# .270 Win with 110 gr Barnes TSX



## Salty Dog

Has anyone loaded any 110gr Barnes TSX bullets in a .270 win? What loads did you have the best luck with and how did they do for you on deer?

I need to work up a load for a .270 and I am curious about these bullets. I may just stick with the 130 gr TSX but I thought I would ask about the 110s.


----------



## muddyfuzzy

i've had great success with rl-22 in the .25-06'. i think the rl-22 burns great for these intermediate volume cartridges. i would ask why such a light bullet. i shoot 120's in my quarter bore which is about a heavy as i can go. i have generally seen heavier bullets with a higher bc usually more accurate.

not to say it won't work, it my end up being the most awesome load ever......that's what great about working on the bench. since the recoil is not an issue with the .270 i would not sacrifice energy(and possibily accuracy) to pick up a marginal gain in flatness with the lighter pay-load. but one thing's for sure, @ 110 gr's they will be smokin'!


----------



## Salty Dog

I disagree about heavier bullets being more accurate. Every rifle has bullets and loads it prefers. Some rifles will do better with heavier bullets and some will do better with lighter bullets even in the same model rifle with same twist barrels. 

The particular .270 I am going to work up a load for has proven to be pretty fickle. I have loaded a few different 130, 140 and 150 gr bullets for it in the past. It has done best with 130s but I have not found a load that has just been 'the one'. Lots of mediocre loads and all of them capable of killing deer but that isn't what we handload for- mediocre I mean.

I also load for a couple of .25-06 and have settled into 100gr bullets in them for deer based on what my rifles like. 

Consider a minute a .25-06 with 115 gr TSX FB vs a .270 with 110 gr TTSX. They don't offer the exact bullets in the weights questioned so I am going with what is available.

.25-06 115gr TSX FB vs .270 110gr TTSX

.25-06 BC is .335
.270 BC is .377

.25-06 recommended powder from Barnes is H4831SC from 47-52g with velocities of 2797-2996 fps.
.270 recommended powder from Barnes is H4350 from 56-59g with velocities of 3250-3430

I don't know about you but to me a higher BC at a higher velocity is a better mousetrap. 

Course the 130 gr has a BC of .431 and velocities of 2927-3133 fps and was my first thought in what I would try next. While looking thru available bullets online I came across the TTSX 110s and they got me curious since it is a lighter bullet than is traditionally used in a .270.

Just saying on paper the 110 ought to be right in there with some other popular deer killers. My personal experience with Barnes X bullets suggests that you can typically scale back one 'size' and get similar performance. That is, if you were shooting a 165 gr standard pointed soft point bullet a 150 gr X will perform as well. If you were shooting a 100 gr psp you can shoot a 80 gr X bullet with similar results. Just because they hold together better and penetrate better. 

What I was hoping to find is someone who has punched some thru some hide, meat and bone and see what they think of the little 110 gr's real world performance on game as well as what their experience was when working up a load.


----------



## muddyfuzzy

do what you must...............and i'll keep chasing holes......


----------



## CHARLIE

Salty dog

the heavier bullets are more accurate over longer ranges because of less deflection from wind. Not so much out of the gun but after it leaves the barrel. ( I think). But who really cares with a hunting round.

Charlie


----------



## magnumb

I'm generally a "heavy for caliber" guy, at least until the TTSX's and TSX's made their debut.

I've owned and shot 5 25-06's and started with the venerable 120gr. NP's and IMR 4831 and have never had anything but wonderful terminal results. Since we are handloaders and "built" differently than most shooter's, we like to try different stuff, "mousetraps", if you will. I am no different in that regard, perhaps even worse than most. So, I next tried the 110 AB's and found them to be very good as well, but they gave me results showing a bit more of the "blood lost meat" syndrome, along with less retained weight per bullet than I like or saw with even the 'ole NP's. Yep.......dead is dead and all that, but remember, we're loonies and that trumps all else, in my book. Perfection for one is not necessarily that of another........fine with me.

Next, Barnes come out with the 100gr. TTSX and with RL22 and Fed. 210M's, I have found my perfect pill, for that particular 25-06. My "heavy for" mantra has now received it's first flesh wound, but being a loonie.......I'm totally OK with that. The last few seasons and their terminal results on blacktail bucks has been a real eye opener. The least blood shot meat I've ever encountered and we're talking some 60+ buck or bull specimens from which to draw such concclusions.

Sooooo, out comes Barnes with their TSX's and I bite on several boxes of their 180gr. TSX's for several of my 300WSM's, 300RUM and 'ole 06. Still being a "heavy for guy" due to 'ole dogs, new tricks stuff, I would usually have gone for any 180-200 offerings which seemed to offer such outstanding terminal effects. But all of my .30's are dedicated to bull elk sized game and I believe in "through and throughs" for such tenacious and thick skinned animals. Deer are much more fragile in that regard, therefore my use of the TTSX's when in that pursuit. I found that the 300WSM's shot the 180 TSX's (RL22, Norma brass, Fed. 215M's) into cloverleaf's and again the results on several bulls were similar to that of the TTSX's on deer. Virtually no blood lost meat, through and through's and DRT results. Again, never had a 180gr. NP fail me in the DRT department, but they couldn't come close to the other 2 atrributes, which both mean alot to me.......and perhaps me alone.

The '06 still liked the 180 NP's better on paper so I stayed with them and the 300RUM loves the 200gr. NP, so stayed put there as well. I say, give 'em what they like, even though a 1/4 in. at 100yds. would make no difference in the long run, my mind and it's working's are tough to compete with.

Some would say that the 150 or 168 TSX's would even be a better choice for the 300WSM's and they could be......I don't know. Other's would say that the 200's would be even a better choice given their dedication to only these largest of animals. Maybe also, but knowing what I know these 180's can do at short and rather long ranges on these rather tough, thick skinned animals, I've no doubt that these 180's TSX's have been the right choice for what I had in mind.

Bullet construction and choice based on the make-up of the animal we are pursuing, distance of shot (which is the least known quantity usually) which we need to practice at differings ranges, caliber/cartridge and the quality of our own efforts in the hunting and marksmanship department...........*ALL* add up to a successful hunt, whether we have one hangin' from the meat pole or not. 'Cuz if we can put all that together, we all know that when that opportunity finally presents itself and we decide that's the animal we'd like to spend the next several hours or days workin' on, it's a done deal.

Loonies just know such things........................


----------



## CHARLIE

Magnumb

I wish I could put it on paper like that. Ya done good.
Ya ever consider that the Barnes bullets are longer, bullet weight to weight than others so the twist rate comes into effect somewhat?

Charlie


----------



## Salty Dog

CHARLIE said:


> Ya ever consider that the Barnes bullets are longer, bullet weight to weight than others so the twist rate comes into effect somewhat?


Absolutely a consideration.


----------



## THE JAMMER

There has already been some great info on this thread. I too have been struck with the 110 gr TTSX bug. I have posted some of this in other threads, and have not, as of yet, posted my complete thread on the subject, but bottom line for me so far is this. In my model 7 7mm-08 and 308 the 110 gr TTSX shoot extremely well. 7mm-08 it shoots just under an inch for 5 rounds with 4 of those going into .6". Luckily the heaviest load, 49.5 Varget, is the most accurate and it chronographed at 3275 out of my little old 20" bbl model 7. In the 308 same results basically, if not a bit better, unfortunately I did not have the chrono with me, but by the book it should be 3350-3400 fps.

As to why use a 110 gr bullet in either of those calibers? Because I'm a reloader and I CAN. I like being able to have many guns with the same gun. That 7mm-08 shooting 110's at 3275 is my 243 on steroids. Shooting 120's, it's my 25-06, etc. Can you imagine how great an antelope round that would be??? I also find it a reloading challenge to find several bullets for the same gun which will perform well.

As to performance at the animal, unfortunately this past week end yielded no opportunites, but I can't imagine a 110 gr TTSX moving 3200-3400 could not be anything short of fantastic.

THE JAMMER


----------



## magnumb

Thanks CHARLIE! Most, including yourself, get the same job done with much less wordiness. Trust me, if I could, I would....................LOL.

Twist rate and bullet design, whether internal or external, surely gets alot of attention. It all makes perfect sense on paper as well, at least to the most adamant of ballisticians. I tip-toe along that tightrope a bit myself, but don't intentionally stay away from experimenting with certain bullets or their weights because "it's not supposed" to work. I've found too often that the perfect projected twist rates and bullet weight combinations often shoot less accurately than somewhat heavier or lighter bullets.

I like the Barnes bullets for all the aformentioned reasons in my earlier post, but won't try to force them to work where they don't want to. I do like their solid design, literally, and that they are on the longer side, being lead free. As Barnes suggests (and I've found to be at least 75% true), their bullets need to be seated out a bit further than what I'm accustomed to doing to realize the most accurate results. Some are seated the minimal 50 out as they suggest, some more and some less. Best part, lot's of length to work with and one can always find a high point between their grooves in which to seat the bullet solidly to the tip of the case neck. As always, if a mag fed rifle, there is that consideration as well. Many of my TSX or TTSX's loads almost touch the end of my mags...........I mean, almost! 

Doesn't bother me a bit and if one thinks about it, recoil has less effect on each subsequent round in the mag as it has less distance to travel to deform the tips (whether tipped or not). If it functions fine (most importantly), then no worries. Of couse, deformed tips don't make a bit of difference within what many of us would consider reasonable hunting/shooting distances anyway.......so pretty much a moot point, except that loonies like undeformed bullets and that particular load and rifle's accuracy call for the longest length I can get to make it shoot to my personal expectations. 

Rules and "given's" are made to be challenged......IMHO and IMHE. Not necessarily safety rules and such, but those "sure things" that just perhaps aren't "so sure". Twist rates and specific bullet weights only don't work when I see that they don't work. Until then, they're all fair game, within reason.

Take care CHARLIE.


----------



## CHARLIE

Hey Magnumb

Nice post again but I think maybe just maybe (best I recall) is that Barnes suggest holding their bullets off the lands further than other stuff. Maybe beginning at 50 off and working from there. My results show (for me) that the shorter or futher off in my 223 anyway the better. Seems the bullet likes to "jump" a little . 

Charlie


----------



## THE JAMMER

Wow, what a great thread. Awesome info from Charlie, as always, and magnumb is showing lots of great stuff as well.

Along the lines of seating depth, which anyone who reloads knows is one of the most important accuracy variables there is, I just did, as I earlier said, some 308's with 130 gr TTSX. Anyone who reloads 308 knows max coal is 2.81", and that's what the manual calls for. Well I looked at these bullets and saw that I could reload them a bit farther out than normal. I tried 2.835, and the bottom of the bullet was still right at the bottom of the shoulder of the case, so I had plenty of neck tension. I then tried them in my model 7 magazine, and four of them slipped right in there no problem. Sub moa results.

The load was mid range in the load data and should chrono about 3000 fps. I actually have about another 2.5 gr of powder I can try in this load which would push the velocity up another 150 fps.

Should be an awesome deer/hog round. Hell, according to Jack O'Connor that would be a good elk round. How many elk did he shoot with 130 gr 270's??

Never thought about the other advantage of the longer cartridge that magnumb pointed out- less distance to travel via recoil to change seating depth. I Like that.

THE JAMMER


----------



## magnumb

Charlie - Barnes does recommend a mimimum jump of 50 off the riflings and perhaps my making note of that in my previous post wasn't as clear as I thought it was.........nothing new.......LOL. That is where I said that their recommended 50 off starting point was generally true in my experience, at least 75% of the time. 

All in all, Barnes bullets do like to jump a bit more than other bullets to the riflings, at least in my experience. Due to their grooves, excluding the original "X's", there's much less bearing surface with their current TTSX's and TSX's and therefore less pressures built up once the bullet engages the riflings. This is also the reason why the current Barnes bullets share little, if any, of the copper fouling issues of their initial or earlier designs. Less bearing surface, therefore less pressure and oftentimes a few grs. more powder (in many cases/instances.....per Barnes tech's initially and now, from my own findings). Not small considerations, to my way of thinking.

Jammer - spot on! Seating depth is right up there when one discusses the main points of realizing the most accuracy one can achieve by employing small doses either this way or that. Had an 'ole '06 that shot just over MOA and knew it could do better, but hadn't tried any closer than 10 off. You know the drill. Back-up gun anyway, almost a consistent MOA shooter, other guns to work on, blah, blah and blah. Decided to try 5 off one day just 'cuz I had the time and felt a bit of loonie guilt for not thoroughly ringing that '06 out (IMR 4350, 180gr. NP's, Fed. 215M's and WW brass). Reduced my 4 shot groups to 2/3 MOA. To some....no big deal. For me.....a reminder that taking short cuts gives you the results you deserve.

Take care guys and I appreciate your insights and offerings. We never quit learnin'......and shouldn't.


----------



## jan1

*270 Barnes Bullets*

While I have not specifically used the 110 grain TTSX in 270 caliber I have extensively used the 130 grain TTSX in 308 caliber. I have observed approximatly 15 kills with this bullet combination, usually at 2500 FPS to maximize shooting comfort for unexperienced shooters. At even reduced velocity, this combination is lethal on game. No bullets have been recovered and no game animal has been lost, even with occasionally marginal torso shots. As Elmer Keith would say, you can eat right up to the hole.
Game animals shot have been whitetails, axis deer, black buck, and hogs. At the velocities being discussed here, the 270 caliber 110 grain TTSX will be devastating even on quartering shots. At impact velocities over, say, 2800 FPS you will lose bullet petals but the TTSX base will travel virtually unimpeded through broadside/quatering game of reasonalbe size. The sheared petals contribute to tissue destruction and hemorrhage. As previously mentioned, for appropriatly sized game, say 250 pounds or less, this bullet will prove excellent.


----------



## THE JAMMER

jan1 said:


> While I have not specifically used the 110 grain TTSX in 270 caliber I have extensively used the 130 grain TTSX in 308 caliber. I have observed approximatly 15 kills with this bullet combination, usually at 2500 FPS to maximize shooting comfort for unexperienced shooters. At even reduced velocity, this combination is lethal on game. No bullets have been recovered and no game animal has been lost, even with occasionally marginal torso shots. As Elmer Keith would say, you can eat right up to the hole.
> Game animals shot have been whitetails, axis deer, black buck, and hogs. At the velocities being discussed here, the 270 caliber 110 grain TTSX will be devastating even on quartering shots. At impact velocities over, say, 2800 FPS you will lose bullet petals but the TTSX base will travel virtually unimpeded through broadside/quatering game of reasonalbe size. The sheared petals contribute to tissue destruction and hemorrhage. As previously mentioned, for appropriatly sized game, say 250 pounds or less, this bullet will prove excellent.


Good post, but I'm not so sure about petals shedding. That bullet really holds together, but you're right it would be smoking out of that 270. I think you may have seem earlier where I am getting 3275 with 110 TTSX's out of my model 7 7mm-08 at sum MOA. I have also shot them out of my 308, and they grouped very well, but didn't have my chrono. I will be doing that this weekend, and will report.

I echo your feelings about 130 TTSX's out of a 308. I've shot these for a while, and have had similar results.

THE JAMMER


----------



## Salty Dog

Thanks for the input Jan1. Good stuff. 

I think I am going to play with those 130 grainers in my .30-06. Just for grins. And I am going to go ahead and get a box of 110 and 130 grainers for my .270 just to see what they will do in my rifle.


----------



## 3chucks

I think it should be a good load. Its hard to find the 110gr. bullets in stock around Houston but you should be able to order them from Barnes. Look at all 4 bullets in that weight class though the 110gr.ttsx and 110gr.tsx and same for the 130gr. bullets. It took a lot of time and money on bullets but now my model7 270wsm will shoot the 110gr.ttsx and the 130gr.tsx in the same place. Most money being spent on about 350 bullets. Good luck the Barnes bullets will work for you.


----------



## THE JAMMER

I will post details later, but yesterday's trip to Carter's yielded some great results.

My model 7 7mm-08: I shot my 3 TTSX what I call box loads (loads good enough to fill a box with them). 110 TTSX, 120 TTSX, 140 TTSX all three grouped under an inch for 5 shots (3275 fps on the 110), but more amazing their POI's were within .5 inches. I can change bullets from 110-140 and not even touch my scope.

Also I shot the 110 TTSX's in my 308 for the first time. How bout 3400 fps with a 3 shot group into .95"

THE "LOVE BARNES X" JAMMER


----------



## spurgersalty

If anybody is still reading this I think I have a prob. Decided while waiting on primer to arrive I'd make up a "dummy" round for my 6.5 REM mag. I was told a good way to determine bullet seating depth was to set a bullet in empty cart. case, set it slightly in case neck with press, then place in rifle to be fired and ease bolt closed so the trifling sets the bullet in the neck. Then, seat the.bullet .10 further in and begin testing loads from there. Well, I'm not sure but it seems to me if the bullet is pushed into the rifling, the.rifling could possibly have enough.grip.to.pull it back out ever so slightly. Am i right here?
Next prob, after doing this the bullet(120 ttsx) was only in the neck between the 2nd and top cannelure grooves. After measuring, I can't remember exactly because I'm at work right now, the coal. was way too long. And the round wouldn't fit in my magazine. 
Well after seating the bullet to SAAMI coal. I noticed that when I held another bullet even with the nose of the seated bullet the base protruded into the case .681. This also put the top cannelure below the neck mouth. I've read that a bullet seated too deep can cause excessive pressures for some reason or another. I got.tjese numbers by taking c.o.a.l of 2.80 a.d subtracting bullet length of 1.321 then subtracting that number from the 2.16 case length. Sound right? If this is all correct, does it mean I'm gonna have to find another bullet that is shorter?


----------



## THE JAMMER

What you experienced is very common. Very often 10 thousandths off the lands yields a COAL in excess of SAMMI. Main reason I think is because of the longer, more slender, higher BC bullets we shoot these days. The lands contact the bullet much farther down from the tip of the bullet.

The overriding given is the COAL relative to your magazine. I know I had a great load for my Colt HBAR, that shot lights out, but it wouldn't fit in the magazine. So lots of time, that's where I start. What's the longest I can get into my rifle, in a hunting situation. I then measure that COAL, and use my comparator to see how far off the lands that is for that bullet. I will usually start out with a few loads at the COAL, and go from there.

I was pleased recently, when trying some of those 130 ttsx's in my model 7 308 that I was able to load some rounds that had a COAL of 2.835 even though max stated is 2.81" and they really shot well. No problem loading them into my magazine, plus they are not too close to the lands. Can't remember the exact distance right now, but certainly not a pressure problem- being too close.

THE JAMMER


----------



## spurgersalty

Well the.pressure prob I was speaking of Jammer I read in the ABC's of reloading. It had something to do with.the.base of the bullet protruding so deep into the cartridge case. From what I read its not on/y with.100% loads but "standard" loads also. Does this make sense or have you heard of this phenomenon? Maybe I read to much:spineyes:


----------



## THE JAMMER

I know what pressure you were talking about. What I was talking about is the extra pressure which can build up if your bullet is tooooo close to the lands of the rifle.

THE JAMMER


----------



## spurgersalty

Like i said in a previous thread, im new to the reloading and sure dont want my first cartridge to blow my gun to smithereens. Thanks for the help.


----------



## Whitebassfisher

I used 110 grain bullets of a different design in a 270 for deer, using 56 grains of 4350. It was accurate and never required tracking.


----------



## SeaTex

Spurgersalty,

I to have only been reloading for about a year. I reloaded straight cases for my .38/.357 until a few weeks ago. I just started reloading bottleneck cartridges for my 7mm-08 and have been experimenting with COAL. I took a empty case and with a hacksaw cut down the neck slightly into the shoulder an "+" cleaned it up and ran it through my resizing die. This is the case I used to measure the overall length of the chamber. I also purchased a Sinclair bullet comparitor to attach to my digital calipers so I can measure to the ogive. This way I feel more confident on my measurement to the lands.
My overall measurement on my rifle was 2.846 so i setup a dummy round at 2.835 which by the way also fit in my magazine. I loaded 20 rounds with 5 different powder charges and shot them this passed weekend. My best group was 1.27 inches. 

Still a work in progress.

Seatex


----------



## THE JAMMER

SeaTex,

Sounds like you are on your way to a briliiant career in reloading. That comparator is one of the best things you can buy, because COAL is huge in reloading accuracy. Sometimes only .0010 difference in seating depth will make a gigantic difference in accuracy. Next get yourself a precision seating die (rcbs work just fine for me, but get a redding if you must). If your oal measurement is 20 thousandths too long, turn the knob 20 clicks, reseat, and measure, and it will probably be right on. Next to a comparator this is an essential tool, in my opinion.

What bullet were you reloading in that 7-08 where you were able to seat .0009 off the lands??

THE JAMMER


----------



## SeaTex

Jammer,

The first bullets I picked up were the Hornady 139 gr. Interlock SP, I was looking for BTSP's but they were out of stock at Bass Pro and 10 Ring. I should have picked up the SST's but didn't, I realize now that I would of had a better BC with the boat tail if I had. 

You have me questioning myself with the statement on seating .0009 of the lands. It was 0.011 (2.846 - 2.835 = 0.011) My understanding that a typical starting point of 0.010 off the lands is safe as long as you are working up your load while looking for pressure signs. I was using Varget starting at 39 gr. with the hottest load being 41 gr. which was .5 grains under the max. The best group with this bullet was 1.270 which came with 40.0 gr. of varget.

Speaking of the precision seating die, that is something I'm looking at. I did notice small variations of .0001 or .0002 in overall length with the Lee die I'm using. These did vary to the shorter OAL not longer OAL. (2.833 - 2.835)


----------



## Salty Dog

spurgersalty said:


> If anybody is still reading this I think I have a prob. Decided while waiting on primer to arrive I'd make up a "dummy" round for my 6.5 REM mag. I was told a good way to determine bullet seating depth was to set a bullet in empty cart. case, set it slightly in case neck with press, then place in rifle to be fired and ease bolt closed so the trifling sets the bullet in the neck. Then, seat the.bullet .10 further in and begin testing loads from there. Well, I'm not sure but it seems to me if the bullet is pushed into the rifling, the.rifling could possibly have enough.grip.to.pull it back out ever so slightly. Am i right here?


One way you can do it is get you a sharpie marker and color all around the bullet. Then start it into the case. Pop it in your rifle and close the bolt. When you pull the case out of the rifle it will probably pull the bullet back out part way if not all the way. The marker will be scraped back by the case mouth when you closed the bolt. Put the bullet back in the case and seat it as far as the marker is scratched off. Measure this length. This is where it contacts the rifling in that gun/bullet combination. It'll give you a starting point to figure how deep you need to seat your bullets.

I have had several rifles that would take certain bullets set out far enough that you couldn't load them in the magazine. Some calibers are worse than others about that.


----------



## spurgersalty

This is a pic of the 6.5 with a bullet setting even tip to tip beside one seated .003 short of COAL. See how far the bullet sets in the case. Should I not worry bout.this? As said also, the cannelures are all below the case mouth. Is this okay? I did.the.dummy round but believe.the bullet can be seated further than the mag zine will allow.


----------



## Salty Dog

Now that is a long skinny bullet! What weight is it? X bullets are longer than cup and core bullets most times. You might look into using either one size lighter of X bullet which would be shorter or maybe their tungsten cored bullet which would be shorter or you might even look into some of the premium lead cored bullets. 

I don't know for a fact that there would be a problem with that bullet but my gut instinct is that I don't like it being seated that deep.


----------



## spurgersalty

They.don't offer the mrx in .264 so that's out of the question. It's a 120 gr ttsx's and the protrusion worries the fire out of me. Guess I might have wAsted my money buying the 120's when I should have bought the 100's. Any other advice guys? Or anyone want to buy some 120 gr. Ttsx's lol.


----------



## Ernest

I've shot a bunch of 6.5 in the 6.5 AR. So, my max. COAL is based upon the mag length. Its a AR-15 platform, so the COAL is relatively short. 

I would not think your case protrusion is a major issue. I'm cramming 129's down in a much smaller case in a weapon that has a lower pressure rating. My buddies are shooting 140 out of this same AR-15 platform with even more case protrusion. 

I would suggest, start low, work it up, look for pressure signs. Its a bolt gun, so a bit of sticky bolt lift is not going to ruin your day or most weapons. 

If your 120's are in 6.5, I'll buy them off you for market price if you need to dump them. Within reason. I'm not buying 10,000 units. Couple hundred or so.


----------



## THE JAMMER

SeaTex said:


> Jammer,
> 
> The first bullets I picked up were the Hornady 139 gr. Interlock SP, I was looking for BTSP's but they were out of stock at Bass Pro and 10 Ring. I should have picked up the SST's but didn't, I realize now that I would of had a better BC with the boat tail if I had.
> 
> You have me questioning myself with the statement on seating .0009 of the lands. It was 0.011 (2.846 - 2.835 = 0.011) My understanding that a typical starting point of 0.010 off the lands is safe as long as you are working up your load while looking for pressure signs. I was using Varget starting at 39 gr. with the hottest load being 41 gr. which was .5 grains under the max. The best group with this bullet was 1.270 which came with 40.0 gr. of varget.
> 
> Speaking of the precision seating die, that is something I'm looking at. I did notice small variations of .0001 or .0002 in overall length with the Lee die I'm using. These did vary to the shorter OAL not longer OAL. (2.833 - 2.835)


OOPS. I had an extra "0" in there. Should be .009.

If you are shooting non plastic tip bullets, you will never get your oal consistently accurate. Hollow tip/match type bullets are sometimes at an angle, and your oal will be different, even though those bullets are made to the closest possible tolerances ( in everything except the length). If you're serious about it, get a precision seating die. You'll never look back.

Of course you will have to get one for each caliber you reload. I have 5 of them. What was that they say about saving money by reloading????

THE JAMMER


----------



## SeaTex

THE JAMMER said:


> OOPS. I had an extra "0" in there. Should be .009.
> 
> If you are shooting non plastic tip bullets, you will never get your oal consistently accurate. Hollow tip/match type bullets are sometimes at an angle, and your oal will be different, even though those bullets are made to the closest possible tolerances ( in everything except the length). If you're serious about it, get a precision seating die. You'll never look back.
> 
> Of course you will have to get one for each caliber you reload. I have 5 of them. What was that they say about saving money by reloading????
> 
> THE JAMMER


Yea I was thinking the lead tipped bullets would be off that much. My next question is the seating die seating off the ogive or the tip of the bullet?


----------



## West Bay Wader

I love the TTSX as much as others on here. As far as the COAL I mostly let the rifle tell me when it is happy. I have some loads that will be just short of touching the magazine in one 700 CDL with floor plate but will not fit in a removable magazine. I have attached a picture of my 2 current hunting loads. The left is a 80 gr TTSX in 243 (3200fps) and the right is a 120gr TTSX in 7-08 (3077fps). Both of these are at 0.54" groups. I should be able to get the 243 to shoot better as it is capable of 0.30" inch groups with other bullets. The picture should give you an idea of how far in the bullets are seated for each. The 243 is 2.630" and the 7-08 is 2.800". If you notice I write my load data on each bullet with a sharpie ( you can probably only make out the COAL).

The TTSX is awesome. Opens very quickly but yet doesn't waste meat. One day I will catch a pig just right and shoot from head to toe to see if I can get a bullet to not exit so I can recover one.


----------

