Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles Problems with the Barnes #4 Manual

I just purchased the Barnes #4 Reloading Maunual and while perusing it I notice something. I noticed some loads were way down from the #3 when comparing the TSX to the XLC. Barnes said in the past there is no need for the XLC coating now that the TSX is available since they both accomplish the same thing, however, even after the corrections were added to #3 the XLC is shown getting as much as 300 fps over the TSX (In this case the 30-06 with 180g bullts). Granted not all powders for the XLC are used in the TSX data.

The questions then are: is the data for the XLC way over max even after the corrections Barnes came out with or is the coating on them that much better then what the TSX gets from having the grooves.

It was nice having loads for the 30-06 that safely (supposedly) turned it into a 300 Mag, but with more rounds in the chamber.

Loading for a 35 Whelen and 300 Win using both #3 (35W) and #4 (300W) I found the velocity claimed for the whelen was beyond optimistic and that my M70 300 hit top velocity four grains under listed max load. Load books are general guides and, as always, maximums should be approached carefully. Listed velocities are whimsical, get a chrony.

Have a chrony. Not the point. If I hit #3 said velocity is that way over pressure or is it safe. If it is safe than I feel Barnes has gone backward in bullet development, however, the TSX is very accurate in the two rifles I have tried them in. So was the XLC.

I guess the reason I am asking is I have some XLCs left over and don't want to get in the danger area.

Just wait until Barnes changes the TSX to next best thing. Oh, they did, and it is called the MRX, or is it the Tipped TSX? I can't make up my mind, so I will wait for the next model.

Sierra reloading manuel edition V list a max load of 100.1 grains of H-1000 under the 250 grain SMK in the 338 Lapua case as giving 3000 FPS. I loaded 98 grains and my chronographed velocity was 3189 FPS. That's 2.1 grains less powder and 189 FPS more velocity.
The manuels are a guide and every rifle will not react the same to the same loads and that is the way it is.

Sounds like you don't believe in progress and improvements. Maybe you would like to go back and hunt by throwing rocks..

The MRX and TSX are a step down for me. Why would I want to hamstring myself and load low BC bullets?

I don't have any problems with the 30 cal 180 TSX and the BC was high enough to take this Antelope at 777 yards with one shot




Not to mention the TSX accuracy, as this 300 yard group will attest

In my opinion, many of the loads in the Barnes #3 manual are a tad too heavy. A few days ago, while testing some XLC loads in a 7mm/08, extraction became sticky about 2 or 3 grains below what Barnes listed as a maximum load.

I think the criticism about Barnes changing bullet design frequently is a valid one. Why should I take on the time and expense to develop a load with expensive bullets when Barnes is going to change the whole equation in a year or two?

I was a bit disappointed when they stopped making XLC bullets in most calibers since for certain applications they work very well. They don't foul as badly as the older Barnes bullets, you can get more velocity with them, they look cool (frivilous I know) and they don't have all those stupid grooves that can reduce neck tension to a little above zero. Fortunately, when I heard they were being discontinued, I was able to horde a lifetime supply for my 7 mm Rem. Mag.

How about these 2 30 cal 200 grain AccuBonds, are they the same?

Here we go again!

I pulled two 30 cal 200 grain AB's just like that last week.

They were 180 grainer's mixed in.


As far as shooting at distance, the TSX bleeds off speed faster than most premium bullets.

Lope can be easy to kill when hit right.
We've dumped them with 22-250's at range.

First off both bullets are 200 grain. I have shot the 180 AccuBond and the 180 TSX on the same day and conditions and the drops that were required were indentical at 1000 meters. Not bleedibg off like you claim.

Yes the Lope was hit correctly, so the BC was certainly adequate.

A little more info for you, often time the manufaters BC will not be exact in your rifle the only way to know for sure is to shoot it.

A little more info for you

A little more info for you and again they are both 200 grain 30 claiber bullets

JWP-that lil Sinclair nut is one of the most usefull tools I've ever found, thx for showing it!

Dober

Dober, you are correct and it shows that all manufaturers make changes and have uniformity issues if one is open minded enough to look, those changes and/or improvements are not limited to one company.

That lil device is one of the most used things on my bench.

I just don't do OAL anymore more, I do the oal with the nut on it, it takes out the variables.

Dober

Well, getting back to the scope of this post I asked Barnes the same question. They said the #3 loads were just fine with the XLCs, but when they used the current lots of powder for the TSX the speed shown is what they came up with. Makes a guy wish for the XLCs returning to production.

I for one am darn glad that the XLC's are way past dead and gone...see no reason whatsoever for them meself.

Different strokes I guess.

Dober