# Loading the 120 gr Barnes TTSX in my 6.5 284



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Thoughts, experience's? 


Granted the rifle that I will be loading them for has a certain panache for the 140 Bergers (sub MOA @ 200) on paper, I thought id try something a little different with a little more punch after the initial impact in the thoughts I might set it up for my daughter to maybe kill a cow elk this year.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

My eyelid gets twitchy when I think about the many many many $100's I spent trying to work up a decent load. -O,- In fact when I threw in the towel and tried to give away all the remaining boxes of Barnes bullets here on UWN, zero takers. Seriously, could not give away unopened boxes LMAO.

They were FAST... I mean SCREAMING fast... +3600fps but they might as well have been shot out of a shotgun for all the accuracy they had. They were ok down downloaded to very slow speeds... which defeats the purpose of them in the first place.

I think the only thing I didn't try is loading them backwards. I have half a shelf of powders left over from my Barnes experimenting days. H1000, 7828, RL19, RL22, RL25... /sigh

Bottom line, I never ever beat accuracy of standard plain old boring cheap Remington Greenbox ammo. I've drunk the Accubond kool aid and reload those predominantly now, and occasionally Partitions when needed.


-DallanC


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

DallanC said:


> My eyelid gets twitchy when I think about the many many many $100's I spent trying to work up a decent load. -O,- In fact when I threw in the towel and tried to give away all the remaining boxes of Barnes bullets here on UWN, zero takers. Seriously, could not give away unopened boxes LMAO.
> 
> They were FAST... I mean SCREAMING fast... +3600fps but they might as well have been shot out of a shotgun for all the accuracy they had. They were ok down downloaded to very slow speeds... which defeats the purpose of them in the first place.
> 
> ...


Were those the old XLC "blue" bullets? They definitely weren't known for accuracy.

I've had good results with the TTSX in my .223, 22-250 AI, 25-06, 270 WSM, and 308.

A 120 should be flying pretty quick out of a 6.5x284. Another consideration could be the 127 LRX as well.

Hammer bullets might also have a good lighter weight option to try!


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

Go with the 140 in ANY 6.5 cal. The 6.5-06 AI I have that my Dad built in 1972 is the sweetest gun I've shot! Dad told me that the 6.5 cal. with the 140 is the best. He went on to explain balance, coefficients, OAL, and stability to me. I believe him, and the rifle proves it.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Longgun said:


> Thoughts, experience's?
> 
> Granted the rifle that I will be loading them for has a certain panache for the 140 Bergers (sub MOA @ 200) on paper, I thought id try something a little different with a little more punch after the initial impact in the thoughts I might set it up for my daughter to maybe kill a cow elk this year.


Man, that's pretty dang good for a bullet that only has one CAPITAL letter.

.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Thanks all for the replies... 

Dallan, that's EXACTLY the situation im crossing my fingers that I don't find myself in! Ugh- 

Soo... I made a couple phone calls to the gentleman that built this rifle along side his own 6.5 at the time. He has had good luck getting the little 120 TTSX's to behave with 53.5gr of R22 seating them -.010, best three shot group has been .485. Another load that has been promising in that same rifle has been 56.4gr of Vhit N-560 printing right in there with the R22. All with Lapua brass and FED 210M primers. Velocities are unknown thus far. Testing has only been at 100yds.


Ill report back my findings after I get some glass mounted up in the next week or three.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

More annoying to me isnt the $$$ lost due to burning up components... but the barrel wear. 7STW barrels only are good for X amount of shots... I put probably over 200 rounds through that gun before I gave up on barnes bullets (the blue XLCs as well as TSX's).

I always tried a final 3 shot group with rem greenbox ammo as a control at the end of a days frustrating shooting, it always made it even more frustrating when factory greenbox would shoot .75" and barnes bullets were in the 3-3.5" range sometimes. There just wasnt an accuracy node to build off of no mater what primer, powder, powder amount or seating depths I tried.


-DallanC


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

I hear ya... 

Ive been down this road with this same rifle a time or two (140 ballistic tips, then SST) both with miserable results and always using the Berger load as a control. The Bergers would probably do the job just fine on any Elk at responsible ranges but im just not sold on their killing ability outside making a "perfect" shot. 

Course my miserable (MOA and a half) could be somebody's good enough though too.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

I've had excellent success with the Barnes 120gr TTSX and more recently the 127gr LRX out of both my 6.5x284 and my 6.5x47. It shoots very nice. Since the advent of the TSX, TTSX, LRX, the accuracy of Barnes has come a very long way. You will not have any issues getting them to group. They are most definitely not the XLC's or even the original X-bullets referenced earlier in this thread.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Cool. Is there a node to be on the look out for in those 120 TTSX's?


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Gotta admit my stomach got upset when I saw this thread. 

I’m wondering if it’d be worth loading a Barnes bullet in that particular cartridge? I ask because we all know that’s a long range shooter’s cartridge and I can’t imagine the Barnes maintaining much accuracy past 300 yards. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Stomach got upset? really? Quite like mine does when I hear people sing the praises of the 6.5CM for much the same thing right? lol Naw man... im confident I can get these little boogers to do what I want them to inside 400 yds, they like a good .050/.085 jump on the lands and tons of speed... figure ill just dip the cases in the powder, filler up, brush off the excess and jam em in there. :shock:


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

The LRX's and the TTSX's are extremely accurate, long distances aren't a problem either as long as you know your dope just like any other projectile. The LRX's do have a lower function window more adapted for getting super expansion at muc lower velocities. I shot a muley two years ago with the 127gr LRX from my 6.5x284 at just under 600 yards and he dropped on the spot and it really jacked him up. My brother shot a Wyo speed goat last year at 435 yards, plugged him right behind the shoulder, ran about 10 yards and piled up. 

As for load, our rifles really seem to like H1000 in Lapua or Norma brass, with the Federal primer. Groups weren't quite as tight with the Hornady brass, but still not bad.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

After work up, knowing the drop is always the easier one. Getting wind figured out is well eh... "fun?" sometimes. lol

The 127 MRX were out of stock (Farmington Cabelas) so I picked up the 120 TTSX. Im keeping my fingers crossed that its the H1000 that does the trick with these. 

Care to share your load data on those 127's?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Longgun said:


> After work up, knowing the drop is always the easier one.


My drops are always into long carpet where I lose them. Thats ok, the vacuum always picks them up, along with a few primers and a pinch of powder.

-DallanC


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

Longgun said:


> Care to share your load data on those 127's?


I'll shoot you a PM. I believe my last load was with h4831sc just to mix it up a little. I'll try and remember when I get home tonight to look it up and message it over to you.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gwailow said:


> I'll shoot you a PM. I believe my last load was with h4831sc just to mix it up a little. I'll try and remember when I get home tonight to look it up and message it over to you.


Excellent. Thank you


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

taxidermist said:


> Go with the 140 in ANY 6.5 cal. The 6.5-06 AI I have that my Dad built in 1972 is the sweetest gun I've shot! Dad told me that the 6.5 cal. with the 140 is the best. He went on to explain balance, coefficients, OAL, and stability to me. I believe him, and the rifle proves it.


140s won't work in a 6.5 Rem Mag Remington stock rifle, Bullets are too long. If you push the bullets back into the case so the ammo fits the magazine you have to reduce the powder charge negating the full potential of a 140 grain 6.5.

My five 256 Newtons (they're 6.5s in a 30-06 case) like 125 grain to 130 grain bullets better than the 140s.

.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gwailow said:


> I'll shoot you a PM. I believe my last load was with h4831sc just to mix it up a little. I'll try and remember when I get home tonight to look it up and message it over to you.


FYI- I started two gr off of your max working up in halfs and ended up with the best performance at your stated max. *Note this max is slightly compressed. Easy bolt lift, clean head stamps ect. All were seated .050 off but with the 3/4 moa it printed (that is IF you don't include the one I pulled nearly an inch high and right- :?:  ) I figure it might be time to start playing with seating depth and see if I can make that little bug hole a teeny one.

Thanks for your help!


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

Fantastic! Now you'll have to post some pictures of critters come this fall!


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

The plan was to take it and my Nosler to Mexico with me this January for Coues but with both rifles being set up for long range (26" tubes Tactical type scopes) they don't quite fit in my double rifle case. :-| 

Not liking the idea of dropping 200$+ on a new Pelican case at the moment.


----------

