.280 Remington Load Data for Barnes 145 g LRX

Johnfn

Member
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
12
Does anyone have a good resource for load data for the Barnes 145g LRX bullet in the ,280 Remington? I would prefer to use H4831sc or H4350 powder if I can.

Thank you!
 
Does anyone have a good resource for load data for the Barnes 145g LRX bullet in the ,280 Remington? I would prefer to use H4831sc or H4350 powder if I can.

Thank you!
I'm looking for the same info for the 280 Ackley Improved using the same powder.
 
I use the 145 LRX in my 280AI with exceptional results.
My rile is chambered in Nosler sami spec. . Load is at the top end. All standard warnings apply. Start low and work up.
Nosler brass new, H4831- 60.9 grains, 145 Barnes LRX, WW large rifle primer, OAL 3.340. Velocity 3050 out of 25 inch lilja 4 grove barrel.
Load does sub .5 for 5 rounds at 100 yards.
 
Barnes has some old load data on their website. Seems to be from before the released the LRX bullets, but they do have load data for the standard .280 Rem with H4350 & H4831 using the 140 TSX bullets. Might give you a decent starting point at least.

https://www.barnesbullets.com/load-data/
 
I have been working with reloader 23 the past few weeks with exceptional accuracy and a lot less powder compaction when seating the 145 lrx, unfortunately I am still working on the extreme spread of velocity and SD. ES is A little over 30 fps. I am trying different primers this week to see if that helps. I
 
I have been working with reloader 23 the past few weeks with exceptional accuracy and a lot less powder compaction when seating the 145 lrx, unfortunately I am still working on the extreme spread of velocity and SD. ES is A little over 30 fps. I am trying different primers this week to see if that helps. I
Is this in your AI or a standard 280 Rem?
 
My Barnes #4 manual doesnt show the 145 LRX but the max load for the 140 gr with H4831SC is 55.0 gr and 57 gr of Reloder 22 is shown as max in standard 280 Rem
RL-22 and H4831 shot best in my 280AI with 145 LRX
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top