Fox Shooting with Tika .270

New_one

Hi, Can anyone advise what is the smallest load you can get for a .270. Hope its not a silly question but it the size of the load connected to the "bang" or level od the bang? Many thanks

clivej

What ever load you use it's still going to be a BIG bang and get you noticed. Even using a moderator on the rifle the report will still be loud.

My advice is use whatever your rifle likes and make sure you can see where that round will go AFTER you have hit the fox and the round has gone on through. A balistic tip round will help to slow the exiting bullet down as it will have expanded somewhat but it can still travel a long, long way after the hit.

Be safe, aim small and have a good backstop.

New_one

Thanks Clive, I have a mod on it. Only have it now 2 weeks. I have fired 140g Hornady, that what i got with it! so one box fired to sight the scope. There is a big band alright! thanks for info. I guess I will have to make another investment for lamping at night!

clivej

New_one wrote: »

Thanks Clive, I have a mod on it. Only have it now 2 weeks. I have fired 140g Hornady, that what i got with it! so one box fired to sight the scope. There is a big band alright! thanks for info. I guess I will have to make another investment for lamping at night!

I hate to say this BUT buying the gun was only the cheap part, if your like me (and many others) the rest of the kit is where the $$$$$$$$$$ go.

:) All the best with your new investment and happy hunting. :)

Glensman

I heard of a gamekeeper using 110gr for foxing in the .270. I use 130gr- this is basically the standard .270 load that made the calibre famous...

Good luck with the bang of it mate, they just are a bit of an animal!

New_one

I was of the belief (incorrectly) that the noise = the gr of the bullet!
Would 110g create less noise that a 130g? Please excuse the supitity

It wasn't me!

New_one wrote: »

I was of the belief (incorrectly) that the noise = the gr of the bullet!
Would 110g create less noise that a 130g? Please excuse the supitity

Not unless it's heavily downloaded, but you won't notice. It'll kick slightly less, but again, not that you'd really notice. Norma loads a 110gr Vmax which is meant to be excellent. That'd be a hell of a foxing load. Whatever you're using for deer should do just fine though.

landkeeper

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Not unless it's heavily downloaded, but you won't notice. It'll kick slightly less, but again, not that you'd really notice. Norma loads a 110gr Vmax which is meant to be excellent. That'd be a hell of a foxing load. Whatever you're using for deer should do just fine though.

it is a fox decided to take a nap on a round bale of straw right at the bottom of a bank in the field where we used to zero the estate .270 there he was all curled up and comfy, looking at me with one eye in the lamp so i let him have one with the .270 the bullet actually hit him in the rear haunch but broke most if not all the bones in his body
it's very much overkill but very effective

Glensman

New_one wrote: »

I was of the belief (incorrectly) that the noise = the gr of the bullet!
Would 110g create less noise that a 130g? Please excuse the supitity

Nothing noticeable mate. The 110 would be a great foxing round, bound to be Very flat.

I stay at 130 because if I'm after a big animal it's not worth me going to re-zero with a 150gr, and then for foxing it's great too.
110 would be (im guessing) the best foxing load available, but then when you go for a deer you'd likely have to re-zero, which is just a pain.

Savage93

Just be conscious of your backstop with a calibre that large when hunting foxes

Glensman

Savage93 wrote: »

Just be conscious of your backstop with a calibre that large when hunting foxes

There was a fox on a ditch last week- would have made a Very easy shot. But I couldnt get a good enough backstop and a fox aint stoppin a .270 round! :rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho

Glensman wrote: »

There was a fox on a ditch last week- would have made a Very easy shot. But I couldnt get a good enough backstop and a fox aint stoppin a .270 round! :rolleyes:

Takes a serious backstop to stop a .270.

For penetration I would rate it as one of the best calibres in it's class

It wasn't me!

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Takes a serious backstop to stop a .270.

For penetration I would rate it as one of the best calibres in it's class

If I wouldn't fire on a backstop with a .270 I wouldn't fire on it with a .22LR. A sufficiently solid backstop will stop anything. It's not something I'll gamble on, regardless of rifle. And rifle rounds are bloody useless for penetrating muck and earth.

Tackleberrywho

It wasn't me! wrote: »

If I wouldn't fire on a backstop with a .270 I wouldn't fire on it with a .22LR. A sufficiently solid backstop will stop anything. It's not something I'll gamble on, regardless of rifle. And rifle rounds are bloody useless for penetrating muck and earth.

it's more to do with the angle of the backstop in relation to the target than the material it's made of, and the ammo used.

.270 in BT's would mince a fox. The old 5.6x52RWS was a serious fox slicer too.
If the fox was hit anywhere it was curtains.

I would not use soft nose on a fox as personal preference as they are too soft and might not expand quick enough. At the end of the day soft nose .270's are for a different animal.

270 Win 130 GR InterBond® Superformance
200 yard zero with less than 6" drop @ 300 ideal for foxes


In saying all that less of a rifle would do just as good a job an

New_one

Lads.thats a lot of excellent info. I have not yet used my .270 only to sight it. Have to say it didn't make a very big hole in the cardboard!!:D. As always I was very careful of the back stop

Glensman

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

it's more to do with the angle of the backstop in relation to the target than the material it's made of, and the ammo used.

.270 in BT's would mince a fox. The old 5.6x52RWS was a serious fox slicer too.
If the fox was hit anywhere it was curtains.

I would not use soft nose on a fox as personal preference as they are too soft and might not expand quick enough. At the end of the day soft nose .270's are for a different animal.

270 Win 130 GR InterBond® Superformance
200 yard zero with less than 6" drop @ 300 ideal for foxes


In saying all that less of a rifle would do just as good a job an

I use softnoses myself. Everything else was way too expensive, but you should see the hole they make- they expand like nothin ordinary! :eek:

Tackleberrywho

New_one wrote: »

Lads.thats a lot of excellent info. I have not yet used my .270 only to sight it. Have to say it didn't make a very big hole in the cardboard!!:D. As always I was very careful of the back stop

Try get yer hands on a box of Hornady Super performance

Glensman

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Try get yer hands on a box of Hornady Super performance

What kind of money? I was quoted Federal V-shok @ £38 for 20, I bought PRVI's instead for £10 for 20!

Tackleberrywho

Glensman wrote: »

What kind of money? I was quoted Federal V-shok @ £38 for 20, I bought PRVI's instead for £10 for 20!

I'm not sure what Price they are in the UK

I'll find out, I'm hoping to pick some up this week in .308

I'd say more than 10 squid theough

New_one

Box of hornady are 35 euro in stakelums, thurles

ballistic

New_one wrote: »

Hi, Can anyone advise what is the smallest load you can get for a .270. Hope its not a silly question but it the size of the load connected to the "bang" or level od the bang? Many thanks

110 vmax loaded by norma will do about three one fps out of a twenty inch barrel tikka. These will give excellent kills on deer even for a shoulder shot including all irish deer species.They will not splash or explode on the skin. They will not cause excessive meat damage either.

Use a t8 moderator and they are not too loud, recoil is a non issue.

With regard to a backstops if a shot is not safe for a 270 then its not safe for 22. the 110 will no rickochet.