I had my first opportunity today to shoot the Winchester 1885 High Wall Hunter in .270 WSM I picked up last week, and I was very impressed. Aside from enjoying the classic High Wall appearance, I was hoping the long, 28 inch barrel would generate some impressive ballistics, and it does! I loaded up three sets of cartridges:

20 rounds with 130 gr. Sierra Spitzer B.T. bullets, 60.5 gr. of IMR 4350, and CCI 250 LRM primers

10 rounds the same as above except 62.5 gr. of IMR 4350 (max load from my IMR manual)

20 rounds with 90 gr. Sierra Varminter bullets, 69 gr. of IMR 4350, and CCI 250 LRM primers (max load from Real Guns internet data)

The lower powered 130 gr. set I used for initial sight-in and to make sure there were no signs of any pressure issues. The hotter loads I used to compare with book velocity levels. One of my goals with this rifle was to see if I could punch the 90 gr. bullets out near 3800 fps. I didn't have a lot of time to refine my grouping with each load, but they were all sub-1 inch at 100 yards.

According to my IMR manual, the hot 130 grain loads should run around 3230 fps in a 24 inch barrel. I clocked an average of 3243 fps. My slightly milder loads clocked an average of 3136 fps.

With the 90 grain loads, the data from the Real Gun web sight indicated I should see 3683 fps in a 24 inch barrel; my loads clocked an average of 3837 fps, with a high of 3887 fps! That's .22-250 50 gr. range, but with a better ballistic coefficient and flatter trajectory. :)

Standard Deviation in the loads ran 20 - 28 fps, and all shot extremely clean. I found it interesting that the 90 grain loads evidenced a significant velocity increase with the longer barrel, while the 130 gr. loads ran about the same as with the 24 inch barrel, although there could be other factors involved since the loads were from two different sources. I found recoil to be fairly moderate, even easier than my standard .270's, although to be fair this is a heavy setup (with the Burris 8-32 scope it's probably in the 11 lb range) and the Decelerator recoil pad is excellent.

At any rate, I'm a happy camper and looking forward to playing with this combo a lot more in the upcoming weeks.

Those are some pretty impressive velocities with the 90gr Varminters. In my regular 270, I use them at just over 3000 fps which comes close to duplicating the 100 yard trajectory of my deer ammo and produces 5-shot groups under an inch. The 110gr Hornady VMAX's were better, but I don't run either very fast so that I can shoot more without cooking my barrel, plus I look for accuracy more than velocity. I never have tried to see how fast I could fling them.

About your trajectory with those 90's, your BC is essentially identical to the most inefficient 50 grain .224 caliber bullets. The polymer tipped and boat-tail designs are noticably more efficient, and they would probably shoot flatter than your 270 WSM.

At any rate, you'll have to provide us with a post-mortum report on the first varmint that catches one. That is if you can see where it lands.

amndouglas

I'll grant you the ballistic coefficients and sectional densities aren't as impressive as the heavier and more aerodymically shaped bullets, but I was primarily in a quest to see what I could do in creating a "varmint" round out of the .270. Looking over the ballistic data in my Sierra manual, I found that the 90 grain .270 bullets pumped up to 3600+ fps will shoot as flat as (or flatter than) a .22-250 out to 500 yards. I was considering the purchase of a .22-250 at the time, but changed course and decided rather to see what I could do with my .270's.

I have a pair of .270 Winchesters, a Ruger #1A and a CZ-550. With 61 grs. of IMR 4350 and the 90 gr. Sierra bullets, I achieved 3500 fps out of the Ruger. Ironically, the longer-barreled CZ (23.6 in. barrel as opposed to 22 inches on the Ruger) was notably slower (3378 fps ave. vs 3440 fps ave.), but much more consistent (std. dev. of 12 fps vs 64 fps). All my loads are within the max limits of the manuals, and none show any pressure problems. Both .270's were grouping the full-house 90 grainers at just over an inch at 100 yards.

When the High Wall came out in .270 WSM with a 28 inch barrel, it looked like just the ticket for a truly "hot" varmint load, having enough barrel length to fully burn the extra powder of the WSM case. The desire for another High Wall, a great price opportunity, and curiousity about the WSM cartridge got the better of me and I ended up on my current course. My 130 gr. loads look like they'll group even better, but I haven't had a chance to play with them as much (I was helping some other folks learn to shoot at the time).

I suppose I should include a hunting story about exploding a varmint at 500 yards, immediately dropping a running antelope at 400 yards, and then crumpling a charging Grizzly at 30 paces, while declaring all other calibers obsolete, but you'll have to wait for someone else to give you that data. :) I'm basically having fun punching paper, exploding water jugs, and watching the chronograph. Maybe in a year or two I'll make it to Wyoming for my dream Elk hunt...

Believe me, I understand what you're doing. My 270 served as my varmint rifle for two trips to Western Kansas. It was definitely adequate, and I could hit dogs out to around 250 yards just as reliably with it as I could with my friend's heavy barreled 223. It wasn't the accuracy or ability of the rifles that limited me, it was my inability to dope that Kansas wind.

Shooting varmints with the 270 definitely has its drawbacks, though, which I'm sure you are aware of.

Number one is the comparitively large amount of powder burned to do the same job. Forget large in your WSM, it's HUGE.

Number two is the cost of bullets. 22 caliber bullets cost quite a bit less for similar or better accuracy and the same results (nice critter explosion followed by the WHOMP!)

Number three is more time spent letting the rifle cool and less time shooting it. It's not a big concern if you've got a 4, 8 or 16 gun battery out with you, but when it's your only rifle and you've got a dozen Pdog pups begging you to shoot them, it's hard not to overheat your barrel.

On the plus side, there's no better practice for deer season than popping tiny targets like prairie dogs at a couple hundred yards. It makes those deer look about impossible to miss.

You probably did the right thing in not getting the 22-250 since your new toy can pull off the long shots. You should just fill out your battery with a 223 Rem and a 17 HMR or 22 WMR to take care of all the closer stuff.

Just curious. How many shots were in your groups?

amndouglas

Just a side comment on the full-house loads: I usually shoot reduced loads for the reasons you mentioned previously - less powder, longer barrel life, and often better accuracy. With the recent acquisition of a chronograph, I've been playing with full power loads to see how my actual velocities stack up against listed velocities (most of my sources only list velocities for max loads). Of course, in the development of a really hot varmint load I've been pushing the max side to get velocities and trajectories up where I want them.

I borrowed a friend's .22-250 Encore for awhile to see how I liked the round. I did like the low recoil and the much lower powder requirements, but the blast was bothersome (although much of that had to do with the muzzle brake he had on his rifle) and I found it a bit of a pain trying to get extruded powders into the small cases (they tend to clog the funnels). Bullet pricing isn't too much different between the two. The .223 and .17 HMR are very tempting. I borrowed the same friend's CZ heavy barreled .17 HMR and loved it - no blast, no recoil, and some of the best accuracy I've seen in any rifle (I shot groups of 5 at a hundred yards that were at the same vertical point and just strung a little horizontally by the cross wind). Paying $9 a box for rimfires is still a little hard to get used to, however!

At any rate, after that I decided to see what I could do with my .270's, saving a bit of money and getting good use out of my existing rifles. Now that I've picked up the WSM High Wall, the financial side is negated, but that was more of an emotional decision. :) I still like the idea of having a rifle/cartridge combo that can serve for anything from prairie dog to elk or moose with the proper bullet.

My shooting Friday consisted of firing two or three shots, adjusting the scope, firing a few more, fine tuning the scope, then shooting a few to verify. Each "set" was well within the 1 inch squares on the target. The shots were close enough to each other that I felt comfortable adjusting the scope. That's not very objective data, I know, but I had only a short amount of time to spend at the range so I never got to shoot the accuracy groups like I hoped to. I'm going to try to get back this week and get some measured groups for you with both the 90 gr. and 130 gr. bullets.

I took the 1885 back out today to shoot a few more groups.

With the 130 gr. Sierra Spitzer Boattails and 60.5 gr. of IMR 4350, I fired a three shot group that measured 1.5 inches. As with each of my groups, it seems the first two shots would generally group pretty closely (5/8 inch, in this case), while subsequent shots would open the groups up a bit.

With 90 gr. Sierra Varminter bullets and 69 gr. of IMR 4350, I shot a 1 3/8 in. 5 shot group. In this case the first two shots were touching each other, but the following shots opened the group up.

My with the 130 gr. Sierra Spitzer Boattails and 62.5 gr. of IMR 4350, my oldest son put two shots in 1/2 inch. My initial 3 shot group ran 3/4 inch, before I started making a few scope adjustments.

From what I've seen so far, it looks like this rifle with my loads will group the first two shots very tightly, but extended shooting will open groups to around 1 1/2 inches.

How experienced are you with shooting groups? Have you tried shooting groups onto black paper so you can't see the holes? Bad optics actually help in this respect.

I've had a few times where I would put the first two shots right on top of each other. I'd want so badly to put that third one right with them, and it would turn out to be a flyer. It can be a mental thing and not necessarily the rifle's fault.

That first shot is going to be the most important. The second one might be important, and after that probably won't matter much unless you're shooting prairie dogs or paper. At any rate, it sounds like it's a decent shooter. I know I wouldn't want to be a varmint within sight of you.

amndouglas

I have a fair amount of experience shooting groups. Having said that, I have no doubt that mental or conditional effects may have opened up the groups. It doesn't take much variation in shooting position, bench motion (I'm shooting from a portable bench), or other factors to make a significant variation at 100 yards. I'm also not that happy with the type of target I was using (a new-to-me target that doesn't offer quite as precise an aiming point) or my optics. At any rate, I'm pleased with the potential and I think with a bit of effort group sizes can easily be held significantly below the magic "1 inch" spread. :)

I spent a little more time at the range today with the 1885 Hunter. I backed off a grain on my loads using the Sierra 90 gr. varmint bullet, to 68 grains of IMR 4350. This produced 3670 fps, and a 1/2 inch 3-shot group at 100 yards. You could say I'm satisfied. :-) After shooting my 45-90, the .270WSM felt like a pellet gun...