Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum

Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/index.php)
-   Guns & Ammo Discussion (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   270 wsm load combo for hunting deer in prairies and another for elk in the mountains? (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=357736)

LandlockedIslander 01-14-2019 12:19 PM

270 wsm load combo for hunting deer in prairies and another for elk in the mountains?
 
hey guys just got an xbolt in 270 wsm. stainless with 23" barrel curious what everyone is using and finding for loads for it in hunting applications? thanks for any info. naturally i will develope my own loads and refer to manuals so dont panic. just curious what others are finding. thanks!

Pioneer2 01-14-2019 12:30 PM

It would be wise
 
To buy several 100 brass while it's still available to reload down the road.I think the WSM's days are numbered with the exception of perhaps the .270 + .300 version that have had some popularity.The Rem short versions are all but extinct.I could be wrong.

shooter12 01-14-2019 01:15 PM

I load 130 and 140 gr Barnes TSX for both elk and deer in my sons 270 wsm when hunting the open country.
Early season in a thick cover I load 160 gr Nosler Partition.
Worked pretty good so far on many deers, couple of elk and moose.


S12

kingrat 01-14-2019 03:06 PM

I load 129 barnes lrx for my sons, hes shot elk,moose,mule deer,and whitetails closest was 60 yards and farthest so far 410 yards and all have been impressive results.

rem338win 01-14-2019 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioneer2 (Post 3911343)
To buy several 100 brass while it's still available to reload down the road.I think the WSM's days are numbered with the exception of perhaps the .270 + .300 version that have had some popularity.The Rem short versions are all but extinct.I could be wrong.

Well, Id say your wrong. Many of these guns are still going off shelves and ammunition sales are strong. The 270 and 300 that is.

Id go with Ramshot Magnum and 130gr TTSXs. Its a 3300fps recipe.

Pioneer2 01-14-2019 04:34 PM

As stated
 
Only the .270 +.300 are semi-popular.Wait 10 years hence the brass hoarding idea.Nothing wrong with the calibers but they are redundant as they have all been around in FL form 50 or more years.And no a short action don't mean much in O'Conner's days barrels were longer and guns were heavier even for the mountains.The Savage model 20 BA was likely the first fly weight rifle.Slick a pre-64 Win 70 in 300 H+H if you want to see smooth feeding.Not in the 1903 MS or Krag class but nice.Tappered case like a coke bottle not a bic lighter.

Smokinyotes 01-14-2019 09:42 PM

In my 270wsm I’m using a 145eldx, fed 215m, R26 and nosler brass at 3247 FPS. It’s the only combination I’ve tried that will give me groups under 1/2”.

buckbrushoutdoors 01-14-2019 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smokinyotes (Post 3911804)
In my 270wsm I’m using a 145eldx, fed 215m, R26 and nosler brass at 3247 FPS. It’s the only combination I’ve tried that will give me groups under 1/2”.

This is currently what I’m using as well and had extremely impressive results on a big bull elk. 60 yards broadside passed through

Ice Fishing Maniac 01-15-2019 10:32 AM

140gr AB's with Federal GM primers and Retumbo is what I use. Deer, elk, moose., bears, wolves, whatever is in the scope sight when I am hunting drops.

Love this caliber and bullet combo !!:sHa_shakeshout:

Scott N 01-15-2019 10:55 AM

My 270 WSM load is a 130 TSX bullet over RL19 and a CCI 250 Primer. Shoots very accurately out of my T-3.

Beeman3 01-16-2019 07:51 AM

If you are going to be doing any long range work I hear the 165 Matrix is a really good elk bullet. Talked about very highly on another forum. I don't know what twist is needed to stabilize this bullet. Should be on Matrix website.

360hunt 01-16-2019 08:37 AM

150 partition
 
My sako seems to like 150gr nosler partitions with Rl17. Groups very well and chronographed at 3175 fps

redranger15 01-20-2019 09:59 AM

I’m spitting 110gr Barnes TTSX pushed by some RL-17. Shot deer, elk, caribou with great success. Never crony but guessing getting around 3500fps. I wanted a fast mainly deer rifle and love the 270wsm.

Shooty 01-20-2019 10:55 AM

IMR4350 behind 140 gr interlock, accurate but low fps (3050). 24" barrel.

catnthehat 01-20-2019 11:13 AM

Personally speaking , I would not try and work up two different loads fir different situations .
Work up one load , get it accurate, and practice !
The biggest variable in any situation is the nut behind the bolt .:)
Cat

shooter12 01-20-2019 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catnthehat (Post 3915585)
Personally speaking , I would not try and work up two different loads fir different situations .
Work up one load , get it accurate, and practice !
The biggest variable in any situation is the nut behind the bolt .:)
Cat

I usually don't work up different loads for many guns/calibers that I own, but my 270 wsm shoots 130 TSX at 3325f.s ,140 tsx at 3200 f.s and 160 gr NP at 3025f.s almost to the same point of impact up to around 300yds.
No need to change zero or anything , only shoot 3-4 rounds of TSXs to foil the barrel if decide to shoot this bullet.

In the heavy bush area heavy and slower 160 bullets perform better(at least out of my experience) then fast ones that could be easier deflected by brunches ,or grass.


S12

catnthehat 01-20-2019 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter12 (Post 3915641)
I usually don't work up different loads for many guns/calibers that I own, but my 270 wsm shoots 130 TSX at 3325f.s ,140 tsx at 3200 f.s and 160 gr NP at 3025f.s almost to the same point of impact up to around 300yds.
No need to change zero or anything , only shoot 3-4 rounds of TSXs to foil the barrel if decide to shoot this bullet.

In the heavy bush area heavy and slower 160 bullets perform better(at least out of my experience) then fast ones that could be easier deflected by brunches ,or grass.


S12

The heavy bullets versus light for bush busting argument had been proven BS by a good many authorities , among them Sell, Whellen, O’Connor,Barsness, Zeifried and others with everything from dowel boxes to actual bush tests .
Cat

rem338win 01-20-2019 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioneer2 (Post 3911514)
Only the .270 +.300 are semi-popular.Wait 10 years hence the brass hoarding idea.Nothing wrong with the calibers but they are redundant as they have all been around in FL form 50 or more years.And no a short action don't mean much in O'Conner's days barrels were longer and guns were heavier even for the mountains.The Savage model 20 BA was likely the first fly weight rifle.Slick a pre-64 Win 70 in 300 H+H if you want to see smooth feeding.Not in the 1903 MS or Krag class but nice.Tappered case like a coke bottle not a bic lighter.

Semi popular......youre terribly out of touch bud. Theyll be here with brass in spades 25 years from now unless we are using rail guns.

I suggest you pay attention to rifles in the field and ammunition sales. They are easily in the top 10 ammo sales for magnums every year since introduction.

Every WSM Ive owned fed fine in push feeds and CRFs. Not like my H&H in a pre64 but more than adequate.

shooter12 01-20-2019 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catnthehat (Post 3915753)
The heavy bullets versus light for bush busting argument had been proven BS by a good many authorities , among them Sell, Whellen, O’Connor,Barsness, Zeifried and others with everything from dowel boxes to actual bush tests .
Cat

Do you care to share the link to such authorities arguments proving that heavy bullet at lower velocity in the bushes does not perform better then faster and lighter one and it could be called BS?


S12

catnthehat 01-20-2019 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter12 (Post 3915764)
Do you care to share the link to such authorities arguments proving that heavy bullet at lower velocity in the bushes does not perform better then faster and lighter one and it could be called BS?


S12

Read their books and magazine articles .
Cat

shooter12 01-20-2019 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catnthehat (Post 3915783)
Read their books and magazine articles .
Cat

I am not a big fun of those authors ,especially when comparing O'Connor and Ken Waters and I seriously doubt that Townsend Whelen was advocating for a light for the caliber bullets in the bushes.
That's why I asked you to back up your statement by posting a link, proving that there is no advantage using a heavy bullets in the bushes.

And you are telling me to read magazine articles...…..ish


S12

raised by wolves 01-20-2019 07:35 PM

Don't have time to reload right now. I use the Winchester 140grain Accubonds in my 270wsm. It's a bit slower than the box states, but it sure does a great job on game. Puts them down fast. Most shots were complete pass throughs, even on an elk and bear.

rem338win 01-21-2019 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter12 (Post 3915796)
I am not a big fun of those authors ,especially when comparing O'Connor and Ken Waters and I seriously doubt that Townsend Whelen was advocating for a light for the caliber bullets in the bushes.
That's why I asked you to back up your statement by posting a link, proving that there is no advantage using a heavy bullets in the bushes.

And you are telling me to read magazine articles...…..ish


S12

Ive read many of the same articles and Cats right. Ron Spomer did it, as well as Barsness and Sefried that I recall. Sefrieds was extensive Most authors dont have "links" because they sell their writing. So go read.

Ive also read Ken Waters and OConnor and none of them have ever written an article that definetively tests bullets "bushability" i can recall. Neither did i see any by Whelen.

So back up your statement by providing links to that old wives tale of bigger be better ...never mind. You cant.

shooter12 01-21-2019 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rem338win (Post 3916027)
Ive read many of the same articles and Cats right. Ron Spomer did it, as well as Barsness and Sefried that I recall. Sefrieds was extensive Most authors dont have "links" because they sell their writing. So go read.

Ive also read Ken Waters and OConnor and none of them have ever written an article that definetively tests bullets "bushability" i can recall. Neither did i see any by Whelen.

So back up your statement by providing links to that old wives tale of bigger be better ...never mind. You cant.

Okay,

Let us just agree to disagree on that matter, since nobody wants to prove their statements.

S12

rem338win 01-21-2019 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter12 (Post 3916142)
Okay,

Let us just agree to disagree on that matter, since nobody wants to prove their statements.

S12

Thats funny. The information is there and youve be given the names of authors that have done the work. Because someone else isnt willing to so all the work, even buy the information for you, youre choosing ignorance.

Thats why these forums are often a ****show.

shooter12 01-21-2019 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rem338win (Post 3916154)
Thats funny. The information is there and youve be given the names of authors that have done the work. Because someone else isnt willing to so all the work, even buy the information for you, youre choosing ignorance.

Thats why these forums are often a ****show.

That's funny indeed..
Read my post #321 again.
I made the statement regarding the use of heavy bullets , based out of my own experience ,and I indicated that.
You and Cat are sending me to read someone else articles and calling BS on what I had first hand experience with.

Some one definitely is ignorant in here, and I don't think its me.


Have a nice day.


S12

elkhunter11 01-21-2019 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter12 (Post 3916166)
That's funny indeed..
Read my post #321 again.
I made the statement regarding the use of heavy bullets , based out of my own experience ,and I indicated that.
You and Cat are sending me to read someone else articles and calling BS on what I had first hand experience with.

Some one definitely is ignorant in here, and I don't think its me.


Have a nice day.


S12

I have read the same tests that other people have mentioned. You can google them as easy as anyone else can if you really want to see the information. I have hunted for over 45 years, but I have not fired nearly as many bullets through brush that even one of those tests simulate, so I will accept those tests as being more relevant.

shooter12 01-21-2019 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elkhunter11 (Post 3916179)
I have read the same tests that other people have mentioned. You can google them as easy as anyone else can if you really want to see the information. I have hunted for over 45 years, but I have not fired nearly as many bullets through brush that even one of those tests simulate, so I will accept those tests as being more relevant.

I really don't want to derail this thread and go into deflection of the light vs heavy bullets debate.
But I've been on a numerous hunts with 270 wsm and 270 Weatherby ( not mine but my good friend has it ) and seen as many as 12 deers shot in the couple of days for many years in a row with .277 bullets by me and by our party members, so I can speak out of my own experience without relying on a magazine writer's articles.

I always do value your opinion Elk , but in this case I have a different one.

S12

AB2506 01-21-2019 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rem338win (Post 3915759)
Semi popular......youre terribly out of touch bud. Theyll be here with brass in spades 25 years from now unless we are using rail guns.

I suggest you pay attention to rifles in the field and ammunition sales. They are easily in the top 10 ammo sales for magnums every year since introduction.

Every WSM Ive owned fed fine in push feeds and CRFs. Not like my H&H in a pre64 but more than adequate.

Pioneer2 is living in the past. The 300WSM is here to stay. The 270WSM deserves to be more popular than it is. Even the 325WSM deserves better. Only the 7WSM seems moribund. Not sure why? Maybe coming out at the same time as the 7SAUM and many writers claiming the 7SAUM was more balanced? But both seem to be irrelevant now.

If I was starting over, I would buy the 270, but the 300 was what was available on a deal I could not refuse. The Kimber Montana speaks to my soul. My perfect rifle.

AB2506 01-21-2019 03:58 PM

To the OP. Pick a good bullet that will do what you need in the worst circumstance you might come across.

For many years now, I have used the Barnes TSX or TTSX. Previously I used some Winchester Failsafe (no longer available unfortunately). I have found these bullets to be very accurate (follow instructions on seating depth), expand reliably, not cause excessive meat damage, penetrate from stem to stern. I like two bullet holes.

Pick a weight and try a Barnes TTSX or a Hornady GMX. If primarily a deer hunter with occasional elk/moose, I would try 130, 140, if primarily elk/moose and occasional deer, I would try 140, 150.

I have good luck with various Reloder powders in the cartridges I have loaded. In the 300WSM, I use RL17.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.