270 win 130gr vs 140gr vs 150gr

[Andy92]

What is your guys opinion on the 270 and what grain too use im always back and forth 130gr is most available but least ft/lbs of energy at longer ranges. What are you guys getting for ft/lbs of energy at long ranges between the 3? Also ive been always toying with the idea of a 270 wsm but factory ammunition is very slim too find. Thanks.

 

[Idaho Lefty]

I shoot, the 140 gr. Berger, Classic Hunter Bullets, in My .270 WSM at 3,175 ave FPS and they are still Going OVER,. 2,000 FPS at, 800 Yards.
I can get 1/2 to, 3/4 MOA accuracy with them ( Factory T-3, 24", Tikka ) and they Kill,.. "Like the Hammer of Thor" !
Elk and, an Antelope,.. DRT ! The .270 WSM is,.. a Lazer,.. Out to. most ANY Reasonable Big Game Hunting,. "Range" !

 

[nwmnbowhunter]

130s are great for 300 yards and in. Past 400 they really start to lose steam

 

[memtb]

What is your guys opinion on the 270 and what grain too use im always back and forth 130gr is most available but least ft/lbs of energy at longer ranges. What are you guys getting for ft/lbs of energy at long ranges between the 3? Also ive been always toying with the idea of a 270 wsm but factory ammunition is very slim too find. Thanks.

For my wife's rifle about 4 decades ago, it was a 150 grain Partition….but only for 400 yards and under. Now that we've wandered into the 2000's, went to 140's……in a Barnes TSX.

That rifle has been retired for many years. If I were to start loading for it again, especially for "longish" ranges, it would be the Barnes LRX in 155 grain……if you can push it fast enough for your intended long range use. If your velocities may prevent the use of the heavier bullet…..consider the 129 grain LRX. JMO

I rarely consider ft/lbs energy, only bullet performance on game…..deep penetration from any angle and any amount of bone or other obstacles (inside the animal) in the bullets path, dictates the bullet that we use! memtb

 

[Andy92]

For my wife's rifle about 4 decades ago, it was a 150 grain Partition….but only for 400 yards and under. Now that we've wandered into the 2000's, went to 140's……in a Barnes TSX.

That rifle has been retired for many years. If I were to start loading for it again, especially for "longish" ranges, it would be the Barnes LRX in 155 grain……if you can push it fast enough for your intended long range use. If your velocities may prevent the use of the heavier bullet…..consider the 129 grain LRX. JMO

I rarely consider ft/lbs energy, only bullet performance on game…..deep penetration from any angle and any amount of bone or other obstacles (inside the animal) in the bullets path, dictates the bullet that we use! memtb

I think of ft/lbs of energy due too thats the force too penetrate thats all bullet choice yes does matter for sure.

 

[308win]

They all work and will kill just fine. More dramatic and quicker killing in my opinion are the 130s (and I'm a heavy for caliber kinda guy). Personally used/witnessed multiple 400+ yrd kills with the 130s, everything from yotes/pigs/deer. Still think it's the best central Texas medicine out there

 

[FEENIX]

I think of ft/lbs of energy due too thats the force too penetrate thats all bullet choice yes does matter for sure.

I am a heavy-for-caliber guy, so my vote is for the 150. You have enough powder capacity with the .270 WSM to propel the 150 and take advantage of the energy it generates, especially at down range.

I do not have a .270 WSM, but I propel the 175 Matrix at 2996 FPS (1840 FPS/1315 FT-LBS at 1000Y) out of my .270 AII got it near 3100 FPS with H4831 SC, but the group opened up and started showing pressure signs. Some are claiming 100 FPS faster with RL-26. Good luck!

 

[Axl]

I have seen a lot of elk killed with a 270 out to 600 yards. From 110 grain to 150. They all kill well, put in the right place. So pick one and shoot a LOT, so you can put it in the right place.
Energy is a useless measure of a hunting bullet, but people LOVE to argue about it.

 

[FEENIX]

Whether you like it or not, ignore it or not, energy transfer is there—it's the law of physics—no argument from me.

 

[memtb]

I think of ft/lbs of energy due too thats the force too penetrate thats all bullet choice yes does matter for sure.

I guess that we'll agree to disagree!

Tissue damage, the more the better, is what kills. Broad heads, with near zero energy, kill quite well with vital tissue damage and by hemorrhage!

Energy seems pretty effective on small game……but, means little to nothing on large game! Simply put…..small animals are much more impressed with energy than are large animals! The ammo manufacturers have been "wooing" us with impressive ft/lbs energy for decades…..and we've been believing it for decades!

If you care to spend a little time on research, try reading this. memtb

Terminal Ballistics

 

[memtb]

I think of ft/lbs of energy due too thats the force too penetrate thats all bullet choice yes does matter for sure.

If you want bullet penetration…..be careful with your bullet selection, or "very" "very" particular with bullet placement" Again, JMO memtb

 

[dogz]

Just to add to the party, I like the 117 Hammer and the 160 Noz