The Accurate Reloading Forums
120 gr 6.5mm ttsx "shoot too"

This topic can be found at:
https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6711043/m/405108899

02 January 2009, 07:07
GSSP
120 gr 6.5mm ttsx "shoot too"
5th firing on Nosler 260 Rem brass. Fed 210M primer. Rem 700 CDL SF Limited Ed, 24".

120 gr tsx seated 2.820". 43.5 gr H4350 and 120 ttsx 43 gr H4350.



130 TSX, 42 gr H4350. .47" group.



militarysignatures.com
02 January 2009, 07:21
vapodog
That's some fine groups.....The 6.5mm calibers are spectacular rifles.


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
02 January 2009, 18:17
Bobby Tomek
I've been runing them through the paces in a 6.5 Bullberry IMP (26", 1:8 Contender barrel by MGM). While they shoot very well, so far they haven't shot nearly as well as 2 of my favored hunting bullets, the 140 grain Sierra GameKing and the 130 grain Nosler Accubond.

In a 25x30-30, the 80 grain TTSX so far has been acceptably accurate but far from spectacular.

On the other hand, my 7mm Bullberry is incredibly accurate with the 120 grain TTSX.


Bobby
Μολὼν λαβέ
The most important thing in life is not what we do but how and why we do it. - Nana Mouskouri

05 January 2009, 19:55
GSSP
I emailed Barnes customer service and expansion velocities and this is what came back from Dave Card.

"The 120 gr TSX requires 1800 fps minimum and 2000 fps for the TTSX. The 130 gr TSX is also at 1800 fps. That is for the testing in water. We do find that when the bullets are shot into gel, the velocities can be lower and still get expansion."

So, to my way of thinking, the extra bc, which should extend the range in which the bullet would be effective is negated by the higher necessary impact speed for good expansion. I've not run the numbers through EXBAL yet so my thinking may be flawed.

Alan


militarysignatures.com
05 January 2009, 20:51
Bobby Tomek
I am glad to see Barnes is modifying their claims from the "full depth of cavity expansion down to 1600 fps."

That was simply not the case in any I have ever put through their paces. WIth that being said, yes, they can be spectacularly accurate.

Also, I have found the TTSX in both 6.5 and 7mm to expand somewhat better at lower velocities than the TSX. So I was suprised to see the e-mail you received saying that the TSX requires less velocity than the TTSX to expand. After all, the TTSX was primarily designed to deal with low-velocity/long range expansion issues via a more cavernous hollow point and the addition of the delrin tip.


Bobby
Μολὼν λαβέ
The most important thing in life is not what we do but how and why we do it. - Nana Mouskouri

05 January 2009, 21:54
GSSP
Another email just in from Barnes about the bc of the 120 ttsx.

"We have a rough one now. It will need a bit more testing to be official.
Right now it looks like it is coming in at .443 so it's a bit higher than I previously was guessing."


militarysignatures.com