160 gr. partition in 270 Win.

[Dr. Vette]

I have been using Norma MRP and am down to around 3lbs left and from what I can find out Norma powders will never be available again here in North America.

Take care
Ed

I reached out to Powder Valley today, and they confirmed that Norma Powders were discontinued in the US two years ago.
That really stinks, as I have 3 rifles that shoot well with MRP and very little of it left.
Thankfully I have some ammo loaded for each, so I have some time to find new loads.

 

[Bruce Mc]

I guess I should be glad that my rifle wouldn't group with MRP and the 160 gr. IMR 7828 showed some promise but I haven't continued load development with it. I pushed off into Reloder 26 which I no longer have any left to continue.

 

[450 Fuller]

With the 160-150 gr Nosler Partition bullets, most game from mule deer to elk and moose , even bear
can be taken. H-4831 is similar in rate to H-450, and can be very effective in the 270 WCF. I have found
that for 1950s pre-64 Model 70s, H-4350, IMR-4350 , H-4831 SC and H-450 even H-870 works well. 4350 and 4831 are accurate powders in 270 Win.

*Older threads save time and reflect both older components use and hunter experience. Neither of which is available
from youngsters with 22s or at the local WalMart.

 

[PJGunner]

I guess I ought to chase down a few 160 gr. Partitions to try in my .270s. I suspect finding an accurate load won't be a problem. I've found, at least for the four .270 rifles I have, finding and accurate load with decent velocity has been quite easy. Frankly, I never did much with any 130 gr. bullet other than early on when I got my first .270. Didn't like the damage on deer meat so switched to 150 gr. bullets and never looked back. Most game taken has been using the 150 gr. Sierra game Kings and the last animal, an antelope back in 2009. I took the rifle as a back up on a couple of elk hunts but didn't need to go to that rifle.

I run two loads for the .270, both using the same charge of WMR which is no longer produced. Either the 150 gr. Game King or the 150 gr. Nosler Partition. Groups run about the same in three rifles, about .75" on average. The oddball is a Ruger #1A that I got for a decent price from a friend whom I bought several other firearms before he passed away. When I took it out it like so many other Ruger #1s just didn't group worth spit. The previous owner had sanded away the pressure bump at the tip of the forearm and did a lousy attempt at free floating the barrel. I cleaned up the free float slightly and used a piece of old credit card epoxied in place where the "bump" used to be. On a good day, and I do my part, I can get close to one inch but so far it hasn't shot worse than 1.5" since the fix. That one will hunt.

I really don't know why I didn't use the .270 more than I did? There certainly isn't anything wrong with that cartridge.
Paul B.

 

[gerry]

An old thread come to life again! Since posting 11 years ago when I had no experience with the 160 gr Partition it's now one of my favorite bullets in the 270 Win. Usually quite accurate and performs great on bigger game. Going to try them in the 6.8 Western this coming year when things settle down.

 

[filmjunkie4ever]

Speer used to make a 170 grain Roundnose in .277 caliber that while not a Partition would be excellent on the same kind of larger non dangerous game.

The .270 has my complete respect as a hunting rifle but to me, if I need more than a 150 grain bullet I likely would grab a 7mm or .30 caliber rifle rather than loading heavier in the .270. But then I have several rifles to choose from. Not everyone does.

I’m kind of a late-comer to the .270, mine is an heirloom. I used it to get my cow elk last year. The 130 grain Sierra Gamekings worked well. I look forward to using it more in the future, its a great round!

 

[cloverleaf]

I just have to ask. Just how much accuracy is really needed for hunting a big game animal? I know it's nice to shoot tiny groups with your loudenboomerkickenharder but are they really necessary or in reality an ego trip. :shock:
I can't speak for anyone else but I've never carried a bench rest around on any of my big game hunts. :roll: I came to the conclusion that as long as the rifle I'm using will consistantaly shoot into 1.5" or less, then it's good to go. Do I have rifles that shoot tighter groups? Yes. Thankfully most of them do. Sadly one of my very favorite rifles does not. It took a bit over two years to get it to be a consistant 1.5" gun and lately with a bit if minor tinkering it's closer to 1.25" these days. The gun is also a one trick pony. It's a Ruger M77 tang safety RSI, the little Mannicher stocked model. I got into it cheap because the previous owner could not get it to group. It took two years playing with different powder and bullet weights before there was any success. What did finally work was a stiff charge of W760 and the 165 gr. Speer Hot Core. Velocity is not all that great according to those who prefer speed but at 2550 FPS it's more than adequate to at least 250 yards which is, so far, the longest shot I've had to take on a Mule Deer. So far, the record with that rifle is 15 deer with 15 shots. What's not to like?
Paul B.

I guess I would agree. O'Connor suggested as much as well. I think, to be able to hit a 4 inch bull CONSISTIENTLY in all kinds of weather from various positions, should probably dictate what my effective range should be. (I will confess right here I cant do that yet). However, the reality is that most of us who hunt do not have an opportunity to "wander with weapons" often enough to make or stumble on to those shot or learning opportunities. So we trade our lack of discretionary time to hunt for discretionary income which we spend on a cartridge that might reach a little farther, a rifle that will provide the chance for a follow up shot, or a scope that will let us see the cross hairs another ten minutes. Additionally, the opportunities to hunt are now a means of revenue for whatever entity, even though usually for the betterment of the sport, it also limits the opportunity for most of us.
So we, if not careful, (I'm guilty) stretch the range, or take a less than perfect shot, though not always intentionally. This plays right into the folks who make and sell all the stuff we use and enjoy. Pretty much always has, to some extent always will. John Browning built a better rifle, no way would I turn one down for a Hawken, at least not back in the day. Dosent make Mr. Browning responsible for decimating bison populations either does it?
Back to my point, I see these muli-thousand dollar rifle set ups, that might shoot bug holes. Would I turn one down to try - heck no! thats part of the fun! And I not judging some one who enjoys using the latest equipment to shoot 1000 yards. (on game is a different discussion- I'm not qualified to weigh in on) But I am also happy with a rifle that challenges my ability to shoot a 1 inch group at 100 yards off the bags. Yup- I guess I've reached to point where I can get a few yards closer if I want a smaller group. Age I suppose. Took me a long time to just learn to "hold on the hair" and work the rest of the fundamentals to try and make a good shot. 300 yards is a long shot for my skill level, with a rest. Some days the equipment can do better. My point is, I'm still working on that 4 in bull off hand at 100 yards no matter how accurate or pricy the rifle. Truth be told, I bet most of us are, but the effort is at least half the fun. CL