Not so scientific look at how bullets perform.

Hey Rich, you think the 230 target will act the same way? Rip the nose off and tumble?

When Riley showed me this bullet this morning I told him he had to post it. Never have I seen the nose ripped off before. I also wonder if the OTM bullets with the thicker jackets will hold up or rip off? So interesting to me....

I haven't really tested the OTM's much so not sure?.....rich
 
Pretty cool! I dug out some .308 Nosler 210 ALR's out of the dirt last year. Not much weight retention at 100 yards, at least compared to a standard Accubond, but i was still surprised they held up as well as they did.
 
I wanted to add to Riley's good work here. This bullet is a 150 ttsx Barnes shout out of a 7rum going 3250 fps. This bullet shot a cow elk at 600 yards and was found on the opposite side in the hide. I was shocked to see that the bullet still has most of its weight retained. 140.1 grains to be exact. The cow dropped in its footsteps. Pretty cool stuff!!
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    139.6 KB · Views: 38
I was shocked to see that the bullet still has most of its weight retained. 140.1 grains to be exact. The cow dropped in its footsteps. Pretty cool stuff!!

would you say you were "triple shocked"? haha. sorry, I couldn't resist. Seriously though, I'm surprised you got such good expansion at that distance. I've only recovered a couple of barnes TTSX from my buddies elk, a 210 grain .338 with a muzzle velocity at 3000 fps. One he shot in the mid 400 yard range and expansion was very minimal only the tip expanded. the other elk was shot at 35 yards and expansion was amazing.
 

Attachments

  • 338.210.jpg
    338.210.jpg
    35.9 KB · Views: 38
  • IMG_6456.JPG
    IMG_6456.JPG
    61.3 KB · Views: 46
Just adding these .308 Nosler 210 ALR's to the thread. Muzzle velocity around 2850, only going through cardboard target into average dirt (not too wet or dry). Side note, I think I got a bad box of ALR's. The best my 300 win mag would shoot them was 1.5" inch groups. some were as bad as 2.5". And for reference, this is the same gun that shoots the 210 Berger to sub 3/8 moa.

lightest bullet below is about 65 grains, heaviest is about 115.
 

Attachments

  • 210.alr.jpg
    210.alr.jpg
    140.2 KB · Views: 60
Posted this in another thread recently, but will add here as well... all recovered at 200 yards in ice. Target was 1/2" plywood maybe 2-yards off a snow-covered, natural-spring flooded hillside. Ice was 10-12" thick at the time of firing. All bullets were 6.5 & 7mm... Berger Hunting vld's, Matrix Vld's, Accubonds, core-lokt & Barnes LRX's. Point was to see how each penetrates, expands & ends up afterward. Barnes LRX's and Matrix were the only two to completely bust through the ice & stop at frozen dirt. Numerous Bergers bannana'd rather than grenade* The ones that did grenade (like expected) all blew up inside the first of 3-4" of ice. Accubonds opened real nice. Core-lokt (in my opinion) don't seem to be bonded at-all. Test was a curiosity thing more than anything to understand how each manufacturers bullet "works" in general...

image.jpg

180 Berger - 2900fps (at muzzle)
190 Matrix - 3025fps
168 LRX. - 3200
140 Berger - 3135
140 Core-lokt ??? "didn't chrony"
130 Accubond 2911
 
resizebullet.jpg

And this one was found in my elk this past fall.. the 168 LRX @ 3200fps. Range was 700 yards, steep uphill angle, bullet entered left-lower-ribs and stuck in the offside skin near the tenderloin/backbone area... pedals broke off but were sitting amongst the slug it-self and the rib-bone fragments it had broke along the way

I really like what these LRX are doing. Near or (relatively) far, in my-opinion they are the go-to bullet
 
Thanks rooster, what is the BC of the 190 matrix?

Litz says .673 officially averaging it from 3000 right down to 1000fps... if I recall correctly, it's 0.706 for the 3000 to 2500fps range tho* They're very very accurate bullets, only problem I've ran into is tearing jackets-- under 3000 they seem to be good/over 3000 and this last batch of tests I had 3 or 4 (out of 15) never hit paper... chrony took it's reading, then someplace past there they dusted ? Wish the jackets were tougher. They'd be unbelievable with their 190gr weight.
 
The Barnes bullets continue to amaze me. Their weight retention is crazy. Even if they break the pedals off they still continue to push through and do the work. I'm very impressed with their lrx line. I shoot the 265 out of my 338 rum with excellent accuracy and have had great bullet performance out to 880 on animals.
 
The Barnes bullets continue to amaze me. Their weight retention is crazy. Even if they break the pedals off they still continue to push through and do the work. I'm very impressed with their lrx line. I shoot the 265 out of my 338 rum with excellent accuracy and have had great bullet performance out to 880 on animals.

This is really good to hear ... I am a big fan of Barnes bullets, and I'm curious why you settled on the 265 LRX over the 225 TTSX? I'm waiting on a custom 338 RUM build, so all I can do right now is look at numbers ... comparing the 225 to the 265, the faster 225 drops a whole lot less than the 265, and wind deflection is more or less the same. I can see better barrel life with the 265... any advice you can pass along?

Also curious what velocity you are getting with the 265 and what barrel length? My guess is somewhere around 2900 fps? Thanks!
 
I settled on the 265 because it was the most accurate for at longer distances. I just couldn't get the 225 to settle down. The speed was awesome, but I wanted to compliment the hard hitting effects that the 338 rum has to offer. My longest kill is with this gun and it was at 880 and also shot my deer this year at 600 and both times the deer fell like they were hit on the head with a hammer. I'm shooting a 26 inch barrel at 2850 fps. I also shot a big sow through the front shoulders this year in Texas completely distroying them. This bullet is the real deal. Long range accuracy, with hard hitting power. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot it.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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