.270 130gr or 150gr or both - Advice please!

[Hickers]

Hi guys,

I am hoping the guys that are familiar with .270s and their abilities would be able give me some input. For years now I have not been able to make up my mind about which is better in Winchester 270win. Where I should just shoot 130grainers or 150 grainers. My Winchester Model 70 Sporter shoots very well with Federal 130grain Power Shock Ammo. I hunt the Karoo yearly with great results and confidence when I have these in my rifle when hunting Springbok and Blesbok.

I have always used 150 grain bullets on Gemsbuck and Kudu when in the Karoo. I find however that my proeferred ammo in 150gr (Winchester 150 grain Power Point) shoots at least 1.5 to 2 inches higher than the 130grain Federal if I do not adjust my scope...strange but true! So every time I switch ammo I must adjust my scope or compensate heavily when aiming. (I zero my 270 at 200m which equates to 1.5 inches high at 100m)

This is not the case with the Federal Power shok 150grains. They shoot to more or less the same point of impact as the Federal Power shok 130 grainers at 100m. I just don't like their ballistics coefficient for longer range shots on Gemsbok as they are round nose and dive after 200m. They are fine for the bush however.

So the questions are:

1) Does anybody have experience shooting Winchester Power Point 130grains and 150 grains through their 270? How do the points of impact at 100m compare? Would this be a better pairing that would require less scope adjusting than the one mentioned earlier?

2) Alternatively do I really need to change up to 150grains for Gemsbok and Kudu....or should I just save myself alot of trouble and use the 130grain bullet for everything? Is it big enough to take a kudu or gemsbok a body shot...even at longer ranges?

I appreciate your help with this!

[Tweety]

Gemsbuck and Kudu are both Tough critters so i would opt for the 150 Grainer.

Why dont you rather settle on the 150 Grainer. Its strength lies in its better (not superior) penetration and retained velocity. It is safer to shoot lighter animals with a heavier bullet than the reverse.

I have never shot a 130 through my 270, but i have shot Kudu ( Eastern Cape), Gemsbuck, Springbuck, Mountain reedbuck, etc. so that is a very vast spread.

But at the end of the day, As Gregor Woods says, "the 270 is a non Magnum caliber that always acts like a Magnum" which, is one helluva compliment.

Either way, it is more efficent than any .22, 243 or 6.7 mm caliber.

[Hickers]

Tweety

You had to go and bait the 6mm brigade...(it does not seem to take much doing)....although I agree with you I really do not want to turn this into another "which is the better caliber" discussion please!! The 243 guys may just go as far as advocating buffalo hunting with their 243s before the end of the day.....on the last run they stopped at Eland or was it Kudu was it?

150 grainers as standard load is a strategy and I have done so in the past. The 130gr just has a better BC and shoots that bit bit flatter. Where I hunt (gratefully) on a family farm the springbok are not big and heads/neck shots are just the order of the day and I feel the 130 allows me to aim dead on out to about 225 yards. Nice if you are compensating for wind as well...

[Tweety]

Hey Hickers,

I was doing exactly that. Yanking some chains.

But when you shoot a 270, you realise all else is inferior. ( )

Slow day at the office im afraid.

[umshiniwam]

Hickers,

no need to use the 130 grainers;

Take a look at the Winchester Power Point ballistics

Bullet Wt. Grs. 150 130
Muzzle 2850 3060

TRAJECTORY LONG (in.)
100 2.2 1.8
200 0 0
300 -8.6 -7.1
400 -25 -20.6
500 -51.4 -42

Not that at 300 yards (270m) there is 0.5 inch difference.

I cn imagine that you would take head shots further than this.

Cheers.

[Sean Murphy]

Also remember that you can greatly improve your terminal ballistics by using premium bullets. If you think a 130gr standard grade bullet is marginal, moving up to a premium bullet may just give you the extra margin that you need.

Sean.

[Webster]

Hey tweety - I have a 270 and a 243 - now what?
I believe the 270 was made for 130gr bullets and you need nothing else! I have dropped plenty Kudu, Gemsbuck, BWB, Hartebeest and smaller stuff with the 270 and many of the bullets have run right through (and I am using std 130gr bullets). But - it is horses for courses and if you gun does the 150gr as well as the 130gr then it makes sense to shoot the heavier bullet. (Of course the 100gr premium in a 243 does the same job - just thought I would throw it in there!!!)

[krobar]

I'd suggest staying with that which you are most comfortable and confident with. If you aren't comfortable taking a kudu with 130gr's, it may be worth it to spend some time working up confidence with the 150gr's at long range.
On the other hand, it sounds like your rifle/ammo combo behaves predictably, and you know how to deal with it, so why change?

[300H&H]

Hickers, i loaded both 150grn and 130grn. i used pmp pro amm but most of the times i used Sierra pro hunter. in the end i permantly changed to 130grn Sierra. why? dont know realy. seems i always found myself buying 130grn. i know when reloading you should weigh all the pro's and cons, and come up with the right answer for the right reason. yet rifle's and hunting remains an emotional thing and in the end there so little diff between 130 and 150. somehow in this rifle the the 130 just seems right.

[Hickers]

Hey tweety - I have a 270 and a 243 - now what?
I believe the 270 was made for 130gr bullets and you need nothing else! I have dropped plenty Kudu, Gemsbuck, BWB, Hartebeest and smaller stuff with the 270 and many of the bullets have run right through (and I am using std 130gr bullets). But - it is horses for courses and if you gun does the 150gr as well as the 130gr then it makes sense to shoot the heavier bullet. (Of course the 100gr premium in a 243 does the same job - just thought I would throw it in there!!!)

Thanks Dave. Are these heart/lung/shoulder shots? What make of 130gr ammo are you using in your 270?

I am comfortable that I can put the shot where it needs to be but was not all that sure about the practical knockdown/killing power of the 130gr .270 round, although it has more energy than the 150gr I see. I must admit that I find the American forums a bit misleading...i.e. I have no idea how big an elk or a deer are in real terms and how they compare to African plains game in terms of toughness or size.

I recently received my 375H&H...so optimising (minimising) on ammo options is becoming important to me. So I reckon if I have my 270 with 130 grainers (and they can down a gemsbok at 300m) and my 375H&H loaded with 300 grainers for bush use (zeroed at 150m 1" high at 100m.) then I am good to go!! Can't wait 'till the season starts!

PS - Come to think of it.....if the guys are putting down Kudu and Gemsbok with body shots from their .243s then what am I concerned about!!??

---------- Post added at 15:02 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------

Hickers, i loaded both 150grn and 130grn. i used pmp pro amm but most of the times i used Sierra pro hunter. in the end i permantly changed to 130grn Sierra. why? dont know realy. seems i always found myself buying 130grn. i know when reloading you should weigh all the pro's and cons, and come up with the right answer for the right reason. yet rifle's and hunting remains an emotional thing and in the end there so little diff between 130 and 150. somehow in this rifle the the 130 just seems right.

Thanks 300H&H. I hear you. I also shot mostly with 150 grainers for years but feeling that 130s are they way forward. Was just not sure about it on the the bigger beasts.

---------- Post added at 15:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:02 ----------

Hickers,

no need to use the 130 grainers;

Take a look at the Winchester Power Point ballistics

Bullet Wt. Grs. 150 130
Muzzle 2850 3060

TRAJECTORY LONG (in.)
100 2.2 1.8
200 0 0
300 -8.6 -7.1
400 -25 -20.6
500 -51.4 -42

Not that at 300 yards (270m) there is 0.5 inch difference.

I cn imagine that you would take head shots further than this.

Cheers.

U,

What ballistics table are you using...must have different BC numbers to mine as my number differ slightly to the flatter side of the trajectory. 150gr 1.9 " high @ 100m and 130gr 1.5" high at 100m to zero at 200m.