I have just purchased some of these to try out in my 270. 22" 1-10" twist.

Question is simple.
Has ANY one had any luck with Barnes Bullets grouping and what is your secret? Ive tried twice before to get these to group in .270 and .223 calibers [yes the .223 has a 1-9" twist] with no joy. In the case of the .270 groupings were as bad a 8".

Is the fact simply that you need a lead core to make an accurate bullet?

If any one had used this particular 110tsx then all the better.

Cheers

Original Barnes 180 gr. X-bullets shoot right at 1" (sometimes as small as .75", sometimes as large as 1.25") out of two different Win Mod 70's in .300 Wby. No tricks or anything special. I haven't tried the TSX's, since I have enough of the others on hand for awhile.

Your .270 groups well with other bullets? You're seating a little off the lands, not jammed into them?

I've also used the original X-bullets in 7mm-08 with good results - maybe 1.5" @ 100 yards.

What load data are you using?

270 groups fine with nearly any pill. Same with the 223. Never had ANY joy with Barnes.

I never worry about seating depth. All my loads are standard as no tricks.

I've had great luck with TSX bullets in my 270 Winchester (SHR 970) rifle.

In fact, they group the very best of any bullet I've tried, and I've tried quite a few.

I have only used the 130 grain bullets, so I can't say anything about the 110 grain bullets.

Consistanly, the TSX bullets are the most accurate of ANY bullets I've used.

However, their standard X bullets have never grouped worth a damn in any of my rifles save one: a 400 Whelen. In that particular rifle they shoot into less than 1 inch at 100 yards.
I suspect it's because the barrel groove diameter is close to .410, and the bullets are .411, resulting in a very tight fit.

Garrett

Did you scrub the bore before shooting?
.

I never tried the original X bullets, but have had excellent luck getting the TSX, TTSX to shoot in several rifles. I did nothing special in load development. I seat the bullets .03 off the lands like I generally start with any bullet and they have been very accurate.

Lou

Does anyone have a good load for 140 Gr. TSX with IMR 4064? For use in a .270 Winchester Model
70

p67, I shoot all of the different weights in the TSX in 270 and they all group superbly. I have a 21" barrel Finnlite that is setup for the 110 TSX's and it shots under 1/2 minute all day long. Two keys I have found are actually at odds with each other--that is that these bullets like to be back off the lands a good bit--at least 20 thou if not 30-50, and the bullets are long for weight. Meaning that when you seat back from the lands a good bit with a long for weight bullet, you are really into the case and consuming powder space. On top of this, a third dynamic I suppose, is that IME you need to push TSX's hard, which means near max charges if you can get em in there, which I haven't had any problem doing, although a few of my loads are compressed.

Make sure you are back off the lands at least 20 thou, and start working up towards stronger loads, and also start tinkering with seating your bullets deeper in the case--further from the lands. I am not certain, but I think Barnes says to start at around 50 Thou off the lands.

Keep your barrel free of excess copper, but I will tell you that I don't have bad fouling with TSX's, despite them being all copper.

Good shooting

Cheers Fish.

Will give them a trial when they arrive. Fingers crossed, this is my last ditch effort with Barnes. I am not the fussy with seating depth. Usually I just got for standard lengths [which are well short of the lands].

I have some spare H4350 [2209] powder about which I am going to throw in there.

Fingers crossed.

I have several observations about loading TSXs after getting two different rifles to shoot them 1/2 moa.

1. Barrel must be completely clean. Totally. Get all the jacket material from the cup and core bullets out. I've found this usually takes 3 complete applications of foaming bore cleaner followed by patches and solvent. If there's jacket material left who knows what will happen. That's harder than pure copper and will strip copper off the bullets.

2. They usually need to be off the lands. When in doubt load to a shorter COAL.

3. Large groups are not uncommon with different powders and charges with TSXs.

4. But things happen quickly. As you approach a point the bullet and rifle and powder like, the group will tighten quickly. An example is my .30-06 with RL19 and 168 TSX. The minimum charge gave me a 4" group. Wow, that's impressive. Min +1 grain was a 3" group. Min +2 grains was a 1.5" group. Min +3 gave me a 3/4" group. Max charge gave me a 1/2" group.

5. A small change can make a big difference. As you can see from the above example, only 2 more grains of powder cut the group size by two-thirds. They will open as quickly. My .243 prefers the middle of the powder charge range and a grain either way turns the 1/2" group into an inch-and-a-quarter.

In both my .30-06 and .243, I found a 1/2" group with the first powder I tried. The secret is to do what you need to do and be patient. With my '06, I almost went home after the first two powder charges threw such big groups, but I didn't have anything else to do, so I shot the loads I had and, voila!

And these bullets do kill like lightening!

LWD

quote:

Cheers Fish.

Will give them a trial when they arrive. Fingers crossed, this is my last ditch effort with Barnes. I am not the fussy with seating depth. Usually I just got for standard lengths [which are well short of the lands].

I have some spare H4350 [2209] powder about which I am going to throw in there.

Fingers crossed.

Don't cross your finger. Buy or borrow a Stoney Point gage. Set your TTSXs .050 off the lands to start. Test that seating depth by trying .030 AND .060. Some rifles like them closer, some like them further.

p67
What bullet are you shooting in the 223? Reason I ask is my 1:9 will stab. the 62gr but not the 70gr TSX. I shoot the TSX in about 12 rifles with sub moa results in all. I use the 110 in a 6.8 with great results. Keep trying you will find a recipe that works.

Perry

quote:

Originally posted by marquezlc:
Does anyone have a good load for 140 Gr. TSX with IMR 4064? For use in a .270 Winchester Model
70

Sorry to say, 4064 is a bit too fast for the 270 and 140 gr bullet. 4350 or 4831 will work much better.

quote:

Originally posted by perry:
p67
What bullet are you shooting in the 223? Reason I ask is my 1:9 will stab. the 62gr but not the 70gr TSX. I shoot the TSX in about 12 rifles with sub moa results in all. I use the 110 in a 6.8 with great results. Keep trying you will find a recipe that works.

Perry

The 62gr. 16" AR15. No good. Didn't do much load work with them, to costly [rather put 2 cheap pills in their neck than one $$$!]. It was only ever a bit of playin about with the AR.

I only just noticed that Federal actually use this in their Fedral Premuim Vital Shok range for the .270.

Looking at the pic of it just look like its seated deep. Just wondering how vital seating deapth is. Like I say, I have never bothered about it and never had inaccuracy problems.

I spose I could buy a pkt of their and see if it runs in my .270. I would imagine if my rifle doesn't work even half well with their gear, I wont be able to get close considering the hours of testing they put into it.

My brother is shooting the 110 TSX for deer and antelope over IMR4350.

I am shooting the 110 TTSX and just arrived in from TX at 4am after I killed my antelope.

My load is 58.0 H4350 and the bullet is seated .035 off lands. Absolute tack driver loads in both rifles.

You can see my antelope here:

200 yards, Ruger 270/Hart bbl, 110 TTSX, H4350, bang flop

Cool 4350 was the one I was thinking of.

quote:

Originally posted by Terry Blauwkamp:

quote:

Originally posted by marquezlc:
Does anyone have a good load for 140 Gr. TSX with IMR 4064? For use in a .270 Winchester Model
70

Sorry to say, 4064 is a bit too fast for the 270 and 140 gr bullet. 4350 or 4831 will work much better.

Yeah I figured it might be kinda fast since I use it in my 22-250 and 22 Hornet well 4064 is out what would you recommend for a 140Gr Barnes TSX as a load for elk. Your ideal powder and charge since I am going to have to go out and buy it either way. What do you use?

marquezlc,

I've had excellent success with a 140 gr bullet in 270 with all of the following:

H4350, 4831SC, H1000
IMR4350, 4831
AA3100, XMR4350
Re22, Re19

I am going to try Ramshot Magnum with a magnum primer also. Barnes lists Ramshot Hunter several times with their testing.

Ultimately, you cannot go wrong with any 4831.

Wow. Cheers for the advice on the Stoney Point gauge!

I have learnt some things.

My usual loading was always 59.5gns 4831 and nearly any 130gn 270 pill [usually Nosler BT]. This would more than often give me a nice 1.5MOA group for 5 shots. Often there would be the odd tight group in there. I always base my group sizes on 5 shots btw.

I have not mentioned that I am using a Browning BARII semi auto because of all the prejudices about semi's being inaccurate. This rifle [and I've had 2 now] always surprises me how well it will shoot for a semi auto.

Back to the Stoney Point gauge.

I have since found out my latest loading of 130gn Hornady interlocks is actually to long. I just seated them up to the cannalure mark and left it. Thinking that it looked okay. Wow! Was I wrong. The gauge shows they need to be shorter. I embarrassed to say how much. I wondered why this bullet was not shooting as well as the other 130gn grain pills I have tried. Perhaps now I have the answer? They would be engaging the rifling at their current seating deapth.

I have also found out that where I was going to seat the Barnes bullets at was way to far back. As much a 0.10"!!!!. What a nub.

What surprised me heaps was where each bullet engaged the lands and groves?
The 4 different types I pictured below



The left hand Nosler was the one I have nearly always used. I have discovered that I actually had this one seated 0.050" of the lands to start with. Bit of a fluke...hahaha. Maybe why it has always shot the best of the 4.

But the Barnes was the big surprise. You would think looking at the pic that the ogive or contact point would be around that first ring part from the tip. Its actually at the base of the first ring? Had to be careful with this one, 'cause with a little to much pressure I could actually push the first ring into the lands and groves which would add about 0.10" onto the length!!

The Hornaday interlock [far right] is just in front of the cannalure. I expected to be able to see the cannalure which wasn't the case.

This picture shows it a bit better [same order left to right]



The Browning must have quite a short throat, because they all fit into the magazine if seated 0.050" back. The Sierra [second from left] being the longest.

I am now much wiser. Thanks heaps.

I have used the Stoney Point gauge and taken 10 measurements for the 110gn Barnes TTSX. Then took the average and subtracted 0.050" off that. Will start there and work up some loads. I will let you all know how that goes.

Cool beans!.

Looking forward to hearing the results

Waiting for the weather to come right.

In the mean time I measured a factory 130gn PMC round. I pulled the bullet and put it in the OAL gauge. Discovered that is is 0.050" to long for my rifle.
!!??

Go figure.

I have heard that some factory rifles have short throats.

It also only had 48gns of some sort of stick powder. Only fills about 80% of the case at a guess [well below the 4831 or 4350].

Some results.



57.5gn H4350. 0.050" off the lands. Thats a 3shot 1.1" group. If I can end up with a 5shot 1.5" group I will be more than happy.

Rifle was my new BAR Longtrac in 270. I have no idea how this new rifle compares to my old BARII Safari, but I couldn't see the point in developing a load for a rifle I was going to sell [now I have my new one].

Quite happy with this to start with.

The hotter loads @ 59.0 and 59.5 left extractor marks on the case head. Primers seemed a little too flat for my liking. They shot a bit bigger than this group also.

Case head of the 57.5gn load


I didn't go lower than 57.5gn. That was just a start figure I picked out of thin air. I will work on some between the 57.0 - 58.0gn range in .3gn segments. [ending 57.9gn]. Barnes reloading data suggests 56-59gn of this powder. So Im in the right area.

Considering I have never had any luck with Barnes before I consider this pretty good. Particularity out of a semi auto.

Thoughts?

Cheers for the advice anyway.

Tikka T3 .270

140g TSX
58g H4831sc

<.5 @100yds.

p67:
According to the latest Barnes manual, the accurate powder for the .270 Win with their 110 gr. TSX is H-4350. Start load is 56.0 gr. and max. is 59.0 gr.
I've never fired a Barnes in my .270 Win but just fired some 130 TSX's in my .270 WSM. The 2nd load I tried gave a 1 1/2" group (5 shots). The last 4 went into 1". I know I pulled the 1st shot so...
My seating depth was 0.050" off the lands as measured to the ogive and I used Fed. GM-215 M match, mag. primers as recommended in the book.
For the .270 Win., they recommend a Federal GM-210 M primer.
I'd make sure my barrel is free of all fouling including copper & start over with what the book recommends. BTW, my best accuracy was at 1 gr. below the max. charge. Hope some of this helps. Bear in Fairbanks

quote:

Originally posted by p67:
Some results.

Thoughts?

Cheers for the advice anyway.

You are off to a great start. Are you using small base dies with that semi auto? There is something to be said about faster burning powders in semi auto rifles also. Since you are using the 110 bullet, you may also consider IMR4064 for accuracy. You may be very pleasantly surprised.

Yeah. Its a pretty good start.
I use SB dies.

I see that Barnes recommended those Fed match primers. Is there much difference between them and the normal ones?

I also used a Nikko Stirling 4-14pwr scope on it. Waiting for my 3-12x50 Swaro to come. I couldn't get a nice sight picture for shooting with the Nikko which isn't surprising. Its was just a scope I threw on to get some idea if these Barnes would work.

Things are looking good.

Final.

I tried a few more 3 shot groups either side of the 57.5gn grouping which previously gave me the best group.

I found that there is a small sweet spot with these bullets. Is that a common theme? Lighter loads gave groups up to 4" (0.6gn less than the 57.5gn load).

There was another cluster of loads from 58.5-59.5 that all landed in the same area i.e the center of the groups was common. Group size in total was 1.7" for all 9 shots. That might be the optimum loading (59.0gn?).

For now, I will settle on 57.5gn. Shot another 1.1" group with this load to match the previous round.

FPS=3250fps. (my current fav load using 130gn Nosler BT does 2950,)

I am using a new scope which is taking some getting used to and shooting prone btw. The Swaro scope is nice for hunting but with the reticle in the first plane it doesnt make for an ideal target scope.
Pic of new rig



Ballistics chart of load below. (near enough anyway). My max range would be 300yds.



All that aside, I am happy with the results.It is a semi auto after all.

Cheers for input.

A thread about the factory Barnes 110gn Federal loads in .270

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/...d.php?t=33902&page=2

p67, I hope things are progressing well for you, I can tell you one thing, the accuracy you are getting from you long-trac is GOOD. I have shot several of them in various calibers, and it is difficult to get really good accuracy with them. I really applaud your efforts, and can tell you I would be quite happy with 1-1.5" groups from a long trac.

Good Shooting.

no offense to anyone...
RTFM on all barnes bullets.
.065 off the the lands, fellas, and if they don't shoot, back off the charge, and set the bullet back FURTHER

anytime i have a barnes load, and helping a friend, i back way the heck down to starting loads, and .075 off... work up till they shoot, and have a ball.

Now, look, .277 TSX bullets won't open up much ... i don't think even .284 or .308 bullets are going to expand very well from barnes.

Be prepared for "penciling" and minimal expansion .. shot placement is ALWAYS most important.

You might try 47.0 grs of 4064.Good Luck

quote:

Originally posted by Fish30114:
p67, I hope things are progressing well for you, I can tell you one thing, the accuracy you are getting from you long-trac is GOOD. I have shot several of them in various calibers, and it is difficult to get really good accuracy with them. I really applaud your efforts, and can tell you I would be quite happy with 1-1.5" groups from a long trac.

Good Shooting.

This is a weird one. I have always had BARs (and an armalite). Accuracy in them has always been mint. My BARII Safari in .270 is very good on accuracy. When I saw the Longtrac come out, I wanted one. Mainly the weight saving. I asked on this web site and a few others about them. Seems they are not popular in the US. I cant figure why?

I read reviews in magazines that raved about them (30-06 and 270WSM plus one other one). So I am a little confused?

I have pulled in to bits. Fundamentally the guts is the same as my BARII Safari. The gas block and piston is ever so slightly different, but everything else (bolt, mechanism etc) is the same.

The only thing I can see that is different that WOULD change accuracy is the way the foreend is attached. The sling swivel is mounted on the front of the gas block. The foreend also touches the barrel on the plastic model. I relieved mine with sandpaper.

Mine shoots. Just like the ones in the reviews. My 130gn Nosler hand loads shoot under 1.5” 5 shot groups no problems. So go figure?

Until I see some proof of this inaccuracy in the LongTracs it’s hard to believe.

p67, I have had acceptable accuracy out of several BARS that I owned (still own one) and it shoots just under an inch. It is a 270 Winchester. I have owned--read as; got rid of--a short trac, not a long trac. It was a 308, and would NOT shoot under 2". OK for some, but a long way from 'mint' for me. Mint, for me, is 1/4", and I'm not keeping a rifle as is if it won't shoot under an inch, really 1/2" for a bolt gun.

I hunt with a lot of different folks on a lot of different properties, and have had an oppurtunity to shoot 5 different long tracs--they are popular. None of them shot under an 1 1/2", although only one of them had actually had a load 'developed' for it. They were shooting various factory ammo, which maybe isn't a fair test, but it is what it is.

quote:

Originally posted by Fish30114:
p67, I have had acceptable accuracy out of several BARS that I owned (still own one) and it shoots just under an inch. It is a 270 Winchester. I have owned--read as; got rid of--a short trac, not a long trac. It was a 308, and would NOT shoot under 2". OK for some, but a long way from 'mint' for me. Mint, for me, is 1/4", and I'm not keeping a rifle as is if it won't shoot under an inch, really 1/2" for a bolt gun.

I hunt with a lot of different folks on a lot of different properties, and have had an oppurtunity to shoot 5 different long tracs--they are popular. None of them shot under an 1 1/2", although only one of them had actually had a load 'developed' for it. They were shooting various factory ammo, which maybe isn't a fair test, but it is what it is.

Any theorys as to why this is with the new Longtracs?

I thought it may have been the alloy receivers not being as stiff as the steel one (but) mymate has a litghweight stalker BAR on 270 which shoots fine so that killed that theory.

The only thing I can ee id the front gas block and foreend mounting thats changed.

Thoughts?

quote:

Originally posted by p67:
(my current fav load using 130gn Nosler BT does 2950,)

I shot three deer in November 08 with 130 gr Nos BT 50 gr IMR4895 2900 fps 22" barrel pac-nor #1 taper, pre 64 M70, 2x7 scope left on 2X, at 400 yards, 400 yards, and 500 yards.

The one at 500y was a lung shot and was ok, but the other two had more meat damage than I would like.
In 2009 I will take a smaller gun.

Ive had good results at 20yds to 300yds with Noslers. Always held together.

If you dont wont damage try a heavier slower hard jacketed pill maybe? I dunno, as long as they die I could care less. Mostly I head and neck shoot so damage is my objective, lung shots are always going to be messy and a last resort shot.

Today I finally got around to testing at 200yards.

I can say without ANY doubt that these pills will not group in my rifle.

Different setting depths and charge weights made no difference. Best was about 5" group.

Similar results when I tried the Barnes 120gn pill.

So.

Its back to the Noslers 130gn... lol

Below is a typical group I shot last week with Hornady 130gn Interlock. (on another thread)

Shot a 5 shot 2.0" group on a fouled barrel (first shot may have been affected). Was a stiff breeze coming from 11oclock as well!.



So the rifle shoots alright.

I have run into two guns that do not love Barnes bullets, but none that were all that bad consistently. Jim Kobe has my 25-06 as I write this because it doesn't like Barnes bullets at full power and I am hoping some bedding work will adjust it's attitude. 1.5-2.5 inch groups is all that it will do no matter the depth. I worked up a Parker-Hale '06 for a friend that won't come below 1.5 inches. I have a .223 FVSS that is really picky about seating depth with 70 grain TSXs. It flings 8 inch groups when it's .010 off it's preferred depth and shots dime size groups at the sweet spot. I have a .243 that shoots TTSXs into an inch at the right seating depth and can shoot 8-10 inch groups when it doesn't like the depth and load. I have a .243 that loves them .005 off and the aforementioned .243 won't shoot them well until it gets to .120 off.

I really hate the pissing around it takes to get them to shoot, but I really love the performance when they hit an animal have them right. I work up a comparable load using Cup and core bullets so that I know the load is basically sound. I then move up quickly to that load using the TSX/TTSX at what I intend to be my starting seating depth. I then back off .010 each group to see where the TSX/TTSX wants to shoot well. When/if I find the seating depth I then refine the charge and depth.

I have to say that the workup is immensely more challenging with some rifles and these bullets. That translates into more expensive considering the price of the bullets. If you try to short cut the process you may have a problem getting s solution, which ultimately is yet more expensive. The only thing I have noticed is that rifles that always shoot very well tend to be much,much easier to work up with Barnes. If a rifle exhibits pickiness about it's loads with cup and core then I have come to expect the same but on a more severe scale with the Barnes bullets. I believe that trying to short cut the process and giving up when easy solutions don't come is probably the reason why some people claim their gun will not shoot Barnes accurately.

A last consideration an one that is more sever with Barnes is the copper fouling. Some rifles will foul very badly very quickly with them. It can be as little as 4-5 shots and accuracy is affected. I have not had a lot of time on this solution yet, but Ultra Bore Coat has reduced fouling in every rifle I have tried it in. It did not improve basic accuracy, but it did lessen the accuracy loss due to fouling in several and seems to be improving them the more I shoot them. If it takes longer to foul to the point of affecting accuracy it may not improve accuracy but still be very, very helpful in maintaining the accuracy you do have.