.270 win help

ropeNshoot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
90
Location
Sumrall, MS
Guys, I need a little help on which direction to head with this load. I'm shooting a Rem 700 ADL in .270 win. I have a load worked up using 130g SST's and 61g of H4831sc and WLR primers. Bullet is seated 20 thou off the lands and I'm getting groups of three under .5". Why change right? I want to use a 130 Speer Grand Slam as well. My first tests were with this bullet and H4831sc using an OCW method. Group averages were 1.5" at 100yds. Disappointed, I tried H4350. The sighters in my OCW test were all three touching while every group after was 1.5"-2". This was all done at 100yds from a bench and all of the bullets were seated to the published depths. Any suggestions on what direction to go from here?
 
I would try playing with seating depth and see what happens. I've had several bullets that I just had to give up on, because some guns just don't like them no matter what you do. If you want to stick with speer, I've had good luck with the 150gr deep curl.
 
Thanks Goose,

The thing that drives me nuts about all this is that the factory Winchester power point loads shoot cloverleaf groups all day with the occasional one hole group. And my good hand load I mentioned struggles to stay under .5". Da**it this sucks!
 
Come on guys, this thread has had plenty of views! How bout some more suggestions? I'm not knocking Goose, just like a little more feedback
 
Well, your rifle simply may not like Speer bullets, end of story. Some rifles are finicky. Mine do not shoot Hornady bullets well, no matter what kind of time I put into the loads.

I suggest, if you insist on working with the Speer bullets, you try Re19, IMR4831, IMR4350 as well and vary the seating depth. I'd find out what the max of each powder is first. Then load up 3 of each at your rifles max, then compare. Whichever one shoots best, go load more test rounds with varying seating depths.
 
Sorry I am new to this site but live buy my pre 64 270. I am not exactly sure what an OTW test is but I shoot speer grand slam's in 150 grain I have found that they buck the wind better and are far more consistent than the 130's. I have also found that more powder is not the answer. I shoot my 150's with 54 gr of IMR 4831 I have found that less powder often equals more accuracy. Maybe try loading only 60 grains of powder,look for your guns resonate happy spot buy changing powder charges.
 
Thanks. That mirrors what I was thinking because charges of 50.4, 51.5, and 52.6 were all three touching. One shot of each charge and all touching! I considered the fact that maybe less is more but didn't want to believe it. I'll try lighter charges with published seating depth and varying the seating depth on the heavier charges. I'll let y'all know when I have something figured out. May be a couple of weeks as I have to go out of town for work on Sunday.
Again, thanks for everyone's suggestions.
 
SST bullets is very soft compared to the Grand Slam. The shape of a bullet could also change resistance. I think you should download a lettle and you might find the groups to narrow down.
 
130 sciroccos shoot really well out of my fathers 270 and they liked to get pushed hard. Might give them a whirl. The have a similar design to the a-maxes.

Reuben
 
FWIW had a 270 that shot 130s pretty well, but shot 140s like you wouldn't believe. Not trying to muddy the water but sticking to one bullet, or one bullet weight may not yield the best results.
 
I have had great success with Wby vanguard 270 using 58grs RL22, Fed 210 primers, and Winchester brass pushing 130 Accubond. Bang flop and have yet to recover a bullet from deer or hog.
 
FWIW had a 270 that shot 130s pretty well, but shot 140s like you wouldn't believe. Not trying to muddy the water but sticking to one bullet, or one bullet weight may not yield the best results.

I have a friend who had the same problem. His .270Win did not want to group on any 130gr or 150gr bullets. He changed to 140gr and now gets 3 shots cutting one another on the target.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top