Why not Barnes?

[DONTSTROKEME]

I always see people useing Sierra bullets, but why not Barnes? I would think that with all copper construction they would be prime. I am useing them but haven't shot anything with them. They don't cost a whole lot more than Noslers. I was just curious..

Joe Oakes

 

[Varmint Hunter]

People on this board tend to shoot what is the most accurate in their rifles over the looooong haul. Typically that is one of the high BC match quality bullets.

The Sierra SMK's have a proven track record for accuracy, reasonably high BC and are easy to find.

As to the Barnes X bullets - shooters seem to either love em' or hate em' with no one in the middle. The newer TSX bullets are MUCH easier to get to shoot well (IMO) and you will find more than a few shooters who swear by them.

All in all, if you took a poll on LRH, I think that you will find more shooters using the Sierra Matchkings than any other single bullet. While their terminal performance on game is highly debated on other boards, it is highly regarded amoung most in the long-range fraternity.

 

[tsmiller4]

In most instances the SMK's have higher BC's than the barnes bullets, as well as being 1/2 or even 1/4 the price of the new polymer tipped X bullets.

Their performance is also excellent on deer as well as elk as some guys say on here. Weight retention is not the best thing about a bullet sometimes. If an x bullet retains 95% of it's weight but only leaves a 1 or 2" terminal trail through the animal and then exits and the animal runs 100yds, in some peoples minds thats not good performance.

But then you take the SMK and it expands 6-12" in the vitals and the animal drops or runs 20 yds, then some people (myself included) would say that's good performance. Even if you only have 40 or 50% retention.

Shoot what is most accurate in your rifle and what is the most cost effective, while still giving you the performance you are after. I think thats the goal.

Remember weight retention is NOT everything!

 

[Roll-Yur-Own]

Another fact is that you have Nosler Accubonds with a high BC and terminal performance. So long range guys would choose them over barnes lower bc bullets.

 

[tsmiller4]

Good point, I know if I were hunting elk or anything larger than deer, the accubond would be the only bullet I would consider, other than possibly, maybe the SMK.

 

[Michael Eichele]

X bullets BC's are largely exaggerated. Mathematicaly, they have a high BC IF they were jacketed lead which has a better "specifec gravity" function. Solid copper has a very low SG function which hurts the BC. Terminaly, they are great if you dont hit a big flat bone at a sharp angle. They are also much harder more times to shoot accurate enough to entertain most shooters found here. Bottom line: Low BC, hard to get accurate (not always) and cost alot more than other hunting or match bullets.

AMAX's, ACCUBONDS and SMK's (SMK's if you match the bullet to the velocity and game you are hunting which goes for hunting bullets too, just SMK's can be more finiky) all do VERY well for much less money, higher BC's and better overall accuracy.

 

[Rogue]

[ QUOTE ]
X bullets BC's are largely exaggerated. Mathematicaly, they have a high BC.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I am new to this, how is BC calculated? Where do bullet makers post the facts, equations or test results, that determine BC?

Rogue

 

[goodgrouper]

Basically, it all boils down to impact velocity requirements to open the bullet. Most of Barnes' bullets require a very high impact velocity to open up reliably in comparison to Accubonds, Mk's, or Ballistic tips which means you need a fire breathing super mag or you have to shoot your animal at relatively close range (by this forum's standards).

The new MRX's show some great long range promise but at over $1 per bullet, I can almost buy 3 accubonds for the same money.

If they can figure out a way to make the MRX's cheaper and if they made them in some heavy-for-caliber weights, I would surely give them a go. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[Rogue]

Will start a new post with this subject.

Thanks

 

[rotorhead]

I have been reloading for a long time and a buddy asked me almost the same question. He said I see alot of bullets here in your stock pile and they are all Nosler and Sierra, Where's the Barnes? as he pulled a box from his pocket to give me for his 25wssm. Keep in mind I had 2 very accurate loads for his gun 1 was a ball.tip 100grn Nosler and the other was a 100grn Sierra match both shoot to 1/2-3/4 center to center 5 rounds. I may be wrong but to me this is an excellent group. He procieded to ask the question again so I did not answer and took his box of pills. The short version 1 1/4 is the absolute best I could get I do not know what I did wrong or what after so many round I just couldn't find what I was looking for, I tried everything I could and the best was AA2700 but this still is NOT good. He asked what happened you have always been able to get good loads for all my guns (6 to be exact) I then answered his question and for 1/2 the money you 3 times the accuracy. I might add the bergers are great bullets as well.

I think the main problem with the barnes is they do not have much of a window It seamed as a .1 grain one way or the other blah I don't know.

Rotorhead /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[Roll-Yur-Own]

The other issue with Barnes is that they are like the boy who cried wolf.

For years there bullets had **** poor accuracy, now these new TSX might be a whole lot better, but, the damage is done.

Anyone (myself included) who had that crappy barnes accuracy does not want to be bothered trying TSX or MRX or any other barnes bullet. Besides the BC stinks!

 

[lefty15]

This year I am going to shoot Barnes X Triple Shock bullets 168GR in my .300 win mag. I was on the Barnes site quit awhile back and noticed that the BC had changed, so I phoned and taked to a guy there at Barnes and he told me that Barnes changed the ogive of the bullet, which will make the bullet alot more accurate. I questioned him about the low BC and he told me the BC had nothing to do with accuracy. He said that with the change in the ogive of the bullet, the bullet will be more accurate, and that is what he said Barnes is striving for.
Both myself and my buddy are shooting 168GR Triple shocks out of our .300 win mags, and the accuracy is pretty good. I just can't wait to shoot something with my new gun and bullet combo.
I was out shooting last night and shot a 3/4" 3 shot group at 100 yards with Triple shocks. I have yet to shoot a animal yet, but I am hoping that the perform better than the Accubonds that I shot last year.

 

[lefty15]

I was finally able to shoot my first deer with my new gun. I shot a mule deer doe at about 75 yards, and my buddy filled his doe tag with about a 300 yard shot. We both shoot Tikka .300 win mags. We are both shooting 168gr Triple shocks with Reloader19. I shot my deer high in the back, and the doe dropped instantly, and my buddy's doe out a 300 yards dropped instantly as well.
After we were done with our deer we shot a few targets, from about 200 yards out to about 400 yards. From the shooting that we did these Triple shocks shot good on both does that were shot, and also the accuracy was also good on the targets that we shot at these distances.

 

[CPerkins]

I am shooting the Federal Premium 165 tsx in my 300 mag this year. I have only shot the load one time and I shot a 3/4 inch 100 yard group. Not as good as my handloads but they will do for this season. I will repost when I see how they perform on game.