collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: .270 160 gr  (Read 4381 times)

Offline jdb

  • the illustious potentate
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 3797
  • Location: selah
.270 160 gr
« on: November 01, 2016, 07:38:26 PM »
So I don't have a back up big game rifle, but I have encore, so I'm going to buy a .270 barrel, and I'm thinking about shooting 160 gr partitions. Any input??
nuke the gray whales for jesus!

Offline 724wd

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 3884
  • Location: Spokane
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2016, 08:37:14 PM »
why so heavy?  140's shoot REALLY good out of a .270.

Offline PlateauNDN

  • Y.A.R. Medicine Man
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 10691
  • Location: God's Country
  • R.I.P. Colockumelk 20130423. Semper Fi!
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2016, 08:43:47 PM »
My .270 loves the blue box of federals 140 gr. Knocked down deer and elk no problem.
If you can read thank a teacher, If you can read in English thank a Marine! 
Not as Lean, Just as Mean, Still a Marine!
He who shed blood with me shall forever be my brother!

"Around this camp, there's only one Chief; the rest are Indians!"

"Give me 15 more minutes, I was dreaming of Beavers!"

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 39203
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2016, 08:48:01 PM »
The 160 grain Partitions will do great. It's just like using 180's in the 30/06. The only reason I might be reluctant to try them in the Encore, is that recoil might be a little too much.

Offline yakimarcher

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 707
  • Location: Naches, WA
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2016, 08:53:45 PM »
Most .270 barrels don't have enough twist for a 160.

Online jrebel

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+24)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Posts: 11341
  • Location: East Wenatchee
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2016, 08:54:08 PM »
My .270 loves the 150 partitions.  I would imagine 160s would work fine also if you can get the rifle to shoot them.  Any of the 140 /150 /160 partitions would be devastating on any game in North America out a .270.  good luck and if you get the 160s to work...make sure to post your recipe. 

Offline NRA4LIFE

  • Site Sponsor
  • Past Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2007
  • Posts: 6057
  • Location: Maple Valley
  • Groups: NRA
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2016, 09:22:47 PM »
What Yakimarcher said.  A little much for a .270.  I have never reloaded past 150.  I prefer 130 for deer.
Look man, some times you just gotta roll the dice

Offline theleo

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Kennewick
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2016, 07:39:16 AM »
I wouldn't go heavier than 150 grains, there's just no real good reason to unless you're just trying to slow it down for brush hunting.

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21759
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2016, 07:47:45 AM »
The 160 grain Partitions will do great. It's just like using 180's in the 30/06. The only reason I might be reluctant to try them in the Encore, is that recoil might be a little too much.
To be more precise, a 160 grain out of a 270 is closer to a 200 grain out of a 30 caliber (.308). Using sectional density as the standard, the equivalent bullet weight to a 180 grain in 30 caliber would be a 145 grain in .277.

I would personally choose something lighter than 160 in a 270, but if it shoots well it should work fine.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 39203
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2016, 08:05:36 AM »
The 160 grain Partitions will do great. It's just like using 180's in the 30/06. The only reason I might be reluctant to try them in the Encore, is that recoil might be a little too much.
To be more precise, a 160 grain out of a 270 is closer to a 200 grain out of a 30 caliber (.308). Using sectional density as the standard, the equivalent bullet weight to a 180 grain in 30 caliber would be a 145 grain in .277.

I would personally choose something lighter than 160 in a 270, but if it shoots well it should work fine.

Yeah, I just meant it's like using the heaviest that's generally available. Bullet weight isn't really that critical. I say use whatever you have confidence in. It could also be said that there's no need to use 130 grain bullets, or 150 grain, just use 140 grain. It's really just personal preference along with finding a bullet that shoots good groups in a particular rifle.

Offline jdb

  • the illustious potentate
  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2007
  • Posts: 3797
  • Location: selah
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2016, 08:22:48 AM »
I have a semi custom model 700 in .270 as my primary hunting rifle. I shoot 130 grain accubonds out of it, my idea here is I stick with the .270 to simplify life in terms of on hand components i.e. I already have 100's of brass. But I want something ballistically dissimilar. This would primarily be a truck gun/back up gun. I thought that with there long heavy profile they'd penetrate like no tomorrow.
nuke the gray whales for jesus!

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21759
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2016, 08:30:11 AM »
Bullet choices and weights will be debated forever, as long as campfires exist.

The use of "heavy for caliber" bullets like a 160 grain in .277 caliber made a lot of sense in the days when bullets did hold together well. Most big game bullets today are designed to retain more weight: some as high as 100%. This allows the use of lighter bullets that can still penetrate, if that is your preference. Some hunters prefer bullets that enter, quickly expand, and expend all their energy inside the animal.

The adage that slow, heavy bullets "bust brush" better than lighter, faster bullets has been disproven.

Pick the bullet you like, shoot it enough at targets to understand its trajectory and accuracy limitations, and go hunting.

Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline Firedogg

  • Past Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2014
  • Posts: 987
  • Location: Eatonville
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2016, 11:16:27 AM »
 If you are thinking more penetration look to bullet construction, not weight. The Barnes TSX/TTSX gives great penetration along with full mushrooming and weight retention.
  Modern design bullets are doing some interesting things for our old calibers changing the way we used to think about them.
There is no greater respect to have for wildlife than to harvest an animal fairly and use it's flesh to feed your family.  ~me

Offline theleo

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 1212
  • Location: Kennewick
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2016, 11:33:10 AM »
A 160 Partition will penetrate like crazy but no more than a 130 grain TTSX or a 150 grain A-frame.

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 39203
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: .270 160 gr
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2016, 11:34:13 AM »
A 160 Partition will penetrate like crazy but no more than a 130 grain TTSX or a 150 grain A-frame.

That's true but it might make a bigger hole.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

AUCTION: SE Idaho DIY Deer or Deer/Elk Hunt by WoolyRunner
[Today at 06:39:13 PM]


2025 Montana alternate list by Wingin it
[Today at 06:28:33 PM]


Son drawn - Silver Dollar Youth Any Elk - Help? by VickGar
[Today at 06:00:54 PM]


A lonely Job... by AL WORRELLS KID
[Today at 03:53:25 PM]


MA-10 Coho by WAcoueshunter
[Today at 02:08:31 PM]


KODIAK06 2025 trail cam and personal pics thread by kodiak06
[Today at 01:52:01 PM]


Blue Mtn Foothills West Rifle Tag by Trooper
[Today at 01:18:40 PM]


GROUSE 2025...the Season is looming! by Dave Workman
[Today at 01:01:22 PM]


50 inch SXS and Tracks? by jrebel
[Today at 11:20:33 AM]


Sockeye Numbers by Southpole
[Today at 11:12:46 AM]


3 pintails by metlhead
[Today at 11:07:43 AM]


Modified game cart... 🛒 by Dan-o
[Today at 08:44:37 AM]


Velvet by Brute
[Today at 08:37:08 AM]


Calling Bears by hunter399
[Today at 06:12:44 AM]


HUNTNNW 2025 trail cam thread and photos by kodiak06
[Today at 05:43:11 AM]


Lizard Cam by NOCK NOCK
[Today at 04:48:54 AM]


Pocket Carry by Westside88
[Yesterday at 09:33:35 PM]


2025 Coyotes by JakeLand
[Yesterday at 07:15:03 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal