New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
#12
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
The new bulletI like a lot is the Tipped Trophy bonded bear claw. But the price is going to be outrageous though.
The new bulletI like a lot is the Tipped Trophy bonded bear claw. But the price is going to be outrageous though.
#13
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
appears only offered through federal premium ammo??
I looked at the Federal published information with the .270 Winchester140 grain regular TBBChigh energyload and the new Tipped bear claw in 130 grain. Even though the standard loading of the 130 grain tipped bullet starts out 40 fps slower it quickly passes the heavier and initially faster 140 grain bullet of the old style.
#14
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
It says its a nickel plated bullet!!!!
Nickel is very hard, can you imagine the damage and effects it will have on the bore of your rifle!!!!!!
NO THANKS, not in my rifles!!!!!!!!!
Nickel is very hard, can you imagine the damage and effects it will have on the bore of your rifle!!!!!!
NO THANKS, not in my rifles!!!!!!!!!
#15
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
ORIGINAL: Pawildman
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
I see the ballistic coefficient for that bullet is a mere .377. Pretty poor. But that would probably not make much difference out to 300 yardfs or so.....
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: S.W. Pa.-- Heart in North Central Pa. mountains-
Posts: 2,600
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
ORIGINAL: eldeguello
Why wouldn't it? Is it LONGER than the 150-grains Seirra Gameking PSPBT?
I see the ballistic coefficient for that bullet is a mere .377. Pretty poor. But that would probably not make much difference out to 300 yardfs or so.....
ORIGINAL: Pawildman
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
I see the ballistic coefficient for that bullet is a mere .377. Pretty poor. But that would probably not make much difference out to 300 yardfs or so.....
#17
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 3,192
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
ORIGINAL: Pawildman
Well, I guess I was questioning it's length. I was wondering if it was too short for adequate stabilization in the normal twist of .270 barrels....???
ORIGINAL: eldeguello
Why wouldn't it? Is it LONGER than the 150-grains Seirra Gameking PSPBT?
I see the ballistic coefficient for that bullet is a mere .377. Pretty poor. But that would probably not make much difference out to 300 yardfs or so.....
ORIGINAL: Pawildman
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
Wonder if it will stabilize in the standard twist .270 barrels?
I see the ballistic coefficient for that bullet is a mere .377. Pretty poor. But that would probably not make much difference out to 300 yardfs or so.....
PA I am with you on this one. I honestly do not know if it would stabilize or not?? I understand some of the other guy's saying it will stabilize. And they may very well be right. I am not a 270 fan-so I do nor have a lot of experience with a 270. 20 or 30 grains of weight can make a difference in some caliber's.
Also velocity is a part of stabilization, and no one has spoken about velocity.
Personally I think these loads are over priced HYPE. IMO. Practice is what makes you a better long range shooter, not ammo. Tom.
#18
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
The required twist rate is determined by velocity and the bullet length.
The longer the bullet the faster the twist rate must be in order to stabilize the bullet.
The shorter the bullet the slower the twist rate can be to impart stabilization to the bullet but it doesn't have to be slower.
The higher the velocity the slower the twist rate can be for any given bullet length.
The lower the velocity the faster the twist ratemuct be in order to stabilize a given bullet length.
With few exceptions do not worry about a bullet being too short. You can not over stabilize a bullet.The main exception being lightly constructed varmint bullets in very fast small bore centerfires. If spun too fast they tend to come apart on their way to the target. An example would be a 220 Swift firing a 40 grain V-Max with a twist rate of 1 in 8.
A standard .270 barrel has a twist rate of 1 in 10 inches. Which is fast enough to stabilize any bullet from 90 grains to 160 grains.
The longer the bullet the faster the twist rate must be in order to stabilize the bullet.
The shorter the bullet the slower the twist rate can be to impart stabilization to the bullet but it doesn't have to be slower.
The higher the velocity the slower the twist rate can be for any given bullet length.
The lower the velocity the faster the twist ratemuct be in order to stabilize a given bullet length.
With few exceptions do not worry about a bullet being too short. You can not over stabilize a bullet.The main exception being lightly constructed varmint bullets in very fast small bore centerfires. If spun too fast they tend to come apart on their way to the target. An example would be a 220 Swift firing a 40 grain V-Max with a twist rate of 1 in 8.
A standard .270 barrel has a twist rate of 1 in 10 inches. Which is fast enough to stabilize any bullet from 90 grains to 160 grains.
#19
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
how outrageous can this ammo be? more than say fed premium 270s loaded with 150 noslers? or some other premo bullet? sure it won't be $10 a box or even $20, but hey if you love the load, who cares, less you're talking about plinking 100 rounds of the stuff each weekend. I just have never got the ammo cost argument......if you do a ton of shooting, sure maybe you can save a few hundred bucks a year? or am I wrong? can you save 1000's of dollars? seems like if you do that much shooting you reload those premo loads already at a discount. and if not, it doesnt really matter since you're only shooting 1-4 boxes of the stuff a year.
Also as said before, have to see if your rifle likes the stuff, my one rifle likes the cheapers ammo available, and I don't argue with it, if it shot the most expenisve Id buy that stuff.
Also as said before, have to see if your rifle likes the stuff, my one rifle likes the cheapers ammo available, and I don't argue with it, if it shot the most expenisve Id buy that stuff.
#20
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 130
RE: New Federal load for the old 270 Win.
I thought about trying this stuff out, but at around $50 a box here in Manitoba, I think I will stick with hornady 130 gr. SST's. I can get two boxes for the price of one and know I have sub 1" groups.