130gn vs 150gn

[Liptugger]

So shooting a 270, usually always shoot 130gn, but going on a hunt and the deer are bigger and may have opportunity for elk so thought 150gn may be better.
Comparing the same ammo side by side the 150gn is slower and produces less energy and drops more. What if any are the advantages for stepping up to 150gn?
Thank you for your input.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

130 grain TTSX will be fit the bill for everything you want to kill with your .270.

Once the regular Barnes Xs came out I went to a 140gn but when the TTSX’s came out I went to the 130gn and haven’t looked back.

SSS

[RackStar]

130 grain TTSX will be fit the bill for everything you want to kill with your .270.

Once the regular Barnes Xanax’s came out I went to a 140gn but when the TTSX’s came out I went to the 130gn and haven’t looked back.

SSS

recently got a 270, will be using it next season.

How far do these Barnes still expand to with the 270? Been thinking of the 150 partition or 130 accubonds , but Barnes seems like a good choice too, I was hoping to set this rifle up for the rare 500y shot that may present itself in the alpine or farmers field.

^^ I would shoot a elk with a 130 grain OP shouldn’t matter if it goes where it belongs

[kevingm1987]

140 gn partition. Best bullet I have ever shot out of my .270. Animals straight up die when they get hit as well. Been apart of 4 moose kills wit the partition. .270,.300 WM and .308. All did the job great!

recently got a 270, will be using it next season.

How far do these Barnes still expand to with the 270? Been thinking of the 150 partition or 130 accubonds , but Barnes seems like a good choice too, I was hoping to set this rifle up for the rare 500y shot that may present itself in the alpine or farmers field.

^^ I would shoot a elk with a 130 grain OP shouldn’t matter if it goes where it belongs

[Redthies]

I’m not into debating environmental impact here, but I am into eating what I bring home. Below are two X-rays of animals shot with copper jacketed lead projectiles. I don’t know exactly which ones, but even the Nosler Partition claims only to retain 60%+ of its original weight. Not what I want in my supper. The Barnes TTSX and other copper monolith bullets are all I will hunt with now. The bullets I’ve recovered are 99% intact. Because of that fact, you can use a bullet with a 20% or more lower initial weight and still have the same or similar energy.

[406elcamino]

Last year on our Elk trip i had brought my 2506 for top side deer hunting but i thought what the hell i will take it for Elk in the morning. In a particular instance i had the opportunity to take a bull moose and the only shot i had was the head.. well aim small miss small shot him at about 80 yards and flattened him never recovered the bullet ( this was a 47" bull and the biggest i had ever seen in my hunting career ). After that i would not think twice in most cases and that is just a 100gr round

[MRP]

I don't have or have ever shot a 270 but every cartage has a sweet spot the most energy and flattest trajectory, 130ish is the .270's. Lighter faster give short range gaine, but at short range ( under 300yds ) probably for 90% of cartridges being used that's point and shoot distance anyway. I see no benefit in going to a heavy bullet that produces less energy despite having a higher ballistic coefficient because you can't pushed it fast enough to take advantage of it. Stick with130, shoot one bullet in one gun and always the same zero.

[Downwindtracker2]

I did a shutdown at Trail in the boiler. Our level of protection was pretty extreme. Companies don't do that for no reason. I'm switching to non toxic. But bonded core bullets like the Accubond hold together much better .

[REMINGTON JIM]

Shot placement (Lungs) is the key to Killing ! 130-140-150 will make no difference . RJ

[Pioneerman]

The weight of the bullet makes less difference compared to the quality of bullet. I have been using solid copper for 20 years and never had a issue and use a little lighter bullet for great speed and performance