Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 7mm Barnes LRX Bullets

Torn between the 145g and 168g for elk (7mm mag), curious if anyone has shot these yet? Shoot the lighter, faster bullet or sacrifice a little speed for a gain in energy? Unfortunately performance on elk will have to wait as I believe these just came out last month, just looking for some opinions before I order a few boxes.

Truth is it is difficult to stay up to the speed that Barnes/Federal change their bullets! Just made change from TSX to TTSX and now comes this "latest and greatest".

Looked at the Barnes site and they only mention one weight for the LRX bullet in 7mm. From their site, the LRX's are supposed to be the deal for ultra long range shots.

Given that Barnes bullets usually have their most reliable expansion at high velocity (spoken in the most genreral terms)I dunno if I would try one of those "made for TV" long range shots with one...I just wouldn't. I'll stick with my Partitions and TBBC's.

Just an opinion and worth just what you paid for it!

Yep, i'm in that same boat with you. Just switched last year to the TTSX and now these. Not sure why they don't list them both on their website, at the moment Grafs is the only place i can find that has the 168's in stock.

From what i can read the LRX's will open up at lower velocities (longer distance shots), but i do agree that faster is always better with Barnes.

while I don't plan to take that 1000 yard shot at elk (at least not with a 7mm) I do feel comfortable at 500 and under (love that rapid z reticle). If these perform as well as the TTSX's but give me the added benefit of a higher BC, i'm in.

They do list them. The 168's are listed under the "new for 2012" products. Check the BC on the 145's vs. the 168's, and plug your info into the JBM online calculator to see for yourself whether wind drift and impact velocity give an advantage to the 168, or not.

I've also read that the LRX opens at lower velocities, but I have yet to hear or read what the minimum velocities are for each LRX bullet.

The 168 has a BC of 0.550
The 145 has a BC of 0.486

You should be able to get about 3050fps from the 168, and 3250 from the 145. With equivalent atmospheric conditions (based on where I live), and a 10MPH cross wind, I show the 145 drifting 2.7MOA (14.3") at 500 yards, and arriving with 2400fps, while the 168 drifts 2.6MOA (13.6")and arrives with 2323fps. It's not until you get out to longer ranges that the higher BC of the 168 really becomes advantageous. By 700 yards they arrive with roughly the same velocity (~2060fps), but the 168 drifts 0.3MOA less in the wind.

I have not heard anything about the LRXs opening better at lower speeds, but I know this.

3,100 FPS for the 145 out of my 41 year old 700 7RM group like this.



and mushroom like this (elk, 300yds, 99.4 and 99.6% weight retention)


I plan on loading the 168s into the Mashburn I'm building.

Those look great!

I plan on trying the 145 out of my SAUM in the next couple months here. I'm not sure how far they'll expand or what the minimum expansion on them is, but I think it should be a good compromise when trying to decide on the 140/150 TTSX anyways.

Thanks for the replies Gents!

It doesn't appear that i'll gain much going to the 168 over the 145's, and by the looks of the 145's in action i won't have any trouble.

jr, what was shot location & penetration you got on that elk? It's obvious that expansion isn't an issue at any reasonable shot distance.

Placed the order with Grafs and i'll have 4 boxes to play with shortly. I'll update with accuracy and load results in the future.

Im thinking the new 168 will be my choice for a Moose bullet for my Model 7 SS SAUM. The rifle loves 162 Amaxs and I can almost touch the rifling while still being within the mag length. This 168 LRX *should* just be a simple swap of the Amax and I'll be good to go

Cant wait for them to be on the market up here in Kanada.

hndyvmax120,

Either will make two holes.

I took a cow elk several years ago with a 150 gr ETip out of my 7mm Rem Mag. Last year, my youngest boy killed an elk with a 130 gr TTsx out of his 270 win. I dont think you need the 168's unless you just want to use them.

have had great luck with tsx 160 grains deadly on elk and mule's
4 me, shoot about moa

I recently swiched from the 140 TTSX to the 150. If I would have known about these 168's I would go that route.

My 700 7RM shoots the 140's 3250fps with RL22 1/2 MOA all day seated .055 off the lands. I would think the 145 LRX would easily get to 3200+.

I did experience a lot of temp sensitivity with RL 22. Despite the great accuracy it gave me I made the switch to Retumbo for the 150's hoping for a velocity around 3150. Still might go with the 168's if I could get them to 2950+ with Retumbo.

I'm sure the 145 would do for Elk but I personally prefer more bullet weight. I do think the tipped versions expand much quicker than the prior versions, plus the better BC.

The 139gr gmx has a BC of .486

I will stick with those.