Barnes 225 gr 45 colt loads

[gary rice]

Anyone had any experience with this bullet in their rifles? Just bought 2 boxes (very expensive i might add) So far my experience with their 300 grn bullets with the 45-70 havent been very good but im going to be stuck with these when i go pig hunting but i have to try them in my marlin 94 45 colt. Any thought appreciated.

[model55]

Have had no experience with those but it is good to know they at least have a load for the 45.Thought they were just going to skip over that.Sorry no help for I apperciate knowing there is a load out there,still po'ed about the whole lead free thing.

[gary rice]

Have had no experience with those but it is good to know they at least have a load for the 45.Thought they were just going to skip over that.Sorry no help for I apperciate knowing there is a load out there,still po'ed about the whole lead free thing.

you and me both.

[JohndeFresno]

Anyone had any experience with this bullet in their rifles? Just bought 2 boxes (very expensive i might add) So far my experience with their 300 grn bullets with the 45-70 havent been very good but im going to be stuck with these when i go pig hunting but i have to try them in my marlin 94 45 colt. Any thought appreciated.

Gary,
What, specifically, is the problem with the Barnes loads you tried? I also live in an area that requires the copper bullets for hunting, and I plan to use a .44 Mag handgun as a camp gun and possibly hunting handgun. Even as a camp gun, I guess, I can't carry any lead loads without risking having an unpleasant encounter with one of our dedicated game wardens who are ordered to enforce the lead ban.

According to the Barnes literature and their reloading manual the bullets are more accurate than conventional loads, with better performance. Their stuff sounds pretty convincing (of course). But what was your problem - a different sight group? Or something significant like erratic groups or unsatisfactory expansion or penetration?

Also - did you use factory loads or handloads?

[gary rice]

Anyone had any experience with this bullet in their rifles? Just bought 2 boxes (very expensive i might add) So far my experience with their 300 grn bullets with the 45-70 havent been very good but im going to be stuck with these when i go pig hunting but i have to try them in my marlin 94 45 colt. Any thought appreciated.

Gary,
What, specifically, is the problem with the Barnes loads you tried? I also live in an area that requires the copper bullets for hunting, and I plan to use a .44 Mag handgun as a camp gun and possibly hunting handgun. Even as a camp gun, I guess, I can't carry any lead loads without risking having an unpleasant encounter with one of our dedicated game wardens who are ordered to enforce the lead ban.

According to the Barnes literature and their reloading manual the bullets are more accurate than conventional loads, with better performance. Their stuff sounds pretty convincing (of course). But what was your problem - a different sight group? Or something significant like erratic groups or unsatisfactory expansion or penetration?

Also - did you use factory loads or handloads?

I first tried the 300 grain tsx in my marlin cb 45-70, but I'll back up a little. The rifle will shoot 2 inch groups all day long with cast 405, remington 405 and speer jsp bullets at 75 or 100 yards with iron sights and I mean dead on. First of all i can find very little data for their bullets and what i can find is usually limited to just a couple of powders. I handloaded 20 rounds with 51 grains of h-4895 and roughly estimate the velocity somewhere around 1650 fps, i dont have a chrono. I took 3 shots at my target at 75 yards and found i wasnt even on the cardboard, then i took a shot at a small rock about the same distance and saw that the impact was at least 2 feet high. I lowered my rear sight as far as it would go (it's a williams wgrs) and it is still approximately 6 inches high but the thing that concerns me most is the erratic groups if you can call them that which are anywhere from 4 inches to half a foot, all over the place. Ive shot 300 grain sierra and hornady bullets and never had a problem like this although they shoot a little higher than my 400 grain loads, I can adjust them. Im thinking of going to a faster burning powder, smaller charges etc to see if i can rectify this, it's driving me crazy. Like you im stuck in kalifornia so we are stuck with this copper stuff and yeah, they will probably confiscate weapons found with any lead ammo even in our vehicles and not in use. Now im trying to come up with something for my marlin 94 in 45 lc with the barnes tsx 225 grain bullet and also i carry a ruger bisley blackhawk. same caliber. Ive heard alot of guys swear by the tsx bullets but at the moment i feel screwed. demoroalized and everything else, lol.

[JohndeFresno]

Thanks for the update, Gary.

Since Barnes wants to sell bullets, I suspect that they'll forgive me if I make a PDF of some pages from their manual and send it to one of their customers who bought their product. If they don't, then don't tell anybody! It will be our secret - you and the couple of hundred readers of this post! I'll send you a PM - the Barnes Reloading Manual Nr 4 (latest - just purchased it) shows loads for 6 powders with each round, for both the 1895 Marlin and the Ruger No. 1 rifle.

[gary rice]

Thanks for the update, Gary.

Since Barnes wants to sell bullets, I suspect that they'll forgive me if I make a PDF of some pages from their manual and send it to one of their customers who bought their product. If they don't, then don't tell anybody! It will be our secret - you and the couple of hundred readers of this post! I'll send you a PM - the Barnes Reloading Manual Nr 4 (latest - just purchased it) shows loads for 6 powders with each round, for both the 1895 Marlin and the Ruger No. 1 rifle.

Thanks very much as i could really use that at the moment. i was just out in the garage resizing and thinking about, "what next?"

[J Miller]

Gary,

This is just a thought and may have no bearing on anything. But I was over on the Barnes site looking at their products and noticed the .45 Colt, Casull, GAP, .460 S&W bullets are all sized to .451". Nothing wrong with that I guess except for all those who have recently commented their Marlins are running oversized bores.
My Marlin 1894 Cowboy likes .454" lead bullets. I haven't slugged it yet, but if the grove diameter is anything over .4515" I'd wager those Barnes bullets won't be big enough to get a good grip on that shallow rifling.
Also since I doubt those bullets will expand to seal the bore I'll bet there will be a tremendous amount of blow by. That will reduce the pressure and velocity of any load.

I was thinking this might have something to do with the accuracy problems you're having with your 45-70. Have you recovered any of those 45-70 bullets for a look see?
Just for the information, why not slug the bore on the 45-70 and compare the ID to the Barnes bullets?

Like I said, just a thought.

Joe

[JohndeFresno]

FYI - LoadData.com has several of the loads listed in the newest Barnes manual, along with loads from the earlier ones. Just enter 45-70 in the search box and the look at the listings that indicated "Barnes" in the various loads - which include the Marlin 1895, Ruger No. 1, old Trap-Door Springfield (and possibly others - I just looked briefly).

If you don't have the approximate 25 bucks to buy the book, you can look at LoadData to find several loads.

[O.S.O.K.]

Couple things - first is same as Joe above - check the diameter of these bullets. The 45-70 needs .458" - I figure that you know that - just checking. An undersized bullet will definately play havoc with accuracy.

Use data published for standard 300 grain bullets - just back off the normal 10% to begin with - will be perfectly safe and give you a lot more data to work with.

Finally, install a taller front sight and that will lower your point of impact and give you greater range of adjustment when sighting. Try a .530" tall front sight - like Marbles makes. The 300's go a lot faster than the 400's and the difference in point of impact is normal.

Another thought - use a 400 grain all copper solid meant for the 458 Win Mag - I think there are several of these made.

[gary rice]

Couple things - first is same as Joe above - check the diameter of these bullets. The 45-70 needs .458" - I figure that you know that - just checking. An undersized bullet will definately play havoc with accuracy.

Use data published for standard 300 grain bullets - just back off the normal 10% to begin with - will be perfectly safe and give you a lot more data to work with.

Finally, install a taller front sight and that will lower your point of impact and give you greater range of adjustment when sighting. Try a .530" tall front sight - like Marbles makes. The 300's go a lot faster than the 400's and the difference in point of impact is normal.

Another thought - use a 400 grain all copper solid meant for the 458 Win Mag - I think there are several of these made.

i thought about the barnes 400 grain tsx and i would much prefer a 400 grain bullet in my gun but as i was telling John, the 300 grain tsx is actually quite longer than almost any 400-405 grain bullet cast or jacketed currently on the market so the seating depth may be a limiting factor in developing a good hunting load as the 400 grain tsx will be longer still. in fact, maybe it was you that i talked to a few months ago on this site about developing load data with the barnes 400 grn tsx for the 45-70? I think the obstacle is the fact that it is designed with the 458 mag in mind. I think your idea about installing a higher front sight probably makes the most sense as long as im stuck hunting with this type of bullet.

[gary rice]

Gary,

This is just a thought and may have no bearing on anything. But I was over on the Barnes site looking at their products and noticed the .45 Colt, Casull, GAP, .460 S&W bullets are all sized to .451". Nothing wrong with that I guess except for all those who have recently commented their Marlins are running oversized bores.
My Marlin 1894 Cowboy likes .454" lead bullets. I haven't slugged it yet, but if the grove diameter is anything over .4515" I'd wager those Barnes bullets won't be big enough to get a good grip on that shallow rifling.
Also since I doubt those bullets will expand to seal the bore I'll bet there will be a tremendous amount of blow by. That will reduce the pressure and velocity of any load.

I was thinking this might have something to do with the accuracy problems you're having with your 45-70. Have you recovered any of those 45-70 bullets for a look see?
Just for the information, why not slug the bore on the 45-70 and compare the ID to the Barnes bullets?

Like I said, just a thought.

Joe

Hi Joe, I havent recovered any bullets so far but i beleive you're correct as my bore diameter sure could have a large impact on accuracy. The barnes tsx for 45-70 is 458 diameter and 451 for 45 colt. Now, i just recieved two boxes of the 225 grain tsx for 45 colt and havent loaded them yet so im not sure how they will shoot until probably next weekend.

[J Miller]

Gary,

Let us know. I'm not where I'm forced to use these all copper bullets, but I'm curious about how they work and what loads work well with them.

Joe

[JohndeFresno]

The other thing to consider, with regards to the fact that the bullets are longer than their lead or jacketed counterparts of the same weight, is that a lighter Barnes bullet might do the same thing, and therefore its length might end up being closer to that which you expect with a certain load.

The Barnes Manual frequently recommends lighter loads than traditional ones in various game calibers. The Barnes company consistently claims that its bullets penetrates deeper than traditional bullets of equal weight - while retaining its weight and expanding to double its size.

For instance: A contributor to the Barnes book (Jeff Gronski) writes that a 165 gr. Triple X .30-06 bullets penetrates like a 200 grain [traditional] bullet; and some other contributors indicate similar results with other calibers. If they are correct, then I would think that a lighter (and therefore shorter) Barnes bullet can be used for a given load, with the added bonus of higher velocities in a given load.

Barnes furnishes a free DVD about their products and their effectiveness, showing actual tests. I have just ordered mine at their website and will be interested in seeing what it contains.

[JohndeFresno]

OK, I have studied the Barnes material that I recently purchased. After poring through the Barnes Reloading Manual Nr 4 and comparing it with other sources, I am disappointed, since I really spent the $26.95 plus 7% Sales Tax so that I would have a healthy dose of load recipes to work from.

The manual starts out with some great articles, including a creditable primer on reloading. Some of the contributing writers are Stan Skinner, Craig Boddington, and Ron Spomer. And the Trajectory and Energy Tables are useful, if you make sure that you download the "Errata" file from the website for corrections.

But some of the calibers are very poorly represented, with powders that I personally don't use.

For instance, their 44 Remington Magnum 200 gr. XPB round shows load tables with minimum and maximum charges for only two powders: AA No. 9 and Enforcer. I, for one, have never used either of these. Since I don't write gun articles for a living and am not a professional hunter, with sixteen different powders already on my shelves, I would like to use one of them, if at all possible.

Yet if you go to LoadData.com and look up the .44 Magnum, you will more than one entry with multiple loads using the Barnes bullet. Specifically, one table shows 5 loads for that 200 grain bullet using H-110, 2400, AA No. 9, V-N110, and Lil' Gun. There's two powders that I use! Per the posting, these recipes were taken from Handloader Issue #244, December 2006.

The upshot is that you can apparently find several loads that are specifically for the Barnes bullets by checking out a caliber on LoadData.com as previously stated. You might look there, and at similar sites, for some good data for your loads.

[Modoc ED]

The Barnes Manual frequently recommends lighter loads than traditional ones in various game calibers. The Barnes company consistently claims that its bullets penetrates deeper than traditional bullets of equal weight - while retaining its weight and expanding to double its size

Ok, I have to interject something here. I didn't want to post about it until I had done some more shooting/hunting but I've got to get my experience out that I've found so far about the CLAIMED deep penetrating Barnes copper bullets.

I don't live in the part of CA that requires lead free bullets; however, I can see it coming state (CA) wide within a few years so, I stocked up on some Barnes Copper Bullets in .308, and .429 . The .308 bullets are for the .30-06 and .30-30 and the .429 bullets are XPB Copper Bullets for my .444 Marlins.

I have handloaded rounds using all these bullets and the accuracy is on par with lead bullets -- jacketed only to this point.

Now for penetration. I've shot a few coyotes with my .30-06 and with a .30-30 and the penetration has been as good as lead bullets -- mostly through and through with no bullet recovery BUT I have shot several pigs/hogs with the Barnes bullets (.30-06/.30-30) and the penetration has been excellent (better that lead or at least the same) AS LONG AS the bullets were penetrating through hide, muscle, sinew, and fat. Where the penetration for the Barnes Copper Bullets doesn't quite measure up is when those bullets (Barnes Copper) strike BONE. They don't seem to DRIVE THROUGH/BREAK UP bone as well as lead bullets (say a shoulder hit).

That's just one observation and after this hunting season, I'll post more about my results using Barnes Copper Bullets.

I haven't done anything with the .444 Marlins using the Barnes Copper Bullets but am not looking forward to Elk hunting with them should a shoulder shot be necessary or all that is offered. I do have an Elk Tag this year but I will be using factory loaded Hornady Light Magnums loaded with their 265gr Inter Lock FNSP bullets -- good penetrator and bone breaker.

Anyway, that's my .02¢ on Barnes Copper Bullets for now. Good penetration through hide, muscle, sinew, and fat but not so good on BONE.

More to come in a few months.

[JohndeFresno]

Modoc Ed,

Thank you for the information. I note that the company also now makes a bullet called MRX - Maximum Range X Bullet - which is tipped with something called "Delrin" (it looks like a blue plastic tip, judging by the pictures) and which is filled with a "patented, tungsten-based Silvex core." The core reportedly allows exceptional penetration while it is at the same time lead-free. They say in their book that it "delivers the deep-penetrating, boneshamshing power needed for raking shots at game," and that "Writers have called the MRX, 'the most techonlically advanced hunting bullet ever created' ."

I suspect that this bullet will be needed to truly test the bone smashing ability of the Barnes line. The manual shows the bullet available in the 30 calibers, but not for the .444 - at least not at the time of printing for Manual Nr 4. A glance at the website might reveal additional loadings with that bullet, since the authors of this book state that they did not get all of the new loads into the book at press time.

I would hope that Barnes will be able to put out some heavy penetrators, since the company first came to fame with the original "Barnes Solids" used for elephants, hippos, and other ponderous fare.

[Modoc ED]

JohndeFresno -

Your thoughts are right on on all counts.

I believe that their new tungsten based "Silvex" does contribute to bone-crushing/breaking and I think that is why they brought it out because they (Barnes) knew their Copper only bullet line was lacking in that area.

I believe that the Barnes (TSX) Copper Bullets will be capable for almost all my hunting (w/.30-06 & .30-30) with the exception of ELK. I would like to see Barnes make their .429 bullets with a "Silvex" core. A .429 Copper Bullet with a "Silvex" core weighing between 265gr to 300gr would be just the ticket for Elk and other big-boned/heavy-boned game hunting with my .444 Marlin rifles.

[gary rice]

JohndeFresno -

Your thoughts are right on on all counts.

I believe that their new tungsten based "Silvex" does contribute to bone-crushing/breaking and I think that is why they brought it out because they (Barnes) knew their Copper only bullet line was lacking in that area.

I believe that the Barnes (TSX) Copper Bullets will be capable for almost all my hunting (w/.30-06 & .30-30) with the exception of ELK. I would like to see Barnes make their .429 bullets with a "Silvex" core. A .429 Copper Bullet with a "Silvex" core weighing between 265gr to 300gr would be just the ticket for Elk and other big-boned/heavy-boned game hunting with my .444 Marlin rifles.

My thoughts also, I would like to see them make something heavier for 44 mag, 45 colt and 45-70. if they dont fill the hollow cavity with something then it might not work, maybe the silvex core your speaking of would be the ticket. Im going to try the 225 grain tsx in my 45 colt rifle and ruger bisley and hope for better results than with my 45-70. if i didnt live here in kalifornia i wouldnt have to worry about this, but i do.