What loads have worked for you guys with either the 165 or 168 TSX? Just trying to figure out where to start......


Regards,

Ted

70.0grs of '22 is starting to fill a W/W hull up,in a 2.800" box.

Both bullets will do over 3100fps with that concoction,CCI 200's and moly.

Gotta go drop tube or '19,to hit 3200....................

Barnes designed the 165 specifically for the .300 WSM, because the 168-gr TSX is too slender and long for proper seating and overall cartridge length. The 165 has a slightly more rounded profile and blunter base.

The 168 is for the .308 Win, .30-06 and .300 Win Mag

Have shot 165XLC's,168TSX and 168A-Max happily,outta 2.800" Sucks based 300Whizzum.

They are fully interchangeable,in my book(rifle)...................

Could be wrong, but I think you've got that entirely backwards... I've got a box of each at home and will take a look.

The '65's were on scene,looong before any TSX'er's.

That being said,all fly like they had eyes,through the mag box...be it Sucks,Blows or Montana.

I've shot 'em all....................

No, I don't have it backwards. I posed the question here about the 165 and 168 TSX and no one had an answer. So I got the store to let me open the boxes and look at, then measure the two bullets. Then I called Barnes and asked them. They said what I posted above: the 165 is intended to give room for enough powder in the WSM, because the all-copper bullets take up more space than lead-core bullets. Both bullets are annealed to the same softness for expansion at the same velocities.

Off topic of the WSM, the rings on the shank need about 40,000 PSI to seat them into the barrel grooves, so the bullets will work in some smaller, lower-velocity BR-type cartridges, too, so long as the initial peak pressure is there.

So this is what I have so far:

-70 grains of RL 22 is the Cats Azz in sucks, blows and Mt's
-168 or 165 both have eyes and kill chitt like lightning
-The folks at Barnes are installing caller id so they know when Lee is calling
-Lee might be wearing a pocket protecter
-Did I miss anything???

Brad, what is your pet load in your MT?

Man, this is too funny. Laughing my arse off!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Poot-thanks for the laugh, I needed one after a day like today.

Mark D

Poot
TOO funny.Love the caller ID plus pocket protector gags.Good burns.

I guess I dare not even mention shooting 175SMK's in a 2.800" Sucks based Whizzum at 3100fps+. Happen to dote upon 70.0grs of '22 in front of it,too.

Hart 1-10" twist,24" long,shoots fair to middlin'...................(grin)

Here ya go Lee... here's some Barnes bullets that I actually load in a 300 WSM:



Left to right: 168 TSX, 165 TSX, 165 XLC.

In my actual (non-theoretical) 300 WSM the 168 TSX, touching the lands, gives an OAL of exactly 2.900. The 165 TSX, touching the lands, gives an OAL of 2.865. The 168 TSX is, on average, .020" longer than the 165 TSX. Seated the same distance off the lands, the 165 TSX "intrudes" into the 300 WSM's case exactly .015" more than the 168 TSX. Entomologically speaking, that's the exact thickness of a knat's dick.

Regardless, I've never run out of room in the 300 WSM case with any powder/bullet combination in the four 300 WSM's I've owned and loaded for since 2001.

I tend to think your judgement has been clouded by the release of fluorocarbons from your pocket protector...

Ted, in my particular rifle I run 64.5-65 gr's H4350 with the 168 TSX.

Yeah, me too...

Be aware that Barnes has changed the TSX several times in the last year. An old lot of bullets may not match the latest manufacturing lot.

Instead of guessing or comparing unknown lots, do as I did and call Barnes to ask a technical expert.

OH BULLSHIT!!!!!

These are brand new lots direct from Barnes in the last 2 mos.

Then you call Barnes, get me a techie name, and I will get him on the phone with the one I talked with. It sounds like you need to call Barnes, anyway, before loading up their bullets.

You can certainly load a 168-gr bullet in a .300 WSM, since it was designed to launch 180-gr bullets. If anyone has some other, genuine, information answering my original question for the reason Barnes offered a 165 and a 168-gr bullets in .308, please share it.

Edited to reflect reality:



Lee I'm done with you, chosing instead to follow the admonition; "never shoot a man who's hanging himself"...

Brad,

Have you ever tried Magpro out of your 300WSM ?

Tony

Tony sure haven't... been contemplating it. Have you?

I've used Ramshot Hunter but get obscene ES's.

If this was true, can you pull out some of your engineering wisdom from your arse and tell me exactly how much powder space you'ld gain by shaving off 3 freekin' grains?

On the .308 thread in the Gunwriters forum, you tell us how the 168 TSX isn't designed for velocities above 2800fps, then here you say the 165 was designed differently for the WSM, yet it keeps the expansion qualities of the 168?
That doesn't compute Lee!

Here's the email response I received from Ty Herring of Barnes when I asked about the differences between the 165 and 168 when being used in a .300 SAUM.

"The current 165gr and 168gr TSX bullets have slightly different ogives. The
new .308 cal 165gr TSX has been changed substantially to a Tangent ogive and
it�s current BC is .380, while the 168gr TSX has our Match Grade ogive and
has a BC value of .404�
"Inside 350yds I don�t think you�ll see any real trajectory differences. You might find that your rifle will shoot one more accurately than another. Hard to say which one until you try them. My favorite is the 168gr bullet."

Notice no mention of my using them out of their design parameters (above 2800fps), or that the 165 was intended for the short action cartridge.

Lee, you may be able to bull schit some people, but you might as well stop here.

Thanks for the info guys. Looks like I will try RL 22 as per Stick's advice and H 4350 as per Brad's advice and see what shoots the best.

As per Lee's advice, I am a bit torn, I can't decide if I should put my weenier in a meat grinder or hit myself in the head with a brick <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" /> You ask a simple question about what loads work well with 165 or 168 grain tsx's and get a dissertation about metallurgy. Intersting info..............................................I think

Like watching one of Jerry's Kids,in a NASCAR Qualifying Trial.

Lotsa smoke and [bleep] hittin' the wall!.....................(grin)

That is so not PC, but damn I have a funny visual in my mind!!!! I can just see one of those little guys flying around the track with his head hanging out the window screaming, "Hey Yeeerie look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeee" I know, I am going to hell for that one, but Stick started it <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

That's why they have peel away skins,on the windows. For drool removal.

See you in Hell...................(grin)

TFF!!!!!

That's just wrong! ... Funny as hell, but wrong! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

High Country, Ive tried Magpro in my 300 WSM, a no go for me, dont waste your money.

I have had the best results in accuracy and velocity with Hunter. I see where Brad had some bad es, that has not been my experience though.

Out of a 23" tube I'm getting 3,060 with a 168 TSX.

Brad,

Well, I have a 300WSM enroute, should have it by this weekend.

I am planning on trying Magpro in it as it worked great in my 270WSM.

I'll post results when I try it .

Tony.

SU35,

I don't have any hunter to try.....think I'll try what "Stick suggested in RL22 and also try H4350 as I have both.

And, of course Magpro..........

I am with Poot, after reading this thread, might as well just slash my wrists and get it over with !!!!!

"Stick, LMAO on that one !!!!

Tony

Ty Herring of Barnes said the same thing he told me the last time we spoke. Apparently, you avoided asking him about the intended impact velocity.

You don't seem to understand that a design parameter of 2,800 fps IMPACT VELOCITY is not the same as 3,200 fps muzzle velocity. A .30-30 will do the job point blank. A high BC bullet at 3,000 fps is for shots at longer ranges, where the impact velocity is 2,300 to 2,700 fps.

If you do some calculations, or actually go shoot at ranges from 100 to 600 yards, you will see that the TSX has no trajectory advantage over ordinary cheap factory bullets until you get to around 500 yards. At that point, the vaunted toughness of the TSX becomes irrelevant, because the impact velocity is low enough for most bullets to retain over 90% of their weight and have good penetration.

If the TSX shoots more accurately in your rifle, that is the only real reason to shoot it.

Go to the 'Nanner Peel Thread and open your eyes.

WTF are you smoking?...................

I don't know, but it has got to be incredible <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I think he'd be answering quicker but me thinks he has a big time case of the munchies....among other things like a severe case of cranial anal submersion.

Mark D

HAAAA!!!! I bet the keys on his keyboard are bright orange from eating copious amounts of Cheetos

I gotta find a way to archive these . . . . . .

Classic Stick, just CLASSIC.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

BMT

Back to the original question, I loaded 67 gr of H4350 for just over 3100 fps with a CCI 250 primer and WW case.

Poot,
You might give magpro a try I did as a last resort and the gun LOVES it. 78 gr with the 168tsx @ 3100 ish. shoot in the .5 for 5 rounds @100yrd.
good luck

Lee24 I talked to TY today and all I can say is your full of bs.

Lee,

Step away from the crack pipe!


If you actually hunted, you'ld know that you can't pick where an animal steps out. It could be 400 yards or it could be 40. What's better? Have a .300 mag on your shoulder while carrying a .30-30 for close shots or just use one rifle with a bullet that will cover all situations? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

Still waiting on an answer for this too.
Why would they redesign the 165 for the WSM, yet keep the same velocity window?

Teeder, here's the gem he posted on the 308 thread... the tune has changed and now the 165/68 are deigned "to work within the average impact velocity of normal hunting ranges with .308 Win to .300 Weatherby."

Hmmm... that means at least 3,000 fps.

His pocket protector's still releasing fluorocarbons...

I guess the bottom line for me is I'm getting the itch again for a .300 SAUM! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />