Practical Backpacking™ Forums

Welcome to Practical Backpacking™ Forums (PBF).

You are currently viewing PBF as a guest which has limited access. By becoming a PBF member, you will have full access to view and participate in tens of thousands of informative discussions, to view links and attachments (photos), and will gain access to other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free! Click to Become a PBF Member! Be sure to also explore the Practical Backpacking Podcast.


Go Back   Practical Backpacking™ Forums > Practical Backpacking™ General Outdoors (Backpacking Related) > Fishing & Hunting
HOME FAQ PBF GUIDELINES BLOG PODCAST GALLERY STORE CALENDAR Mark Forums Read

Fishing & Hunting The Fishing & Hunting forum is for discussion (on-site content) that directly relates to wilderness fishing and hunting with an emphasis on engaging in these activities while on backpacking trips. Lightweight/packable gear, personal experience/technique, and trip reports are of central focus. [Reminder: PBF is for actual content, not links/reference to offsite content.]


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-09-2010, 09:18 PM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
dsuursoo dsuursoo is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Senior Member
Backpack: Mountainsmith Maverick 65
Sleeping Gear: ALPS +20 mummy
Shelter: Kelty Noah 9x9
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by richwads
My limited experience on small game with the 1800 fps 110 gr .270 was on grey squirrel head shots, so I dunno about the body exploding question. The head didn't explode anyway, just a nice hole in and out.

But, the hydrostatic shock of such a supersonic slug through a body cavity might be different - though a bullet designed for 3000+ fps would not expand at under 2000.

I've shot many rabbits with a .30-30 download of 5 gr. Uniique and 110 gr Speer hollowpoint (broad nose for tube magazine) at an estimated 1200 fps, with no unusual destruction whatsoever. Not a tack-driver, and a loopy trajectory, but gud enuf fer 25 yd shots.

BTW, I read up on that Trail Boss powder - good call! I believe I would start with that, and use full size 130 gr slugs as you suggest, to keep velocity down and eliminate expansion. The trick will be to match point of aim to minimize scope adjustment. Counting clicks is OK, but in the field there's the "let's see, did I go CW or CCW?" factor. And I found myself switching ammo and scope settings often enough to forget what I did last. Also, put a spot of fingernail polish on the headstamp of reduced loads so you know what's in the chamber. Reduced .270 loads with spitzers look amazingly similar to full loads .

i was planning on different colored rings with a sharpie to indicate how many times the casing has been shot/reloaded, to avoid using very worn casings.

depending on the drop of the round, i might just use a holdover of mils(mil-dot scope), and call that good enough. i don't plan on going over 50 yards, and i figure that big fat bullet doing its non-expanding thing at low speed would do the trick.

honestly, a non-expanding bullet would do the trick all on its own regardless of expansion. if i had a .308 i'd just pick up some mil-surplus AP rounds and load them up hot. that tungsten/steel round with the carbide cap would go flying through without doing much in the way of slowing down or expanding.

but i don't, so i can't, etc etc etc.

on the trail boss: i found the loading in the hodgdon's annual, as well as an article about using trail boss in a variety of cartridges to either produce lower recoil rounds or plinker rounds. to be sure the loading with trail boss would be a real loop... almost 26" of drop at 200 yards according to the calculator i just ran the data through. the bullet hangs on to its velocity and energy well though. looks like my point of aim would be point of impact at 84-85 yards, so perfect for the situation. about 500 foot pounds of energy dropping to about 410 at 100 yards.

i think i've discovered a rabbit round for .270.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-10-2010, 04:43 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
MoondogFiftyfive MoondogFiftyfive is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Associate Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 270
Richwads I tend to mix my measurements sometimes, that was 1000Meters per second (MPS ) we are fully metric in Australia but I grew up with English imperial so sometimes i remember in one sometimes in another, like using "Angels" for aircraft height
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-10-2010, 07:00 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
dsuursoo dsuursoo is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Senior Member
Backpack: Mountainsmith Maverick 65
Sleeping Gear: ALPS +20 mummy
Shelter: Kelty Noah 9x9
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,482
hear you on that moondog... i still find myself using both(thanks to military time).

the thought behind using an ultra velocity round and a non-expanding bullet(there are a few out there that are one metal throughout) isn't a new one, fur hunters have been using them for a while now. just two neat holes and done.

the trouble with that route is that your shot has to be perfect or you're going to be looking for a while.

so i think a soft nose with this very reduced load is the way to go. the performance and impact energy are similar to a 9mm parabellum, which can be used for small game(not saying it should, but it can...), but the bullet's a lot more efficient. the hope is that a soft nose round will expand a little, but not explosively like most varmit bullets do.

the real test will be the first use in the field(in just a month or two if i have my way...), i might switch to the high velocity non-expanding bullet instead.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-10-2010, 07:35 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
richwads richwads is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Associate Member
Shelter: Tarp
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Posts: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoondogFiftyfive
Richwads I tend to mix my measurements sometimes, that was 1000Meters per second (MPS ) we are fully metric in Australia but I grew up with English imperial so sometimes i remember in one sometimes in another, like using "Angels" for aircraft height

Ahhh . . . . Yes, now I get it. You're right - doesn't matter what bullet you use at full load - bunnies are not edible. Sorry for the overreaction.

And dsuursoo - it does seem like the supersonic shock factor is what puts a little critter down without depending on expansion, with bullets between 1200 and 1800 fps, and I look forward to hearing about your tests.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-10-2010, 08:53 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
dsuursoo dsuursoo is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Senior Member
Backpack: Mountainsmith Maverick 65
Sleeping Gear: ALPS +20 mummy
Shelter: Kelty Noah 9x9
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,482
scope's due to arrive this week, so possibly this weekend, depending, the first range trip to get it sighted in. figure a while longer to get the loading equipment, and we'll know if the rabbit round is viable on paper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by richwads
And dsuursoo - it does seem like the supersonic shock factor is what puts a little critter down without depending on expansion, with bullets between 1200 and 1800 fps, and I look forward to hearing about your tests.

well, comparitively speaking, that .270 bullet smoking on through at 3300fps or higher is kind of like a person being hit by a meteor. doesn't matter too much where it hits so long as it's in the vital zone.

Last edited by dsuursoo : 02-10-2010 at 08:57 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-07-2010, 04:09 PM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
Surveyor Surveyor is offline
Practical Backpacking™ Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 144
You would be much better off using a .22 Long Rifle for foraging and hunting small game than trying to load a .270 Winchester down to something it is not intended to be. Too much opportunity for bullets to become lodged in the barrel or have detonation problems due to squib loads. Not to mention the fact the firearms ad ammo is so much lighter.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-07-2010, 04:27 PM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
dsuursoo dsuursoo is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Senior Member
Backpack: Mountainsmith Maverick 65
Sleeping Gear: ALPS +20 mummy
Shelter: Kelty Noah 9x9
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surveyor
You would be much better off using a .22 Long Rifle for foraging and hunting small game than trying to load a .270 Winchester down to something it is not intended to be. Too much opportunity for bullets to become lodged in the barrel or have detonation problems due to squib loads. Not to mention the fact the firearms ad ammo is so much lighter.

except for the whole cost factor(buying another gun), the fact that i'm most likely to be out for small game while i'm out for large game, and the .270 is still a pretty small bullet, but packs a lot more wallop at the same velocity as the .22. it'll also drift a lot less at range.

and while it might be lighter, carrying two guns doesn't sound like fun to me. maybe if i got an AR-7 or one of its copies, then it might be okay.

the real point of the discussion was the versatility of the .270(which writers have been remarking on for decades now). of note, it's been loaded down for years as a small game round with terrific results. the mauser action is more than capable of handling any blow-back from burst casings(you get a lot of noise and smoke and that's it), and modern firearms don't have issues with two bullets in the barrel unless there are a lot of other things wrong with the barrel(bad bore sizing being primary- if the bore is too tight of course a low-loaded round will get stuck). to tell the truth, muzzle-loading guns are the only ones where this was a concern(and then only in the older days before modern steels)

i for one am not terribly concerned on this front. if i get the back-discharge from a round that doesn't make it out the bore, i'm going to stop and field strip, just because i'm thorough(and notice things like funky discharge). the loading i found for trail boss works up enough pressure that the round will clear the bore every time, it's just done burning before it's halfway down the barrel on a 24" rifle(like mine) so the velocity is low.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-08-2010, 08:09 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
Mountaineerbass Mountaineerbass is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Associate Member
Backpack: Osprey Aether
Sleeping Gear: Big Agnes Lost Ranger
Shelter: REI Quarter Dome
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsuursoo
maybe if i got an AR-7 or one of its copies, then it might be okay.

I have an AR-7, shot several more, and would not recommend for hunting small game unless you are REALLY close... very poor accuracy.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-08-2010, 08:42 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
Doss Doss is offline
Practical Backpacking™ Junior Member
Shelter: Bivy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountaineerbass
I have an AR-7, shot several more, and would not recommend for hunting small game unless you are REALLY close... very poor accuracy.

I have a Henry Survival Rifle (the new AR-7) and have actually been surprised by the accuracy VS my dads old AR-7.. that said it is very picky about ammo and some rounds provide craptastic accuracy and others really good. Using CCI Varmint I have taken small rodents at 75 yards (and yes I have a scope on it). I like that it is light and simple but it does have its flaws but they can be worked through with a little attention and polishing.

My dad used to use his .270 the same as you are talking and had no problems other than forgetting to put the smaller round in and taking out a rodent with the wrong round a time or two and having no rodent left

That is a beautiful weapon though, reminds me of my .250 Savage
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-08-2010, 09:10 AM
© 2006-2016 Practical Backpacking™ / All Rights Reserved
dsuursoo dsuursoo is offline
Practical Backpacking­™ Senior Member
Backpack: Mountainsmith Maverick 65
Sleeping Gear: ALPS +20 mummy
Shelter: Kelty Noah 9x9
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tooelecherokee
I have a Henry Survival Rifle (the new AR-7) and have actually been surprised by the accuracy VS my dads old AR-7.. that said it is very picky about ammo and some rounds provide craptastic accuracy and others really good. Using CCI Varmint I have taken small rodents at 75 yards (and yes I have a scope on it). I like that it is light and simple but it does have its flaws but they can be worked through with a little attention and polishing.

interesting... i might look into one of those air force pilot's survival rifles(they simply folded over instead of breaking down like the AR-7.). those look neat, and they pack a shotgun round for the fast movers.

the main issue with the AR-7 for accuracy is the barrel, and how it mates to the receiver. it's really difficult to make sure those are perfectly aligned, especially given that the rear sight is on the receiver and not the barrel.

one with a scope on the receiver would alleviate a lot of that issue, though you'd still have to be careful how you put it together.

[qoute]

My dad used to use his .270 the same as you are talking and had no problems other than forgetting to put the smaller round in and taking out a rodent with the wrong round a time or two and having no rodent left [/quote]

had that happen a few times hunting small game with various pistols... i'd use shotshells, but would only have the first round or two loaded as shot(the rest would be standard rounds for whatever pistol it was). as i typically used my .357... well, you get the idea.
with that said, .38spl wadcutter rounds make terrific rabbit rounds. lots of wallop, big hole, low velocity and enough expansion that there's no overkill issues.

Quote:

That is a beautiful weapon though, reminds me of my .250 Savage

found out more about it after i took it to the riflesmith for a look over and zeroing the scope. turns out it's made my CZ(who make the wonderful 5xx series rifles and the infamous CZ-75 series pistols), who did a lot of contracting for sears back when. they're apparently rarer guns. the stock is a later add-on, not factory. the trigger is fully adjustable. he said the action feels like it's only a couple years old, not almost 50.

so hey, go me!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Katahdin, Baxter State Park, Maine, Part 1 of 3 marcheurapied Trip Reports 1 10-09-2009 11:31 AM
The Wind Rivers (WY) - Elkhart Park to Green Lakes: Part 1 adventure_dog Trip Reports 0 08-17-2009 01:28 PM
Troop 45 Philmont Trek - Part 1 Taedawood Trip Reports 1 08-16-2009 06:09 PM
Soda can stoves must be part of a system BeaverTrapper Backcountry Kitchen 6 05-30-2006 02:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Backpacking Forums


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2006-2017 Practical Backpacking™
Practical Backpacking is a trademark of Absolutely Prepared™
Practical Backpacker is a trademark of Absolutely Prepared™
Practical Backpacking Podcast is a trademark of Absolutely Prepared™
Practical Backpacking Magazine is a trademark of Absolutely Prepared™