Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles QC Issue with Barnes 168 TTSX?

After testing a variety of 180 grain TTSX loads for my Sako M85 300 WSM, I attempted to reset my scope for my hunting load (168 TTSX + 58.0 g of RL15). Much to my chagrin, this previously accurate hunting load went from an average of .95 MOA, 4-shot groups to a 2.5 inch, 3 shot group.

As it had been a long time since I tested this load, I thought that maybe my rifle was showing the effects of throat erosion. I therefore set about the task of checking the distance to the lands using my Hornady OAL gauge with my modified Hornady case and a sample of 168 TTSXs. Unexpectedly, I found that my 168 TTSXs would not fall into my Hornady modified case - I automatically assumed that I must have mistakenly resized my modified case and so I ordered a new Hornady modified case. When my new modified case arrived, I was annoyed to learn my 168 TTSXs would not fit into this new case as well. The Implication was that it was my 168 TTSXs that were the problem - their diameters were too large to fit into the Hornady modified case.

Well today, I received my new box of 168 g TTSXs and I can happily confirm that all 50 of these bullets fit flawlessly into my Hornady modified case gauge,

I contacted Barnes and described the issue I discovered in an email. To their credit, they quickly responded to me Thankfully, they informed me that I should not be worried about the safety of Barnes bullets as it was impossible for them to be too large in diameter as to cause a safety issue. While this is great, I'm wondering if this issue would explain my suddenly poor accuracy with a proven load. I've loaded the new bullets using my proven load and will provide an update if accuracy improved.

While I am happy with Barnes Bullets and will stick with them, it is annoying that I may now have to segregate my TTSXs according to slight differences in their diameters.

Each new lot of Barnes Bullets need to be treated an a completely new component. Tremendous amount of lot to lot variation with them IME. So if you develop a load that works with one lot number, buy a couple boxes.

When you measured the diameter of the different batches of bullets what did they measure?

Anxious for your report back on the new lot of 168’s

Not my experience at all.

The bullets that worked flawlessly with my Hornady modified cases measured .308"; the bullets that did not fit the modified case measured approximately .308 1/4 to .308 1/2" at middle and the last bands, starting from the base-to-tip (measured with a caliper).

However, the Barnes rep correctly pointed out that I would need a micrometer to measure correctly to 10 thousandths of an inch and so my measurements are almost certainly inaccurate.

Here is an excerpt of the Barnes's response:

"It is impossible for a solid copper bullet in 30 caliber to pass through our dies during manufacture if they are over .30820” let alone .30850”


The only way I know their is a detectable difference in the diameters of my Barnes bullets is that the "good" bullets fit flawlessly into my Hornady OAL guage cases (two .300 WSM and one 30.06 modified cases) whereas the "bad" bullets could not. With the "bad" bullets, the bullets got hung up on the middle/band and the last/Third band, starting from base-to-tip (note: I also tried pushing the bullets into the cases with the tip going in first.

One last thing I forgot to mention - approximately half of the bullets in the "bad" box of bullets fine into my Hornady cases. If a Barnes copper bullet cannot pass through their dies if they are over .30820, perhaps the step where they are cutting the bands into the Bullets created a small burr (I could not see any burrs, but my eyes are admittedly not that great).

A detail I forgot to mention is that approximately half of the bullets in the box containing the larger diameter bullets worked fine with my Hornady modified case.

I've tried 150, 165, and 180 grain Barnes bullets in addition to 168 grainers with my .300 WSM and with each bullet weight, I determined the distance to the lands using a sample of 10 bullets. Until my troublesome box, never did I have an issue with a Barnes bullet failing to fit into my Hornady modified cases.

In short, Until I decide to switch bullets, I guess I will be checking segregating my bullets into those that fit into my modified cases and those that don't.

BTW - just got a hold of a box of 165 Federal Trophy Bonded tips - they may end up being my new go-to bullet for moose.

Even quality Mitutoyo dial and electronic calipers are generally only certified for measuring +/-0.001 inch if you read the tech info on them. The Barnes rep was right, you need a tenths-reading micrometer to know what's up.

I finally had an opportunity to retest my .300 WSM pet load this past weekend (58.0 g RL 15, 168 TTSX, Hornady Brass, Fed 215 Primer). I'm happy to report that my "Pet Load" is still good to go. I fired, two 3-shot groups. First measured, 0.32., the second, 1.06" (ave of w groups = 0.72").

While this sample is small, given the history of this load, I am confident it averages just below MOA (e.g., 0.95").

The implication of my successful shooting sessions suggests that the 168 g TTSXs that would not fit my Hornady OAL gauge brass were the cause of my "Pet Load" accuracy going south.

Going forward, I will always check the diameter of my TTSXs - those that fit into my Hornady OAL gauge brass will be used in my hunting rounds; those that don't will be used for fouling shots.

Nor mine.