Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
375 RUM guys
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="benchracer" data-source="post: 965493" data-attributes="member: 22069"><p>I have been looking at Barnes data for the 270 TSX and I think you may be right that QL is on the conservative side with this particular combo. Note the following:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>QL shows the 270 TSX pressuring out with Ramshot Hunter at more than 100 fps slower, with a 4.5 grain lower powder charge, and a HIGHER load density (100% vs 95%) than Barnes data shows, with all other factors being equal.</p><p> </p><p>Something is definitely off somewhere. I suspect that real world shooting from your chosen combination will have a lot to say on the matter.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="benchracer, post: 965493, member: 22069"] I have been looking at Barnes data for the 270 TSX and I think you may be right that QL is on the conservative side with this particular combo. Note the following: QL shows the 270 TSX pressuring out with Ramshot Hunter at more than 100 fps slower, with a 4.5 grain lower powder charge, and a HIGHER load density (100% vs 95%) than Barnes data shows, with all other factors being equal. Something is definitely off somewhere. I suspect that real world shooting from your chosen combination will have a lot to say on the matter. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
375 RUM guys
Top