Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Report: Barnes 127 LRX @ 511 yards from ULA .260 Rem

Recently shot a buck at a laser-measured 511 yards. I wanted to recover a 127 LRX from my .260 so I waited until he offered a very hard quartering-to shot that also gave me the benefit of hitting bone upon impact. Buck was approx 185lbs live weight.

Rifle & load used was an ULA .260 Remington shooting a 127gr Barnes LRX at 2850fps MV over 45.3gr H4350, Lapua brass (0x) and a 210M. This load has proven to be a solid sub-moa performer from this rifle with the first cold-bore shot center punching the aiming dot each time. To say that I'm a believer in the value of an ULA rifle is an understatement, btw.

I'm a fan of the Rapid-Z 600 on a hunting rifle and used one for this shot. I prefer to always use the reticle when the scope is on a hard-stop at 9x (it's the 3-9x model conquest which is a second-focal plane scope). Worked the ballistics on this load in typical early-rifle-season conditions (500' Above sea level & approx 39 degrees f) and determined that with a 100y zero I'd have perfect aiming points at 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 yards by using the reticle stadia that were intended for 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600. In other words, I held the 600 yard stadia on my 500 yard target to make this shot. When I hunt out west I can use the reticle stadia at the intended ranges due the higher altitude and resulting decrease in air density. I'll adjust my zero (depending on altitude) to do this. My explanation makes this sound much more complicated than it is. This is a very simple way to get excellent results in the field. I've confirmed this effectiveness on a number of rifles/cartridges with very easy and consistent first-round hits to 650 yards. I shoot my tactical and competition rifles much farther than this, but generally limit on-game shots to 700 yards. Inside that range, shots are generally not that challenging. Beyond that range, the variables begin to add up and consistency goes down. It's just a personal limit based on my standards, nothing else. If I was toting my .338 Lapua, I'd stretch this out further, but that's like cheating & that bastard is heavy.

Impact velocity for this shot was right around 1950fps. I like to keep impact velocities at 2,000+, but Barnes apparently suggests a minimum-impact velocity of 1600fps for the LRX. I like a little insurance on game so I'd probably not stretch much below this level. Once again, at higher altitudes out west I could add approximately 100 or so yards to my shot distances and still keep that velocity due to environmentals. With all of that said, it would have been hard for this critter to die much faster.


Green circle was intended point of impact (POI). Red circle was actual POI. Actual was an inch higher and 1.5" right (down wind) from intended. Diagram shows angle and distance of travel through deer.



Recovered just under hide. There was actually partial penetration of the outer hide, but the bullet did not leave the hide. Recovered weight is 122.7gr or 96.6%.












Upon impact the deer ran 15 yards total before going down and never moving again. I was very impressed with the quickness of expiration. Estimated penetration distance was 22" and included on-side shoulder and off-side ribs. The expanded bullet showed some loss of the ends of two petals, likely due to the bone impacted.



Summary:

Based on this sample of one plus the results of two 127 LRX from the .260 Rem used by family members this deer this season, I'll continue to use the LRX as my bullet of choice for big game. I also intend to try it on elk after seeing the penetration and performance achieved at the edge of its application/velocity window, so to speak. I see no reason to doubt that this combo will be an effective ultralight elk killer inside of 600 yards.

The .260 is my favorite centerfire rifle cartridge by far.

Nice job.

The LRX looks just like the 130gr TSX in my avatar that was recovered from my Elk. Quartering away to the right at 195 yds, it went in behind the first rib, up and along the spine and stopped at the hide on the off-side shoulder.

The point is, I like Barnes bullets, they work.

I prefer a little more exspansion but considering you have a dead deer they seem to work....congrats!

I would, too. With that said, it did the trick - and fast. Largest expanded diameter I can measure is 0.46 inches. As those petals were folding back that would be larger, of course.

Can't see getting much performance down to 1600fps as some have said Barnes specifies on these. I haven't looked to verify that claim so who knows if it's true.

I would also add that on larger game or if I thought the chance of losing an animal in cover was greater than it was here I wouldn't intentionally take a hard quartering-to shot. Without an exit there wasn't much blood to follow. Of course, the deer fell nearly in his tracks so it didn't matter. Still, I'd go broadside on an elk with this load if at all possible.

Looks good to me!

Heck yeah! Great shooting and great info.

Glad to see a .260 can kill a deer...

Thanks for posting! Great shot!

The bullet pics only reinforce my thought that I will only use Barnes mono-metal, solid dealy-o's if I ever go to Africa and need to punch through a Rhino's skull cap!

Not enough expansion for me, and Berger, Sierra, Nosler, and Hornady can get it done with better BC, price and accuracy!

Think Nosler NBT's for the best of pretty much all worlds...

Dober

I'd say, based on experience, that the NBT is the best deer bullet we've ever had. With that established, I'm trying new(er) things, primarily monos over the last few years. I'm extremely pleased with the killing I've done on deer with them thus far and will continue the experiment until something else comes along.

Since having a daughter I'm also much less anxious to use lead-core bullets when she may end up eating some of the meat. Small chance of issues, but a small one totally in my control will be eliminated in every case practical as long as I'm around.

Bullet did it's job just fine.

BTW - I like your deer "sketches".

Do we get to see a pic of the buck?

Greentimber: Do you have a sense for whether the 127LRX is running close to the advertized B.C. of .468?

The 'Warren Commission' report!

Nice recap/report, thanks for sharing, congrats on the fine shot, indeed the 260 is a fine round, as many other 6.5s, one of my favs, simple, and works!

Deer pics would be nice.

To date I have used the 130 AB as my choice for an all around 6.5 slug in 260/6.5x55, bc .488....at LR, retention would not be an issue, and expansion might be more positive at lower speeds w/a cup/core. A 120 NBT is a good one Dober, no doubt. Some guys on the LR hunting forum have used the 140 Amax to 600-650 yds on deer, they no doubt do very well at reduced speeds.

Not recommending changing what works, but if one wants to REALLY stretch a 6.5, a mono may not be the optimum, but again if it works, I won't argue w/success. No doubt I'd run an LRX thru an Elk, and not shy from any shot angle if I knew the shot would end up thru vitals. Tough bullets, something I'd lean to for larger than deer game.

greentimber,

Congrats on a fine shot and deer!

Your explanation of your load, scope and everything else was very clear, and you obviously did the required range work.

One suggestion I have about lead is going to www.springerlink.com/index/BFPM6CLJ036W3VKW.pdf

Europe is ahead of the U.S. in actual studies about it's effects on humans from game meat, since they've been much more crowded than we are, and have been hunting even longer!

Thanks for the lead report, John. As I suspected, there is little concern for us. Also as suspected, the small risk that does exist is magnified significantly for developing children.


Excerpts from the report:

�Children are particularly sensitive to the chronic effects of lead. Even low levels of lead exposure can affect a child�s mental and physical growth.�

�It appears that some effects, particularly changes in the levels of certain blood enzymes and in children�s neurobehavioral development, may occur at blood lead levels so low as to be essentially without a threshold.�


�No correlation was observed between the individual game meat frequency data (meals per week) and the corresponding logarithmic values of the blood lead concentrations (Pearson correlation coefficient r=0.046). Two-way ANOVA was used to uncover main and interaction effects of age and type of subject (hunters and controls) on the dependant variable blood lead. Female subjects were not
included in the ANOVA model. The independent variable age was broken up into in three categories of young, middle-aged, and older subjects (20�39, 40�59 and >60 years of age). The variable age was conceived as a control variable because age effects on blood lead levels have been described [27]. The main factors, age (p=0.47) and subjects (p=0.89) as well as the interaction of the combination (p=0.75) had no effect on the blood lead levels. Thus, there was no statistically significant difference in exposure to lead between the hunters and the controls.�

�Accordingly, the consumption of roughly 50 g game meat per day (estimated from the questionnaire) containing 0.2 μg/g lead (median from ref. [16]) amount to a lead intake of 10 μg, which corresponds to a blood lead concentration of about 8 ng/mL. It is interesting to note that the conversion factor for children is greater than for adults [11]. �

�In summary, the results in this study suggest that the uptake of lead from game meat was negligible, given that this type of food was a dietary source of high lead concentration.�







I've been 100% satisfied with the results I've had from TTSX so far. If there were some practical down-side of some sorts to using them I'd consider going back to lead. Haven't found it, though. Obviously, I see no reason to leave lead-core bullets for other applications ie; defense, target, or competition shooting or for varmint/predator hunting. I'd love to see a mono bullet with the BC of a VLD, but that isn't going to happen any time soon. Still, my little .260 seems to be enough gun for what I want it to do. I do have a couple .300 WSMs and a .300 Win if I decide I want more gun for elk. I'm running the 168 TTSX and 165 TTSX in those respectively. All three are sold sub-moa performers (unlike the ULA, which is a sub-MOA for 5 shot groups rifle, 3 shot groups is all I've attempted with the mag rifles) with the Barnes bullets.

I can't find a way to catch one of the 168s in a whitetail, though.




The ULA/127 LRX upon final confirmation of load:



I later finished the statement written on the target: "First four in" with "0.4something..." and # 5 opened it to 0.8"



The buck (look next to the forend tip to see the bullet bulge just under the hide):

Excellent write up! I used the 120 gr TTSX in my 7mm-08 this year for the first time, worked great at 100 yds. Nice to see that the Barnes monos will expand out to the practical limits of the cartridges they are used in when proper weights are selected.

One thing to consider, not sure ALL Barnes are created equal, there are the TSX, TTSX, nor LRX, and others.

Plus you have diff calibers and speeds all will perhaps affect to varying degrees, perhaps small, the terminal performance, even perhaps twist rate if far from the norm.

No doubt, they do the job as intended.

Lastly, that's one accurate flyweight rifle, and I am sure it's not so easy to hold that tight for 5.

One thing that comes to mind, and JB and others might comment, when a bone busting mono hits bone (as what appears in your shoulder hit) - the killing is done more than just the bullet and it's effects alone, as there are bone fragments that explode in different directions, also into vitals, this secondary shrapnel adds to the killing effect I am sure. Not that there would be any consistency to just will happen as every shot is a little different, but there is that 'effect.'

Greentimber,

Seems we have similar results with small variables. My shot being broadside, through and through. Near same distance, 500 yds for me, and nearly same velocity, mine being 2830 fps muzzle vel. My elev was 7500'.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...07865/all/Report_Barnes_127_gr_LRX_6_5mm

Alan

I saw that Alan. Your hunting spot is a whooooooooole lot nicer thn mine, though!

The info on the LRX box is spot on.They don't like a 9 twist.