I recently bought the new Barnes Manual (No. 4) and I wanted to try some of Barnes suggestions for their 250 grain TSX and Banded solid bullets in my Blaser 9.3X62 so I thought I would load some up and shoot them over the chrono which I did today. Temp here was about 87 degrees.

The first "problem" that I encountered with the Barnes bullets is that Barnes suggests that both the TSX and banded solid be crimped in place at an OAL of 3.205 for the 250 grain TSX and 3.150 for the banded solid. My go-to powders, RL15 and Varget, both take up too much room so it was back to the drawing board. I found a load on the Hodgdon powder site, 56 grains of H335 that worked perfectly. I used a Winchester magnum primer and a Norma case. The bullets fit in the case at the suggested seating depth with little or no powder compression. Hodgdon shows a velocity for the 250 grain TSX bullet of 2435 with a charge of 56 grains or H335. In my Blaser the TSX was running at 2464 fps. Pretty close.

The next "surprise" came with the banded solids. The Barnes manual suggests that because the banded solids have less bearing surface, you have to load them with a bit more powder to get the same velocity as the TSX bullets. That was not the case with my 9.3. The same powder charge, 56 grains of H335, produced an average of 2514 fps with the 250 grain banded solids. My only explantion for this is that because of their rather blunt shape, the banded solids have a lot less free bore than the TSX bullets. Anyway, I plan to back the banded solids off about 1 1/2 grains to get them running a little closer to the TSX bullets.

I haven't shoot either load yet for accuracy.

If you have any loading suggestions for these bullets, I would appreciate it if you would pass them on.

Dave

Dave,

Just a few observations. I shoot the 250 gr old style Barnes-X bullets and their is no need to crimp them. Have not loaded the TSX version yet. Crimping the 250 gr TSX bullet to an AOL of just 3.205" or 81.4 mm is rather short. CIP states 83.6 mm. Most rifles have been chambered to accept 85 to 86mm with the Spitzer ogive that the Barnes X or TSX features, allowing the bullet to get closer to the lands.

My question is .... why load to the unnecessary longer jump?
Going short on a long-throated caliber does not make sense in my opinion.
The other point is that one does not need a magnum primer to ignite 56 grains of extruded powder.
It just unnecessarily raises the chamber pressure to spike higher.
Crimping is not needed on a modest recoiling rifle like a 9,3x62, unless you prefer that extra insurance or peace of mind that the bullet will not move (punched into the case) under adverse conditions.

So, check your Blazer's magazine limitation ito what AOL it can take.

Warrior

Warrior:

I had been loading my 9.3 with Varget and seating the 250 grain TSX bullets out to the max overall length of 3.91. However, the newest Barnes manual suggests crimping the bullets into the front cannelure grove which puts the TSX bullets pretty deep into the case necessitating a change in powder. H335 is a spherical not and extruded powder. That's why I went with the magnum primer.

One other thought. Because of their shape, I think you have to seat the banded solids somewhat more deeply in the case. If I don't crimp the TSXs, I may go back to Varget and the 3.291 overall length. However, I think I am going to have to stick with ball powder for the banded solids because of their rather blunt shape.

Dave

Dave,

2.91??? is this correct or a typo?
2.91 is very short - 73.9mm

Warrior

Warrior, it must have been a senior moment. I meant to say 3.291 of course. I have corrected my post.

Thanks.

Dave