I'm planning on using a suppressed 6.5 Creed for cow elk if I get tag and been waffling between the 130 Accubond and 127 LRX. I had my Tikka barrel cut/threaded from 24 to 18.5. 41g of RL 17 gave ~1800 fps prior to chop, and now yields ~2650. Barnes lists initial expansion down to 1600 fps. but I couldn't find any low velocity tests of this bullet.

Anyway I got around to testing the LRX with water jugs and a reduced load of 19.5g AA5744 for a velocity of 1770 fps. Here is the recovered bullet after passing through 6 gallon jugs and stopping at the log backing them. I feel pretty good about the results since I will not drop below 1800 fps until beyond 450 yds, and I'm not taking a shot that far. Not massive expansion but almost double diameter to .45.





I need to gather more jugs and try that Accubond too. Curios how it will fair that slow.

I could live with performance like that.

Good test. Thanks. LRX is a great bullet.

Reducing velocity to mimic longer range shots also reduces RPMs which many believe aids expansion

That isn’t too bad. It’ll be better yet when it’s shot at full power with the additional RPMs acting on it as well.

Great test, thanks for posting it up.

Looks good. When you test the accubond in the same manner please post results if you don't mind. It would be interesting to see the difference.

What they look like after going through a deer at about a hundred yards and into the ground. Also out of an 18" suppressed 6.5 CM.

Beauty! What load/velocity?

Have yet to see an LRX fail to expand similarly to a TTSX at ranges out to 300+ yards on game, even when started at muzzle velocities down to 2750 fps.

Might also comment that shooting water jugs is the least realistic of the many kinds of "test media" I've used. Which is why I haven't done it for years,

I understand your comment but I wanted to satisfy my own curiosity and it was a method I had at my disposal. It still provides a data point and proves decent expansion sub 1800fps…even though in water jugs.

Thanks for posting that djb.

I've often wondered if the LRX bullets might be a better all around bullet (even at short range) for non-magnum cartridges than the TTSX. I'd like to see an expansion test of the ttsx vs lrx in the same cartridge/velocity/distance(s).

41.0 gr Big Game. 2675 fps sans suppressor.

My albeit limited experience with half a dozen animals and only the 127 suggests the LRX makes animals bleed alot and they die fast.

As most of us do have access to water jugs, I wonder is there is something suitable for filling them that might be a decent test media?

Good to know. I also have an 18" 6.5CM (waiting on its suppressor), several boxes of 127LRX, and a jug of Big Game. Bumping 2,700fps with that bullet should be good enough for around here.

I like the jugs. Fully admit it isn't the same as ballistic gel or as much work as paper, but its cheap for us to compare bullets and get a benchmark from across the world.

Lrx rox

I wish there was a lighter LRX to use in my 18" .308 Win.

I’d bet the 130’s would be rippers in an AR.

Have used a bunch of different kinds of test media over the decades. The one I trust most for comparing big game bullets is stacks of dry newspaper, which in my experience tends to replicate how well bullets penetrate when hitting bone better than anything else I've tried. And bone is a far bigger variable than "soft" chest tissue--which water jugs kinda simulate, but not all that well.

Absolutely

Hey JGRaider,

I gave the 130 Accubond a try yesterday. Same load of 19.5 g AA5744. Much different result. Bullet went through the first jug w/o expanding and then started to tumble. It started into jug #5 then bounced to parts unfound. I was a little surprised, but the Accubond appears to be harder at 1800 fps (*at least in milk jugs ).

I'm curious how the 129 SST's will fare. I pretty much use SST's exclusively now for target practice paired with a comparable LRX/TTSX for hunting in all my rifles as they are reasonable priced and have always shot very well for me. I often carry both bullets when hunting in case I want a softer bullet for some reason, varmint, long shot, etc.

Here's the exit hole from the 1st jug before it started tumbling....

The 127g LR has been a very easy bullet to tune for me in the 6.5/06, 6.5x55 custom Rem 700. At 3150 fps in the 6.5x55 custom, I am using a 26" Brux #6 contour, with R#26 and cci 250...tiny groups. Using Both R#23/22 in the 26" Brux, 6.5/06 around the same speed, #5 contour

Both of the barrels above are 8T, and both shoot sub 3/8" three shot groups that repeat. These I use on power line tree stands for deer and hogs.

For short range of 300 and under, the 6.5/06 with the old Hornady 129g Sp will NEVER let you down in terms of penetration on bone from any angle, an amazing bullet.

Nice test. Thanks for posting that up.

Be interesting to see your 129 SST test.

We sure have been happy with the 127 LRX's out of our CM's.

Beretz,

I ran the test with the 129SST. It appears its reputation as a soft bullet is
deserved and performed well at low velocity. Expanded more than I anticipated. It lost 30g and expanded to the same diameter as the 127 lrx.


I ran the test again on the sst at a velocity of 2600 fps and it came completely apart.


I tried all three bullets in packed newspaper and all three zipped right through
without expanding fyi.

federal 130 grain terminal accent is all you need better performance then both barnes or accubonds

143 eld x is another great bullet for the creed

Any consideration given to the 129gr ABLR? I shoot it in my 6.5 Grendel at 2300fps and it's rated for expansion down to either 1400 or 1600fps.