270 wsm load combo for hunting deer in prairies and another for elk in the mountains?

[bitterrootfly]

Originally Posted by shooter12

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

here is an article that talks a little bit about brush deflection in a .308 and in a .223, I have had similar experiences to you but the results of this were interesting.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/hu...t-rifle-bullet

[shooter12]

Originally Posted by bitterrootfly

here is an article that talks a little bit about brush deflection in a .308 and in a .223, I have had similar experiences to you but the results of this were interesting.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/hu...t-rifle-bullet

There are tons of articles on internet including previously mentioned Jack O'conor's ones.
This is what he wrote about his tests:

O'Connor summarized his results this way: "I found that the higher the bullet velocity, the sharper the point, the thinner the jacket, the lighter the weight, the greater the deflection."


The OPs question was which 2 different bullets in 270 wsm for 2 different applications.
As I mentioned before , the 160NP of semi spitzer design out of this caliber at around 3000 f.s works better then 130 gr at 3300 f.s in the bushes ,which corresponds 100 % with what O'Connor was stating.


I've done myself and witnessed probably more then 55-60 kills with 270 wsm and this is not my favorite caliber when hunting bushes, so when I do it I select the heavy for the caliber bullet especially if elk and moose are on the menu.
They are very accurate out of this rifle also.


S12

[AB2506]

Jack's tests were not as thorough as some more recent tests. Also bullet construction is noticeably better than in Jack's day. I would suspect results would be different than 50-60 years ago.

[AB2506]

Shooter12, what the tests indicate is that ALL bullets, regardless of velocity, weight or caliber are deflected by obstructions. The density of the object hit and how close it is to the muzzle, or the target has more of an effect than velocity, weight or caliber.

[shooter12]

Originally Posted by AB2506

Jack's tests were not as thorough as some more recent tests. Also bullet construction is noticeably better than in Jack's day. I would suspect results would be different than 50-60 years ago.

You can tell that to Cat, because he put his name as a reference .


S12

[kelly1]

If you are buying factory ammo Federal has a premium load with 150 gr Nosler partitions,you can't go wrong with that

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by AB2506

Jack's tests were not as thorough as some more recent tests. Also bullet construction is noticeably better than in Jack's day. I would suspect results would be different than 50-60 years ago.

There is no question that some bullets have changed and others have come along after The tests that were done after O’connor, Sell , Asgard and the other older writers , but the tests by Zeyfried, Spomer, Barsness, anc the modern day writers are recent .

The findings at the end of the tests have always been the same - every bullet will deflect , some more than others but the only way to negate it is to make a clear shot , same as with an arrow .
The other one is that one cannot only count on one deflection , and that the glider the deflection to the shooter the greater the POI difference at the target .

Shooting brought brush is NOT something anyone should recommend to anyone .
But that is just my opinion , others can recommend whatever they want to whomever they want .
Cat

[shooter12]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

There is no question that some bullets have changed and others have come along after The tests that were done after O’connor, Sell , Asgard and the other older writers , but the tests by Zeyfried, Spomer, Barsness, anc the modern day writers are recent .

The findings at the end of the tests have always been the same - every bullet will deflect , some more than others but the only way to negate it is to make a clear shot , same as with an arrow .
The other one is that one cannot only count on one deflection , and that the glider the deflection to the shooter the greater the POI difference at the target .

Shooting brought brush is NOT something anyone should recommend to anyone .
But that is just my opinion , others can recommend whatever they want to whomever they want .
Cat

So , what is the bullet/bullets that OP was asking for in 270 wsm that you recommend for his type of hunting?


S12

[Steelhorse Cowboy]

Elk?
150 and go with a bonded or monolithic.
BC is better and the tougher bullet should give you a pass thru.
Sometimes even the best shot goes not where you wanted to and youre into shoulder.
I've seen many a elk downed by a 270 but I personally believe in 7mm/300's with 165 gr plus with a tough bullet.
My 2 cents

[rem338win]

Originally Posted by shooter12

You can tell that to Cat, because he put his name as a reference .


S12

Actually, you also suggested his and Elmer Keith's ilk promoted some bullets/cartridges as better brush busters.

Your feelings hurt?

[1899b]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

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

Exactly. Keep it simple. Quit the ballistic masterbation. People like to tinker when there is no need for it most times.

[shooter12]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Actually, you also suggested his and Elmer Keith's ilk promoted some bullets/cartridges as better brush busters.

Your feelings hurt?

It looks like not only Cat but yourself also were not reading those authors properly .
This is your post about O'Connors tests results:

Ive also read Ken Waters and OConnor and none of them have ever written an article that definetively tests bullets "bushability" i can recall.


In my post 32 I copied the exact statement from O'Connors test summaries which by some reason you can not "recall".

I mentioned earlier that O'Connor may not be my favorite writer, but it does not mean that I did not read his articles .

And don't you warry about my feelings, try someone else.

S12