[quote=kraky1;196087]Magnum...not trying to start an argument but I don't understand your post. The guy wants to try retumbo and is looking for someon who's used it. I post that it worked great accuracy wise and got me 3250 fps with a 180. You come on with apparently no experience trying it and tell the guy you think he'll find it's too slow a powder?
One last question...can you explain your comment about how accubonds get higher velocity at lower pressure than other bullets??[/quote
To explain how Accubonds get higher velocity with less pressure would take a book!
Here's a simple explanation.
If you have used Accubonds or Ballistic Tips a lot,you would have noticed that for a long bullet,which they are longer than other bullets of the same weight,they have less shank that engraves the rifling,which means,as my tests over my chronograph have proved,they get higher velocities with less powder than other 'conventional' style bullets of the same weight.
Less powder means less pressure.
Now for your other comment,you stated,Retumbo worked GREAT,and got 3250.
I shoot a 300 Weatherby!
I have found Retumbo to be TOO SLOW for this catrridge with 180gr Accubonds for the above reasons.Which means that you can get very high velocities without the need for ULTRA SLOW powders.
You quoted using Barnes tsx 180gr bullets,which anybody that has reloaded for more than 5 minutes knows they produce HIGHER pressure than anyhting else,therefore needing a SLOWER powder to get published velocities.
Hope this answers your question.