Lower velocity 270 rounds for hunting?

[mjbskwim]

I am cooking too.
I have read posts from Alaskan guides that say that some of the locals take all the big game up there with a 270. Not uncommon,not irresponsible .
Shot placement is key though

 

[agc91campora]

I saw where OP mentioned he's not into reloading, but some more food for thought here. I just got into reloading for my A-bolt .270, found a friend who would let me use his equipment. I found that the most accurate load for my rifle also happened to be the slowest load. We chronographed it at 2,600 fps. With the proper bullet expanding properly, that could be ideal. Here's my 3 shot group at 100 yards.

 

[Oregon Rob]

Very nice!

 

[mjbskwim]

270 was the second gun,well about the same time as 223/556,that I reloaded for.
My groups were about half of factory ammo
Nothing like above though

 

[eightyeight mag]

Pass through shots usually lead to a better blood trail.
Shooting them in the shoulders will normally drop them on the spot due to the fact you are basically breaking their front legs, but also damaging a lot of meat in the process.

As far as recoil goes, if one practices and works on their recoil management skills, you should be able to shoot a .300 mag just as well as a .270.
It all boils down to technique.

 

[mjbskwim]

As far as recoil goes,

Plus with the Limbsaver or a Decelerator from Pachmyre? there is no reason to have a gun that hurts
My friend said I would hate a 7mm but the one I have has one of the 2 above on it and is quite pleasant to shoot

 

[thorborg]

Of your two questions I'll pick the first. No offence, but the second seems, well, frivolous.
Since 1973 I've been using the same Nozzler Ballistic tip hand loaded projectiles in .270 , deer, 130 gr. / elk, 150 gr. (until last year I used a .243 on my deer.) I never lost one, followed a blood trail, or recovered bullets. Except two elk I found the bullets and the one deer I hit in in the shoulder socket, it exploded the bone which created a massive exit wound with bone but severely fragmented the bullet within. All between 70 and three hundred yards.
What is important for me are results, maybe more importantly, the ability to not have to calculate over and under hold during my heart thumping excitement. Sighted in @ 130 yards the rise and fall is insignificant for a .270 to make a difference at those distances. OK, the 70 yard one was a little high but I'm calling it a flinch and he still dropped before the smoke cleared. (A rattler out of Vale Oregon six feet away was a different story, dang hard to hit a rattler close up with a rifle,)

 

[osprey]

Of your two questions I'll pick the first. No offence, but the second seems, well, frivolous.
Since 1973 I've been using the same Nozzler Ballistic tip hand loaded projectiles in .270 , deer, 130 gr. / elk, 150 gr. (until last year I used a .243 on my deer.) I never lost one, followed a blood trail, or recovered bullets. Except two elk I found the bullets and the one deer I hit in in the shoulder socket, it exploded the bone which created a massive exit wound with bone but severely fragmented the bullet within. All between 70 and three hundred yards.
What is important for me are results, maybe more importantly, the ability to not have to calculate over and under hold during my heart thumping excitement. Sighted in @ 130 yards the rise and fall is insignificant for a .270 to make a difference at those distances. OK, the 70 yard one was a little high but I'm calling it a flinch and he still dropped before the smoke cleared. (A rattler out of Vale Oregon six feet away was a different story, dang hard to hit a rattler close up with a rifle,)

There are so many good choices for projectiles these days a good hand loader can accomplish about anything he wants with many different calibers. We are truly spoiled by the choices. Thorborg I was not aware that ballistic tips came out in the early seventies. My recollection is they came out in the eighties and several years later they came out with a thicker tapered jacket version for big game as the standard version expanded and fragmented too violently. That is what I recall but I am getting old. Edit. I just looked it up, they came out it 1984. Perhaps you meant the partition?

 

[thorborg]

There are so many good choices for projectiles these days a good hand loader can accomplish about anything he wants with many different calibers. We are truly spoiled by the choices. Thorborg I was not aware that ballistic tips came out in the early seventies. My recollection is they came out in the eighties and several years later they came out with a thicker tapered jacket version for big game as the standard version expanded and fragmented too violently. That is what I recall but I am getting old. Edit. I just looked it up, they came out it 1984. Perhaps you meant the partition?

I'll give you 84 and spot you five years just to ensure were good.
In the unlikely event anyone went out looking for 43 year old bullets I apologies for the egregious error caused by an old mans lack of memory. osprey said they are only thirty years old. Still, a proverbial ton (+/- 100#) of meat my wife and I have wrapped over the years. Please ignore any dates involved in my last and maybe future post.

My advocacy was not for the ballistic tip but for the .270 which is what the OP's original quest was for.
Regardless of projectile, light recoil, flat shooting .270 still has its merit in what I maintain is objective, not subjective. Is it the best? Many board feet of timber has been consumed in camp fires debating that one. Sometimes violently. My .243 also has merit for deer.
I have a friend that has taken more deer and elk than I with his sporterized 303 British he acquired in the early 70's (+/-6 years)
As clarification, the ballistic tip was embraced by me for its lack of deformation upon recoil in the magazine saving me pulls and reloads.
I have followed the controversy over the ballistic tip up to and including Hornadys new claim to fame using dopler radar. I stand by my original statement of personal "results". and have many witnesses to back them up. Are there better projectiles ? Very likely. I don't see messing with what works for me.
As far as fragmentation, What ever the year Nosler first offered their ballistic tip I bought some, liked them, then bought a bunch of them, and am still successfully hunting with them, and all game have stopped dead in their tracks.
I have yet to pick fragments from my teeth. something some bird hunters aren't able to say

 

[Ura-Ki]

The Good old .270 is pretty darn hard to beat for all round usefulness. I have used mine to take a lot of game over the years, and all have dropped where they stood! If the rifle was lighter, I would probably use it a lot more then I do! I have a ultra light Tikka T3 in 6.5X55 Swede that I use for times when I need! The ol .243 is also a fav of mine! Probably not the best for Elk and such, but it could work! As to just how good the .270 is, look at all the excelent bullets there are out there for it, and all the load data to work from! A person can build up the absolute best loads there rifle likes and the usefullness goes up from there! Personally, I have found the .270 all but matched the best of the 7 mm mag with proper hand loads! That it can also shoot almost as flat and almost as fast is reason enough to stick with the Ol Girl!

 

[Silver Hand]

I hunted with a .300 win mag. [Among other calibers used for brush work] with accuracy under 5/8'' @ 100 yards, a 180 grain Speer Grand Slam traveling about 3,200 fps leaving home.
For myself I liked the higher velocity that maintained flatter trajectory with less bullet drop resulting in more energy at long range for anything passed 300 yards requiring a high power spotting scope to acquire a point count my old 3.5 to 10 A.O. Leupold and 10x Quality binoculars could not find.
What most don't get about the magnum cases is they have a distinct advantage at long range. Bullet drop and energy remaining in the pill are a considerable advantage, no matter what you are shooting that far away.
I have shot a lot of game and in my own interest and something you may want to consider is I never had a blood trail to follow whether close or far, that 180 grain Speer - Grand Slam Pill remained under the hide, and spent all of it's energy inside the body cavity. No matter the range and I don't think I have ever shot an animal under 100 yards as the results were always the same. One shot one dead animal with the bullet remaining inside the body cavity.
Elk taken did not always fall on the first shot but never walked far thinking about what just hit them and rest assured the second round made them even more incapable. I always found the bullets to have the same or similar appearance regardless of range, expansion just stops at a certain point, I am sure if large bone is involve this can change and there were several I just never found, but never left the cavity.
If you care not to follow a blood trail, spend all the energy on the animal leaving him a few grains heavier then his last meal, and then save the walk.
The only reason I did not shoot Nosler partition bullets at the time is the 180 grain pills just did not shoot for me and the extreme bullet weight variance was twenty grains in a box of 100 back in the late 1970s.
With the plastic tips involved in bullet technology today you know they will fly straight in the end will they hold up? Find a sand bank and dig them out to see what is remaining, I found many surprises like jacket shedding, Only the jackets remaining and so on. Oh yeah No Blood shot meat using these poor coefficient pills.
Good Hunting
Silver Hand

 

[Ura-Ki]

I have used the .270 on big brown bear several times and it has worked as well as just about any! Punching thick bone and punching deep for the heart/lungs is well with in its ability! Is it the best for this work? Probably not, but I have never felt under gunned with it! It also helps that I carry a .338 win mag one of my other bigger rifles for this sort of work (as a back up) when things get dicey or danger close! That I can switch to a bigger more powerful rifle makes this possable!

 

[Arne K]

Don't over-think it. Find out what brand shoots well out of your rifle with a 130-150 grain bullet, practice, and then go kill a deer.

 

[Artpro]

Will we ever resolve the "tomato/tomaaato" debate????????????????

 

[brokenarrow]

Of your two questions I'll pick the first. No offence, but the second seems, well, frivolous.
Since 1973 I've been using the same Nozzler Ballistic tip hand loaded projectiles in .270 , deer, 130 gr. / elk, 150 gr. (until last year I used a .243 on my deer.) I never lost one, followed a blood trail, or recovered bullets. Except two elk I found the bullets and the one deer I hit in in the shoulder socket, it exploded the bone which created a massive exit wound with bone but severely fragmented the bullet within. All between 70 and three hundred yards.
What is important for me are results, maybe more importantly, the ability to not have to calculate over and under hold during my heart thumping excitement. Sighted in @ 130 yards the rise and fall is insignificant for a .270 to make a difference at those distances. OK, the 70 yard one was a little high but I'm calling it a flinch and he still dropped before the smoke cleared. (A rattler out of Vale Oregon six feet away was a different story, dang hard to hit a rattler close up with a rifle,)

You need to use the wide end of the gun for snakes!