28 replies [Last post]
WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains
Don Fischer wrote:
WesternHunter wrote:
Don,
Ya may want to re-check the ballistic tables for the 150 gr .270 and the 150 gr .30-06. Reload manuals and tables from various ammo makers show nearly same velocity for both. With certain hand loads there can be differences of up to 150 ft/sec between them. I agree that the .30-06 has more potential for a bit more powder and a bit higher velocity due to the shorter bullet of the 150 gr .30-06, but they are usually the same velocity when loaded.

You'll get the same energy transfere when you throw the same grain, shape, and velocity of bullet regardless of bullet diameter. The difference in these situations is sectional density.

With reloading you certainly can make a 150gr 270 shoot with a 150gr 30-06. What you can't do is make it keep up when you go after the heaviest loads. Not possible because of the bore size. You'll notice in cartridges with the same parent case that the larger the bore size, the lower the pressure at a given charge. The difference isn't great but exists. where the advantage goes to the 270 with the 150gr bullet is that it is a heavier constructed bullet with better ballistic qualities. Those ballistic qualities exist because of the length of equal length bullets. You'll find the same is true with all cartridges based on the same parent case. The bigger bore reduces the pressure somewhat.

You'll notice that the 130gr bullet in each has about 100fps advantage in the 30-06. The 270 is generally said to reach 3200 fps and may well be able to but then the 30-06 will do 3300 fps if pushed. In either case, pressure must be suspect. The same 130gr bullet from a 25-06, wildcat bullet's, won't get 3100fps without a very long barrel and high pressure.

keep in mind that, all things being equal, as bullet dia increases, pressure decreases.

Don I know this is an old post, and I'm not trying to argue, but I still have to disagree with these numbers. I was referencing both the .30-06 sprgfld and the .270 win both using 150 grain bullets and both loaded to their max. Under these circumstances both cartridges perform pretty near identical to each other. I'm getting my information from both various factory ammunition ballistic tables as well as various reloading manuals.

With all due respect I have to disagree with the figures you stated above. A .270 win with a 130 grain bullet loaded to max pressure out of a 22 inch barrel will only safely give you a bit under 3100 ft/sec. A .30-06 with a 150 grain bullet can not safely give you 3300 ft/sec. In fact a 150 grain bullet out of a .30-06 is typically maxed at around 2900 ft/sec and more like 2850 ft/sec is typical. To get 3300 ft/sec out of a .30-06 you need either a longer barrel (longer than 24 inches) or a much lighter bullet. Something like a 110 grain bullet loaded to max in a .30-06 will give you around 3300 ft/sec, but a 110 grain .308 diameter bullet is not your standard biggame hunting bullet in this cartridge. If you check the numbers in any reloading manual you will see. I reference 22 inch barrels here since most modern sporters are barreled with 22 inch barrels and not the 24 inch that many ballistic tables derive their data from.

Offline
Location: Southern California
Joined: 12/02/2006
Posts: 39
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains
fuzzybear wrote:
The availability of heavier bullets and a bit larger entrance hole.

There is that whole issue of knock down power and exit wound size that is really significant, but difficult to quantify. What I'm saying is: a larger diameter bullet, such as .308, does a better job than a smaller diameter bullet such as a .270 - even when the energy numbers work out to be the same. I've read detailed physics explanations of why this is, and it's a pretty convincing argument.

Bottom line: even though the 270 is an effective and extremely popular choice for elk, a guy's better off with a 30 caliber or better for big critters like elk. More actual shocking power and an easier blood trail to follow.

Offline
Moderator
Joined: 12/03/2005
Posts: 1691
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains

Well, I've never seen the difference between the entrance or exit wounds of a 270 compared to a 30 cal in the hundreds of deer/moose that I had hanging in my barn.
Never heard a Pathologist tell me " that is a 30 cal wound without a doubt, give the 270 back to the owner, not the murder weapon"
Have never heard expert testimony from anyone identifying bullet diameter solely by wound examination.
But I will listen, give it your best "shot" Big smile Big smile Big smile

CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains

How much difference can there be between bullets that are different in size by about 3/100's in diameter?

Offline
Location: Southern California
Joined: 12/02/2006
Posts: 39
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains
CVC wrote:
How much difference can there be between bullets that are different in size by about 3/100's in diameter?

Hey, Hammer 1 (and everyone else) - I'm not here to proselytize. Just passing along some information. If the 270 floats yer boat and hangs meat in the barn every time, then God bless you and keep on truckin! If you REALLY wanted to see the analysis that explains the advantage of a larger diameter bullet, I'll try to dig it up. But otherwise - I'm just sayin it came from some pretty hard core, experienced hunters with strong engineering/physics backgrounds. You know - for whatever it's worth.....

As for the whole 3/100s of an inch thing, I suppose one could use that same argument in reverse to support using a 243 on elk. I know a guy who DOES use 243s on 'em, but that doesn't mean that's the best bet....

Offline
Moderator
Joined: 12/03/2005
Posts: 1691
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains

Yes Indeed, would surely love to read the scientific data but you can save the opinions of those experienced hunters(we got experienced hunters right here and we can't agree on very much) Big smile

Offline
Location: Southern California
Joined: 12/02/2006
Posts: 39
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains
Hammer1 wrote:
Yes Indeed, would surely love to read the scientific data but you can save the opinions of those experienced hunters(we got experienced hunters right here and we can't agree on very much) Big smile

I think it's important to distinguish between credible scientific evidence and somebody's opinion. My intent was not to offer anyone's "opinions", but to point out that this independently verifiable (scientifically sound) information came from people who understood real world hunting quite well, as opposed to just coming from some ivory tower academics.

At any rate, I cannot find the studies and articles now (this was quite a few years ago). But for whatever it's worth, a quick Google search did turn up this related discussion: http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3114395

The overall conclusion there (which is a bit different from the more detailed analysis I've seen before) seems to be that diameter does make a difference, but just not very much. Maybe someone else is interested enough to research further for the kind of info I ran across before - but probably not. I bet the 270 fans will still like their 270s, the 308 guys will prefer those Thumbs up , while the 338 boys will continue to think we're all wimps Big smile

CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
.270 win handloads for Elk/Mulies in the mountains
DaGooster wrote:
CVC wrote:
How much difference can there be between bullets that are different in size by about 3/100's in diameter?

Hey, Hammer 1 (and everyone else) - I'm not here to proselytize. Just passing along some information. If the 270 floats yer boat and hangs meat in the barn every time, then God bless you and keep on truckin! If you REALLY wanted to see the analysis that explains the advantage of a larger diameter bullet, I'll try to dig it up. But otherwise - I'm just sayin it came from some pretty hard core, experienced hunters with strong engineering/physics backgrounds. You know - for whatever it's worth.....

As for the whole 3/100s of an inch thing, I suppose one could use that same argument in reverse to support using a 243 on elk. I know a guy who DOES use 243s on 'em, but that doesn't mean that's the best bet....

I think part of the equation is bullet weight. .243's max out on the light end of the .270 and 30 calibers.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
Barnes bullet weight for mulies?emberglo308/18/2011 10:20 am
attracking mulies on whitetail antler rattlesscrottydog1108/27/2009 16:14 pm
45 Long Colt HandloadsHighflyer706/27/2012 08:11 am
Mulies in OregonOregonHuntress1005/01/2008 11:15 am
Hunting muliespappenz1307/07/2006 09:25 am