Lower velocity 270 rounds for hunting?

[Oregon Rob]

I am pretty sold on my .270 but wonder if when hunting for west side black tail what would make an optimal round? What round would allow one to shoot under 100 yards and not get a pass thru?

Read More

 

[motoman98]

Why, Are you going to shoot them indoors?
Rifle bullets most often pass thru, killing by blood loss caused by massive tissue damage. A .38 special or .45 acp may not exit at that range but it sure wouldn't be a humane kill.
You'd be better off with a bow and arrow to satisfy that requirement.

 

[Certaindeaf]

If you don't want pass-through capacity, especially with the classic heart/lung shot you're going to wind up with no edible meat or a wounded animal if you have to take pretty much any other kind of shot.
I'd just get a good solid base 130gr and call it good.

 

[Joe13]

Know what is beyond your target...

 

[Certaindeaf]

Know what is beyond your target...

Pretty much.
The thing is, it's not just so simple as reducing velocity. Bullets are made to function within a range of velocities to accomplish what's desired. If you go below it, they won't expand and will have more penetration and above, they blow up (or at least the front part does/can on a solid base.
Just know what you want and what you want the bullet to do and what that particular bullet does. If you do insist for some reason on a slug staying in the body with a broadside lung shot, you'll have to use a fast and frangible bullet.. and pick and place your shot very, very carefully.
I wouldn't bother as it's very limiting and potentially inhumane.

 

[Velzey]

Get yourself some 160gr Nosler partitions. Load them on the low end of the scale in the reloading book.
Still plenty of killing power at 2400 feet per second with a 160 grain bullet.

You can also find .270 round nose bullets. I know a few companies have made them. Load them in the same fashion.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Get yourself some 160gr Nosler partitions. Load them on the low end of the scale in the reloading book.
Still plenty of killing power at 2400 feet per second with a 160 grain bullet.

You can also find .270 round nose bullets. I know a few companies have made them. Load them in the same fashion.

Good call for minimizing meat damage.. but we have no clue why he wants "no pass-thru shots".. those'll sure pass through probably a buffalo with a raking shot.

 

[Oregon Rob]

I mostly just thinking from a little bit different perspective. I'm not establishing a point of view just thinking out loud more than anything. In the personal defense world the ideal round deformed as much as possible and stays in the body. I know this transfers the most energy as opposed to a pass through. I'm not sure why logic would be different for an animal vs a human. I know that dear my son shot this year was about 70 yards out he took out part of the heart and lung and the animal ran about 40 yards before he knew he was dead. I'm sure the bullet never deformed very much both the entry and the exit wounds were pretty darn clean.

 

[Certaindeaf]

It can't be argued that a non-exiting bullet didn't dump all its energy, however, I want my bullets to go all the way through whatever I'm shooting at, at whatever angle (within reason).. unless I'm exterminating varmints.
"I'd just get a good solid base 130gr and call it good."

 

[osprey]

I have killed 6 deer with 140gr Nosler Accubonds from a .270 and recovered 4 bullets. These were handloads going 2950 fps and ranges varied from 15 yds to 300 yds. Bullet weight retention was around 60-70%. All the bullets were found just inside the hide on the off side. To me this represents optimal energy dump and I believe even the ones that passed through probably delivered most of their energy and barely got out.

 

[Joe13]

In the personal defense world the ideal round deformed as much as possible and stays in the body. I know this transfers the most energy as opposed to a pass through

In the defense world we are worried about "collateral damage" to bystanders, and that is why personal defense load are under powered and made to stop in a body if possible (to mitigate collateral damage - not for maximum energy transfer).

If that were not the case then there would not be defense and hunting rounds just killing rounds.

 

[mjbskwim]

Hand gun defense rounds aren't so much made "under powered" as they are made to expand so they don't penetrate too far.
Not anywhere near an expert but I have talked to many hunters that are very opinionated about what they will shoot for a given game animal. My friend wants the pass thru for blood letting and trail. Some want all the energy dumped in the animal. It's all what you are looking for
As far as the deer running 40 yards before it knew it was dead,that happens a lot,with many calibers.
From what I have learned from reloaders and watching and reading what others have learned,it has all to do with,what you want the bullet to do,what you are shooting at and bullet design/velocity mix so that the correct bullet if flying the proper speed to do what YOU want it to do.
So like Velzey was kind of saying get the right bullet and load it to the correct velocity

 

[Joe13]

Maybe under powered was the wrong term but it was my understanding that they use a lower flashing powder and my personal experience running SD rounds thru my pistols gives about the same or a little less felt recoil as the cheapest target FMJ rounds.

For example in my .357mag blazer brass kicks harder then Hornedy critical defense; then there is stuff like Barnes that are made for handgun hunting that kick like a mule.

 

[mjbskwim]

Maybe under powered was the wrong term but it was my understanding that they use a lower flashing powder and my personal experience running SD rounds thru my pistols gives about the same or a little less felt recoil as the cheapest target FMJ rounds.

For example in my .357mag blazer brass kicks harder then Hornedy critical defense; then there is stuff like Barnes that are made for handgun hunting that kick like a mule.

I think it really depends on what ammo you buy.SOOO many manufacturers seem to load down their stuff.
Heck,old reloaders say the new books call for lower powder charges than the older books
Lawyers and insurance companies

 

[tarster]

I took my dads 270 out this year and shot my deer at about 45 yards with it, I got a pretty angled shot and it ended up taking out one lung with some rib fragments and then I am sure it broke the spine from what we can tell. It was a 150gr nosler partion doing about 2700fps, and because of shot placement it passed right through, Now dad has taken many deer with this rifle and in a number of cases he has found the bullet just inside the skin on the opposite shoulder he shot through.. So i figure its like everything.. shot placement is key.

Shoot a deer in the shoulder with a 270 and get your bullet back.. shoot it where there is no bone and never see it again.

 

[Oregon Rob]

I have to say I really appreciate all the input. I have accomplished what I had hoped for: give me food for thought that I would not have come up with on my own. I know it’s all theoretical and that if the shot goes where it needs to that the end result will be meat in the freezer. It’s just fun working through the mental exercise.

As for rreeloader…I am not. I wish that I was but circumstances don’t make that very feasible.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I have used 130 gr. Winchester silver tips for years and have never had any issues with them! Also, the good old Remington Corlock work very well, just not the most accurate. For bucking the wind or for longer shots, the Swift Scirocco work very well! Why I switched to a 7 mm mag, I don't know, the old .270 still does every thing the big 7 does and cheaper and less recoil. I know of some people that use a 115 or a 120 gr. bullet but I have no experience with those. Many say the old .270 is the best of every thing and there is no North American game it cannot kill clean! I would support that claim!

 

[Oregon Rob]

I have owned the big 7 and I believe/know that I am more able to control the shot on the 270 because there is so little recoil. It’s MUCH easier to squeeze the trigger while not anticipating the shot with the 270. Maybe I’m not manly enough for the 7 Mag.. so be it. I believe that all things being equal I would make more kill shots with the .270. It’s downright fun to shoot, not so with the magnums for me anyway.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I have owned the big 7 and I believe/know that I am more able to control the shot on the 270 because there is so little recoil. It’s MUCH easier to squeeze the trigger while not anticipating the shot with the 270. Maybe I’m not manly enough for the 7 Mag.. so be it. I believe that all things being equal I would make more kill shots with the .270. It’s downright fun to shoot, not so with the magnums for me anyway.

Yea, I got my self suckered into the Mag craze too. The .270 does every thing the big 7 does, and the 30/06 does every thing the big .300 mag does. It takes an exceptional rifleman to find the diffrences with these, and whill I can, its not worth it in the end! The exception would be the .338 win mag, or the even bigger .375 holland and holland that I reamed out to 375 Weatherby mag! For those two, I definatly needed the extra power! For every thing else, the old stand bys are more then enough! Good luck on the .270 adventure, its a fine old Cal, and at one point or another, every one has factory loaded it! I even found a large selection for it when I went to Africa!

 

[mjbskwim]

I have owned the big 7 and I believe/know that I am more able to control the shot on the 270 because there is so little recoil. It’s MUCH easier to squeeze the trigger while not anticipating the shot with the 270. Maybe I’m not manly enough for the 7 Mag.. so be it. I believe that all things being equal I would make more kill shots with the .270. It’s downright fun to shoot, not so with the magnums for me anyway.

Shoot the caliber that best suits YOU