Do it all again atleast once more in caseo cf any shooter error
Otherwise I agree with cam
Printable View
Do it all again atleast once more in caseo cf any shooter error
Otherwise I agree with cam
More interested in the band from 53.2-53.8, trying slightly different loads in that band worth it IMHO
I would shoot round robin at multiple targets, but then I am a harmonics believer when it comes to load development..... Not everyone's cup of tea, but works for me and I'm happy with the results.
I had to open the pandoras box :(
I'd be trying some loads upwards from 54.7 .. maybe 55, 55.3 (if its not too big a load)
The other obvious candidate for further investigation as @ebf points out is the band from 53.2-53.8
Also, shoot 5 shots groups ... gives the good stuff more chance to shine.
you should never have got rid of your 243 ;) ( can of worms openers seem to be cheap to buy at the moment )
Also, I do my OCW testing at 150 yards not 100 ... as long as you can shoot well (and it looks like you can) my opinion is that 150 makes the really open groups as obvious as the nose on your face.
T
Not really bro, Looks like you got some pretty good loads there in the 53's. Load up some more of what ever load you thinks best. If you can repeat what you already have produced and you're happy with the speed, sight it in and go hunting.Quote:
Originally Posted by scottrods
Really its only as much of a cunt as you want make it, but to me its shooting sweet to kill animals out to 400 easy. If you were to miss it wont be because you didnt shrink it by 1/4 inch.
Im assuming you want to use it for hunting, otherwise if your target shooting disregard above :)
I shot and loaded for a .270 Win for over 40 years and looking at all the data I acquired over that time AR2209 would not be my first choice of powder. H4831 gave consistently best accuracy and velocity with 130-150 grain bullets, H4831 is AR2213SC in todays language. Other powders I used were Norma 204 and Norma MRP, Norma 204 was powder of choice for 100-110 grainers.
Also you are a long way off the mark with seating depth. With 130gr Hornady SP my overall loaded length was 84.0 mm against your figure of 75-76 mm but to get the best results you need to know where your leade starts for any given bullet once you have that measurement tweaking the seating depth is easy.
If your not getting any pressure signs I'd be trying some higher loads, I run 56gn in my 270 over 130gn hornady SP, she's a sloppy old chamber though.
Seating to the lands touch is 3.001 measured average five times. Ive set it as 2.970 using hornady ogive tool and feeding ok from mag.
Still have the 243 but set that up for roos with 55gr pill. The 270 for hunting.
My two loads with 2209 I have for my 270 which is also a remington is 51.5 (very cold load for 270 but accurate) and 53.5 grains with a hornady 130gr sp which is not as tight as the 51.5 load but still gives me an inch at 100m
I found this to be an excellent way to find the lands ... and its a laugh to listen to this good old boy's accent ...Quote:
Originally Posted by scottrods
Which pill you running and what powder ? I had a crack using the Sierra Blitzkings for 243 and they were -OK- but ran hot as hell and got very innaccurate at 250+ yds ...Quote:
Originally Posted by scottrods
Vmax 58's on the other hand are the bomb ... shittingly accurate ... using 2206h (45.8gn) from memory although dont quote me on that
T
Hi everyone!
Just my .50c(Fifth centes) in this case. I just checked Nosler website (270 Winchester Load Data) for the cartridge and projectile in question and I must agree with Grunta, your reload is too short as you can see in the link I attached here, it may be the actual cause. Regards the powder charge, we can see that you have a promissing little "range" to work thru in between 53 and 54 grains, via the ADI data book 54.3gr is the maximum, so, in my honest opinion and suggestion I would load 5 rounds of the following grains and triple check the length you seating it.
The 2.520" you see in the ADI book is for the "CASE TRIM" not the C.O.A.L., so do it again with the maximum C.O.A.L. of 3.280" - 3.300" and it shall be enough to fit your magazine, from there you will see improvements or not.
Just an example that happen to me, my 7mm rem mag has better accuracy when I load the rounds to fit in to the magazine.
So, to finalise, reload 5 rounds of each charges of he following charges and then work from there(don't worry to much about the .5gr increments they will give you some space to work after you find a "close" sweet spot.) 53.0, 53.5, 54.0, 54.5gr.
Good luck, hope it give you a bit of light!
And accuracy too! Lol!
All the best!
Mac
IMPORTANT! ALWAYS be safe and check your rounds after each fired, check for the basic / standards "danger" signs!
I'm with Tony T on this one. Your in Canterbury so is gunworks go and get some of there powder sample Adi 2213 and try that. Most of the guys I know that reload use it. I used 57gns with a 130 Sierra when I had a 270. Nick Harveys manual has a start load of 55 and a max of 58.
My 2c
He is measuring his overall length from the ogive of the bullet with a comparator not from bottom of case to bullet tip which is why people are saying his overall lengths are too short, if he were to measure to the tip of bullet he should be pretty much spot on with actual length.Quote:
Originally Posted by PERRISCICABA
Sum good advise given.
If you not happy try moving up to a 140gr accubond, or SST, I have had several rifles over the years that wouldn't shoot as well as I wanted, with light for cal bullets, one of witch was a .270 win, TC icon, but its great with 140gr accubonds & 150 gr Partition.
Yup. Mine loves the 140 absQuote:
Originally Posted by southernman