looking for a 3300 fps 150 grain 270 weatherby accurate handload

[Ryno440]

I'm looking for a accurate handload for my 270 using 150 grain long range accubond.  I want 3300 fps Thank you much

[catskinner]

you want 3300 fps with the 150gr bullet, well what you want and what you get, might be two different things, depends on what your barrel length is. I have a very accurate load with the 150 gr ballistic tip, I use in my accumark with a 26 inch barrel. It's a strout load of RL25(over any published data)for an average of 3245 fps. If I go any hotter, I start to get pressure signs.

Rob

[fasttrx88]

I am with catskiner on this one . I'm shooting 150 grain bergers and again above published Max load of vhitavouri N560 or hodgdon H-1000 and I'm maxed out at 3250 and two other accumarks I load for I can't go that high but that should be close enough

[Ryno440]

What are your guys powder charges to let me know what you stopped at so I can start lower and build up to your loads

[catskinner]

Sorry, but I won't give that load powder charge out on the internet, like I said earlier, it's over any published data. I can say it's RL25, Weatherby cases, Fed 215 primer, 150 gr ballistic tip bullet, 3.300" OAL. I started using nosler data, and worked up slowly.

Rob

[Fotis]

Here you go.  This is what my 270 Bee ultralight does.

[dubyam]

You're getting good advice. Plan for 3200-3250, and you may get as much as 3285-3290, but 3300 is really outside the safe realm.

I've used IMR7828ssc to good effect, and have known guys who get good accuracy out of H1000, H4831, Norma MRP, RL22, RL25, and Accurate MagPro, though MagPro is going to very likely give you the lowest velocity of the powders suggested by the  here. The tough part may be finding what your rifle likes.

[giddens1972]

If you can find some VVN-560 you may be able to get close... Ive gotten over 3400fps in mine with 140 Accubonds but it shows a lot of pressure signs.

John

[looserowels]

I know I am late to this discussion but..............I recently started another topic about load development with this same bullet and while I have some input from the Nation, I continue to research - hence my discovery of this thread.

First, while I do not wish to spark fuel, and I mean no disrespect to those who make statements similar to ".....I wouldn't publish that data in the internet...", I have to question why. There are plenty of worse things that are shown on this www, what is wrong with showing what your test results are? Isn't that the point of this particular forum? If people are careless enough to go straight to a stout load based on a forum comment........... well that is their choice. Additionally, I find it somewhat hypocritical to not publish the load data but tease everyone with a velocity figure that is near or above max value.

All that aside, here is my limited experience with this caliber/bullet combination as it relates to the velocity aspect of this subject.
I started my load development with H-1000 because that is what I have, and sparse internet information that I have found indicates it is a fairly common powder used in this caliber. Using the information on the Hodgdon website I started at their recommended starting load of 75 grains. Here are my average velocities in 1/2 grain increments from my first testing:
75: 3260
75.5: 3325
76: 3330
76.5: 3337
77: 3358
I got similar results in subsequent testing using overlapping charges starting at a lower weight and different atmospheric conditions:
73.5: 3208
74: 3227
74.5: 3262
75.7: 3273
75.9: 3285
76.1: 3294
76.3: 3316
76.5: 3302
In the first outing I stopped when I started seeing pressure signs - note I was still 2 grains away from the published max of 79. In the second outing I had plans to shoot 2 more strings at 76.7 and 76.9 but ran out of time.
Since my velocities are so high, I have elected to do further testing at lower than published data from 72-75.
Some might question the validity of my velocity measurements since they do seem high but, while I haven't sent the Oehler to NIST for a "blessing", I had previously used it on factory Weatherby loads and obtained data consistent with published data from Weatherby for 130 Spitzers and 150 partitions.
For the record, my rifle is a 24" 1:10. I have recently done a thorough clean using bore tech because of a recommendation from dubyam and multiple people posting their positive results with it on the internet.
I am anxious for my next data set and you can bet that I will post the results here on the web to share with other fellow seekers. I would rather post it in one thread, however, so I will update the thread that I started recently.
james

[catskinner]

taken from the last post.  " Additionally, I find it somewhat hypocritical to not publish the load data but tease everyone with a velocity figure that is near or above max value."

So you find it hypocritical that I would not post my load data because it's over any published data, well sir, I don't give two flying fucks if you liked it or not, it was MY choice not to give out my load data, everyone needs to work up their own loads for their rifle's. If you want to post your load data, that's fine, that is your choice.

Rob

[BB340]

In this day and age with a lot of people out to make a quick buck if somebody got hurt thru careless reloading they could say they got the information from somebody from this site and then go ahead and take legal action against them. So it could be wise to keep data to ones self. jmo.

[badsection]

In this day and age with a lot of people out to make a quick buck if somebody got hurt thru careless reloading they could say they got the information from somebody from this site and then go ahead and take legal action against them. So it could be wise to keep data to ones self. jmo.

Agreed! 

[dubyam]

Liability is the reason I don't publish my data, as well.

I'll say as far as your experience, James, I'm betting you're well above 65kpsi. Velocity is the primary direct indicator of pressure, and working up to 3300fps with a 150gr in the 270Wby is absolutely above 65kpsi. It's likely you're above 70kpsi. Factoring in your 24" barrel, I'd guess you're approaching somewhere between 72-75kpsi, but that's just an educated guess based on 20+ years loading experience, plenty of physics classes, and a lot of time using software simulators for pressure estimation and comparing that to real world data.

In a 24" barrel, 3200-3225 is going to be a max load. Going above that will shorten brass life and increase the risk of a bad outcome should temps rise or you get a batch of bullets which are on the large end of the diameter tolerance spectrum.

It's your rifle and you're welcome to do as you please, but the reality is, I'd you're seeing 3300fps from a 24" barrel, you're a marked amount above 65kpsi, which is considered the safe pressure limit for brass cartridges in modern sporting rifles.

I'd also challenge the idea that getting published velocities from factory ammo indicates your chrono is apot-on, as those published numbers are from 26" barrel testing. You may have a tight chamber, in which case start loads may approximate max pressure for your rifle. Again, do what you like, but I don't want to be at the bench next to you at the range if you're going to push the envelope like that.

[looserowels]

I expected those types of responses and fully agree everyone is entitled to their opinions and what they choose to transcribe on the internet.
Part of my point is I acknowledge we live in a sue-happy world where many sue to make a "quick buck", but that should not cause us to hold back publishing data in fear of retribution.
In all these forums, people, including those in the previous responses, give sound advice and when discussing load data they almost always include the standard don't-sue-me clause of "...always start low and work your way up... every rifle is different...."
I joined this forum to seek data from those who have experience. I do not have 20+ years of reloading experience, nor do I own more than one rifle in this caliber, nor do I have 1 of nearly every Weatherby caliber. I admit it gets frustrating to get so close to the data one is seeking just to get told "I won't publish it on the internet". In my previous post, I simply wanted to question "Why?" at the same time guessing it was because of the virtual liability. I am thankful for the couple of PMs with load data I received. Perhaps they sensed minimal liability.

Continued on next post...

[looserowels]

Continued from last post...

My data, which may or may not help anyone else, indicates I have reached or surpassed max pressures. As pointed out by others, it is my rifle and I will do as I please with it, which is further reduce my charge weight (see my previous data) to stay within safe operating pressures - I would rather have dubyam on the next bench at the range having fun with me. Nowhere in my posts did I indicate I was going to increase my charges. I will, however, overlap lower charges to further validate previous velocity data.
If my chrono is spot-on then the educated guessed pressures are valid and admittedly high.
If my chrono is not spot-on then my educated guess is that I am near max pressures.
I am choosing to trust my chrono data for a couple reasons. 1 - It errs on the safe side. 2 - it was validated with other rifles with known round/velocity combinations - not just my rifle.

Thanks for the healthy discussion. I simply challenge people to not fear being sued over internet data. You are already providing sound, cautious advice, showing a charge weight won't send someone to a lawyer office.
In the end I respect everyone's choice - even if it is to not give two flying anythings.......