Does anyone have reloading data for this? It has a high BC for it's weight and seems like it would be a flat shooter. Thanks for replies!

Ammoguide shows a 120 grain bullet going 2546 fps. Barnes states their bullets gain 50-150 fps over conventional bullets. Gaining 54fps would have the 120 grain leaving at 3600 fps and a point blank range of 346 yards! I wouldn't have to hold over at all here in Missouri. Unfortunatly I'm not a paying member of ammoguide so I can't see the charge and stuff. Does that sound like a safe load? It seems awful fast.

Tyler, I take it this is for your 7mm Rem Mag, correct??

If yes, the 120 TSX would be just about ideal for deer hunting - at least as far as flat trajectory is concerned, perhaps somewhat less so for meat damage from close shots.

The first thing to do, is to figure out if the bullet shoots in your gun.

Reloadersnest.com has some 120 grs data, as does IMR, and Alliant.

The bullets listed in these data sections may not be the TSX, but it should give you an idea of start and max data to be able to safely work up.

- mike

The TSX is a wonderful hunting bullet. But, Barnes has come under fire for WAY over rating their BC. Even though the TSX is longer than say a 120 ballistic tip there are those who say that the rings slow it down quickly down range. I would NOT expect it to fly any flatter than a 120 BT. As far as reloading data here are SOME MAX LOADS from barnes #3 manul for their regular x bullets. Work up carefully. Others have reported that they have been able to get more velocity out of the tsx before hitting max loads but the work I've done they seem to fly a little faster than other bullets with the same load. THEREFORE, I've come to believe that they actually may make slightly MORE PRESSURE than other bullets instead of less as has been claimed.
The loads....
73.0 of RE22
66.5 I4831
73.0 I7828
70.0 H4831

FWIW I had a 7mm mag with 26" barrel and did indeed get just past 3500fps without pressure signs with some bts's. Good luck....let us know if you get good results. I'm sure you know that all the speed in the world is useless without accuracy.

Thanks for the quick replies, I should be able to start loading by next weekend. I have the state fair and two-a-day practices coming up so I can't do anything next week. I'll see if I can find a local shop that carries them, if not I'll have to order them online. Yes, accuracy is the key. If nothing I handload works, the cheap Remington Core-Lokts were grouping about an inch so they can be plan B.

Yes, I'm loading for my 7mm RM. Those 120 grainers could be good for a 7mm-08 too. In all reality that probably would've been a better choice, but I like "big guns", and the word magnum lured me in.

Tyler: below is part of an email I got from Barnes about a month ago:

"Barnes is currently retesting all TSX bullets, and will post the new values on the company website (www.barnesbullets.com) as they become available....So far many of the TSX's have lost about 15% to 20% of their value..."

That would put the real BC of the 120 TSX in the .33 to .35 range.

Shoot...still not too bad for a 120 grain. IMR 4831 is at the top of the pack in velocity for everything under 140 grains. I think I'll try it and maybe Reloder-22, everyone talks good about it.

Tyler,

I have loaded 120 gr bt's and hornady hp exclusively for the 7mm RM. Very effective on deer. It has been my experience that slower poeders like RL-22 perform best in the 7 with 140 gr and heavier bullets. IMR-4350 has consistently produced .5 moa for me. Max load with the bt is 66.0 gr. Another great powder is IMR-4831.

quote:

If yes, the 120 TSX would be just about ideal for deer hunting - at least as far as flat trajectory is concerned, perhaps somewhat less so for meat damage from close shots.

I shot a couple of whitetail deer in TX with a 120-grain Nosler Solid base 120-grain bullet from a 7X57mm at a MV of around 3100 FPS. The deer were between 80 and 100 yards away when hit - the internal/meat damage was awsome! I went back to 140 grain bullets!

Would a TSX cause that much damage? It should hold together, but would the velocity alone make too much bloodshot meat?

The tsx doesn't leave much meat damage. Expect a hole the size of your thumb through the animal. There will be a little bloodshot around the hole. Somehow they seem to wreak havok on internal organs even though they make a relatively small hole....I guess I have to think it could be hydrostatic shock cause it isn't from the "shotgun" effect of lesser bullets disentegrating.

Internal damage without messed up meat is what I'm looking for. I bought the 7mm RM as my first rifle, my grandpa thinks this was a really bad decision. Probably was, but I shoot it fine. He's waiting for me to shoot a deer with it so he can show me "why I should have got a .243 instead of blowing the deer up". If it wasn't for me wanting to show him the 7mm doesn't have to ruin half the deer, I would use BST's.

You will have very little meat damage if you don't hit major bone. Eat up to the hole as I like to say.

If you want to destroy meat, a medium weight conventional bullet in the .243 is about as good a place to start as any. JMO, Dutch.

quote:

Originally posted by Tyler Kemp:
Would a TSX cause that much damage? It should hold together, but would the velocity alone make too much bloodshot meat?

Don't really know, but a lot of the damage from HV projectiles is from the shockwave it causes in water-containing tissues, rather than bullet frangibility. Just look at what a FMJ at over 3000 FPS does......

Hey Tyler

As far as meat damage goes, like Kraky says the TSX does very little. Evidence an Elk I shot last year

bullet going in


bullet going out


at 253 yards with a 180 gr TSX out of a 300 win mag.

With a TSX you want to hit bone, like shooting them through the front shoulders for 2 reasons: it will put them down faster and will insure the TSX opens up completely without a quick pass thru.

If I were you, I would reconsider the 120 and go with the 140 gr instead. Flat shooting is vastly over rated IMO. Much more important is accuracy, sectional density, wind drift and energy.

For example, comparing the ballistics on the 2 TSX's, the 120 gr and the 140 gr

120 gr / MV 3500 fps / 2080 energy at 300 yds / 28.25" drop at 500 yds / 16.2" wind drift at 500 yds
140 gr / MV 3300 fps / 2285 energy at 300 yds / 30.5" drop at 500 yds / 14.7" wind drift at 500 yds

So for 2" less drop at 500 yds (who can even distinguish that at 500 yds?) you are giving up 200 foot pounds more energy and 1.5" less wind drift and a greater sectional density which leads to better penetration.

Also with lighter bullets you should use a faster powder like IMR4350 (like molar1 suggested) so you will fill up the case less (especially with a shorter bullet like the 120 gr). With the 140 you can use slower powder and the longer bullet will seat deeper so that you can seat the bullet into the powder. I like to match the powder & bullet so that when I seat the bullet, it is very slightly compressed. That always works better for me.

Also your gun has a certain twist rate, I would guess 1 in 10. You will probably not overstabilize the 120 gr bullet, but most factory guns are given a twist rate that is best for a normal weight bullet for that caliber. In a 7 mag I would guess that weight would be from 140 gr to 160 gr.

Personally, I would even recommend the 160 gr, but everyone knows I am a member of the HEAVY BULLET MAFIA.

Twist rate is one in 9 1/2". Local gun shop carries 140 grain through 175 grain TSX so I may go with that.

With that twist a 140 might be just right. Here's some info

http://sst.benchrest.com/shilentwist.html

take note of the 3rd sentence.

If you wanted to save a little money and get a real good performer on game and almost as good accuracy you might also consider the Nosler Accubond 140

http://www.nosler.com/index.php?p=11&b=5&s=3

Tyler,

I've tried the 120 TSX out of my custom 7mm WSM...

2 inch groups at 100 yards with MV around 3500fps with 69 gr Reloader 19

140gr Accubonds are giving me 3250-3300 fps with 0.5 inch accuracy with 67.5 gr Re 22

So for me it was a no-brainer.

BTW the reason I tried the 120 grainers was in hopes of reducing recoil a bit... those 140's at 3250fps out of a 6 1/2 lb gun are stout!

As an aside, my cousin loves the 120gr TSX out of his 7mm-300 Winchester Weatherby improved. He gets cloverleafs at 3600fps.

Jon

What does the 7mm-300 Winchester Weatherby improved look like? Sounds like a high powered 7mm, possibly like 7mm STW ballistics?

How hard were you pushing it to get 3500 fps? I'm assuming my 7mm RM could achieve that, but every gun is different.

I've heard lots of good things about accubonds, and they have a crazy high BC in the 160 grain. What is the BC of the 140? Accubonds are cheaper, I might go with those or TSX, I'll see what the gun shop has in stock and at what prices. If only I could afford those Lost River Ballistics 7mm bullets. BC is .644 or something insane like that. At over a dollar a bullet though.

In my opinion, the 120 gr. TSX is a better deer bullet than the 140. I use the 140 on elk, and haven't found one yet.

The higher velocity does improve the performance of these bullets, and kills are quicker, in my opinion, the faster they go.

With the 120, less recoil, and equal or BETTER killing ability at normal ranges. Also, with the lighter bullets, I prefer lung shots. They seem to put them down plenty quick. JMO, Dutch.

I just loaded up some of these for my T3 in 7 mag the other day. I stopped at 70g R22 that gave me 3270fps with the 120g TSX. must have been about a 3/4" three shot group.
I will try 71g and mabey 72g next.

Tyler...

My cousin made his 7mm- 300 win weatherby improved after he shot out the throat on his 7mag. His loads routinely flattened primers and his barrel only lasted 400-500 rounds! He simply rented a 300 weatherby reamer, then reamed out the chamber to 300 win length- that way he can fireform 300 win cases to his new case... he also wanted a little freebore for increased velocity. He chose that overall case length in order to fit into his mag box (after hacking away chunks of it first, though). He's a lot braver (or more foolish depending on your point of view) than I am. Ballistically, it's a little better than the 7mm STW, not close to the 7 ultramag. But he built it a few years before the ultramags came out, so it was the bomb at the time!

I have a Rem sendero in 7mag I use exclusively for hunting stands with 300-600 yard shots. Don't get hung up on ballistic coefficient unless your going to shoot past 500 yards... the difference in trajectory under 500 is irrelevant when you compare it to #1- knowing the exact distance to your target; #2- knowing the windage; and #3- the accuracy and precision of a particular load in the rifle you're shooting. I've never tried the 120gr TSX's, but with 140gr Accubonds, 69.0gr Re 22, seated 0.02" off the lands, my gun will print 5 shots under 2/3 inch everytime, with most groups going under 1/2 inch. They're travelling 3225 fps on average. 70 grains gave me 1 inch groups at 3275fps, and 71 grains get around 3400fps, but primers flattened and case heads also flatten (I only shot 2 rounds after this and disassembled the remaining cartridges- I'm scared of high pressures!) These were out of the factory 26" barrel. No problems with terminal performance- one shot kills at 325 yards last year on an 8pt, 405 yards and 425 yards 2 years ago on a 9pt and doe. I would not hesitate to pull the trigger out to 600 yards if the conditions are perfect (ie almost no wind and the animal is perfectly stationary feeding broadside). I've no need or desire to even try the 120gr TSX's in that gun, as it would simply be a waste of time and money.

Don't fret about spending the money on the high dollar 200 grain .284cal bullets. While the ballistic coefficient may be astronomical, your rifle's twist rate will probably not adequately stabalize them, and again, trajectory will be so similar under 500 yards you will be unlikely to see any advantage, anyways.

Jon

Sorry, forgot to address one more question you asked:

quote:

How hard were you pushing it to get 3500 fps? I'm assuming my 7mm RM could achieve that, but every gun is different

I wasn't even begin to stretch the legs of my 7mm WSM... I simply stopped load development because of poor precision. 2 inch groups of that gun are unacceptable. I would guess it would go around 3600-3650 before I would even see pressure signs. But you're right about every gun being different... My 7WSM is a really fast gun for some reason. I can burn the same bullet with a grain LESS powder out of a barrel 2 inches SHORTER and still get 75 fps over my 7 mag. Ain't life grand!

Jon

Haven't used the TSX, but have used the 120 x-bullet out of 7mm stw for deer. Can't say anything bad about them other than they fouled real bad in my rifle. They sure do hit hard when pushed fast, never had a problem with getting them to expand. Everybody has their own opinion, but shooting deer sized game in the shoulder with a magnum will ruin some meat regardless of bullet selection.

All that being said, I know shoot 140 Accubonds b/c they foul less in my barrel. Deer don't seem to like them either and they seem to hold up to stw velocities so far.

Well I think I'll get some cheapo bullets to practice with and then some TSX's for final sighting in. A whole box should last a while, I won't be shooting it with expensive bullets unless I'm hunting.

Tyler,

Any bullet, including the TSX, will destroy a lot of meat at 3,500 fps. My brother shot a nice buck with the 168g Barnes out of a 300 Win Mag at 50 yards and we ended up throwing both shoulders away.

Nothing wrong with the 120g TSX in 7mm. For penetration on a deer there is absoutely no reason to go heavier (meat damage is another issue). What is the likelyhood that you will be shooting over 300 yds? Unless it's likely, any velocity much over 3,000 fps is mostly a mute point.

BTW, this is slightly off topic so ignore as you please, but if you really want to impress your grandpa.......listen to what he is saying and make a point to go with one or more of his suggestions. He will be impressed that you listen and trust his advice without insisting you get the real facts by your own testing (which indirectly implies you don't trust his opinion). Now if you really want him to feel special, after using his advice and bagging that buck, go to him and thank him for taking the time to help you and pass along ________ (what ever it was he recommended to you that contributed to your success).

Trust me when I tell you there is more to life than the ultimate load or technical gadget and you may find out grandpa knows more than you suspected.....but if not, you will still win.

There could be a pretty likely shot presented over 300 yards. I doubt my grandpa would be happy if I took it and missed or injured an animal. I know I wouldn't. Where we hunt there are a large variety of shots available. There an old house on a hill, then out in front of that is a field that kinda dips into a valley for probably 250 yards and comes back up. After that there's a fence and a humongously long field thats pretty flat after that. About a 1/4 mile past where that old house is theres a field that gets cleared before deer season. Its probably 100 yards by 200 yards. Past that field is a TON of woods where my grandpa likes to hunt most of the time unless we see deer out, which is why I want a good levergun. I'll try my best to make a picture so I can show you our huntin' grounds.

Here's my rendition of the land where we hunt. Try not to laugh too hard. It is pretty accurate though.

What the heck! It's tiny! Well since you probably can't read any of what I wrote it's not of that much use. Anyways the red rectangles are the house and old barn, we park near there then walk to wherever. Blue ovals are ponds, and green circles are trees. The flourescent green one is the field where I could get a long shot.

I used the 140 TSX last year in my 7MM 08 and love the clean kills on deer with very little bloodshot meat. The lung shots had no bloodshot meat. I am trying the 120 TSX this year to see if there is any difference.