a good choice, although R-22 might produce slightly better velocities with less pressure, as will H-4831. According to the Speer manual, R-19 should perform well with loads from 53-57 grs behind a 130 gr bullet, but the data seems to suggest that you will run into high pressure before you reach the optimum velocity for a 130 in a .270 as they predict 2900 with 57 gr of R-19.

If you need half inch groups from your hunting rifle, the deer on the Bruce Peninsula must have shrunk since I was there, but both the BTs and the Accubonds have a good reputation for accuracy.
 
Load for the bullet weight. Who made it or it's construction, except for Barnes bullets, doesn't matter.
There's H4350 and IMR8208xbr 130 grain data on Hodgdon's site.
RL-19 data on Alliant's site under Speer 130 grain SP.
You'll have to work up the load with whatever powder you opt to use anyway.
 
Boomer said:
Since both the Accubonds and the BTs are of the same weight and profile, and if you seat them to the same length, your rifle will never know the difference if you load them both with the same powder charge. The .270 shines with slower burning powder and I think R-19 should be a good choice, although R-22 might produce slightly better velocities with less pressure, as will H-4831. According to the Speer manual, R-19 should perform well with loads from 53-57 grs behind a 130 gr bullet, but the data seems to suggest that you will run into high pressure before you reach the optimum velocity for a 130 in a .270 as they predict 2900 with 57 gr of R-19.

If you need half inch groups from your hunting rifle, the deer on the Bruce Peninsula must have shrunk since I was there, but both the BTs and the Accubonds have a good reputation for accuracy.
Click to expand...

Heading out to Southern Alberta where shots are typically a lot further then around here
 
Hodgdon's has agreed that Jack O'Connor set the load for a 270 with 130 grain bullets and H4831 surplus powder.
Jack found that 60 grains worked great and he repeatedly wrote that load up in his many shooting articles.
When Hodgdon's got around to testing loads for their surplus powders, they just accepted Jack's loading, which was already so widely used, without even testing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom