THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM FORUMS


Moderators: Mark
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Barnes and Hodgdon 7 mag data - big difference
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
Developing loads for the 145 Barnes LRX in a 7mm Rem mag.

Looking at Barnes 150 gr tsx loads from their website with IMR 4831. Max load is 60 gr.

Hodgdon reloading data from their website with IMR 4831 and 150gr tipped tsx. Min is 60 gr, max is 65 gr.

Assuming the bullets are similar - who to believe? I assume both companies are using pressure measuring equipment.

Thanks for any input.

David
 
Posts: 301 | Location: Corvallis, Oregon | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of hivelosity
posted Hide Post
Hear What you said. You are comparing two bullets made from two different manufactures. two different constructions.
They may be the same But I think not.
Dave
 
Posts: 2134 | Location: Ohio | Registered: 26 June 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the reply.

Both bullets are Barnes - one a 150 gr TSX, the other a 150 Gr Tipped TSX.

Is there that much difference?

David
 
Posts: 301 | Location: Corvallis, Oregon | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of hivelosity
posted Hide Post
sorry I read it as a hornady bullet and a barnes .
different company. It depends on the type of rifle or the method and the testing equipment used. Some use universal receivers 5grs in a mag caliber may not mean much. I would use the barnes data. start low and work up
 
Posts: 2134 | Location: Ohio | Registered: 26 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Mike_Dettorre
posted Hide Post
Interestingly enough there is only 112 fps difference or less than 4% but a 8% difference in powder.

I would start at about 52 grns and work up in 1/2 grn increments until I got a velocity I liked and then work on tuning for accuracy.


Mike

Legistine actu quod scripsi?

Never under estimate the internet community's ability to reply to your post with their personal rant about their tangentially related, single occurrence issue.




What I have learned on AR, since 2001:
1. The proper answer to: Where is the best place in town to get a steak dinner? is…You should go to Mel's Diner and get the fried chicken.
2. Big game animals can tell the difference between .015 of an inch in diameter, 15 grains of bullet weight, and 150 fps.
3. There is a difference in the performance of two identical projectiles launched at the same velocity if they came from different cartridges.
4. While a double rifle is the perfect DGR, every 375HH bolt gun needs to be modified to carry at least 5 down.
5. While a floor plate and detachable box magazine both use a mechanical latch, only the floor plate latch is reliable. Disregard the fact that every modern military rifle uses a detachable box magazine.
6. The Remington 700 is unreliable regardless of the fact it is the basis of the USMC M40 sniper rifle for 40+ years with no changes to the receiver or extractor and is the choice of more military and law enforcement sniper units than any other rifle.
7. PF actions are not suitable for a DGR and it is irrelevant that the M1, M14, M16, & AK47 which were designed for hunting men that can shoot back are all PF actions.
8. 95 deg F in Africa is different than 95 deg F in TX or CA and that is why you must worry about ammunition temperature in Africa (even though most safaris take place in winter) but not in TX or in CA.
9. The size of a ding in a gun's finish doesn't matter, what matters is whether it’s a safe ding or not.
10. 1 in a row is a trend, 2 in a row is statistically significant, and 3 in a row is an irrefutable fact.
11. Never buy a WSM or RCM cartridge for a safari rifle or your go to rifle in the USA because if they lose your ammo you can't find replacement ammo but don't worry 280 Rem, 338-06, 35 Whelen, and all Weatherby cartridges abound in Africa and back country stores.
12. A well hit animal can run 75 yds. in the open and suddenly drop with no initial blood trail, but the one I shot from 200 yds. away that ran 10 yds. and disappeared into a thicket and was not found was lost because the bullet penciled thru. I am 100% certain of this even though I have no physical evidence.
13. A 300 Win Mag is a 500 yard elk cartridge but a 308 Win is not a 300 yard elk cartridge even though the same bullet is travelling at the same velocity at those respective distances.
 
Posts: 10164 | Location: Loving retirement in Boise, ID | Registered: 16 December 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of thecanadian
posted Hide Post
what makes this more interesting is that the TTSX bullet is longer. I too would go with the Barnes data.

TSX 1.344in
TTSX 1.434in


"though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."

---Thomas Jefferson
 
Posts: 1092 | Location: Eau Claire, WI | Registered: 20 January 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Thanks.

I loaded the 145gr LRX with IMR 4831 and my velocities were very close to what was on the Hodgdon website.

The Barnes velocities seem to be in the 280/7mm-08 range.

David
 
Posts: 301 | Location: Corvallis, Oregon | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of sheephunterab
posted Hide Post
TTSX has canelures cut in it to help reduce pressure, the TSX does not...they are two very different bullets and should be loaded accordingly.
 
Posts: 1857 | Location: Alberta, Canada | Registered: 27 February 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Realize that 4831 is very slow and 5 grains is not much difference. But there will always be differences between companies that print data. Many variables. many.
 
Posts: 17374 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
Moderator
Picture of jeffeosso
posted Hide Post
start low.. powder is cheap, compared to steel rain


opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club

Information on Ammoguide about
the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR
What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR.
476AR,
http://www.weaponsmith.com
 
Posts: 40030 | Location: Conroe, TX | Registered: 01 June 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sheephunterab:
TTSX has canelures cut in it to help reduce pressure, the TSX does not...they are two very different bullets and should be loaded accordingly.


Really? What planet did you just arrive from?

http://www.midwayusa.com/produ...-lead-free-box-of-50

http://www.midwayusa.com/produ...-lead-free-box-of-50

Get you fact straight before you post!!
 
Posts: 1205 | Location: Minnesota | Registered: 07 February 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Thanks again for the input.

I examined all of of the 7mm Rem Mag data from the Hodgdon website. There are 140 loads provided with different bullet weights and Hodgdon/IMR/Winchester powders.

I looked at the difference in grains between the max load and the min load and obtained:

Difference | #Loads
(grains)
2 ................ 7
3 ................ 22
4 ................ 48
5 ................ 37
6 ................ 20
7 ................ 5
8 ................ 1

My general conclusion is that 5 grains is a big difference and still don't quite get how the Barnes and Hodgdon data are so different for bullets that seem so similar.

Anyway, I did work up a load for the 145 LRX and it all seems fine with respect to measured velocity and charge, and I do not feel it is close to any limits.

David
 
Posts: 301 | Location: Corvallis, Oregon | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of graybird
posted Hide Post
Here is some additional data for 145 grain bullets. Link


Graybird

"Make no mistake, it's not revenge he's after ... it's the reckoning."
 
Posts: 3722 | Location: Okie in Falcon, CO | Registered: 01 July 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of PaulS
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by graybird:
Here is some additional data for 145 grain bullets. Link


stevespages are infamous for listing loads that are well beyond any manual in print.
I would not rely on that data without comparing it to bullet and powder manufacturer's information.


Speer, Sierra, Lyman, Hornady, Hodgdon have reliable reloading data. You won't find it on so and so's web page.
 
Posts: 639 | Location: SE WA.  | Registered: 05 February 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of graybird
posted Hide Post
It's just another source to help make an educated decision.


Graybird

"Make no mistake, it's not revenge he's after ... it's the reckoning."
 
Posts: 3722 | Location: Okie in Falcon, CO | Registered: 01 July 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Nakihunter
posted Hide Post
I do not own a 7mm Rem mag but I shoot a 280 Ack Imp.

My buddy shoots the 7mm RM & the 7mm WSM. Using published data , he is struggling to get loads shooting 160 gr Accu Bonds above 2950 fps with H1000, Re22, H4831 etc. He is now trying Re25.

Does anyone have a good pet load using 160 gr bullets over 3,000 fps?

BTW I use the Nosler data for the 160 gr Accu Bond and get close to book velocity in my 280 Ack Imp - around 3,000 fps with 59.5 gr of N560.


"When the wind stops....start rowing. When the wind starts, get the sail up quick."
 
Posts: 11396 | Location: New Zealand | Registered: 02 July 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Assuming the bullets are similar - who to believe?
It's likely both are entirely correct - for the rifles they used in their tests. If both had used the same rifle their data would probably be very close to the same.

Never mind the small differences in bullets, your rifle isn't the same as either of their's so it would be foolish to expect your results to match either book source and THEY know it! That's why ALL manuals tell us to "start low. and work up slowly....".

It seems a lot of people read that and still expect if they can just match components perfectly then a loading manual should give them spot-on information. But it should be clear no book can do that because no normal component variation will equal the change effects of the rifle itself! That's why I have to laff at people asking "expert" advice for loading a specific bullet; they get lots of somber advice from magazine experts but real reloading experts know there is no such data any one - or any book - can give! If any source matches what we get very closely it's a statistical accident.

Bottom line, load whatever you want to try and experiment with new things in your own rig, no one else can spoon feed you perfect information, or any meaningful "pet loads" for that matter!
 
Posts: 1615 | Location: South Western North Carolina | Registered: 16 September 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of BigNate
posted Hide Post
I had to use Barnes bullets a few years ago 'cause of the environmental Natzis in Kalifornia and bought XLC's on close out.
I tried all kinds of "book" loads and found myself underwhelmed. I picked the two best grouping powders, and started a long slow trip over "book max". I was surprised at how much over I went before seeing issues.
 
Posts: 2376 | Location: Idaho Panhandle | Registered: 27 November 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Jim C,

I hear you and agree that each rifle is different, but folks look to reloading manuals and powder manufacturer websites as guides as to where to start. In my original post Barnes max is Hodgdon min. This does assume the 150 TSX and tipped TSX are similar. From the Barnes website

"We recommend using the TSX® and MRX™ data when loading TTSX® bullets of equal weight."

BigNate - how did you choose a starting charge weight?

David
 
Posts: 301 | Location: Corvallis, Oregon | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia