+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 45

Thread: new Barnes 6.5mm 127gr LRX bullet

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Chieftain Drifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,505

    new Barnes 6.5mm 127gr LRX bullet

    In case this hasn't already been posted...

    In 2011, Barnes introduced a new LRX bullet designed to increase BC by altering ogive and boattail lengths (compared to their TTSX bullets) to improve long-range ballistic performance:

    http://www.barnesbullets.com/blog/20...nge-x-bullet®/

    For 2012, Barnes has added a 6.5mm / .264 version weighing 127 grains. BC is .468 and SD is .260:

    http://www.barnesbullets.com/product...ew-barnes-lrx/

    MidwayUSA website indicates that availability is expected later in March:

    http://www.midwayusa.com/product/392...tail-box-of-50


    My guess is that these bullets will be somewhat long and take up excessive case capacity in the Grendel, but perhaps the higher BC might offset lower velocity to some degree.


    Slightly off topic, but I'm still wishing for some premium 6.5mm hunting bullets in the 105gr to 115gr weight range with a good BC and reduced velocity needed for expansion (while still holding together for closer shots at higher impact velocities). Seems like this would be a sweet spot with the Grendel for medium game hunting, and a potential opportunity for bullet manufacturers.
    Drifter

  2. #2
    Moderator LRRPF52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    6,236
    I handled the 127gr LRX at SHOT, and had a lengthy discussion with one of the Barnes engineers. They're just down I-15 from us, so I asked him if we could do some testing on an LRX-type bullet in the 100-115gr range, since the LRX has a lower impact velocity expansion threshold. The LRX is in fact, more appropriate for a case like the .260 Remington, 6.5 Creedmoor, .264 Winchester, and 6.5 Swede.

    I expressed to him how great it would be to support the Grendel with some Barnes products, as in a Grendel-specific solid. I need to follow-up with him, and about 50 other people to boot.

  3. #3
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    43
    That is exciting, I might have to go put that on my midway wish list now. I agree with you on the 105-115gr bullets, I think this is a good start though! I for one am very interested in knowing what you hear from Barnes LRRPF52.
    Last edited by crispy; 03-05-2012 at 07:25 PM.

  4. #4
    Warrior
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    280
    What Barnes bullet is loaded in the AA round with 115gr bullet that is loaded in Hornady brass showing in "what's new" section on AA website? Completely agree that would be a sweet spot, especially given predominance of 1-8.75 and 1-9 twist barrels in the market.

  5. #5
    Moderator bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NRA Member, SAF Member Central Washington State
    Posts
    3,546
    Quote Originally Posted by bobke View Post
    What Barnes bullet is loaded in the AA round with 115gr bullet that is loaded in Hornady brass showing in "what's new" section on AA website? Completely agree that would be a sweet spot, especially given predominance of 1-8.75 and 1-9 twist barrels in the market.
    Its not a Barnes, its a Berger, specially run for Alexander Arms and that loading.
    Gun Confiscation WILL NOT Happen In My Lifetime. Pat Kelley 1998

    NOR IN MINE!

  6. #6
    Warrior stokesrj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tampa Bay Area
    Posts
    879
    I really don't understand the desire for 105-115 grain bullets. The real beauty of the 6.5 caliber and it's secret to better than expected results on game lies with the heavy for caliber bullets. That is largely a dated opinion because it was from a time before premium bullets were available. Bullets of conventional design but heavy for caliber, fired at moderate velocitity really perform well. That is how the 6.5x54 got it's reputation in Africa, and the 6.5x55 got it's reputation in norther Europe on Elk (moose).
    If we decrease bulelt weight, length, BC and make them tougher, we can then enjoy higher impact velocity at close range and lower impact velocity at longer range. I would argue there is no better weight for the 6.5 Grendel than the 120-140 grain weights if the range is zero to 400 or 600 yards, if the range is zero to 300 yards then a case for lighter but more heavily constructed premium bullets could be made but why?
    Bob

  7. #7
    Chieftain Drifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,505
    stokesrj- I understand your viewpoint. I think those "old school" cartridges were successful in part due to penetration. Like the 6.5x55 that you mentioned, I also put the 7x57 in the same category. Long heavy-for-cartridge bullets at moderate speed will certainly do the job. And though they are no less effective now, modern bullet designs can likely perform even better, and possibly provide more DRT's and less tracking.

    Even the 120gr to 123gr weight range is somewhat lacking in premium hunting bullets for 6.5mm. The premium selection gets better at 129gr+, but those bullets are longer and seemingly better suited to cartridges with larger case capacity (like the .260). The 123gr A-max is arguably the most accurate bullet for the Grendel, and it will expand at lower velocities making it quite effective for taking game at longer range, but it can't be counted on for consistent penetration at shorter yardages. The 120gr Nosler BT isn't a bad choice for deer, but it needs ~1800+ fps for reliable expansion. The Barnes 120gr TTSX is somewhat long for its weight, and it also requires ~1800+ fps.

    Just as Barnes can redesign a bullet for better BC and lower expansion threshold without it coming to pieces at close range (such as the LRX), perhaps other bullet makers can too. The right design in the 105gr to 115gr range might be better suited to the Grendel case. Hornady SST supposedly expands reliably down to ~1500 fps, but it will also hold together at higher impact velocities with its interlock design. Hornady makes a 120gr SST specifically for the 6.8 SPC, and indication is that it has been highly successful for taking medium game. Something similar designed for the Grendel would be nice. Or maybe the Nosler Partition could be updated for better BC and a plastic-tipped nose in the appropriate weight range.

    I think bullet makers can design whatever they put their minds to. But on the business side of the equation, there has to be a recognizable opportunity to make it a profitable venture for them.

    When Barnes designed the 95gr TTSX specifically for the 6.8 SPC, I think a couple of parties (including Wilson Combat) had to commit to purchase ~20,000 bullets before production could start. It might take something similar for a Grendel-specific bullet.

    When considering the AR-15 platform for hunting, I tend to think the Grendel's advantage over the 6.8 SPC is long range performance. But if you run the ballistics of the 95gr TTSX and 120gr SST in 6.8 against appropriate 6.5 counterparts at realistic velocities from hunting-length barrels, keeping in mind bullet expansion thresholds (~1600 fps for 6.8 95gr TTSX and ~1500 fps for 6.8 120gr SST, versus ~1800+ fps for 6.5), there's really not much difference in effective range. Putting ethics aside regarding how far away game should be taken, I think the Grendel in a hunting application is held back somewhat due to a lack of bullets tailored for it.

    I don't expect everyone to see it my way, but that's my take.
    Last edited by Drifter; 03-05-2012 at 10:43 PM.
    Drifter

  8. #8
    Chieftain sneaky one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    mpls., mn
    Posts
    1,321
    Bob, from a, (close- inside of 50 yds.) deer hunter like myself-the lighter mono metal, or bonded units are fine. I've used the GMX-100gr. with awesome results at 40 yds., the 120 Nos bt. came apart miserabily at 15 yds., the tsx is fine too. I'm turning down some Horn. Interbonds , into the 110-115 gr. range. I want to use them in close, and to 200yd. A while back- toolsofthetrade- posted a recovered 129 I.bond thru h2o jugs. I have that bullet, it only lost 6gr.-thru a few layers of med.-heavy density plastic, and h2o. Perfect mushroom, a tough well made bullet. They hold together, even at a higher impact velocity than he achieved , albeit at a lighter wt. The thick woods I hunt in only afford me a reaction shot most of the time. Speed helps. ( I used to lug around a- 26" 7 rem mag. so I could get the shot close in-speeeed!). Tough bullets finish the job. You have hunted in Africa, I have not- you know tough bullets save you from cape buff.! As we all know, the Grr. is a med. size game getter. Some have used it for elk. I wouldn't-but that's a personal choice. Hopefully big red=Hornady = reads some of these threads. I'm pushing their great lineup, I don't work for them, I am only trying to help give ideas-sway them to make a few more Grendel sized units for us all to enjoy. Drifter, Im with you all the way on lighter bullets., That's why I tweak some of them, with excellent results. Dan.

  9. #9
    How about a 110-115 gr Nosler Partition bullet with a plastic tip (for better feeding and less bullet damage in the AR15) rather than the soft lead tip. It could be a really good bullet.

    I would like to see a 110-115 gr Barnes TTSX made specifically for Grendel velocities. The number of medium game bullets an average person uses in the field makes them affordable enough.

  10. #10
    Warrior
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    713
    Sounds like the new offering from Barnes will be perfect -in my 6.5x55. And great in my 6.5 06. For my 6.5 Grendel (on paper @least) I fail to see how it will be superior to my 130gr Swift Scirrocos-and it will cost more.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts