blk - thanks for the input. I've had several other folks indicate similar things. The reason I keep coming back to the 175 is the monster BC. In looking long, the long range crowd shoot heavy for caliber bullets due to the ballistic advantages inherent. Their definition of long range is different than mine but all bullets start dropping like rocks somewhere around 350-400 yards. Fast bullets with big BC's make a difference between 400 and your personal limit. I'm also trying to not use turrets. My thinking and associated goals has been to dream up a rifle combination that:
- shoots a high BC bullet pushed fast enough to reduce drop to the mimumum possible
- retain less than a 3.5" inch mid-range maximum rise
- use a stadia wire scope
- comfortable recoil
Plus, I do have concerns about Barnes bullets expanding at long range. I have a handful of non-expanded TSX's taken from my moist clay "bullet test media" (aka dirt pile). Add my experience from last fall with 100 gr TSX from my 25-06, a similar experience with a 140 TSX from my 7mm RM and I'm concerned. I may have gotten bad batches of TSX's but in conversations with Ty, he's seen TSX's fail to open when striking something hard. My dirt pile is not hard, nor does it contain rocks but I still keep finding un-expanded TSX's. Dirt piles are not animals but it is more than a little discomforting to find so many unexpanded TSX's, and very small exit holes in the critters slain. I'm confident they expand in animals but can't explain some of my recent experiences.
I still think TSX's are the ticket for high velocity, smaller for caliber bullets. Noslers peel off the front portion and I've seen ugliness generated from broken bones resulting from close range shots. The trade off is simple: Weight retention (TSX) smaller exits, or Weight loss, larger exits, chance of making a mess (Partition). I'll usually go with weight retention but in looking long, I also want to know my bullet will expand reliably. I'm comfortably on the fence with the TSX and long range.............
