I will never believe I am posting this. If I could, I would change my last name to Nosler...I do love their bullets. However, everyone on this board is singing the praises of the Barnes Triple Shocks..."like a bolt of lightning, only better"...etc. Well, I am going to give them a try & see what happens.

Got a pre-64 (1949) model 70 in 270 that is giving only so so accuracy with my ballistic tips and accubonds. By so so I am saying inch and a half for 5 shots. Every other pre-64 has given me half inch or better (no kidding), so I am wanting to try these against my better judgement. Any good loads utilizing RL-22 or 4831sc will be appreciated. Barnes like to be about .05 off the lands right??

300 RUM: Loves my Noslers, but while I am trying the 270's why not see what the 165 grain Triple Shocks will do in this round? It likes RL-22 as well.

Suggestions sincerely appreciated.

270 bullet weight?

For the rum I would go with the 180 gr TSX and Retumbo. set them .050 off the lands and work up as always with you powder charge.

Good luck
I hear what you are saying about the Noslers but I realy think The TSX's are a better game>

130 grains on the 270...sorry I didn't mention.

Prdator, me trying Barnes is like John Wayne "coming out". I can't stand the X bullet, as its performance on game, accuracy, and fouling were horrible. I have developed a lifetime bias against them...this is a huge step for me to even acknowledge that they exist. Got 165's ordered for the 300.

Hank,

Before you give up on the Accubonds, you need to try seating them back, like .050-.070 off the lands. Also try the 140 Accubonds with Magpro powder. I think you just may find a load that you'll like.

My pre-war model 70 winchester shoots the 130gr TSX's very good. I get better velocity with
RL-22 than 4831 in my rifle. With the 130gr TSX my top loads with RL-22 is either 59.0gr or 60.0gr depending on the temperature. Velocity is right at 3100fps. Of course you will have to work up your loads according to your rifle, but I have found that in all the rifles I have shot the TSX bullet in they shoot like a house a fire. I understand your dislike of the X bullet but these TSX's are a whole new ball game. Less pressure, less fouling with great accuracy at higher velocity.

quote:

Originally posted by Hank H.:
130 grains on the 270...sorry I didn't mention.

FWIW, I never liked the original Barnes either but the TSX was a breath of fresh air. Night and day difference in accuracy and performance.

My rifles like 59.0 and 60.5 of Re22, and another prefers 57.0 Re19. 58.5 H4831 works very well in my brother's rifle.

Hank, The duke cant " come out"
I just find it funny that we have had just the opisit in results from the partition to the X
Granted I only tryd the X in 4 guns, 2 264s a 7 ultra and a 25-06 they all loved them. The one 264 I have shoot over 100 head of game and always if I did my part the 120gr X did its.

Right now Im loading TSX's in 9 rifles from 243wssm to 416 rem and in one 264 the 140 Xlc shines.

I wish I knew a good load for the 165 in the ultra but I do not. Now in the 300 wsm thats difernt.

Good luck with them I realy think you will like them.

I am loading the 130 TSX in my 270 with 54.0 gr of H 4350EXT. The average velocity was 3047.

Well this is a fine howdy do....Got my Barnes bullets and the little insert said to seat them .050 off the lands, use your Stoney Point Gauge to measure it, blah blah blah. Well, the damn gauge got stuck in the chamber and won't come out. Tried to pull it out by the ass end of the gauge and it broke off! Now I have a thoroughly stuck 70 case in the chamber and I can't pull it out. I also can't push it out from the muzzle end because the hole used to attach the gauge where the primer hole used to be is too big...my cleaning rods just pass through. Now, at best, I am looking to have to get my Pre-64 "rechambered" to clean out the stuck case. Now I am really po'd at Barnes. it can't be my fault can it? Good Lord what a way to start the weekend.

quote:

Originally posted by Hank H.:
Now I am really po'd at Barnes. it can't be my fault can it?

Hey Hank

This is just the beginning. I've heard of Barnes bullets causing car wrecks on the way to the range! Be careful!

Also, I think they should put warning labels on the boxes that handling those all copper bullets can cause increased flatulence, but that's just my opinion.

Woods, I believe you are on the right track there...I have experienced low gas mileage in my truck ever since I picked up the bullets yesterday. Also was told the resale value of my house was diminished.

My wife can't stand any more flatulance around here either. Damn those Barnes bullets....I should have stayed with Nosler.

If you think TSX are expensive, wait until 2007...

With the price of copper going UP daily, guess what is going to happen to all ammo, cases, and bullets?

Stock up now, while you can.

I was not aware of the copper price increase. Thanks for the heads-up.

I guess I need another couple of thousand bullets anyway. Should get me through another 5 years.

Hank, You have had so much trouble I just need to take them TSX's off your hands just send them to me and all will be well

I woulnder if you could get a tap that would just barely grip the brass and try and pull it out that way?
I would think a good swith could fix you right up Im just so glad I have a Geat one close by!

Better luck

Howdy Prdator,

I posted my question on the Gunsmithing thread and long story short...I got it all worked out. Turns out it was not Barnes fault after all. What you said to do was exactly what I did...ain't it funny how bright minded folks think alike?

If they don't shoot straight I will ship 'em all to you tomorrow. Be lookin' for them in the mail tomorrow just in case.

I appreciate your help!

Hank

You want my address? I figured out a way to bottle flatulence and substitute it for gas in my truck so those TSX's would go to good use!

Dang woods...hope my sweet wife doesn't find your phone #, she will definately be calling to see how she can bottle me up.

Off to the range....

Before you spend too much money hedging on copper futures....might be good to be aware that the excellent ballistic coefficients published by Barnes are being drastically revised downward for their TSX and MRX line. Their 180g TSX BT now shows a BC of .453, and the .308 200g TSX FB lists at only a BC of .423. I recently emailed the company about it and got a prompt reply....but I expect more bad news like this to follow.
I am particularly disappointed that the BC for my .375 270g TSX FB dropped from .503 to .326....enough performance lost for me to look elsewhere.

Happy shooting,

Dan

Dan H,

I am no bc expert, but have a decent working knowledge of it. How is a published bc that is being revised causing you to reconsider? The published bc is only a bc that is "on paper". The real world bc, calculated after the bullet leaves the barrel is the real bc and that has not changed. Not trying to be a smart a$$ please understand.

I have read numerious articles by the gurus that state that the "Whizbang 180 grain bullet had a ballistic coefficient of .390 in XYZ's Loading Maunal. After shooting my preferered load for the Whizbang, the true ballistic coefficient was calculated to be .396 at 3000 fps." This lead me to believe that the on paper bc is only a guidline and not the true bc. The TSX is still a pretty nice bullet based upon what I saw yesterday...will wait till hunting season to make my final judgement.

Take it easy and have a great weekend.

I realize that BC's are simply a tool for paper comparison....
What I didn't go into was that the Barnes Bullet BC's (which were previously simply assumed to be the same for TSX and their other X bullets) are being updated. Their email in reponse to my question about it basically stated three things:
1. Barnes is in the middle of a complete reshoot on the ballistics of their bullets. This one is being done at 300 yds instead of 100. It should be both more accurate and more applicable to hunters.
2. Changes from a fairly racy secant ogive profile to a tangent ogive profile have improved accuracy but reduced BC's.
3. TSX grooves have improved accuracy and reduce fouling but also serve to reduce BC.

I agree with you that your own shooting at all ranges must be considered the most important proof of load and usefulness.

I do consider Barnes new data to be a valid comparison or update to their line. Their terminal performance has never been in question.

As far as BC reality goes, if you recall, it seems Nosler, Sierra, and Hornady did something similar some years back as well.

Cheers,

Dan

some would say if all of your hunting shots are under 300 yards, then who gives a crap about bc anyway.