RE: Barnes MRX
 

My thoughts exactly. This guy is obviously making his info up. Another internet genius. I'm not saying that the MRX isn't a good bullet it most likely is.

RE: Barnes MRX
 

I'vebeen pretty pleased with the TSX, butthe MRX doesn't much interest me, at least not at its current price.And really, Ican't think of a situation I'd want to use it anyway. On short range shots the claimed higher BC (due to the plastic tip) wouldn't be necessary. In this case the TSX (and most other bullets) would work fine. On really long range shots I'd want something with a better BC than a bullet with a ringed shank could provide. So, I don't see me using it any time soon. I kind of see it as a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. But if others wantto use it, then by all means, go for it.That's my .02$.

RE: Barnes MRX
 

1. 1/4 of the way up I consider front shoulders. (My wife is in the medical field I am but an engineer)
2. The bullet went between the heart and lungs blowing them apart. The heart fell out without cutting it from the lungs.
3. The bullet went through 2 shoulders (or legs as they are actually called) shattering them and yes he did run 20 yards.
4. The fact that this particular bullet did not weigh 99% (it was 95) is not the point as this is not a typical test shot. The MRX's seem to act just like the X's (with my wet phone books) My XLC's and TSX's when not hitting 2 shoulders or a backbone consistently are in the upper 90 percentile. (several 130's weighing 126 or better) (the lost tip in the MRX weighed something) I will admit the "always 99%" is an exaggeration, I should have said 95%. I am sure if the same shot was made at point blank range with the 130 gr TSX's @ 3950 fps the petals would have blown off, but the whitetail won't catch it to see, an it should still be above 85% weight retentsion
5. The Bal tips were about 10 percent even if I didn't hit the shoulder (legs), and I was then shooting a much milder 30-06 and 270.
6. So No I haven't the large number of animal tests with the MRX's but have tested the best way a poor engineer can. And since they seem to work just like the other X's in like tests..........And I have a very large supply of dead animals I've killed with them.

By the way I thought this deer had been shot before and had an absess in the shoulder where the bullet stopped because it was HUGE. Like 3 times (sorry an estimate) larger than the other side. It was all blood blown into it and swelled up, no absess. But what should I have expected? He was hit by a meteor! I don't mean to keep you from using what works for you, I'm sure a hand grenade will kill deer too and it is also right there in the 10 percentile for weight retension (another estimate) but close counts with hand grenades. You busted me for 4%. I'll take it.
I have stuck with the Barnes because they are the first lightweight bullet that has held together for me. (yes the partitions did but I love velocity and I said lightweight) By the way I was using the 130 gr BT's in 270 (3200 fps) and 150 gr in the 06 (also 3200 fps) and 300 Wby (3500 fps) I do like the 125 gr BT's in the 30-30. I cut the tip back to make it a small flat point and it worked fine in another buddies gun. We left a couple without cutting the tip for a first shot (and you had to shoot it, it wouldn't eject unfired but the cut off ones would).
Good luck and happy hunting. The goal is to have fun, eat well, enjoy life and have your own opinion!

RE: Barnes MRX
 

Don't worry you won't keep mefrom using anything, I have my own experiencesto formulate what to use and where. Opinions based on experience are never a bad thing. Understandable that your liking to push bulletsin light for caliber grthe all copper x bullet would show the best return. The NP would surely do it as well but by design and shedding of the front 1/3rd you'll never equal a x bullet in retention. Worse yet with a BT that by design is a rapid expansion bullet.

As far as testing mine is based on game not media simulated to be game or more than. All Iwas saying.I have had excellent results with TSXon larger deer species. My sampling is rather low of 2 bull elk and 1 bull moose.Though the results have been the same and I feel comfortable suggesting it for this usage.I also used the 140gr/.284TSX to take 2 mule deer with, my results were ok but I don't think the TSX is required for deer sized game if the ribs/heart/lungs are your main target. If the shoulder I think it would preform very well but haven't taken this shot on deer with itand rarily see the need for this placement. So the BT and others work fine for deer IMO and experience. I have only found one TSX bullet recovered frommy bull moose, it penetrated both lungs and exited via the scapula (or shoulder;)) and found in the opposite hide. It lost one petal, diameter was .714 and retention was 92%. Amazing results from a 1/4 away shot of maybe 70 yards on large animal weighing 1000lbs + on the hoof!!

What does the mrs. do? Mine is a Nurse. I have spent the last 12 years in the cardiac and diagnostic imaging field. As a sideline I butcher.
Anatomically correct is kind of my thing and may explain my itching of the head commenton your deer recount.

Like you said all a difference of opinion.

Have a good season.

RE: Barnes MRX
 

The wife is similar to you, not the butcher part (I hope). She has done X-rays, Mamograms, MRI's etc and is leaving a job as a medical claims reviewer for a disability re-insurance co. to a contingent MRI position so she can spend more time with our 14 mth old son. (His middle name is Remington) I would think all of us hunters think of ourselves as butchers.

I would love to try out the Barnes bullets on an elk sized animal. I guess I could pop one of Mom's cows. OK maybe not a good idea. My biggest animal was a 21 point whitetail. (killed with a 270 win and a 110 gr hornady hollowpoint with a drop of superglue in the tip to keep it from blowing up) As for the anatomically correct thing, I am the same way when it comes to designs and tooling. (my field) I work with vehicle designers and manage the design, purchase and install of assembly plant tooling.

I use the Barnes exclusively because I want to use one bullet for everything so I don't have to resight-in the rifle. When I was using the old 270 it wasn't that bad, but 10 shots with the 30-378 and my shoulder feels like it went through the meat tenderizer. If the Bal coef on the new 150 MRX's is where it should be I'll be set. (I'm shooting the 165's because the MRX 150's aren't available yet) Have you tried the Lazzeroni 120 gr in your 7mm? If it is a 7mm rem mag I have a nice load for it if interested.

RE: Barnes MRX
 

McRib is back.
That sandwich costs as much as the MRX bullet. I'm going to try the 180 grain.