MRX & TSX BC Values

Festus · #8 01-17-2006, 06:59 PM

I should think (and the photo supports this) that much of the air has been pushed out of the way by the meplat and ogive so the secondary and subsequent shock waves would have a diminishing effect on drag. I still think time at the range is the best way to determine flight path. I just used some of the biggest words of my life, I hope I didn't screw it up. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]
Festus

big-foot · #9 03-04-2006, 01:42 PM

Federal posted a drop chart for the .308 180 gr. I matched the chart and got a BC of .568 unadjusted.

http://www.federalpremium.com/ballistics...p;bulletwgt=180

remingtonman_25_06 · #10 03-04-2006, 01:48 PM

Seems awfully high for a barnes bullet.

jwp475 · #11 03-04-2006, 09:18 PM

The MRX is supossed to have a higher bc than the TXS I hav e shot the 180 TXS in 300win and RUM mag and a bc of .525worhs well for me. The 225 TXS in 338 from my experience the bc is lowwer than the .482 listed as it shoots with more drop at extended ranges than a .482 bullet should

dog caller · #12 03-05-2006, 10:03 AM

Here is a BC estimator

http://www.uslink.com/~tom1/calcbc/calcbc.htm

I just genericly punched in some numbers and the shorter the bearing surface, the lower the BC. Since the grooves cut in the bearing surface are actually an absence of bearing surface, that would make for a lower BC all by itself. Wouldn't it?

kraky2 · #13 03-05-2006, 07:36 PM

Just a couple "seat of the pants" things I've seen and heard. There was a guy on one of the forums claiming to be an ex employee of barnes and he said that the rings do affect the bc cosiderably. From what I've seen in the gun magazines where they;ve compared actual bc to claimed I would reduce the barnes tsx by a minimum of 10%. Regarding cannelures it seems the hornady sst has one of the closest bc accurate claims and it DOES use a cannelure. They usually show up as good and usually better than a ballistic tip. It also seems that bc ratings seem fairly close out to 500 yds and then fall off on their way to 1000 yds. I guess the only way to test is to shoot and see. One thing I love about these forums is the experienced reports of the long range guys.

jwp475 · #14 03-05-2006, 07:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Just a couple "seat of the pants" things I've seen and heard. There was a guy on one of the forums claiming to be an ex employee of barnes and he said that the rings do affect the bc cosiderably. From what I've seen in the gun magazines where they;ve compared actual bc to claimed I would reduce the barnes tsx by a minimum of 10%. Regarding cannelures it seems the hornady sst has one of the closest bc accurate claims and it DOES use a cannelure. They usually show up as good and usually better than a ballistic tip. It also seems that bc ratings seem fairly close out to 500 yds and then fall off on their way to 1000 yds. I guess the only way to test is to shoot and see. One thing I love about these forums is the experienced reports of the long range guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw that guy and put no credence in his claim of being a ballistic tech for Barnes. The TXS do generally run 5 to 15 % lowwer than the listed bc from Barnes which is the bc for the original X-bullet.Barnes is corruntly establishing an bc for the TXS. The listed bc for 180 grain is .552 I am useing .525 and it works great for me out to 1000 yards.