Barnes Triple Shock Bullets

[Trapper7]

When they first came out there was no loading information available for these bullets. We were told to use the same loading data as the XBT and not the XLC.

Is that still the advice recommended by Barnes?

[Rocky Raab]

This is a straight cut and paste from www.barnesbullets.com:

What load data should I use for the Triple-Shock X-Bullet?
Loading data is being created for the Triple-Shock X-Bullet. Until this data is made available, we suggest you use standard X-Bullet data. In some cases, pressure will be reduced, allowing you to add a couple of grains (in 1/2 grain increments) of powder to the maximum loads listed, while watching carefully for signs of pressure.

[Slim-Zippy]

I know that you have probably have checked the Barnes site again. But some one told me that they had reposted some stuff on the Barnes site. I don't know for sure, but you might try it again. Heck, give Barnes a call and ask them.

John

[Cossack]

Working up a load for my 7/08 using a chron it turned out that the TS load came in exactly midway between the standard X and the XLC. You still have to keep them back off the lands a bit too (.040 to .050), to avoid pressure spikes.

[Terry Blauwkamp]

I love the TSX, and have found them to be very forgiving in seating depth, not like the old X bullets where each .005 made a big difference.

[Trapper7]

I emailed Barnes and all they told me was that a new reloading manual would be out early this summer.

I really like the Triple Shock bullet. I killed a large cow elk this last fall with a heart shot at about 100 yards with a 150 grain Triple shock bullet in a 30-06. The powder was 58 grains of IMR4350. The elk stumbled about 15 yards and fell over. The bullet passed completely through the elk.

[denton]

I've heard claims from a reputable sources, that the TSX are typically undersized. Yes, this will lead to less fouling, require larger charges, and get high muzzle velocities, just as their web site says, but at a high price in barrel life and probably accuracy.

If you have some TSX on hand, I'd be very interested in seeing your diameter data, to see if this is really true. Or, if you want to send me a single bullet, I will mike it, post the results, and send you back the bullet.

[Varmint Hunter]

You got me interested enough to go down stairs and put the mic on some new 140gr .284" TSX bullets. Guess what - they measured exactly .282" across the shank or belt area.

Wonder why they call them .284's? :D ;) :D

[Cossack]

We got a bigger problem then you thought!
I just measured some Barnes X, Triple Shocks, Hornady, Nosler and Sierras used for my 7mm guns. They measured an exact .2835.
Who would have thunk they'd ALL be undersized?!! :eek:

[denton]

I don't think .0005" under is a problem. I think .002" under is a serious problem.

So, by that, your TSX's were OK, but Varmint Hunter's were a problem..... hmmmm.....

[Dutchboy]

I just measured my .277 and .284's with my trusty dial calipers, and they are, as close as I can read, about .283-something. Maybe 5 thou less than the regular Hornady's I have on the shelf. Not enough to worry about.

Incidentally, the TSX's measure just a few thou less than the GS custom HV's I have laying around. Though one is grooved, and one is banded, the engraving process will actually increase the diameter of the bullets enough to create a seal.

Finally, who shoots enough barnes bullets to wear out a barrel? JMO, Dutch.