280ai and 120 ttsx
- Thread starter Cscott
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Hodgdon site says max load of 59 gr of H4350 with 120 gr nosler ballistic tip for 3271 fps from 24" barrel.
Take Aim at Rifle Reloading Data | Hodgdon Reloading
Take Aim at Rifle Reloading Data | Hodgdon Reloading
D
Deleted member 46119
Guest
Seems like Barnes is making the bullets but no one is publishing loads.
Between the published loads for 120 Nosler and QuickLoad you can get a decent sanity check place to start.
There is a load for the 280 with a TSX 120. IIWM I would start with a load a little below max for a regulary 280 and work up.
What powder and COAL?
chad
Well-Known Member
From my experience with barnes bullets this hunting season I will not ever use them again.
Maybe going to a lighter bullet might be a different story but the 140 ttsx bullets poke holes right through them and they run off with no blood.
I am going to go back to the accubonds.
Maybe going to a lighter bullet might be a different story but the 140 ttsx bullets poke holes right through them and they run off with no blood.
I am going to go back to the accubonds.
ohiohunter
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,670
No blood= miss hahahaha
I've had great luck w/ barnes. Every one I recovered was as advertised. Just a few weeks ago my girlfriend shot a small bull with 150gr 7mm-08 at 190yds, no blood. Must have center punched the heart b/c he took 2 steps and curled up. It was cold and raining so I didn't want to play doctor to find out.
My friend shot a cow w/ same gun but 140tsx hit mid body behind shoulder she basically fell over the ridge she was on. Shot at about 150yds.
I have a 150gr 30cal out of a 30-06 I recovered from a doe. It went from her brisket to her hind leg just under the skin. The bullet looks as advertised. I also have a few muzzle loader bullets I've recovered, and again all as advertised. One doe I shot had about a golf ball sized channel through the front side of her shoulder. Any bullet can potentially fail, so I wouldn't think changing would make a world of difference. I'd only consider changing if there were multiple failures.
Barnes would be perfect if they'd lose the relief cuts and increase their BC's. I'm not certain those are as effective as advertised and just there to ease worries of fouling.
chad
Well-Known Member
They weren't misses
D
Deleted member 46119
Guest
Not everything works for everyone.
I like TTSX. My shooter likes TTSX but if they don't work for you no one will have a problem with that. Please don't bad mouth them. A sample of 1 is is not a statistical indicator of design or implementation. The TTSX works for others.
I like TTSX. My shooter likes TTSX but if they don't work for you no one will have a problem with that. Please don't bad mouth them. A sample of 1 is is not a statistical indicator of design or implementation. The TTSX works for others.
chad
Well-Known Member
If you like them great, I dont! I'll use what I have faith in as you will do the same. But don't tell me what I can and can't do.
ohiohunter
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,670
HAHAHA.. no reason to get butt hurt... its just the interweb
I hope the op got what he needed from the hodgdon load data site as the thread was kind of hijacked.
Ramshot Hunter, 65.5 grains, C.O.A.L. at 3.271 inches hit an average of 4,455 fps out of a 24 inch Rock Creek barrel.
That load is just shy of the 66.1 grain max that Barnes publishes.
It's basically ballistically equivalent to a 257 Weatherby with a 110 accubond.
The 280 ai is very versatile!
That load is just shy of the 66.1 grain max that Barnes publishes.
It's basically ballistically equivalent to a 257 Weatherby with a 110 accubond.
The 280 ai is very versatile!
Is that a misprint.....4455fps....holycrapola...
