270 cal 135 matchking

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by Calvin45, Jun 22, 2019.


Help Support Long Range Hunting by donating:


  1. Calvin45

    Calvin45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    244
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    any of you ever play with the 135 grain Sierra matchking in a 270 Winchester? Or a .270 of any flavour? I have not and wouldn’t plan to hunt with it, but am intrigued by it as perhaps being a means to see just how accurate my rifle has the potential to be. I’ve always heard matchkings are less sensitive to seating depth than many match type bullets and in general easy to get good accuracy with. Anyone ever work with them in a 270?
     
  2. James Bertolini

    James Bertolini Member

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2018
    Hi Calvin 45 I'am fairly new here and I tried the 135 gr. sierra matchking with Imr 4831 touching holes at 100 yards off the bench . 57.7grains .270 win. Also used Ramshot magnum not as good 3/4inch group at 100 yrds. Could have been me.This is with Shilen 24 inch barrel .
     
    Frog4aday likes this.
  3. Calvin45

    Calvin45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    244
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Hey thanks for the reply! I was starting to wonder if no one had ever used these.
     
  4. Frog4aday

    Frog4aday Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    471
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    I was curious about this thread and was 'watching' it. I think most .270 Win shooters are 'hunters' and since it isn't a hunting bullet, it gets very little attention and love. But for a guy or gal looking to "see what she'll do" a MatchKing bullet is never a wrong choice. Glad to hear James Bertolini gave them a try and has info to share. Thanks James.
     
  5. Calvin45

    Calvin45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    244
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Yeah I know, it seems there are few smallbore calibers as purely dedicated “hunting only” as 277. The 10 twist cripples it’s capability compared to the 6.5 and 7mm diameters surrounding it for distance work, and for whatever reason it must have been declared in its infancy that this bore diameter would never even be experimented with for match type cartridges and bullets. Perhaps it’s just as well, it does one thing and does it fantastically well with no fuss. But I’d love to see more options for it, I love shooting my 270 just for fun and can’t possibly be alone, and while cheap soft points are cheaper than match bullets, the same is not true for the hunting bullets with bc comparable to match bullets.

    I doubt I’ll even hear back but I emailed nosler about the possibility of an rdf bullet in .277 diameter. Bergers are great I’m sure but too pricey for what I’m talking about here.
     
    Frog4aday likes this.
  6. Frog4aday

    Frog4aday Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    471
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Hey Calvin45, I agree with you. The .270 Win is a classic and fine hunting cartridge. It just excels for hunting lower 48 and Hawaiian game. It would have made a great 'target' cartridge, too, if anyone had been so inclined, but as you said, being 'bracketed' by the 7mm and 6.5mm guns, no one really felt the need to take the .270 Win down the 'target' rifle road. And that's fine.

    I've yet to have a .270 Win that wouldn't shoot sub-MOA (knock on wood.) I'm probably just lucky in that experience, but the round is capable of very fine accuracy. There will always be haters, and they can shoot what makes them feel special. It's all good.

    I just got a Rem 700 in .270 with a 1 in 9 twist. I'm going to load up some 160gr Partitions and see how the gun likes those. Figured it would be a good elk/moose load if it shoots well.

    Post up if Nosler responds to your RDF bullet request in .277; that would be interesting.
     
  7. Calvin45

    Calvin45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    244
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    I certainly will let you know. Yeah it’d be kind of redundant to try making the 277 bore a competition/target/elr contender at this point, the bases are covered, but there’s got to be a truly incredible amount of 270 win rifles out there and people who like options, so I can’t see why there’d be no interest at all.

    I agree about accuracy too...I think simply because it’s a hunting cartridge almost always chambered in sporter weight rifles the assumption is that the 270 cartridge itself just simply isn’t as accurate as some well known accuracy rounds, but that hasn’t been my observation. The other thing I like about it is it’s seldom picky. There have only been two projectiles, one factory and one hand loaded, that my cheap savage 270 has not liked. It can do under an inch at times, but for my hunting what I love about it is that apart from the two bullets mentioned there’s honestly nothing it doesn’t put inside 1.5”. That is remarkable to me. Perhaps the fact that the 1:10 twist sees no variation means the bullet makers have all had to design projectiles optimal for that twist, whereas with the 22, 24, 25, 26, 28, and 30 calibers there’s always been variability in what twist has been selected. Additionally, for a long long time the only 270 was the 270 Winchester, then the weatherby, and nothing else until recently. So projectiles were built around the dimensions of that one cartridge, dedicated.
     
  8. Frog4aday

    Frog4aday Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    471
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    This right here! ^
    That is the beauty of the .270 - it was the only one for so many years. So everything was 'simple' for the bullet and brass makers. 1 in 10 twist. Usually a 22" barrel (sometimes 24"). The reamers were standard. No funny business to be found with longer or shorter forcing cones or odd-ball twist rates. Never really thought about all that until your post. Good insight!
     
  9. Calvin45

    Calvin45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    244
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    I almost forgot, I said I'd let you guys know either way about what Nosler said...it's not good :( The individual who got back to me said that honestly there's next to no chance of that happening unless a .27 cal cartridge is designed explicitly for long range shooting with heavy for caliber bullets, but they did say they'd let those higher up than themselves know of the expressed interest, so maybe if enough people want something like this it could happen.
     
  10. Frog4aday

    Frog4aday Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    471
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Thanks for the follow-up. It's nice someone from Nosler responded. Market forces being what they are, I can understand their reluctance to make a bullet for such a small, limited market. That being said, there is some marketing genius to MAKING such a bullet when no one else does. You become the 'go-to' for the few seeking such a bullet. And it becomes a chicken-vs-egg deal; there is no market because there are no bullets so people go to another caliber. Maybe if there were bullets, the market would increase?

    Probably not though. Seems 6.5mm is the 'hot-new-sexy' thing. Then the 6mm with heavy for caliber bullets is gaining ground, too. Moving FARTHER from the .270 toward lower recoiling rounds. Makes sense. If I'm going to be putting a lot of rounds on target, I want accurate, great BC, and the less recoil the better. Speaking of which, I thought the .224 Valkyrie would take off more than it has. Wonder what's going on there?