TSX ogive changed- no notice!

[Shootin4fun]

Has anyone noticed that Barnes recently changed the length and ogive of the .277 130gr TSX? The are now .070" shorter, and if you use the same die setting as used on their previous profile, they seat .020" deeper! I found this out the hard way by loading up a batch and then noticing the difference between the new batch and ones I had left from before.

My big concern is that with a new profile, a new round of load development will be required. Seating the bullet deeper will result in higher pressure and there is a .020" greater jump to the lands. If I were pushing the limits of pressure with the previous profile, this deeper seating could be dangerous, no? And given that my load is now somewhat random, I have a batch of 20 expensive rounds that I have no idea of how they will shoot. I am getting all set for a pig hunt, and now don't have time and a place (out of the deep snow where I live) to test new loads, so I'm less than thrilled with Barnes at the moment.

One important thing regarding the change is that BARNES KEPT THE SAME MODEL NUMBER (27742) AND THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THE "NEW" TSX ARE DIFFERENT THAN PREVIOUS BOXES. THAT JUST SEEMS WRONG!

In engineering, if we make any change to ANYTHING in a product, we must document it for everyone else downstream. Glad these Barnes guys are not working for NASA!

 

[Engineering101]

You are right, from an engineering perspective that is complete BS. I would not have expected it from Barnes and have not seen this in any of the various Barnes bullets that I shoot but I will check this should I buy more.

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

I've seen it with other brands too as far as changing the pill's nose without telling anyone... btw, a longer run at the rifling(shorter round) will usually lower peak pressure because of reduced engraving forces needed. Pistols will have issues with pressure if you shorten the rounds too much though.

 

[Shootin4fun]

Well, it will be interesting to see what the change does to the impact point and grouping. I still have a few unfired rounds of the same load & components but with the previous bullet profile along with the new ones I just made up so when I do make it to a range I'll be able to do a direct comparison.

Considering the meticulous nature that precision reloading requires, and the effect in behavior and performance a change like this has, I think the Barnes folks are really out to lunch for not somehow informing the customer that the product has changed. If they didn't want to change the model number, how about a "New and Improved" banner or something?

 

[TOM H]

Has anyone noticed that Barnes recently changed the length and ogive of the .277 130gr TSX? The are now .070" shorter, and if you use the same die setting as used on their previous profile, they seat .020" deeper! I found this out the hard way by loading up a batch and then noticing the difference between the new batch and ones I had left from before.

My big concern is that with a new profile, a new round of load development will be required. Seating the bullet deeper will result in higher pressure and there is a .020" greater jump to the lands. If I were pushing the limits of pressure with the previous profile, this deeper seating could be dangerous, no? And given that my load is now somewhat random, I have a batch of 20 expensive rounds that I have no idea of how they will shoot. I am getting all set for a pig hunt, and now don't have time and a place (out of the deep snow where I live) to test new loads, so I'm less than thrilled with Barnes at the moment.

One important thing regarding the change is that BARNES KEPT THE SAME MODEL NUMBER (27742) AND THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THE "NEW" TSX ARE DIFFERENT THAN PREVIOUS BOXES. THAT JUST SEEMS WRONG!

In engineering, if we make any change to ANYTHING in a product, we must document it for everyone else downstream. Glad these Barnes guys are not working for NASA!

Barnes rec seating depth off the lands from .030" to .070" for best accuracy. I shoot the 140gr TSX in my 270 and they do vary little from lot# to lot#. You may be deeper but you should check how far from the lands that may of not changed much and if you have concern why not call Barnes.

 

[AZShooter]

Don't you just hate it when they change the bullet design? You wonder what went wrong with the rifle!

When Barnes first came out with the X bullet they changed many of their bullets several times those first few years. Never any notice. Anyone remember those days of perpetual redesigned bullets?

20 yrs ago I purchased a box of 85 gr 6mm partitions. Turns out it was an older box. I found a great load and decided to buy more. The next box was newer and the groups were aweful. I called Nosler and they admitted they changed the design. Had to work up another load. It was the first time I encountered this issue and it was a real letdown in the faith I had in the company. No notice.

Two years ago I ran low on 200 gr Accubonds. It had been at least six years since I bought those original accubonds. Sure enough the load didn't shoot with the new bullets. After some careful controls checking rifle, I called Nosler and they said they changed the bullet. No notice.


So far Berger hasn't changed any of the bullets I use but most are hybrids. Sure hope they give notice or change the product number if they do.

Incidentally Sierra says they never alter a design. If they do change something they change the product number. Nice to know.

You know it will happen to us again.

Speaking of design changes wait to you get to be in your 60s. If you really like something you had better buy several now as they will be different next year. You would think the marketing folks would have done more research. Baby boomers are a large part of the buying market and we tend to be loyal to stuff and hate change for change's sake. Needed to say that, feel better now.....

 

[FEENIX]

I'm all about changes (esp. for improvement) but as common courtesy (esp. in regards to safety), notification to end-users is a MUST ... regardless of tolerance, NASA/engineering or not!lightbulb

 

[Shootin4fun]

Thanks for the perspective AZ. The fact that some manufacturers don't change the model # or print on their product to indicate a new design is a sign of laziness and makes their operations, no matter how large, seem like mom & pop operations.

What the manufacturers seem to miss is that reloaders are kind of like sports fans - we spend a lot of time and money deciding on a particular bullet and then they go and change the 1st and 2nd string lineup just before an important game without telling the fans. Its a good way to get fans to choose another team. In the case of going on a hunt unaware of a change in the bullet design, it could mean a wounded and lost animal or a missed shot altogether.

I will post results on the impact point and accuracy of the new ogive design.

 

[Bart B]

Every bullet making company I know of makes new pointing dies to shape the front half of their bullets when the old one wears out. Sometimes the use the same mill as before. Other times they use a new mill to shape the die cavity; it' won't have the exact same shape nor dimensions. Such is life. But that much difference is a bit much. Sierra Bullets may have the best machine shop crew and tools these days making their bullet making dies.

Years ago, Lapua bullets had match bullets from 3 or 4 different pointing machines in a box of them; proved by use of 20X optical comparitors checking their ogive shapes.

 

[Shootin4fun]

Years ago, Lapua bullets had match bullets from 3 or 4 different pointing machines in a box of them; proved by use of 20X optical comparitors checking their ogive shapes.

That would be rather disturbing to me if intended on shooting them long range.

 

[BrentM]

Not bagging on berger but I have a box of targets with 3 different sizes. I am sending in samples this week so they can review.

 

[Shootin4fun]

Here is the response Barnes sent back to me, which I thought is resonable from a PR standpoint anyway. We will see if there is different behavior using the same settings and load. Hey, at least they answered my email promptly and better accuracy is always welcomed! Man, it must be a ERP nightmare for them if they have 2 different models in the factory that have the same name and model #.


"Thank you for your email. Indeed we did change the O-give from a secant to tangent design as this helps with accuracy. During the year of transition we put notification in the box stating a change had been made. We advise customers to keep everything set the same and the majority have reported similar if not better results. We do still sale the old style of bullets upon request and can be ordered over the phone. "

 

[Bart B]

In response to my remarks that Lapua had different bullet ogive shapes:

That would be rather disturbing to me if intended on shooting them long range.

Very true. In the 60's and '70's it was known amongst long rangers that 3 or 4 out of a box of Lapuas would end up in the 9 ring if the shot was called dead center. But most of the time, it was caused by severe unbalance; lead cores and/or bullet jackets were not all that uniform.

 

[TOM H]

That would be rather disturbing to me if intended on shooting them long range.

Lapua is now a sponor of the US F-Class open rifle team so what happen 50 or 40yrs ago isn't too important.

Current Sponsors