.270 AI owners sound off ...

[FEENIX]

Inspired by @JM97850 post https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/270-ackley-improved.225460/

Mine is a Savage 110 LA with 30" SS Lilja 1:8" 3G #6 with JP Enterprise Beenie Cooley brake, B&C carbelite stock. Current accuracy load is with 175 Matrix VLD propelling the 175 Matrix VLD at 2993 FPS using H4831 SC, WW brass, CCI BR2, .020" off the lands. Optic is Burris Veracity 4-20 FFP with Horus Vision ASLI on 20 MOA base.

(Coyote @ 525 yards)

I only know about 5 or so here thus far ...

 

[JM97850]

Only had mine for a few weeks. It is based on my old Rem 700 270 win mountain rifle, Trigger tech trigger, Bell and Carlson Monte Carlo stock, and a Pac-Nor #4 sporter 1 in 8 twist w/26.5" finished barrel length. Optics are a VV 6-24. Current accuracy load is 60.5 grains of H1000, 170 Berger EOL's, Winchester primer. .012 off lands. 2982 fps with an ES of 9.

 

[Schnyd112]

Not a .270 ai, but a wsm in a Kimber Montana. Still learning it, slow twist so I am shooting 117 hammer hunters at 3300 FPS over h4831sc. Chasing Nevada antelope starting Friday.

Probably going to test h4350 with the same bullet after antelope but deer in October.

 

[matt_3479]

Inspired by @JM97850 post https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/270-ackley-improved.225460/

Mine is a Savage 110 LA with 30" SS Lilja 1:8" 3G #6 with JP Enterprise Beenie Cooley brake, B&C carbelite stock. Current accuracy load is with 175 Matrix VLD propelling the 175 Matrix VLD at 2983 FPS using H4831 SC, WW brass, CCI BR2, .020" off the lands. Optics is Burris Veracity 4-20 FFP with Hirus Vision ASLI on 20 MOA base.
View attachment 146953
View attachment 146954
View attachment 146955
(Coyote @ 525 yards)

I only know about 5 or so here thus far ...

Curious if you know the bc on the 175gr matrix vld. They post the 165 but say nothing on the 175?

Also have you tested the 165 against the 175 for hunting medium/big game?

 

[FEENIX]

Curious if you know the bc on the 175gr matrix vld. They post the 165 but say nothing on the 175?

Also have you tested the 165 against the 175 for hunting medium/big game?

Post number 24 was an estimate. I have tested the matrix 175 here is the info for my testing.

G7=.3225

G1=.6435

My friend who has a similar test method as me has tested the 165 matrix at the following,

G1=.638

That would make the G7=.319

Good luck, make sure your scope tracks when your figuring out your drop data, if the click values are off on your scope it will mess up your solutions from your ballistics program and you will be chasing velocity and BC numbers trying to get it to match.

Mulehunters numbers are a dang good place to start IMO, depending on the program you use it will get you out there a ways. With the 165 I can use a G1 BC of .650 in Loadbase and it will be nuts on to 1890 yards, using Applied Ballistics program a G7 BC of .314 work very well this last weekend shooting 1001 and 1890 yards, a G1 needs to be stepped to get out there that far.
Very fun shooting a 270 WSM that far, it holds it own rather well!! I just passed 800 rounds on this barrel and the throat is holding well!!

https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/g7-bc-for-277-165-grain-matrix-vld.84889/

Sorry, my load development is old and was based on the information above. I started with a G1 of .650 for the 175 and never adjusted since then. No test beyond 1000 yards. My best WAG is that it is probably close or exceeds Berger's 170 G1 of .662.

The previous owner Marshal, used to have it adverstised on his website as 175 G1= .7381 (http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/matrix-ballistics-165-grain-277-vld-has-anyone.3768496/).

@bigngreen is probably the resident authority on the bullets as he tested them quite a bit as well as hunting successes with his .270 WSM. IIRC, he favors the 165 over the 175. Hopefully, he'll chime in.

ADDED: 8/30/19

I emailed Matrix last night ...


"I started with 165s and 175s bullets from previous ownership. Back then the advertised BC was in.7+ range but I started mine at .650 but no test beyond 1K yards. I recently acquired ~500 175s of your new bullets and was wondering if you have come up with a new and more realistic BC test or have been reported back to you from afield. My barrel is a 30" 1:8" 3G.

Please advise. Thanks!"

Their prompt response today ...

 

[memtb]

While I don't have or use a 270 Win., I'm very surprised that there is not a larger following for the 270 AI. In looking at the 270 Win. case, it appears to be a "prime candidate" for the AI conversion!
Hope you guys like you AI and are as successful with your 270 AI, as I am with my .375 AI. memtb

 

[FEENIX]

While I don't have or use a 270 Win., I'm very surprised that there is not a larger following for the 270 AI. In looking at the 270 Win. case, it appears to be a "prime candidate" for the AI conversion!
Hope you guys like you AI and are as successful with your 270 AI, as I am with my .375 AI. memtb

I originally wanted .280 AI but everybody seems to have one. I am fine with the .270 AI unpopularity and like it the way it is.

 

[Frog4aday]

I heard the reason people disregard going the AI route on the .270 is that you can 'only' get another 100 fps from it. I don't know if that is true or not. But to me, that is still of value. The 'original' .270 Win was loaded to 3,160 fps with 130 grain cup & core bullets. Then, over time, that got reduced to slower speeds by the ammunition makers. I can only assume with better pressure testing equipment, they were finding that the original loads were a bit too hot for comfort at that speed so they backed down?

That being the case, the .270AI would allow the .270 Win to be what it was originally intended to 'be' (and then some.) All without a belt or a 'proprietary' cartridge case to buy. Just use .270 Win ammo and you are good to go; brass formed and ready to use.

I think there will be a day when I do a .270AI, which is why I'm watching this thread.

And where is @Alibiiv? I could have sworn he just built a .270 AI on a Ruger 77 'tang safety' action. Hopefully he finds his way here and posts up.

 

[Alibiiv]

I heard the reason people disregard going the AI route on the .270 is that you can 'only' get another 100 fps from it. I don't know if that is true or not. But to me, that is still of value. The 'original' .270 Win was loaded to 3,160 fps with 130 grain cup & core bullets. Then, over time, that got reduced to slower speeds by the ammunition makers. I can only assume with better pressure testing equipment, they were finding that the original loads were a bit too hot for comfort at that speed so they backed down?

That being the case, the .270AI would allow the .270 Win to be what it was originally intended to 'be' (and then some.) All without a belt or a 'proprietary' cartridge case to buy. Just use .270 Win ammo and you are good to go; brass formed and ready to use.

I think there will be a day when I do a .270AI, which is why I'm watching this thread.

And where is @Alibiiv? I could have sworn he just built a .270 AI on a Ruger 77 'tang safety' action. Hopefully he finds his way here and posts up.

That's me I'm the one who built the Rugers in .270 AI. Dennis Olson built the rifles for us at the beginning of the year. Right now I am waiting for dies, so...can only fireform the ammunition. I am fire forming and then resizing the necks using a .270WSM resizing die. Cannot use the regular .270 Winchester dies due to the expanded case of the AI brass. I'm having problems closing the bolt because I cannot full-length resize without the dies. Ordered them and a hydroform die from Hornady, supposed to be here before the snow flies I hope I think that the negative reviews about the .270 Ackley Improved as being an "overbore round" is something that was written long ago, and now no one seems to be taking the new powders into consideration. Right now I really don't have a great load, but getting around 3350 out of a 26 inch Lilja barrel that's had around 60 rounds put through it; it's a pretty stiff load and the Hornady brass is not holding up too well. The cartridge is like a laser round, we're shooting 8 inch steel at 300 yards (because that's the longest distance we have to shoot at) and the rifle is not dialed in at all. I'm getting around 1-1 1/2 inch groups at 100, have not had too much time to play with the rifle and do a ladder test yet. Really want to get the dies before I really get serious with the rifle. We've (my son and I) have been playing with the 35 Whelens and the .358 Winchesters getting ready for our annual bear hunt in Maine; leaving this coming Saturday for a six-day hunt.

 

[John Polk]

Have any of you heard of the .270 Weatherby magnum?

 

[Trm82]

Why would you bother with the 270AI
When you could just shoot a 270wby? It's faster anyways and no fireforming brass.

 

[John Polk]

Agreed.

 

[Turnbolt53]

Agreed, but for different reasons.

I don't know why you would bother with it when the SAAMI 280AI is available, with low-cost off the shelf dies, brass, and a much better selection of high-BC bullets.

I guess just to be different may be enough reason for some, but it's not like the 280AI is extremely common.

 

[John Polk]

I was writing to those who prefer .270.