Author Topic: Some thoughts on accuracy with the Barnes X bullets... (Read 1211 times)

IronKnees · « **on:** May 26, 2003, 03:53:09 PM »

I'm starting to see a pattern when it comes to Barnes X bullets, pretty much across the board when it comes to caliber... I started trying them when they first hit the market, and have had outstanding accuracy with virtually all my rifles. Especially my .45-70... Now, here is what I have noticed. I DO NOT LOAD HOT. In fact, for most of my hunting, since it's is all close range, I use a term that I have more or less coined. I call it 100 yard loads. I load most of my muzzle velocities to that which you would normally find out at around 100 yards. For wild boar hunting using 180 grain bullets, this results in a muzzle velocity of around 2400 fps or just a bit more.

Now, without question, some rifles just will not shoot the Barnes X no matter what you do, but here is my theory. The jacketed lead core bullets, which of course make up most of the premium bullets have the hardest jackets, while the copper used in the Barnes X bullets is somewhat softer. Also, of course, lead is softer yet. The lead core jacketed bullets will obturate (slug) inside the barrel, and thereby conform to differences in actual barrel dimensions. However, the all copper Barnes X bullet will not do this, and needs a better "match" or fit to begin with. Over the years, I have noticed that the guys who have emailed me, or posted on my forum about having accuracy problems, almost without fail, were loading very hot... We all know that cast lead bullets will only work properly up to a certain velocity. Beyond that, accuracy will fall off dramatically, and lead fouling goes way up... I'm thinking that perhaps, slowing down the Barnes X bullets a bit may be at least in part, an answer to accuracy problems. They don't slug and conform to the barrel, and if pushed too fast, I am thinking that perhaps the "skid" down the barrel, and don't get the proper spin... They also copper foul badly if pushed too fast... Just a thought, but I am starting to think there is something to this... since again, I load to modest velocities, and have never had accuracy problems. One note: Obviously, depending on the weight of the bullet, you are going to have to load to a velocity that will stabilize the bullet, but this will not be anywhere near MAX velocity...

sharpshooter · « **Reply #1 on:** May 27, 2003, 02:15:33 AM »

I haven't had any luck with the Barnes. I haven't done alot of testing with them but what I have done wasn't very impressive. I bought a box of the X bullets for my 7mm Rem.Mag. in a 160 grain. I yet to find a good load for it with these bullets. :cry:

IronKnees · « **Reply #2 on:** May 27, 2003, 02:58:42 AM »

Sharpshooter, there most definitely are two distinct camps on this. Those who just love the Barnes X bullets, and those who have not had any luck at all with them. The fact that they don't "slug" inside the barrel makes me think that they need to "fit" your gun to some degree, or they may not shoot well in it no matter what you do. However, there is one thing that I have noticed over the years when guys email me with questions. First, YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST stay within the Barnes reloading data. Many, many times I've had guys email me and it turned out they were WAY OVER MAX.... once they backed off their load, they reported better accuracy. The Barnes X is much longer, takes up way more space inside the case, does not "slug" and has a longer bearing surface... all these things make for very different pressures than so called "normal", jacketed lead bullets. My thinking is that once pressures and resulting velocities are kept in check, that accuracy, assuming your rifle fits them, will improve... Again, these are just my thoughts... and certainly not gospel.... but the fact that I load mid range in terms of pressure and velocity, and have had wonderful luck with them both in accuracy and in quick kills makes me think that speeding them up too much may be part of the problem.

:?

eroyd · « **Reply #3 on:** May 27, 2003, 05:49:45 AM »

I've been carefully working up a load for my 257 Roberts Ackley improved using a Surplus 47N powder (similar to 4350). Using Barnes 100 gr XBT and Nosler Solid base bullets. At 51 grains the Barnes bullet really flattens out the primer,(no other problems though), the jacketed bullet load I'm sure could be pushed a little harder. (I won't) Both grouped great but I was delighted to see a .75" five shot group from the Barnes. Thats smaller than I figured I could hold at a 100. Next time out I'll put them over a chrony.

The only animal I've shot with a Barnes-X was with a 130gr 270. The moose was hit simultainiously with that and a 180 30cal Nosler partition. Both bullets hit within 3 inches of each other just behind the shoulder on a broadside shot. The barnes x tracked straight through and wasn't recovered. The mushroomed Nosler (- the front core) ended up just under the skin along the backbone halfway down the body?

sharpshooter · « **Reply #4 on:** May 27, 2003, 11:45:43 AM »

Where could I get some barnes loading data for the 7mm with the 160 gr. barnes bullet?

IronKnees · « **Reply #5 on:** May 27, 2003, 12:40:43 PM »

I've got the latest manual, Sharpshooter. Send me an email giving me an idea what powders you like, and I will send it to you... I don't like to "post" data, but if you twist my arm real hard, I'll email it to you...

Graybeard · « **Reply #6 on:** May 27, 2003, 06:53:21 PM »

Dave your results sure don't mirror mine nor those of most posters I've read on many forum sites on the internet.

Except for a Custom Shop 6 TCU barrel I've so far not found a single load with any caliber of X bullet I consider to be accurate enough for hunting in any of my rifles. I've not given up, I've just not found a workable load yet. I have some left in both 6 MM and .308" and am gonna keep trying. I'd sure like to find a good accurate hunting load for both so I can try them and see how they work on game. Heck I may do that anyway in an area where only close shots can be taken just to see if they are as good on game as Barnes and some others say.

I first tried them in both of my 6 TCU barrels and did find a load in the 15" that I felt adeqate for the limited range of the barrel. I think the load averaged a bit under 2" at 100 yards where conventional bullets of similar weights went closer to 1/2" and almost never over an inch. The other 6 TCU barrel never kept any load under 3" at 100 yards and seldom did that well. Both were Custom Shop barrels the same except for one being 15" and the other 23". I tried them in a Ruger #1 in 6 MM Remington. They were the worst shooting load in it but them hardly anything stayed on a 8.5"x11" target sheet so that's no real put down of the bullets. I have tried them in my super accurate Browning LW in .243 and am still looking for a load I can live with for it. I have some more loaded to try now.

I've tried the .308" bullets in my very accurate Rem. 700 LSS Mtn. Rifle with no success to date. I tried them in TC barrels chambered to both .30-30 and .30-30 AI and so far nothing has been much under 4" at 100 yards and generally speaking I won't take a gun to the woods that won't do better than that. I still have some more of the .308s left but not many so will give it another try when I find the time.

I have some of the new .257s supposed to come my way when they are available and I'm sure hoping to find a load that works in my R700 ADL in .257 Roberts. For the LW .243 and the R700 .257 Roberts both I'd like to use only premium bullets for hunting as they are a bit lighter than I'm used to and I like exit holes. If I can get the Barnes X bullets to shoot in them that's perhaps what I'll use assuming they really do perform on game as expected. If not I'll go to another premium bullet for these two mid caliber guns.

I've reshot the .45s in wet paper and got expansion so this fall I'll see if I can give them a try in the RB .454 Casull on deer to see how they do.

GB

IronKnees · « **Reply #7 on:** May 28, 2003, 01:20:26 AM »

Yeah GB, It's the darndest thing I ever saw... You find guys who either have had GREAT success with them, or... guys who can't get them to shoot in anything they own... But again, since I almost NEVER load anywhere near MAX, I got to thinking that perhaps this could be key to an accurate load...

Hcliff · « **Reply #8 on:** May 28, 2003, 11:26:14 AM »

I have had the best accuracy with top end loads. The Boat tail design has also worked better. It has to do with the bearing surface. That is why the new one has rings to keep pressure down. My 25/06 was particular and loved the 90 gra XBT but dosn't shoot the 115 as well. When working the loads for a X bullets you have to follow the guidlines aboutr being off tyhe lands. They need room to move before hitting the rifling.

Guns love or hate Barnes. The Failsafe has had similar results on animals but are more forgiving. I think it is the back of the bullet can bump up to seal the bore better. The problem is the Failsafe is limited on calibers. There are a lot more choices with the X bullet. Both are devistating on game.

Hcliff

Big Tom · « **Reply #9 on:** May 30, 2003, 05:53:02 PM »

The Barnes website has some definite mandates for bullet seating with their bullets. They dont work well with the regular seating procedure. They need to be 0.30 to 0.70 AWAY from the lands.

I noticed that when I was working with them in my .300 Wby.

They say most calibers work best 0.50 back rom the lands . I hope that was helpful. I am a rookie at reloading, but pretty good at reading. :-D

IronKnees · « **Reply #10 on:** May 31, 2003, 03:29:04 AM »

I don't like to redirect or change a post subject, but can't resist saying this. This kind of post is really what makes GB's forums (and my own forums over on my page) great. We can totally, even vehemently, disagree on a particular subject like this one, and not have it develop into an electronic &1$$ing match. I've had success doing one thing, you have had good luck doing it differently, and someone else has had other things work. We can share all of that on here, and unlike many forums, everyone comes away happy. None of that name calling etc. It doesn't make me right and you wrong, or you right and me wrong... it just makes good sharing, conversation, and thought provoking information for all.... We owe GB a debt of gratitude... Dave

eroyd · « **Reply #11 on:** May 31, 2003, 03:44:31 PM »

Does the Barnes moly coating help? I was told that the problem is; if the moly rubs off you can get a dangerous spike in pressure if the loads were worked up with moly bullets.

Sweets 7.62 is awesome copper remover, I've tried the Barnes, Shooter's choice and Benchrest. Just make sure you use it in a well vetilated location.

Hcliff · « **Reply #12 on:** June 02, 2003, 10:25:56 AM »

I personally have never had the problem with fouling. Sweet's is what I use to clean the fouling. The coating has not gave me the increased velocity that was supposed to happen. Good bullets.

Hcliff

IronKnees · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2003, 10:35:59 AM »

There is a good deal of controversy on this subject. Actually, it's worthy of a whole new thread. Molybdenum disulfide (Ms. Moly aerosol is what I use) was all the rage a while back, but now, the buzz is that it is hard to clean out of your barrel and requires a special solvent... Unless I am mistaken, Barnes says theirs is not moly, but their own coating... I've had mixed results coating with moly myself. In some cases it improved accuracy, and in some cases it hurt... In every case though, it required working the load up all over again, as it does indeed have an effect on pressure, velocity, and accuracy... that much I do know...

Jeff Vicars · « **Reply #14 on:** June 02, 2003, 10:46:00 AM »

All guns I have tried X bullets in have shot great. This was not always the case until I learned that absolutely all fouling from conventional bullets has to be removed before firing x bullets. Even if the bore looks clean ammonia type solvents need to be used until there is no blue on the patches. l

IronKnees · « **Reply #15 on:** June 02, 2003, 11:01:56 AM »

Jeff. Very well put, and you are absolutely correct. I think one thing we all fall into here is that up to a point, we can more or less switch bullets with some of our favorite loads and get away with it... lead core jacketed bullets that is. However, Barnes X bullets are different enough not only in composition, but in sectional density and thereby bearing surface, performance inside the barrel (lack of obturation) spelling?

etc., that they simply need their own set of "rules" if you will.
I have used Barnes X bullet hunting more than any other. Wild boar, moose, and deer are among the game harvested with mine, and the moose was a "walked off" 300 yard shot. Chrony velocity for that one was around 2750 fps, and it was really accurate. ... Just my thoughts for what they are worth...

Hcliff · « **Reply #16 on:** June 03, 2003, 05:12:48 AM »

Iron knees

I believe that the Barnes coating is a baked on coating. It was used in racing cars and the aerospace as a friction reducer. I think Barnes used that so the cdoating would rub off and be messy as some moly can be. They claimed better results.

Hcliff

IronKnees · « **Reply #17 on:** June 03, 2003, 05:48:50 AM »

I use Ms. Moly aerosol, but here is how I do mine... First, I heat the bullets with a monocoat blower... It is like a hair dryer, except hotter, and is made to shrink the covering on radio control model airplanes... Once "hot", I then spray on the moly coating, and then dry it using the blower... I usually apply two light coats. I have never had problems with it coating the barrel, and also have noticed that if you let it cure for a few days before putting the bullets back in their box, it does not mar when the bullets rub against one another...

Hcliff · « **Reply #18 on:** June 04, 2003, 08:07:20 AM »

That's a great tip! Thanks. I could give that a try with the heat shrink gu we use for wiring boats at work. The heat must be the key

Thanks again

Hcliff