reduced power .270 load

ezzy6.5

Well-Known Member
Hi All, I have been asked by a mate to take a look at his PH 270 this weekend. He is struggling to hit anything with it and it's kicking lumps out of him.
I was going to knock up some lighter loads to try. Bullets will be 130gn gamekings, Norma brass and federal primers.
Looking in the cupboard I have some H414, some re22, re19, H1000, and some H380. that is surplus and as i'm financing it i thought id try the 414 with a starting load of 50gns. has anyone got any experiance of making a low recoiling load with any of these powders? will there be much differance in the factory Norma he is using at the moment. would one of the other powders be more suitable (I only use N160 but I don't want to use that on Ammo for someone else)

Ezzy
 
Sorry not to comment on those specific powders.

My main thought with the .270 is based on a Ruger and my current Sako. They always seem to soot better groups when at the top end of the powder load. I use 60gr of H4831sc for my 130gr gamekings.

Good luck.

DC
 
It will have to be 130s for this weekend as it's all ive got in stock for the .270. he paid £150 for the rifle and doesn't want to put a mod on it as he feels it's a waste of money on a £150 rifle. i'll try a few over the weekend if he still cant get on with it he's going to chop it in for a 243
He bought it second hand and doesn't even know if it's ever been cleaned.
I will clean it, check the action screws and Crown. Then i 'll shoot it with his factory stuff to see if it's him or the rifle. we will take it from there.
If the 130s wont work i'll get him to pick up some 100s in the week.

Ezzy
 
I used 51.5gr of N160 with a 140gr in an unmod'ed 270 for years. Made it a pussycat. I would try the same load with the 130gr bullets.

Nasty kicking 270's tend to be a symptom of poor stock shape. No doubt I will attract Brithunter's ire for suggesting this....
 
I used 51.5gr of N160 with a 140gr in an unmod'ed 270 for years. Made it a pussycat. I would try the same load with the 130gr bullets.

Nasty kicking 270's tend to be a symptom of poor stock shape. No doubt I will attract Brithunter's ire for suggesting this....

Well I might take my Blaser up for him to try :rofl:
 
Down loading a .270 is daft as it is designed to be fast and flat. If he doesnt mod it, why not sell and get a more tender and loving round...like a 6.5x55.
 
Down loading a .270 is daft as it is designed to be fast and flat. If he doesnt mod it, why not sell and get a more tender and loving round...like a 6.5x55.

For my benefit, Why is downloading a 270 daft? he bought a £150 rifle to see if the sport was for him. If he part exes it he might get £100 for it then add the hassle of a variation. If he mods it he will still need a variation then screwcutting them buy a mod. He hasn't shot a deer yet! If I can find a mild load I can easily duplicate a bloody 6.5x55 .He can practice without developing a flinch or if he has one already we can work it out. Just because it was designed to be fast and flat means nothing to me. Please remember that this guy zero's his 222 at 70m and wont shoot it past 100m so a few hundered fps wont make a blind bit of difference to him or the Deer
I only wanted to know if anyone had any experiance of these powders in milder loads. :doh:


Ezzy
 
ezzy i have no idea on the powders you have listed but 42 grains of h4895 with a 150 grain bullet is a nice load for a 270 ,atb wayne
 
For my benefit, Why is downloading a 270 daft? he bought a £150 rifle to see if the sport was for him. If he part exes it he might get £100 for it then add the hassle of a variation. If he mods it he will still need a variation then screwcutting them buy a mod. He hasn't shot a deer yet! If I can find a mild load I can easily duplicate a bloody 6.5x55 .He can practice without developing a flinch or if he has one already we can work it out. Just because it was designed to be fast and flat means nothing to me. Please remember that this guy zero's his 222 at 70m and wont shoot it past 100m so a few hundered fps wont make a blind bit of difference to him or the Deer
I only wanted to know if anyone had any experiance of these powders in milder loads. :doh:


Ezzy

Fair play, I didnt see he had spent £150 on the rifle, a mod will be another £200 or so. My point was to chop it and get a 6.5x55, as they are softer to shoot, not a debate as to caliber is more effective..they both work. Still, save up for a mod. I have two .270s, one modded and one not..it is a fair thump for someone to learn with. The mod makes a fair bit of difference.
 
ezzy 6.5

Try PM'ing Adamant. He shoots a 270 PH i think and i know he has tweeked various loads for it, think he has done a 'soft' load for munties to stop messing them up to much.


Jonathon
 
I'm guessing he's not going to get a Mod put on it by the weekend. I would buy or borrow a copy of Lee's "Modern Reloading VOL II" and read the part about reduced loads. In the far right column of the loading data, where appropriate, there is a set of four digit number preceded by a decimal point. Using the calculations detailed in the book (you MUST read the chapter to understand it. Have a calculator) you can not only reduce the load, but know the resulting pressure and velocity. One of the many reasons I like the book.~Muir
 
I have found there are two powder charge 'accuracy nodes' for most .270s when using the similar burn rate powders RL22, N160 and H4831 - the first is around 49 to 51 grains, giving around 2600fps, and the second usually bang on 59 to 60 grains, giving 3000fps. However, in an light unmoderated rifle, I'm not entirely convinced theres a massive difference in perceived recoil between the two - my PH gives about 17lbs of recoil at the 2nd load point.

My woodland load involves using heavy bullets, so isn't an option if only 130s are available. He might want to try some Sako 156gn factory loads instead - I find them very mild to shoot and often use them overseas without the mod'. It is also worth fitting a really good recoil pad and a decent cheek raiser (i find Hillman ones best), as these make a real difference for someone with a recoil flinch. Lastly, look at the trigger - old PH rifles can have terrible trigger set ups but can usually be easily adjusted to a smooth 2-3lb pull, massively improving accuracy - PM me if you want an email copy of the PH trigger manual.

Adam.
 
Most Parker-Hale stalking rifles built on the Mauser 98 or modified mauser 98 actions use a Timney typw trigger which is adjustable for not only weight of pull but length of trigger movement/sear engagemanet tna over travel. The trouble is that people don't seem to read the instructions and play about with them even stoning/grinding/filing sears etc and generally mucking up the whole she-bang.

Some such as the 1100M (African Magnum) which is of 1981 vintage have the std Mauser two stage rigger which can be worked over to improve the pull and reduce the weight:-

P-HTriggeradjustmentInstructions.jpg


The instructions for the Timney type trigger as fitted to the 1100 Lwt, deluxe model 1200 Super, 1200C, 1200TX and 1200V also the Model 1000 and Midland 2100.
 
Adamant is right the recoil is relevant to the weight of the bullet in other words the heavier the bullet the more recoil to counter this the rifle has to get heavier which is why a moderator seems to dampen the recoil or the bullet needs to be lighter.
 
Ahhh just had a thought, or rather remembered something affecting P-H rifles, which may effect felt recoil. Should have thought of it sooner :rolleyes:.

The weight and density of the walnut used for the stock varies. For instance the 1200 Super in 7.92mm has a very light coloured and light in weight stock. It must weight half the weight of the stock fitted to the 1200C and such a difference would be noticeable in how much recoil is felt.

I suggest you pull the stock off and see how much it weighs, you can check the action bedding and the trigger is set up correctly at the same time then make sure the screws are tightened correctly after re-fitting the stock.

Just an idea ;).

If the stock is very light it will explain the heavier felt recoil. If it's too much the stock could be weighted. P-H did this to their model 1100M in the Big Game calibres of .375, .404 and .458.
 
I have found there are two powder charge 'accuracy nodes' for most .270s when using the similar burn rate powders RL22, N160 and H4831 - the first is around 49 to 51 grains, giving around 2600fps, and the second usually bang on 59 to 60 grains, giving 3000fps.

That is interesting.
I havent really had much chance to experiment with mine but I have a load which groups very well with 56gr N160. I figured it was about 2800fps from the QL.

never really bothered about the recoil though. I do think stock shape fit and even the way you hold make a big difference.
When I was 14 and started shooting the .270 I always made sure that the rifle was much tighter up against my cheek and shoulder. I was a skinny youth in those days and controlling the recoil was the first thing I was taught. may be wrong but I am sure a lot of accuracy issues stem from people who have poorly fitting guns and have not prepared themselves for recoil that may have caught them out.

I have a BSA Majestic "lightweight" or whatever it is called, which to compound matters has a collapsed recoil pad from standing up for so long in the cabinet! has a brake but it barks a bit.
Also have a John Dickson PH 270 which I hope to get out this month after a full restoration. I have added a new pad which is a full 1-1 1/4" thick to bring the LOP closer to what my orang-utan arms need.
not much in the weight between them and both are unmoderated.
 
Back
Top