Barnes 115 gr TAC-TX Gel results

[White Smoke]

30.0 grains of CFE223 produced a 0.91" group at 2418 f/s out of an 18" barrel. Still playing with the 90 TNT's and 95 V-max"s, but the groups are still holding at sub-MOA.

[White Smoke]

Hey Rick, even though I got a sub-MOA group with the 115 TAX using 30.0 grains of CFE, I'm still open to testing other powders. What kind of accuracy are you seeing with H335? Any other suggestions to try? I tried 8208 and have H335, RL-10 and 15 in my locker.

[rickOshay]

I’m going to start with H335 and then TAC, 2520 and CFE.

[White Smoke]

I just went through my bullet supply and found a bunch of 120 TTSX bullets from the previous barrel tests. I just loaded up a ladder using H335. We'll see how they fly with the new barrel.

[Dinny]

https://youtu.be/q754y6y8khE

[rickOshay]

Looking forward to your results.

[White Smoke]

Range results...
120 grain TTSX - 27.5 grains of H335 shot a 0.47" group at 2370 f/s and 28.0 shot a 0.46" group at 2372 f/s (left photo)
100 grain TTSX - 27.5 grains of RL-15 shot a 0.96" group at 2338 (right photo)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]16232[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]16233[/ATTACH]

[Mike from Texas]

Finally emerged from COVID-19 cave to test the Barnes 115 gr TAC-TX in gels

Here are the initial results:


On left, recovered from gel after impact at 1660 fps and 30" of penetration.
On right, impact at 1940 fps and 22.5" penetration. Diameter of expanded petals was 0.51".

I did not recover two shots at 1790 and 1763 fps impacts. Because of the length of penetration, and small cavity, I am concluding that they did not open up significantly.

It looks like these will begin to open in the 1800 - 1900 range. A significantly lower threshold than the TTSX.

I will load these up again and target the 1850 -1900 fps range to see if I can zero in this.

That's pretty disappointing. I was told by Chase at Barnes that they would reliably expand down to 1500fps. Your results suggest otherwise.

[tdbru]

Barnes tests expansion in WATER as the video shows. much harder medium than GEL or deer. so i don't put any faith in anything Barnes says about expansion vs velocity. they might as well take an 8 lb. hammer and smack the bullets on an anvil and then claim they expanded at 0 FPS.

from all the info i've read about, it appears going lighter (think starting out picking a LFP bullet weight at the same weight that you end up with using cup/cores after they expand and debride themselves) and then going as fast as you can on your loads.

if i can ever put some fur in the crosshairs i intend to test this hypothesis. between not getting drawn and not finding game, i have no first hand evidence on this hypothesis yet.
-tdbru

[Happy2Shoot]

Barnes tests expansion in WATER as the video shows. much harder medium than GEL or deer. so i don't put any faith in anything Barnes says about expansion vs velocity. they might as well take an 8 lb. hammer and smack the bullets on an anvil and then claim they expanded at 0 FPS.

from all the info i've read about, it appears going lighter (think starting out picking a LFP bullet weight at the same weight that you end up with using cup/cores after they expand and debride themselves) and then going as fast as you can on your loads.

if i can ever put some fur in the crosshairs i intend to test this hypothesis. between not getting drawn and not finding game, i have no first hand evidence on this hypothesis yet.
-tdbru

I have never thought of it that way, but I like the end result. I have always thought it was widely known to load light for caliber when using all copper expanding bullets.

[A5BLASTER]

Barnes tests expansion in WATER as the video shows. much harder medium than GEL or deer. so i don't put any faith in anything Barnes says about expansion vs velocity. they might as well take an 8 lb. hammer and smack the bullets on an anvil and then claim they expanded at 0 FPS.

from all the info i've read about, it appears going lighter (think starting out picking a LFP bullet weight at the same weight that you end up with using cup/cores after they expand and debride themselves) and then going as fast as you can on your loads.

if i can ever put some fur in the crosshairs i intend to test this hypothesis. between not getting drawn and not finding game, i have no first hand evidence on this hypothesis yet.
-tdbru

Are you could just use whatever copper bullet you want and place it on the high shoulder/spine and get good expansion and instant death to the animal.

But I do love me some 85 grain trex bullets doing nearly 3200 fps from my cz grendel.

[Happy2Shoot]

No, I was thinking a 123gr SST for deer or 100gr TTSX would be interchangeable in my mind.

[tdbru]

H2S,
that's about where i'm at. since LFPs don't typically come apart and lose weight, but do need all the mv they can get to initiate expansion, what is the weight you expect to end up with. if one thinks that 80% weight retention is "typical" of a good cup/core design, then what's 0.8 x nominal cup/core starting weight of a cup/core design that one would typically use? or closest to it for LFP. i.e. 0.8 x 123 = 98.4. well 100gr. is about there. i've got some 100gr. ttsx loaded into 6.5Gr. cases with both PPV and Benchmark. both group well and the PPV is a smidge faster than BMK. but no first hand experience yet on deer. good luck.
-tdbru

[Stinky Coyote]

Had higher hopes for this, just makes my decision to stay eld-m that much easier. The mono's seem to have some work to do for the slow cartridges. Great post btw and thank you. Hope to see that follow up with the 18-1900 tests.

[Stinky Coyote]

So there's this thread from awhile back.

https://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthre...post212367

Showing a recovered 123 eld-m from a 2200 fps launch at 320 yards and estimated impact velocity in the thread around 1650 fps, North Carolina using that elevation say 700-1000' and 75% humidity with a .48-.49 BC I'm seeing 1700 fps impact maybe others wanna run the numbers but that's a staggering performance difference between that 1660 fps tac-tx. There is gel YouTube of the eldm as well and stated by that guy it went 1" further than the sst but it's here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in9FB5WbKWM, so it went 19.7" in the gel with a 2250 fps impact so sorry if I'm hijacking a little, I've been very interested to see if this mono would make as good a hunting bullet as the eldm and it's not looking good. I have a recovered eld-m in a buck from a 2100 fps impact that went 18" and retained 81% of it's weight, steep quartering away shot. I have a 420 yard 1800 fps impact on a doe that was quartering away also but it exited after 15" of penetration so we can imagine it will be somewhere over 81% retained weight of the 2100 fps recovered one. I'd have to guess that 1700 fps recovered eldm from my first link is about 95% weight retention? Obviously big bone all that goes out the window so this all for comparison purposes only and nerding out over terminal ballistics. The Grendel appears to scream for rapid expansion design bullets imo, they have plenty of SD to allow adequate penetration while opening up easily at these slower velocities. A bonded eldm may be perfect as cores separate from jacket frequently at the end of the travel but the work has already been done but do not make it any tougher ie; thicker jackets etc. Just bond it for possible perfection.

[Oso Polaris]

I have a few boxes of the 115gr TAC-TX that I started some preliminary load development (didn't complete it). I used CFE223, ranging from 29gr (2,300fps) to 31gr (2,500fps) with most groups in the 3/4" size. Spring 2021 I bought a bunch of 123gr SST and focused my load development on this bullet with very good results.... and as result haven't had a driving purpose/need to take up the 115gr TAC-TX bullets, again.

I am surprised and disappointed by the reported poor performance (expansion photo) depicted a few posts above. For past 10 years I have used the 110gr TAC-X in 300BO at 2,200 fps. Its performance more than offset the slower velocity of the 300BO. I was really hoping for the same type of performance with an extra 200-300 fps out of the Grendel.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]18460[/ATTACH]

IN the early years of Barnes' introduction of the TSX bullet, and its variants, they had an issue with the .224 bullet. The 62gr bullets worked fantastic in 223 Rem, but when they introduced the 75gr version it consistently failed to expanded. The elongated profile made the tip to fragile and instead of expanding on impact it would collapse and become an extremely effective solid core penetrating bullet.

When comparing the 30 cal (110gr and 120gr) to the 6.5mm (115gr) bullets, the wider/stockier profile of the .30 cal bullet may contribute significantly to its superior level of expansion.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]18461[/ATTACH]

[Happy2Shoot]

I'd say the test is inconclusive, as opposed to a bullet failure.

First, thank you rickOshay for your hard work, time, and money.

I have seen a few tests where handgun bullets did not open up at all in synthetic gel, but mushroomed nicely in 10% gel.

Also, Barnes does water tests not gel. When you get a minimum velocity number from Barnes I would add 75 fps for water vs gel and add 75 fps for their idea of minimum vs my idea. So add 150 fps.

[outbreaker]

I gave up on Barnes years ago. I could get good accuracy and they worked well on headshots (everything does), then I shot 3 does in the lungs. All 3 ran about 50 yards and bedded up where I could see them. With solid shot placement which was confirmed after recovery, it took each one about an hour to die. Virtually no expansion and very little damage to the lungs. My conclusion.......if you do not hit bone they will not reliably expand.

I have killed over 100 animals since 2005 (deer, axis, blackbuck, pigs, coyotes, coons) with the 120gr Nosler Ballistic tip and have never had one run more than 15 yards and pile up dead. 66% bullet failure rate (explosion) made me try Barnes. Funny thing is that in each case of bullet failure the animal ran no more than 1-2 yards.

[Stinky Coyote]

I gave up on Barnes years ago. I could get good accuracy and they worked well on headshots (everything does), then I shot 3 does in the lungs. All 3 ran about 50 yards and bedded up where I could see them. With solid shot placement which was confirmed after recovery, it took each one about an hour to die. Virtually no expansion and very little damage to the lungs. My conclusion.......if you do not hit bone they will not reliably expand.

I have killed over 100 animals since 2005 (deer, axis, blackbuck, pigs, coyotes, coons) with the 120gr Nosler Ballistic tip and have never had one run more than 15 yards and pile up dead. 66% bullet failure rate (explosion) made me try Barnes. Funny thing is that in each case of bullet failure the animal ran no more than 1-2 yards.

In the big game world up here in Alberta there's a lot of guys loving the barnes but they are driving them with a lot more than 30 grains of powder and recognize the rule of thumbs are light for caliber and drive them really fast, minimum 2000 fps impact so ya barnes not ideal for sub 45 grains of powder cartridges imo.

I'm with you, in these slower cartridges I'll take rapid expansion designs like ballistic tips, a-max and now eld-m etc. all day long, with the great SD to start they really do magic work terminally. With the good bc they stretch that distance out increasing efficiency of that powder burned. I'm 123 gr eld-m guy all the way in this cartridge. Which is nice as I don't reload so I get to have my cake and eat it too all from the factory shelf, rifles and ammo.

I'd likely only shoot the eld-m from creedmoors as well but that's too much horsepower for me lol