270 Winchester and Barnes lightweight bullets on deer?

[bcraig]

Wondering if anyone haas used the 270 Winchester with the Barnes 110 or 85 grain bullets on deer ?If you have please relate the results.
Thanks,Craig

[charles p]

No, but I've tried 125 grain 30-06 with poor results.  I like 130 an my rifle likes 140 in my 270.  In 280 and 7mm-08 I use 140, in 25-06 I use 117, and in 243 I use 100.  I just haven't seen better results from the bullet construction of the lightest for caliber bullets, with one exception.

I have a 7-30W Thompson Contender pistol.  I shoot fragile Sierra 130 SSP bullets designed to function at pistol velocities.  They are great on deer.  I've tried 120 BT bullets but they did not deliver the DRT performance.

If you want to shoot light bullets to get more velocity, try the copper bullets.

[BBF]

I have no experience with Barnes bullets. For myself I can't understand the rationale to use light for caliber bullets on big game.
 The exception would be something like a 235 gr bullet in a 375 H&H instead of the more common 270 gr loads for smaller big game.

[bcraig]

I think the rational is that since Barnes bullets stick together so well that a person can use a lighter weight for higher velocity and flatter trajestory and less recoil.
The Barnes x bullets are supposed to be totally different from regular bullets with a cup and core construction.

[shot1]

The barns X-bullets do expand with reasonable velocity, they hold together and keep on trucking through bone, gristle, and most anything else that gets in the way. They are as long as much heaver cup and core bullets because copper is lighter than lead. The only problem is really long range. The light bullets start out fast but at longer ranges they slow down a lot. You need more velocity for the Barnes to expand than you do for the trick point cup and core bullets at longer ranges. If you put a 110 gr Barns X from a 270 win. through the shoulders of a deer out to 300 yards or so it will most likely drop like a rock. If you live in the communist state of, Oh no the condor might get sick if it eats the gut pile of a deer killed with a lead bullet, California. Solid non-lead metal bullets like the Barns are your only choice for hunting.

[parkergunshop]

My experience with the 90 grain Barnes in a .257 Ackley Improved is that it blew up on deer at a velocity of 3400 FPS.   

I went back to my 196 Grain Norma Soft Point at a velocity of 2380 FPS in my 8x57 as my primary deer load.

For my hunting conditions high speed/high velocity is not needed.   Anything below 100 grains is a varmint bullet from my viewpoint.

I have used my .270 Winchester with the 130 grain bullet with good results as well as the 130 grain in my 30-06, my longest shot was with a 130 grain in a 30-06.

Simply don't understand the logic of ultra light weight bullets for the caliber on big game?

[bcraig]

goodness gracious a Barnes x bullet blew up on a deers shoulder ! that goes contrary to what i have read about barnes x bullets for years and years. BUT thats the kind of real world experience i want.
I too have used the 8x57 Mauser on a couple of deer ,one with a PRVI 196 soft and another with a reload of 47 grains of H-4895 with a 150 Sierra.
I have killed 6 0r 7 with a 130 grain Ballistic Silvertip factory loads out of a 270 and it killy them great.
i would thik that a 11o barnes .277 bullet would have a much better chance of penetrating than a 130 cup and core out of a .308 bullet.Apparently you have given thought to a lighter bullet than standard for a caliber or you wouldn,t have tried a 130 in an 06 ! Again I would think that a 130 cup and core .277 bullet would be a rather different beast than a 130 in a .308 caliber. Matter of fact best of my knowledge a .277 130 more closely compares to a 165 out of a .308 as far as sectional density goes.
The logic of a bullet that will hold together and at the same time allow for a flatter trajectory and lighter recoil is something that i understand and would appreciate !I Am getting more recoil concience as i get older and I hunt an area where I may shoot at 20 steps to 400 yards or so. makes sense to me !

[yooper77]

I don't use any Barnes bullets, since I witnessed a 100 grain old Barnes X-bullet out of a 25-06 Remington fail to expand on an Antelope. These early bullets spiked pressures and where slow velocity out of the muzzle.

I don't and never will hunt California condor range, so I don't have a use for non-lead bullets.

If I find the need to ever use a non-lead rifle bullets, I would choose the Nosler E-Tip over any Barnes bullets.

I use 150 grain bullets and IMR-4831 powder out of my 270 Winchester, stellar SUB MOA accuracy.

yooper77

[bcraig]

Haven,t they changed the bullt since the early days when accordin to some the bullets didn,t open reliably ?
I also used to hear that the Nosler ballistic tips were too fragile in the early days but they had toughened them up.I haven,t had any problems with the Ballistic tips over expandin and find the plenty tough for deer and still kill quickly.
Now it would seem as if the same loads that i have used with much success and satisfaction would be where to stop except for the fact that bullet weight plays a huge part in the recoil equation and if I find that the Barnes x bullet will give me good killing characteristics with a flatter trajectory and less recoil then I would probably give them a try.
Now i know that anynumber of firearms and projectiles will work ,slow large bullets ,fast large bullets,slow small calibers etc, etc(handgun hunted exclusively for over 12 years with factory loads and cast bullets both soft and hard) various different rifle calibers,muzzleloading rifles and handguns and homemade bows and arrows)
Not really that i need anything different than a cup and core and any grain bullet if i put in the right spot and hunt within the range limitations of the weapon BUT i do like to try differnt things and that is why i posed the question of has anyone used the 85 or 110 grain Barnes bullets on deer ? Still waighting for some one to chime in with this information as i know as wide a diversity of hunters that are here on Graybeard surley someone must have used the loads I mentioned on deer.

[parkergunshop]

Bcraig,

It was not a Barnes X bullet that blew up, was a copper jacket .032 thinkness  lead filled Barnes 90 grain spitzer.

In any case I switched to the 100 grain Speer which is more accurate.

[Siskiyou]

I prefer heavy for caliber bullets but the all copper bullets have changed that option because of their longer overall length then the jacketed lead bullets.  When Nosler and Hornady introduced their non lead .277 bullets they came out with 130-grain bullets.  I suspect they did that because 130-grain is the best copper weight for the 270 Winchester.  Nosler has come out with a new 6.8 bullet at 85-grains most likely aimed directly at the 6.8 Remington

I must admit that the kid in me was tempted by the high velocities the 110-grain Barnes TTSX bullet can be driven.  When standing at the display shelves I had a box of 110-grain bullets in hand, but put them back and purchased the 130-grain TTSX bullets.  The higher B.C. of the 130-grain bullet should pay off.

270 Caliber



  Diameter Weight Description S.D. B.C. CAT# 
  .277"  110-gr  Tipped TSX BT  .205 .377 27772
  .277 130-gr  Tipped TSX BT  .242 .392 27775


 


Right to Left:  130-grain Hornady, 140-grain Hornady, 140-grain old style WW Silvertip, 130-grain Barnes TTSX, and 150-grain Sierra BT.


First two 130-grain Barnes out of my rifle that was sighted 3” high at 100-yards with the WW 140-grain Silvertip.





My old eyes were not sure of what I was seeing after firing the second shot.  I took a walk down range and confirmed that #2 cut #1 shot.  I took a picture with my camera phone. 

I was tempted by a nice bear when carrying the rifle loaded with the Barnes bullets, but I passed because I did not have a bear tag in my pocket.  I did kill a buck later that season with a 270 using the reliable cup and core 150-grain Hornady.

I have talked to a couple of hunters that have taken bucks at over 300-yards with the Hornady 130-grain GMX.  They were happy with the bullet.  A shooter at the gun club was not happy with the 130-grain GMX bullet at the range, but had good experience with the Barnes TTSX.

[benny]

I have not used the 85 or 110gr barnes on deer, but i shoot the 130 tsx exclusively out of my 270wby.  Trajectory will be almost identical because of the much better b.c. of the 130.  Took a large bodied buck last december looking back over his shoulder at me.  destroyed two ribs on the way in liquified the innards and exited the base of the neck.  bad angle, but he was getting ready to leave town and it was the only shot i had.  barnes are the only thing i will shoot now as the last four or five deer have all been one shot quick kills, always penetrate through from various angle, even through bone.  very accurate as well.

load the 130's, barnes manual says you should get 3200 in your 270win, and be done with it...

[redranger15]

I've shot 2 caribou and a deer with the 110 ttsx out of my 270wsm. One bou through both shoulder blades at 174 , dropped like a sack. The next one was at 75 yards broadside, in the ribs , blood was pouring out went about ten yards. The deer was the same as the second bou but he made it about 75 yards. Shooting the 110 will penetrate the same as if your shooting a 150 lead. You will kill anything with the 110 that you would kill with a 150 lead. And they never blow up. Two holes 1''-2''= dead. Also had friend shoot a deer at 75 yards dead on, found the bullet at the back hip just inside the hide, DRT.

[yooper77]

I do have some Nosler Accubond 110 grain in .277 for my wife using (H-4985) reduced loads.

I bet these would work great at full velocity as long as the accuracy was there.

Nolser shows Optimum Performance Velocity is Minimum 1800 FPS to Maximum Unlimited.

http://www.nosler.com/Bullets/Accubond.aspx

yooper77

[semperfi1970]

You could not pay me to put a Barnes bullet in one of my guns. Back in the day during the copper bullet uprising many a folks ended up with bolt set back and ruined chambers or bent bolt lugs. The copper bullets have to be long to make up for missing weight, the increased bearing surface caused pressure spikes. They have sence reduced the bearing surface by adding rings to the bearing surface(poor fix). Cant say as though I have ever seen a Barnes bullet shooter place in a bench rest comp, thats rite we dont shoot copper bullets.

Long live lead.

[yooper77]

You could not pay me to put a Barnes bullet in one of my guns. Back in the day during the copper bullet uprising many a folks ended up with bolt set back and ruined chambers or bent bolt lugs. The copper bullets have to be long to make up for missing weight, the increased bearing surface caused pressure spikes. They have sence reduced the bearing surface by adding rings to the bearing surface(poor fix). Cant say as though I have ever seen a Barnes bullet shooter place in a bench rest comp, thats rite we dont shoot copper bullets.

Long live lead.

Absolutely, I agree. I had a friend that shot the older Barnes 100 grain X-bullets in his 25-06 Remington and he was mad at high pressure signs and complete bullet failure.

Makes you wonder why/how Nosler makes their E-Tip bullet without the silly anti-pressure grooves. I am guessing they know something about making bullets.
http://www.nosler.com/Bullets/E-Tip-Lead-Free.aspx

yooper77

[redranger15]

You could not pay me to put a Barnes bullet in one of my guns. Back in the day during the copper bullet uprising many a folks ended up with bolt set back and ruined chambers or bent bolt lugs. The copper bullets have to be long to make up for missing weight, the increased bearing surface caused pressure spikes. They have sence reduced the bearing surface by adding rings to the bearing surface(poor fix). Cant say as though I have ever seen a Barnes bullet shooter place in a bench rest comp, thats rite we dont shoot copper bullets.

Long live lead.

 I think you don't have a clue.  It's a hunting bullet, ever think that's why. Oh and the grooves are meant to help prevent copper fouling in the barrel.

[parkergunshop]

Sorry Redrambler,

A solid copper bullet with a long bearing surface will raise pressures over a lead core bullet that compresses easier to fit the contour of the lands and grooves in the barrel.   Most lead core bullets have a copper based jacket surface just like the solid copper bullets that contact the lands and grooves in the bore, whats the difference in fouling, maybe the particular alloy and the fact that it takes more pressure due to the longer contact surface to start the solid copper bullet into the rifled part of the barrel and you have more  contact with the bore.

In any case a maximum load with one bullet may cause a pressure rise if you switch to a different design bullet of the same weight, just as mixing cases when reloading may do to a lessor extent, some brands of cases have less internal capacity than others.   Boat tail bullets generally have a shorter bearing surface for their weight.  The grooves in the new solid Barnes bullets reduce the bearing surface and they seem to have a slightly rebated base like a boattail.

Some folks may get great accuracy with Barnes bullets, I never did, however their accuracy was ok for normal hunting conditions.  Barnes bullets are designed for hunting not benchrest shooting or other competition rifle shooting in any case.

[yooper77]

You could not pay me to put a Barnes bullet in one of my guns. Back in the day during the copper bullet uprising many a folks ended up with bolt set back and ruined chambers or bent bolt lugs. The copper bullets have to be long to make up for missing weight, the increased bearing surface caused pressure spikes. They have sence reduced the bearing surface by adding rings to the bearing surface(poor fix). Cant say as though I have ever seen a Barnes bullet shooter place in a bench rest comp, thats rite we dont shoot copper bullets.

Long live lead.

 I think you don't have a clue.  It's a hunting bullet, ever think that's why. Oh and the grooves are meant to help prevent copper fouling in the barrel.

Barnes have a line of match burner bullets that are now (April 2011) available, but time will tell if they ever see a real match.

http://www.barnesbullets.com/products/coming-in-2011/new-match-burners/

Barnes knew from their older X-bullets failure which created severe fouling and high dangerous pressures, so they put the grooves in their bullets.

Just click on the Barnes FAQ link below:

http://www.barnesbullets.com/information/bullet-talk/faq/

Can I expect copper fouling when using TSX Bullets?

Barnes quote: "Because of mutiple grooves machined into the shanks of Triple-Shock bullets, less bullet area comes in contact with the bore. This reduces pressures and virtually eliminates copper fouling."

yooper77

[redranger15]

 I thought the bad fouling was the first reason for the grooves and pressue reduction was a bonus, thanks for the info.
 

[yooper77]

Nope, pressure was a problem day one when veteran re-loaders approached maximum load data compared to ordinary cup/core bullets to the Barnes X-bullet. I personally forgot about the copper fouling, but I do remember now my buddy complaining about this along with the high pressures.

Apparently Barnes wanted to save time and money, so used the public firearms, time and money for their testing platform. Very risky and it backfired in my eyes, so I don't consider Barnes bullets for anything.

yooper77

[LanceR]

bcraig, if you are looking for lighter recoil with a lighter bullet you will have to load it to less than maximum velocity or you will have the same recoil as with a heavier bullet.

The lighter bullets can be pushed faster so there's no recoil reduction unless you slow them down.  I've worked up a number of .308 and 30-06 reduced recoil loads with Barnes tipped and regular TSX bullets and they work very well.

I note that a lot of the responses speak of the old X bullet which Barnes has not made in some time. 

400 yards is a long way under any conditions and is even longer when shooting a reduced load.  It will put a premium on range estimation and calling the wind.  You'd have to call Barnes and ask what the high end terminal velocity recommendations are.  I know that nearly all the TSX bullets will reliably expand to 2x diameter down to the 1400-1500 FPS range. 

If you can give me an idea of how much of a recoil drop you are looking for I'd be glad to crunch the data for any bullet you pick for trajectory, energy, windage and recoil.  If you want the recoil data an accurate weight for your rifle and scope would help.  Also, an idea of what load(s) you've been shooting would let me tell you what the % of recoil reduction might be.

Lance

[LONGTOM]

Just use the standard 130 or 150 gr bullets loaded in factory ammo and you will be good from point blank to over 500yds on deer.
I have been a .277 man for well over 40 years and the 270 or 270wsm has never let me down except 1 time back in the late 60s with 150gr Remingtons that would not penetrate the near shoulder of a deer at less than 75yds. Not once but twice on the same buck. The third shot took his throat out while on a hard run at just over 140yds. He went less than 50yds and is on my wall today. My first big buck when I was 14. A nice 11 point.
I have taken 3 deer in my life over 475yds. Two dropped right there from shoulder shots and the third was a behind the shoulder shot which ran about 65yds.
I too, thought about the 110gr Barnes loads.
In fact, I have 3 boxes of Federals in my ammo cabnet now but have never tried them on a deer.
I just keep using what has worked for me for so many years.
130s all the way!!!
I love my 270s!!!




LONGTOM

[bcraig]

lance I have been using the calculator on Handloads .com and also looking at the Hodgon site and getting data off there for velocitys and powder charges and according the this calculator the 110 grain barnes at around 3200 will recoil somewhere around 11.5ft ponnds of recoil compared to the 130 gr bullet at 3050 which will recoil around 13.5 FT pounds of recoil for a recoil difference a little more than 10%.
Comparing the 85 grain at 3500 shows about 8.7 FT pounds of recoil which is somewhere around 40% less than the 130 grain load.I used a 9 Pound rifle weight for all these figures.
Lance I would be interested in you running these figures through your ballistic program.
As far as hunting goes I hunt on the same family farm i have hunted on for 40 years so am pretty good at estimatin distances actually I aint estimating them i know them !
Although I do reload I am completely satisfied with the performance of the Factory Loaded Winchester 130 grain Ballistic silvertip but just looking to keep GOOD performance WITH RECOIL REDUCTION.
In addition ALL THE loads Listed including the factory Winchester load is doing 2000 FPS or better at 400 yards so falling within the envelope for reliable expansion with any of the loads should be no problem.
Now I can live with 270 130 gr recoil but IF I can find good performance with less recoil why not ?

[LanceR]

Well Sir, this is a good example of why I like Barnes bullets.  I don't use them exclusively but since they retain nearly all their weight they penetrate like a heavier jacketed bullet and, at least in my guns, will shoot as good as anything else, I do use them pretty exclusively for reduced recoil loads. 

The only two Barnes bullets I've ever recovered were both on the other side of deer after downhill shots.  One hit a farm road here on our farm and the other was a few inches deep in a bank.  Both had expanded to twice the original diameter with the perfect symmetry shown in Barnes adds.  Each had only lost 5-6 grains and I suspect that was the ballistic tips.  One was from a reduced power 30-06 load I loaded for a friends son.

Hodgdon's H4895 is a great powder for reduced recoil loads.  The deeper penetration of a Barnes TSX or TTSX at any given velocity and bullet weight makes H4895 with Barnes bullets a great choice for reduced loads.

For a reduced load with H4895 you start with the amount of powder called for in the max load and divide it by 0.06.  You can safely use any amount of powder between those two figures with uniform ignition, pressures and velocities.  It is the only powder I know of tested that way for reduced recoil loads.  The Hodgdon website's "Youth Load" page lists some good reduced loads designed to keep the bullet within 3" above or below the line of site out to 200 yards (a 6" mean point blank range or 6" MPBR).  They are some good examples of what a reduced load can do and all are good white tail deer loads.

Check Hodgon's website for an H4895 load for your bullet and cartridge as a starting point.  If it's not listed or you have any questions, call them at 913-362-9455, they have tons of data that's not on the website.

For the .270, the Hodgdon site shows a 110 grain Hornady (the Barnes data should be similar) at 3215 FPS with a max charge of 47.5 grains of H4895.  That means you can use anything from 47.5 to 28.5 grains safely.  A look at the "Youth Load" page shows a 110 grain load at 2594 FPS with 36.2 grains of H4895.

If you carry over the velocity change the lowest power load (60% of the max load) might look like 2000 FPS with 28.5 grains-a very viable 130 yard white tailed deer load and a recoil pussycat at only 5.0 pounds of recoil in an 8 pound rifle.

I'll use an 8 pound combination of rifle/scope/mounts and a scope height of 1.5" above the bore to list the changes in recoil, energy and trajectory with bullet weight and velocity changes.  I'll also assume a 6" MPBR.  All examples show a 10 MPH side wind for windage.  All examples use Barnes Tipped TSX bullets.

A 130 grain TTSX at 3000 FPS will recoil with 14.8 pounds of force.  The MPBR is 291 yards and it gets to 400 yards with 1271 pounds of energy-well over the 800 pounds many experts feel is a good white tail deer value.  At 400 yards it drops 16.3" and with 14.6" of windage.

A 110 grain TTSX at 3215 FPS (the max H4895 load) has an MPBR of 308 yards.  At 400 yards it has 12.9" of drop, 1224 pounds of energy and 13.9" of windage.  Clearly you can get these to fly flatter and with less windage than the 130 grain bullet and pay only a small energy penalty.  The recoil, however is UP to 15.1 pounds because of the higher velocity.

Now, lets pull some steam off the velocity.  The 110 TTSX at 2900 FPS has a 280 yard MPBR, at 400 yards it has 18.8" of drop, 16.1" of windage and 964 pounds of energy-still well over what a white tail deer should need.  The recoil is down to 11.7 pounds-a solid 20% reduction.  The 400 yard velocity is 1986 FPS so you are well over what you need to fully expand the bullet.  I suspect that something on the order of 40-41 grains H4895 will give you these speeds.

Note that the reduced load (2900 FPS) has a 11 yard shorter 6" MPBR and, at 400 yards, has only 2.5" more drop and 1.5" more windage than the 130 grain bullet-not too shabby.  Not too shabby at all.

I think you are on the right track.  Please post back with your thoughts and your results.

Lance

[bcraig]

Lance I cant get on handloads .com for some reason today,could you steer me to another free site that i could rerun the figures ? I could have sworn that a 130 gr bullet running at 3050 had more recoil than a 110 grain bullet at 3200 fps both with gun weights of 9 pounds (which is about what a  to 7.5 pound rifle will weigh with scope,mounts, sling,swivels and ammo.)
If you dont mind run the figures for an 85 grain bullet at 3500 FPS for a 9 pound total as well .
BTW what are you using to run the data?
Thanks,Craig

[helotaxi]

Given a max loading which results in essentially the same muzzle energy, a heavier bullet will have greater recoil.  The heavier bullet has more inertia that must be overcome which leads to a higher initial recoil impulse.  This is why competition pistol shooters use the lightest bullet possible pushing it to the velocity needed to make power factor.

[LanceR]

Craig, I'm not sure you can count the sling and swivels because they are not rigidly attached and don't move as a homogenous mass with the rifle.

Recoil is not just a simple matter of the mass of the ejecta (bullet, powder, sabot if used) and the velocity.  In modern firearms the "jet" effect of the accelerating propellent gases has a significant effect-somewhere around 25-50% of the total recoil energy.  As the bullet exits the muzzle the gas accelerates past and around it.  The higher the bullet velocity and gas pressure the more pronounced the effect.  The result is that the recoil energy does not go up as a straight line function of a velocity increase.  Another factor is that the lighter bullet will generally need the same or, more often, a larger powder charge which will cause another increased input to the recoil equation.

The calculator I use is at:

http://www.jbmballistics.com/ballistics/calculators/calculators.shtml

The trajectory calculator I use is the "Trajectory-Drift" one.  I change the vital zone radius to 3" for a 6" MPBR which allows me some wobble while staying in the heart/lung area of any legal sized deer.  At the bottom of the page I un-check "Elevation correction for zero" and "Target relative drops" and then check "Zero at MPBR"

An 85 grain FB TSX at 3500 FPS has a MPBR of 311 yards and will get to the 400 yard line with a 13.2" drop, 20.3" of windage but only 755 pounds of energy-pretty marginal for deer.  The sectional density is pretty low, too.  The recoil in a 9 pound rifle is 10.4 pounds.

The 110 at 3215 FPS out of a 9 pound rifle is 11.7 pounds of recoil.

The 130 at 3000 out of the same rifle is 14.3 pounds.

I don't think the 85 grain bullet is worth the greater windage and the lower terminal energy for only a 1.3 pound drop in recoil.  If you want a lower recoil I still think the 110 at a lower velocity is your best bet.  At 2900 FPS it will still be a stone cold killer.

Lance

[LONGTOM]

Just wondering:
270 Winchester, Federal Vital -Shok, 110 Grain Barnes Tipped Triple-Shock X Bullet.
Solid copper polymer tipped bullet.
Muzzle velocity: 3400 fps.
Velocity at 100 yards: 3125 fps.
Velocity at 300 yards: 2624 fps.
Muzzle energy: 2823 ft/lbs.
Energy at 100 yards: 2386 ft/lbs.
Energy at 300 yards: 1682 ft/lbs.

Above figures taken from a Federal ammo advertisement.

How does the recoil of the loading above compair to the standard 130gr loading of 3000 to 3050fps?



LONGTOM

[bcraig]

Long Tom using the calculator that Lance uses ,for the 130 at 3050 it shows for a load using 55 grains of powdee to be 15 foot pounds and for a load using 60 grains it shows 16 foot pounds.
gain using the same calculator for the 110 at 3400 it shows a low of about 14 foot pounds for a 55 grain load and a high of about 15 for a 60 grain load.
Hard for me to put a hardcore definitive answer on is because the hodgon load That at  use shows a 110 loading but it is not a Barnes bullet which will change the answer somewhat.
The reason i use the differences in powder weight is that I dont know how much of what kind of powder the factories are using for either the 130 at an industry standard of 3050 or the Federal load of the barnes 110 at 3400.
But what does appear to be true is that the 110 at 3400 will be a little lighter recoiling than the 130 at 3050.And the 110 at 3200 will recoil a lot less than the 130 at 3050.
Just my take on it and all the variables could be skewed by using different powders and charge weights IE using a powder that required a lot of it to reach 3400 with a 110 and then using a powder that required a smaller amount to reach 3050 with a 130. Also seems to me that the powder burning rates would affect the recoil speed which would give a different percieved felt recoil.
how about a good ol boy test? SHoot a few rounds of the 110 grain federal load and then a few rounds of the 130 grain loads and let us know what the difference seems to be to you .
Craig