I just learned a valuable leson today in reloading. I got in my Barness 155gr X All Copper M LE bullets today. I had heard that they were so long it cut down on the speed due to lack of powder room. Well tody after comparing it to a 250 gr nosler I am a believer.The bullets are the same length yet 100 grains different in weight. I can see now that shooting an all copper bullet unless you have a huge case it is impossible to get you speed up as much as a nosler or Speer. Due to length of bullet it just is impossible. Now i know guys thanks. Still fonna shoot the Barnes if possible as performance is perfect but I see why other would go a different route plus Barnes is very expensive 40 for 33.00
First off, doesn't Barnes give load data for this Bullet ?
Plus, there are tons of Compessed Loads out there, and they function just fine
Even compressed, those longer lead free bullets take up room that could otherwise be used for powder. There is a reason why lead and lead core bullets hang on even after hundreds of years.
The middle three are the Barnes bullets 125 / 140 / 155
TAC-XP bullet lengths
125grain = 0.624"
140grain = 0.682"
155grain = 0.733"
Here is what your are up against...
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/BarnesTACXPbullets_zps3732caac.jpg)
Load data from Barnes;
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/barnes10mmAutoloads_zps8d484255.jpg)
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/barnes10mm155grdata_zps1b425a83.jpg)
Where there's a will, there's a way. Necessity IS the mother of invention. Living and hunting in CA has made it a necessity, for me.
Velocity isn't the problem. It's easy to get the bullets up to "speed" compared to similar sized traditional bullets. Problem is, when the bullet gets there, it's carrying a fraction of the energy.
The published Barnes loads are laughable. A 155 gr. bullet, of any construction, at 1229 FPS isn't impressive for the majority of needs, to those who "need" them (like hunting in CA). There's a LOT more to maximizing cartridge efficiency than just "compressing" the powder charge. I do that, a lot, but it has to be very calculated and thoroughly tested. Compressing as little as 102% can completely change a powder's burn characteristic, and every powder is different. Some can be compressed as much as 125%, and it's rather uneventful. Others become unstable at less than 105%, and the rules change every time any component or parameter is changed. "More powder" is never the answer, in itself. The load charts The_Shadow illustrates it very well. The "load density" indicates the approximate compression rate of the powder. The "less than 100%" loads are less than 100% for a very specific reason. They don't compress well, or perform well or within acceptable pressure, even at 100%. I use the 10mm Barnes 155 gr. bullet for my hunting and other needs, and none of them go that slow. Not even close. Same goes for the other calibers I load with them. Too little bullet energy or KO is irresponsible hunting.
DMIagreewith that irresponsible hunting statement as someone who as you know has hunted and been hunted it seems in all of North America. ?You must be gunned for the animal you are stalking and you must know the range tour equipment and eyesight will allow you to shoot. As my eyes have faded so has my shooting distance. /i am down now to where a 6.5 inch handgun will do just fine to get me 3 or 4 deer for meat every year. In TN we have a 3 a day limit according to where you live. We kill over 1,000,000 per year here.
Im surprised at their power pistol data, it looks really light
Quote from: gofastman on June 12 2013 09:59:03 PM MDT
Im surprised at their power pistol data, it looks really light
They are all "really light". That was my point. We have to get outside the box to make an effective cartridge. While they are fine for most SD needs, they are NOT sufficient for effective hunting rounds, and the bullets just don't perform on hard targets, such as medium/large game at lower velocities. I got all the exercise I wanted in my younger years. Chasing a bleeding buck 2 miles was exciting 30 years ago, but doesn't work into my itinerary these days. Not that I wouldn't, just that I won't if I don't have to, if it can be avoided. This is why older hunters use larger (more powerful) cartridges. When I was a young man, a 35 Remington or .30-30 was more than enough. Now, not so much. I want to find them where I hit them, and not have to run to get there. I get my game, I just don't have (want) to work as much to get it.
Im wondering why its so light though, It seems to me that Power Pistol doesnt mind being compressed, am I wrong?
Quote from: gofastman on June 13 2013 12:54:22 PM MDT
Im wondering why its so light though, It seems to me that Power Pistol doesnt mind being compressed, am I wrong?
The Power Pistol load they list
IS compressed. 115%, by their chart. That's quite a bit for a "book" load, but not really alarming. You have to get outside the box (and out of the book) to get realistic performance.