bowhunter-tw Report post Posted July 8, 2023 Anybody have a current Barnes reloading manual with the 168gr ttsx bullet data for 300wsm? ive got an older edition with older bullet designs. For a 168 xlc BT it shows 7828 loads but online barnes doesnt list this powder for the 168TTSX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
10Turkeys Report post Posted July 8, 2023 As far as I know their number 4 is still the latest manual that they have, and there is no data for IMR-7828 in it either. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bowhunter-tw Report post Posted July 8, 2023 This is probably a question better suited for barnes, but would bullet design play that big a part in powder compatibility? I would imagine weight would be the determining factor for powder? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
10Turkeys Report post Posted July 9, 2023 I can't answer that question. I haven't played around that much with Barnes bullets. From what they state their bullets do like to be loaded off the lands, and that's what I found out with my .270. I would pick one of the powders seat some bullets to their specs and see what happens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucafu1 Report post Posted July 9, 2023 On 7/8/2023 at 12:42 PM, bowhunter-tw said: This is probably a question better suited for barnes, but would bullet design play that big a part in powder compatibility? I would imagine weight would be the determining factor for powder? Weight and the design/shape since copper bullets are less dense for their size. Barnes has some info on their website as well. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bowhunter-tw Report post Posted July 9, 2023 I saw the info on their website; even though the bullets weigh the same I guess bearing surface and jacket strength could change? But chamber pressure is still held to a max rating. Would 7828 be considered completely incompatible or just no starting data? im going to talk to barnes tomorrow; will report back after I do Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
10Turkeys Report post Posted July 10, 2023 Between the powders listed in the book and online IMR-8208 XBR is the fastest and RL-17 is the slowest. IMR-7828 is quite a bit slower than the RL-17, might not be able to put enough IMR-7828 in the case to get any velocity out of it. Also that old XLC bullet didn't have any grooves in it like the newer bullets. TSX/TTSX had to be a longer bullet to get the grooves it compared to the XLC bullet. That might be why they are driven better with a quicker burning power. I don't know, but I'm sure Barnes will know when you call them. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bowhunter-tw Report post Posted July 10, 2023 Spoke to Barnes; they said that the old data or even data from a different bullet of the same weight can be applied as long as you begin with the starting load and watch for pressure on your way up. You might not achieve desired velocity before the case fills with the slow powder. The TSX bullets will be a longer bullet so I could potentially reach a compressed load sooner, as long as pressure is ok it wouldnt be an issue, but id be loosing out on speed. So basically the new data specifies the optimal range of burn rates but is not the only powders that will work. I also asked about what feature of a bullet is most critical for pressure, FB vs BT doesnt make a difference, bearing surface is what will drive pressure from bullet design to bullet design. that being said I may be looking to find a more optimal powder for the 300wsm. I’ll give a few 7828 loads a try first. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kennyt Report post Posted July 11, 2023 I’ve had good luck with the 168 in my m70 300wsm using Varget. I was just over 3000fps. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kennyt Report post Posted July 11, 2023 I used hodgdons data off the web site for the 165GMX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
