Bigjav
Active member
Is there any difference between the LRX and triple shock bullets other than the LRX have a higher ballistic coefficient? Is made of a softer metal that will expand at a lower velocity?
Barnes LRX question
- Thread starter Bigjav
- Start date
cahunter805
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,527
The TTSX velocity limit for expansion is 2000fps and the LRX is 1600fps. The LRX is a longer nose and boat tail also. I’d try the LRX if your rifle is twisted right.
GlockZ
Well-known member
I believe the Barnes LRX bullet is made to expand at a much lower velocity than the TSX or TTSX bullet. I've gotten a chance to try a factory box of LRX in 270 Win and out of my Savage they are accurate. The furthest I was able to shoot them was 300 yards and had some impressive groups. I'm on the East Coast and it's rather difficult to find a range where you can shoot past 300 yards.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Pretty sure same metal, so I assume additional expansion at lesser velocities is due to the internal channel/tip design.
belshawelk
Well-known member
I was going to start a post about these. I have never shot any Barnes. I am looking at both the LRX and the TTSX for my .30. I don't shoot past 500 but looking for a hard hitting bullet that wont come apart from 10 to 500 yards.
Also looking at the ELD-X. While its considered a "long range" anyone have experience at 100-500 with elk.
Also looking at the ELD-X. While its considered a "long range" anyone have experience at 100-500 with elk.
jryoung
Well-known member
I'm pretty sure there's no difference between the LRX and TTSX other than a more efficient shape for a higher BC. I've never seen anything from barnes highlighting better expansion at lower velocities.
I have plenty of experience with Barnes. So long as you are mindful of minimum expansion velocity, you should be fine. I’ve shot critters up close at high velocities and a fair ways out . They have performed great for me.
Shameless plug for Hammer Bullets as well.
If you want a bullet that stays together, you don't want to use the eldx.
I have ran the 139 gn LRX in a 7mm-08. So far, so good on deer and antelope.
NVDesertHunter
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2016
- Messages
- 160
Used the 145gr LRX in a 280AI for a few animals this year..Elk at 300 yards that passed through both shoulders, a pig at 330 yards that went through the spine and shoulder and a WT deer at 40 yards through both shoulders.
I've tested both the LRX and TTSX in ballistic gel out to 400 yards and didnt notice an advantage with either one. I personally use the LRX bc of the better B.C which equals better velocity retention while traveling downrange. But again, I didnt notice a difference out to 400 yards.
I've tested both the LRX and TTSX in ballistic gel out to 400 yards and didnt notice an advantage with either one. I personally use the LRX bc of the better B.C which equals better velocity retention while traveling downrange. But again, I didnt notice a difference out to 400 yards.
Bigjav
Active member
I wanted to try the 127 in 6.5CM and the 175 in either the 30-06 or 300WM
Last edited:
Bigjav
Active member
Also curious on required expansion velocity because I see the Hornady GMX and some nosler etips have a higher BC in some calibers
Take a look at the 124 Hammer in 6.5, the 166 for .30-06, and the 181 for .300 WM. mtmuley
Dougfirtree
Well-known member
I happened to be speaking with a Barnes rep today and according to him, it's not as simple as LRX vs. TTSX. Each individual bullet has a unique min expansion velocity and they'll tell you if you call. there are certain weights of TTSX that have similar expansion numbers to certain LRX weights (for instance, the 168 and 180 .308 TTSX bullets expand at 1600, while the 165 and 150, 130 TTSX .308's are 1800). There was a lot of variation in the 7mm bullets. Some of the LRX models were as low as 1400, but I'd be inclined to add a few hundred fps to whatever they say. Might be worth calling them about the specific bullet you're looking at. And, as you pointed out, the E-tips often have higher BC's.
Personally, I'd be very curious to know what bullets Winchester is using for their new copper ammo. They're selling factory loaded all-copper cartridges for about 26 bucks per box. I wonder if they're taking a hit, or if they're somehow able to get all-copper bullets for lead prices...
Personally, I'd be very curious to know what bullets Winchester is using for their new copper ammo. They're selling factory loaded all-copper cartridges for about 26 bucks per box. I wonder if they're taking a hit, or if they're somehow able to get all-copper bullets for lead prices...
std7mag
Well-known member
Winchester has traditionally had a relationship with Nosler.
Take the Winchester Silver Tips for example. It's marketed as "Combined Technologies", but it's just a coated Accubond with a different color tip on it.
Wouldn't surprise me to find out they are using Combined Technologies mono bullets (aka some variation of Noslers E-Tip.
Take the Winchester Silver Tips for example. It's marketed as "Combined Technologies", but it's just a coated Accubond with a different color tip on it.
Wouldn't surprise me to find out they are using Combined Technologies mono bullets (aka some variation of Noslers E-Tip.
Bigjav
Active member
It'd be nice if they just printed the damn velocity range on the box like the noslers do. Winchesters new copper looks like the rebranded 95/5 line only which was a rebranded razorback line. Federal has cheaper lead free that I've seen in 308, 243, 270 and 30-06 and I've seen some yellow box Remington's loaded with Barnes that are cheaper than the standard Barnes ammo
Laelkhunter
Well-known member
Not really sure how they do it, but the bullets are designed to expand at lower velocities experienced at longer range.
Last edited:
yakimanoob
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2021
- Messages
- 256
I've been looking at the 139gr LRX for my 7mm/08 since at the moment they seem to run about 1/2 the price of the Hammer bullets I'm currently using.
FWIW, I asked Barnes about the minimum velocity for the 139gr 7mm LRX and got this reply:
The important point is that expansion is complicated, and there's variance even among the same line of bullets. This makes sense to me, and I think is the case for all bullets, even though manufacturers tend to post minimum velocities for product line instead of the individual bullet. Kudos to Barnes for not doing that.
FWIW, I asked Barnes about the minimum velocity for the 139gr 7mm LRX and got this reply:
The important point is that expansion is complicated, and there's variance even among the same line of bullets. This makes sense to me, and I think is the case for all bullets, even though manufacturers tend to post minimum velocities for product line instead of the individual bullet. Kudos to Barnes for not doing that.
The 7mm 139 is also the LRX's golden child. It, in their words, is the best bullet the make. I'd get some if I had the time for load development this year.
SilentBirdHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2024
- Messages
- 326
When I lived in Alaska I hand loaded for moose and liked the performance of the 200 gr LRX in my .300 H & H.
