95gr TTSX in... 270wsm?

[MeepDog]

Does anyone have experience with the Barnes TTSX 95gr in .277?

I've heard pushing those lightweight coppers at blistering speeds is the ticket but 95gr out of a 270 seems bonkers. I have a 270wsm and the speed would be way up there but I dont know if theres even load data on a 95gr in a 270wsm.

Sportsmans has them on sale right now so I was curious if any of ya'll have loaded this bullet. Is it possible the bullet is designed for like 6.8spc or something like that? I'm going to get Barnes on the phone

[elkslayer069]

Nosler has 100 grain load data i would start there

[EnglishSetter]

No personal knowledge, but....

Since there's nearly no weight loss, consider it to be like 120gr as far as the animal is concerned.

My buddy uses 185gr Barnes in his 338 up through elk.

[raydog]

From Barnes website

[EnglishSetter]

From Barnes website

that's weird.  When I pull up Barnes for .277 I don't see 270 WSM listed at all.

[Bob33]

The sectional density of a 95 grain bullet in 270 is about .177. The sectional density of an 80 grain bullet in .257 is about .173. I shoot an 80 grain TTSX bullet out of a 257 Weatherby at about 3950 ft/second with excellent results on deer and antelope.

[Griiz]

From Barnes website

that's weird.  When I pull up Barnes for .277 I don't see 270 WSM listed at all.

Barnes makes bullets for .270 that you can handload yourself. They just might not manufacture complete bullets ready to shoot. I have some barnes bullets that I have handloaded for my 270 wsm, but use hornady interlocks in 140gr because they shoot accurately and have done well on game animals.

[jrebel]

Does anyone have experience with the Barnes TTSX 95gr in .277?

I've heard pushing those lightweight coppers at blistering speeds is the ticket but 95gr out of a 270 seems bonkers. I have a 270wsm and the speed would be way up there but I dont know if theres even load data on a 95gr in a 270wsm.

Sportsmans has them on sale right now so I was curious if any of ya'll have loaded this bullet. Is it possible the bullet is designed for like 6.8spc or something like that? I'm going to get Barnes on the phone

file:///C:/Users/jrebel/Downloads/Hammer%20Hunter%20Post%2011-4-24%20(.17-.270%20cal).pdf

If that link doesn't work....go to this link and and click on the PDF file for load data.  Keep in mind, this is load data documented by reloaders and their experiences with their rifles.  Start with a safe load and work up to pressure.  I have very limited experience with the TTSX but have extensive experience with Hammers.  I would think load data would be very similar for the two monos. 

https://hammerbullets.com/hammertime/threads/hammer-hunter-load-data.7/

For what it is worth......Hammer Bullets love speed.  That .270 wsm should push a 80-100 grain bullet upwards of 4K feet per second.  I am pushing a 80 grain HHT out of a 6.5 creed at 3600-3700 and still working the load.  At the speeds your talking....and with Hammer Bullets.....I would not look at the tipped hammers (HHT's) but rather the AH or HH line.  Shooting monos fast is super fun and devastating on game.  That said, I have learned to balance speed and weight with mono's and have been very happy. 

Report back and let us know how this plays out. 
 

[MeepDog]

The sectional density of a 95 grain bullet in 270 is about .177. The sectional density of an 80 grain bullet in .257 is about .173. I shoot an 80 grain TTSX bullet out of a 257 Weatherby at about 3950 ft/second with excellent results on deer and antelope.

Holy moly thats fast. I ran a comparison calculator with the 130gr TTSX going 3200 with that 95gr going 3700 and the 130 retain a whole lot more energy. For a 270 WSM to drop under 1k foot lbs energy at 500 is a bit quick. I bet that 95gr would be devastating inside of 200yard on just about anything though.

[Stein]

I load the 95 grain in a .243 for my daughter's rifle.  It kills deer and antelope plenty dead.  I shoot the 168s in my 30-06, they don't have to be going unreasonably fast, I think 1500 fps at impact to open if I remember right, when I worked up the loads I set max range at 300 fps over what they told me was the minimum.

[Skillet]

I load the 95 grain in a .243 for my daughter's rifle.  It kills deer and antelope plenty dead.  I shoot the 168s in my 30-06, they don't have to be going unreasonably fast, I think 1500 fps at impact to open if I remember right, when I worked up the loads I set max range at 300 fps over what they told me was the minimum.

Not to hijack, but what's your max range based in that criteria?  I have some 168's I plan on loading my '06 with

[zwickeyman]

On the Hammer site with a 100gr Mono (this is starting loads)

RL15      57 gr @ 3715
RL16      62 gr @ 3480
RL17      62 gr @ 3425
Varget    57 gr @ 3560
H4831    67 gr @ 3575
IMR4064 58 gr @ 3575
IMR4350 64 gr @ 3645

[BigGoonTuna]

3700 out of a 270 WSM almost seems a on the low end of the scale, since their data for the regular old .270 Win is over 3600.  Might just be hitting the point of diminishing return.

I haven't loaded the 95gr in anything, but I have worked up some loads for the 110gr TTSX over 3400fps in my 270. Haven't shot anything with it but paper but they're pretty accurate.

[Stein]

I load the 95 grain in a .243 for my daughter's rifle.  It kills deer and antelope plenty dead.  I shoot the 168s in my 30-06, they don't have to be going unreasonably fast, I think 1500 fps at impact to open if I remember right, when I worked up the loads I set max range at 300 fps over what they told me was the minimum.

Not to hijack, but what's your max range based in that criteria?  I have some 168's I plan on loading my '06 with

Kinda depends on deer or elk.  If you subscribe to the 1500 ft lbs for elk, that's the limiting factor and I'm at about 425 yards which is my limit.  For smaller animals, it will hold 1700 fps out to 625 yards at 1100 ft lbs. 

I verified Barnes recommends 1500 fps for the 168 but you have to check as it's different for different calibers and weights, some are up to 2000 fps.

[MeepDog]

3700 out of a 270 WSM almost seems a on the low end of the scale, since their data for the regular old .270 Win is over 3600.  Might just be hitting the point of diminishing return.

I haven't loaded the 95gr in anything, but I have worked up some loads for the 110gr TTSX over 3400fps in my 270. Haven't shot anything with it but paper but they're pretty accurate.

Yeah the 110gr makes more sense to me than a 95gr, but if those lightweight bullets grouped well I'd have some tough decisions to make.