One of Us
| I have some 250 grain TTSX on the way from Cableas. I haven't been able to find anything on the internet for this load. I emailed Barnes this week, and they stated they haven't done a load work up for this bullet in either the Ruger or H&H. I have an H&H and was advised to use loads from their #3 manual, which had 76.5 grain max load for their old 250 grain XFB bullet. No OAL was listed. |
| |
new member
| Thanks Lee. I went ahead and loaded some test groups of 71-76 grains rl 15. They shot best at 72. Just at an inch for a 5 shot group. This is cleaning between groups so that includes a "fouling" shot in the 5. Accuracy seems to go way down when I don't clean. I couldn't hit the lands and load in the magazine with the 250's so I started as long as the mag would allow for a COAL. Don't have that length as it is at my buddy's shop. As an experiment I actually loaded some 65 grain loads and 3 shot groups would shoot a cloverleaf, even better than the 72 and noticeably less kick than the 76. Good luck. I didn't see any pressure signs in any of my loads. My 270 tsx loads were more accurate across the board |
| Posts: 6 | Location: Wyoming | Registered: 11 May 2011 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| UPS delivered my 250 grain TTSX last night. I will load some up today. In my H&H for the 270 TSX 72 grains of R15 was my most accurate load too. I dug two of them out of the berm at 425 yards, and they had barely opened. Now I know dirt isn't the medium for testing, but I was concerned just the same. So I'm going to try the 250 TTSX and drive the hell out of them. FWIW my CZ 550 simply hated the 260 grain Accubond using Varget and Reloader 15. It shot patterns. If I can't get the 250 grain TTSX's to shoot, I'm staying with the 270 TSX's and shoot less than 400 yards. |
| |