Anyone know why Barnes recommends .050" off the lands? Is it a pressure thing with these bullets? I've always seated just touching or back about .010" and had better accuracy.

Rick, the 168 TSX wouldn't shoot in my 30-06 seated .020 or .030" off the lands. When I moved em back to .050" the groups shrank in half. Particularly in a hunting weight factory rifle I learned years ago that it's a myth that bullets shoot best close to the lands... some shoot best that way, some don't. Adjusting seating depth acts just like a barrel harmonizer (like the old BOSS system) allowing the bullet to leave the end of the barrel at the optimum point in the "wave" as the barrel vibrates under firing.

Experimentation is the watchword...

try both--have a Kimber that likes them just touching for whatever reason.

I've seen posting's where anything from touching the lands to .050 can work. Seems like they now are just about like any bullet on the market. Reloaders often forget what a big impact seating depth seems to make on accuracy.
In my browning Bar auto I'd probably be lucky to get within .080 of the lands with the clip space I have....but it doesn't matter because that just might be the sweet spot! If you have a OAL gauge I'd recomend measuring some ammo that has been accurate and try and duplicate that distance to the lands as a starting point. (Or even measure a factory round and start with that dimension)

I've even gotten .5 inch groups with my .270 when the 140gr TSX were seated .09 off the lands. I'm going to adjust my dies and try .05, but I may end up sticking with .09. Who knows? Just experiment and see what you come up with.

Kraky, Magazine length don't matter- I'm loading for a TC Encore. Guess I'll just experiment some more. There was a note inside the box that stated the bullets would perform better out a ways from the lands, like .020 - .050. Read somewhere else that if you seat the "X" bullets too close pressures would raise. Just trying to find the truth!! Rick

If your encore is like my contender you'll be able to hang em waaaaaaay out. Looks like you've got some unlimitted experimentation on your hands. I have read a post or two where people said a great place to start is to use the same jump to the lands as a known accuracy load for the same gun. Don't worry about the pressure problems--the bands have solved that.
I still think they want a little jump start because some of their load date is VERY agressive.

kraky, mine's a TC custom shop 264 WM but it is throated the same as SAAMI, the long bullets have to be seated way deep. thinking about having the throat cut deeper later on but I don't know if it would give me anything? What do the bands do (or not do)?

quote:

Originally posted by rick243:

What do the bands do (or not do)?

The bands or cannelure like grooves on the outside supposedly help relieve copper "galling" by giving the copper displaced by the rifle lands a place to go rather than scraping off all the way to the back. Same as the grooves on the Northfork

http://www.northforkbullets.com/FAQ.htm

I wouldn't monkey with cutting things beyond what the factory has done--I'd say you would stand a chance of making a problem more than solving a problem you most likely don't even have. Re the "bands". The barnes bullet is solid copper. Most your highly accurate match grade bullets have thinner jackets and lead cores that....if you can imagine it...conform to the barrel as they go down it. Ie a softer jacket might conform to the imperfections of a "non custom" barrel. But your higher quality "tougher" bullets with thicker jackets, bonded cores, or solid construction most likely will have more trouble shooting good. So, what the bands do is give a "relief" so to speak as they travel down the barrel--the tougher jacket can sort of "wipe out" into the space of the band and allow it to conform as it travels down the rifling. I think in the future alot of bullets will have bands. They will most likely allow flexibility of the bullet vrs the rifling. The problem will be how a bullet manufacturer can make them economically. Time will tell but for barnes the xlc coating was pretty much a failure.....but the triple shock has been a great and needed reversal for them.

Thanks guys, Looks like I could wear this barrel out finding the "right stuff". The North fork looks like a well designed bullet. Never heard of them and can't recall seeing them in the catalogs. Anybody tried them?
Looks like this whole 264 WM thing is useless anyway. I bought the damn thing thinking I might get lucky and draw one of our KY Elk tags someday. Found out last night the Fish and Wildlife have set a minimum caliber for KY Elk at 270 or larger. Some big-bore freak must be on the board. Oh well it should make a heck of a deer rifle. Have to start looking around for another Encore barrel OVER 270 cal.!!! Rick

quote:

Found out last night the Fish and Wildlife have set a minimum caliber for KY Elk at 270 or larger.

Huh, not the dumbest idea though...

I have used the Barnes TSX in the past for elk and have been very satisfied. When I move the TSX closer to the lands, I get a rapid pressure buildup. The factory recommended .050 works best for me. This year I am trying the Northfork 225 gr. in my 338 Win Mag. So far, at the range, it has been super accutate and I'm at .038 off the lands. The Northfork appears to be a hybrid of the Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, but with the rings I can get much better accuracy in my rifle. Hope this helps.