270 load tests.

So, following up on my old post. I went back to my trials of 130g accubonds in 270win.
MY last trials were seating the projectiles 30thou of the lands. This time I changed a few steps in the powder measures and set the COAL at exactly what Nosler reccomend.

I think I have a winner.

Attachment 38521Attachment 38522Attachment 38523Attachment 38524Attachment 38525Attachment 38526Attachment 38527

Those targets without 5 shot , groups are because the bolt wouldn't close on the handload easily so I didn't shoot it.

What load did you stick with out of interest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't be stuck with a COAL they recommend.
You need to find the right distance to the rifling that suits your rifle and handloads and that fits in your magazine.
Is your Remmie drop mag or floor plate? Floor plate is better, as you can seat the projectiles out more.

So with the 53.5gn load, try some seated 10, 20 and 30 thou of the rifling again.

PS, if you couldn't close the bolt, check the headspace, as the shoulder may need to be bumped back 5 thou more.

I had similar results with a 270win. We ended up with 53.5 gn.
But I moved the oal out to 87.5mm IIRC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

What load did you stick with out of interest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Haven't loaded any more, looking like the 54g is the best.

Good 1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Had already tried the same span but different gaps between loads, went up in 0.3 last time and 30thou off lands. They were worse.
A friend at deerstalkers reccomended reducing the COAL to nosler reccomendation, and its improved.

Its a hunting rifle after all. Not paper puncher, so looking for first shot repeatability.

Id say 53.5 is the best looking at group size myself.

How big are the squares? 1"? To me something does not stack up with your results. Rather than show a "node" your results look too scattered to draw a decent conclusion from. 0.5g powder change should really not show such dramatic poi shift as well as change in group size. Have you tried a simple flat base or other known load to compare against?

53.5 and play with seating depths maybe ?? Could go 0.2 either way as well.
I also shoot out further, at 100 mine was ok, at 200m &300m she was well out. Validate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This has to be the first .270 tread that @Toby hasn't joined in :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6mm ackley

This has to be the first .270 tread that @Toby hasn't joined in :thumbsup:

---

I did laugh at it not gonna lie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiwijames

How big are the squares? 1"? To me something does not stack up with your results. Rather than show a "node" your results look too scattered to draw a decent conclusion from. 0.5g powder change should really not show such dramatic poi shift as well as change in group size. Have you tried a simple flat base or other known load to compare against?

---

20mm squares (excel resizing them).
Probably the rifle jumping around on the table off the bipod. Will be trying my caldwell rest at NZDA range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

53.5 and play with seating depths maybe ?? Could go 0.2 either way as well.
I also shoot out further, at 100 mine was ok, at 200m &300m she was well out. Validate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

These were from a while ago. Using 30thou off the lands.
Attachment 38569
Attachment 38570

What do you aim for on those targets? Middle of middle box?