I have had, as most of the regulars know, a strong distaste for the Barnes Triple shock all copper bullets. Today I decided to put the Barnes to rest forever. I selected my Sako TRG chambered in 7 Mag to be the test bed as it is as accurate a rifle in the nest. I also had some 160 grainers gathering dust on the shelf.

The little card that comes with the bullets says you can go over max loads by one or 2 grains and to seat 50 thousandths off the lands which I did. I opted to go with the Sierra data using RL22 my go to magnum powder. The book listed the max load at 65.2 grains so I carefully loaded 66.2 grains and got a very good speed but a nice shined spot on the base of the case. Well, that irked me:Banghead: . So, I backed off to 65.7 and had no problems with exactly the same speed.

On to the deck (range) and fired my first 100 yard group then moved the scope and fired my secong group. I was a little shocked with the results as both groups were near MOA. I'll have to wait til the wind dies down before trying them at 250 yards but things look promising!:eek: Regards, Rick.

Rick, I just can't bring myself to shoot all copper bullets in any of my rifles. It's just wrong. There I've said it, and I ain't afeared that I did!!! My 700 Classic in 7 mm Rem mag just shoots 150 grain Sierra Boattails so well that I've naver been tempted to try anything else. They kill elk pretty dead too.

I did however try the 180 grain triple shocks in the 300RUM. Not very impressive. After 3 different loads (15 rounds) and near a pound of powder later, I gave up.

Glad you got them to work for you. It looks very promising.

RJ

RJ, Why are you so deadset against copper. I just looked at my first reloads in 270Wby and the 130Barnes XLC's worked pretty good but the NosBTs did better. Now that we have Accubonds which shoot aolmost identically as the BTs that what I use. I got goood groups with the XLCs but better with the Nos. I was getting 3/4" or better with the Barnes but better with the Nos.  So now with the Accubonds available and the price of Barnes, well it's a nobrainer. Just curious as for your dislike of the copper , other than cost  and I've found others that work better as well.

Hello Mark. These are the first groups under 2 inches that I have ever shot with these bullets......keep in mind 100 yards is one thing and 250 to 400 is another. Stay tuned. Regards, Rick.

Quote from: Mark R;81082RJ, Why are you so deadset against copper. I just looked at my first reloads in 270Wby and the 130Barnes XLC's worked pretty good but the NosBTs did better. Now that we have Accubonds which shoot aolmost identically as the BTs that what I use. I got goood groups with the XLCs but better with the Nos. I was getting 3/4" or better with the Barnes but better with the Nos. So now with the Accubonds available and the price of Barnes, well it's a nobrainer. Just curious as for your dislike of the copper , other than cost and I've found others that work better as well.

Not too bad Rick. I got lucky with the one and only time that I tried Barnes bullets. The 200gr XFBs are accurate, consistant and deadly in my 338. I'd use that rifle and load for anything that walks North America and most of the rest of the world. I haven't tried them in anything else but I may in the future. We'll see.

I hate Rick's targets. I prefer to dislike Barnes bullets because of poor performance, not just for emotional reasons. :)
 
Like RJ, I don't particularly care for copper solids, regardless of manufacturer. They poke holes through things, and I'm a "keep 'em inside" guy. Even though I use the OLD Barnes Xs in my .338 WM, I only did/do it because Barnes was the only manufacturer that would make light-for-caliber bullets in the bigger calibers like .338. I used the 160 Xs with tolerable - 1.5 MOA - precision. Never got the 175s to shoot worth keeping. The 185 XLCs were VERY good shooters in a friend of mine's .338 WM for whom I made handloads. Of course, Barnes quit making those - probably because they actually worked as described. In fact, they quit making almost every thing but the Triple-Shocks.
 
I don't like Barnes because:
1) The BCs they report for many of their bullets are just plain bullwash. And the nicest way I can put it. They are far-and-away the worst prevaricators when it comes to reporting BCs. They're not even close to reality, and the only reason they do it is to sell bullets. I have seen a couple of their large-caliber bullets with realistic BCs, but that's simply because they know that for most big-bore shooters, BC is not a selling point.
2) I'm all but certain, that Barnes ripped off GS Custom Bullets of South Africa for the "Triple-Shock" idea, and to top it off, they are too cheap to even copycat correctly. "Correctly" is to make the bands exactly groove diameter, and the bullet shaft exactly bore diameter. This means that the bands seal the grooves, and the bullet's shaft 'rides' the bore. The Barnes imitations are crudely made, relatively speaking, and the bullet shaft is larger than the nominal bore of the given caliber.
 
So that's the emotional reason, (they're fundamentally dishonest people), I don't want to like Barnes bullets. (By the way, Fred Barnes hasn't owned Barnes Bullets for a very long time.) But I'm not so hard-headed that I refuse to acknowledge performance, regardless of the manufacturer. I just refuse to like them. Oh yeah, and I refuse to buy them.
 
Paul

I'm in Paul's boat. To add to what he said, the 180's have to be seated so far into the powder cavity to get them to go in the magazine of my 300RUM it ain't funny. Plus they are the ONLY bullet I've ever had keyhole. EVER.

RJ

Well, it's a moot point as it shot 3.8 inch groups at 250....ragged holes too. Back on the shelf to collect dust. I'm going to shoot some pro hunters in 140 grain and see what they do. The Accubonds shot sensational, however, it's just too much bullet for WTD unless you take out a shoulder....not my cup of tea. Since 1960 I have been a leave um in the animal guy. You don't need a blood trail when the deer never go more than 3 steps. Son Eric shot a nice 8 point last year with the 165 gr Sierra and 290 yards ('06 Ackley) and the bullet still exited the animal....dropped straight down with no vitals left and all 4 quarters intact. Sure was easy to dress. The Ballistic tips were so-so....1.2 inch groups at 100. I need to test them at 250 as this rifle has a habit of tightening up at longer ranges. Yawn....I'm starting a new thread on long range performance. Regards, Rick.