OK, I have a new to me Tikka T3 Lite in 6.5x55. I know that it shoots OK, as the first owner shot only factory stuff and did OK. I reload and think I can do better!! We shoot deer in western Kansas at decent ranges. The longer the gun, the better! I have one box (100) of Berger 130 VLD Hunting bullets. I am naturally drawn to heavy bullets -- tried to find so 140's (the Tikka is 8:1 twist) but they are impossible to find. I found some Barnes LRH 127 coppers as well. Interesting.... I have a philosophy of trying to develop a load with the RIGHT bullet from the beginning and not messing around with multiple flavors. Did that along the way, with mixed results. I did some comparing today. I assume (using .260 Rem as basis) that in a modern 6.5x55 I can get about 2850 from a 130ish bullet, and about 2750 from a 140 gr bullet. I ran some numbers using the ballistic coefficients for the Berger and Barnes bullets. The heavy lead 140 Berger maintains over 1000 ft/lbs further, over 700 yards. So if (BIG IF) I can get the heavy 140's to shoot, they would be the theoretical best choice. I have a good Leica 1600b RF and plan to plant a good turreted scope on the Tikka, if I find a good load. But I cannot buy the 140's right now.... the 130's also maintain 1000 ft/lbs of energy to about 650. Not so shabby, and honestly, what more can I expect from a light weight gun.... The Barnes LRH bullets drop under 1000 ft/lbs at about 550 yards. But as a solid, they might perform better, even at longer range... They are intriguing as well... So any input on this question? 127, 130, 140?? Lightweight gun at "modest" long range distances, with a modest cartridge... Perhaps I should smell the roses and realize that shooting anything with a lightweight gun at 500+ is a miracle in and of itself and stop obsessing about heavy bullets?