New powder Load Data Rant

[BD]

Something that really is pissing me off, more and more. Ten years ago I settled on the .270 WBY as my choice for a longer range open ground condom bullet hunting rifle. IMHO this cartridge offered the best confluence of velocity, sectional density and delivered energy for anything up to the size of moose. During the past ten years all kinds of new slower powders have come on the market which IMHO would greatly expand the possibilities in the cartridge. WHY IS THERE STILL NO NEW DATA for the .270 WBY? It would appear that all of the data produced is geared primarily toward the new short and super short magnums. The gun press is comparing these new cartridges favorably to the older WBYs, but guess what? They're comparing new loadings of RL 25, Retumbo and the like to the older cartridge velocities gotten with H4831 and 7828. I really think that apples to apples the .270 WBY would still provide the best confluence of velocity, sectional density and energy. A little data would sure help to find out! I could care less about the 1/4 inch difference in bolt throw on a beanfield rifle. Come on, we're talking about 8 or nine pound setups here with BIG glass, and barrels in the 26 inch range. Who cares about the little bit of difference in action length. BD

[StarMetal]

Yeah you're right BD, that 270 WM is among the first that started the mag craze and it is a good one, kinda forgotten too because of the new hoopla. I was looking ballictic charts over one day for the non belted cartridges and it seem the best long range cartridge was a wildcat...the 6.5-06. If you remember Master Shooter on the old Shooters had a rifle built in that caliber and shot 1000 yard competition with it. Seems that range of calibers from 25 to 7mm have the edge in ballistics.

I agree with you that beanfield hunting, it doesn't matter if the rifle is long or heavy, but some of those new short cartridge rifles are really really light and for mountain hunting and alot of carrying they are the cat's meow. Probably a neat rifle for you would be Ruger #1 with a long heavy barrel in the 270 WM.

Speaking about short cartridges I was just reading about the rifle version of the 221 Fireball of Remingtons, except it was in a CZ 527 rifle. What was eye opening is the little round turned in performances from 2900 fps to 3500 fps, with bullet weights from 35 grs to 50 grs. Now 2900 some fps with a 50 gr bullet isn't too shabby for that little round. It sure isn't giving up much to the 222 Rem and it's quite a bit shorter. I'm not using shorter in the sense it's better, just that it sure got alot of performance out of less boiler room.

Joe

[swheeler]

BD: You should be able to work up load data with any powder you want, just use common sense and safe reloading practices. I believe VV has data on the 270WM with some of its new slow powders.
Scooter

[BD]

swheeler, sue I can work up loads to a point., and I have a pretty load load using RL25 behind the Nosler 150 partition. But common sense limits me to the velocity range achievable with the older, faster powders as there is just no data at all for most of the newer ones in .270 WBY. Keep in mind that we're operating in the 65,000 psi range here. Pretty close to the edge. So, A guy would think that more velocity was possible, but going there is kind of shakey ground. I don't begrudge anyone their Super Short Loudenboomer, but couldn't they produce a little data for the old farts along the way? BD

[BLTsandwedge1]

"I don't begrudge anyone their Super Short Loudenboomer, but couldn't they produce a little data for the old farts along the way? BD"

BD, IMHO it's intentional that they (the people who dumped money into the R&D of the new short & super short rounds) do not produce data for older cartridges. R&D engineers have an impressive amount of pressure on them to come up with a brand-new never-seen-before product that will be a home run hit in the market. I think it would be detrimental to their capture of market share by showing that older cartridges perform just as well..........

[swheeler]

BLT: I think you have a pretty good handle on what they are up to! That's why I would grab a few factory loaded rounds, a good vernier micrometer, and some of the newer slower powder I was interested in. Use the factory rounds as a baseline for pressure(this is where the good mic comes in)load new brass until I got the same head expansion as first firing of the factory rounds,then reload once fired cases until I got .0005-.001 head expansion, back off 1 full grain. After I had found the maximum usuable load, then and only then would I chronograph the load! It should be easier with these new powders as they are listed on the burnrate charts, some of the powders I have done this with had no data of any kind listed. I used this method before chronos were readily available, the worst thing to ever happen was a leaky primer. Start low, work up, use what you know to produce safe ammo! Common sense goes a long ways! Safety first- accuracy second- velocity third. Scooter

[BLTsandwedge1]

"Safety first- accuracy second- velocity third."

Great motto Scooter! I can think of lots of things that it applies to.......