New Barnes Manuel?/Info Help
03-23-2014, 11:44 AM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 516
New Barnes Manuel?/Info Help
I have found that the website for Barnes was last updated in 2010. Since then I'm sure manuals have been updated but not the site? If anyone has one could they send me a picture of the 115 tsx for 257 weatherby. I seen and been finding info that 68/72 were min and max loads as the site says 63.3/67.5 with H1000. Just trying to find out more about this. I can load it up myself and find out if I need to. I have had no problems with 66.5 grains as this is my best load to date, which is barely under an inch at 100 yards. Also, is there any info with rl25 for the 115 tsx. Thanks
03-23-2014, 12:23 PM
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,780
Barnes #4 .257 Wby 115 TSX
IMR 4831 60.0 gr/3,100 fps - 65.0 gr/3,302 fps
XMR 3100 60.5 gr/3092 - 65.5 gr/3,273
RL 22 60.0 gr/3,063 - 67.0 gr/3,308
IMR 7828SSC 63.0 gr/3,105 - 68.0r/3,298
H1000 66.0 gr/3,073 - 72.0 gr/3,287
Magnum 69.0 gr/3,196 - 74.0 gr/3,383
Note:
My chronograph has never shown velocities very close to any of the Barnes published loads. The Barnes manual is mostly self promotion, not too much real content.
IMR 4831 60.0 gr/3,100 fps - 65.0 gr/3,302 fps
XMR 3100 60.5 gr/3092 - 65.5 gr/3,273
RL 22 60.0 gr/3,063 - 67.0 gr/3,308
IMR 7828SSC 63.0 gr/3,105 - 68.0r/3,298
H1000 66.0 gr/3,073 - 72.0 gr/3,287
Magnum 69.0 gr/3,196 - 74.0 gr/3,383
Note:
My chronograph has never shown velocities very close to any of the Barnes published loads. The Barnes manual is mostly self promotion, not too much real content.
Last edited by Big Uncle; 03-23-2014 at 12:26 PM.
03-23-2014, 03:03 PM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
A little friendly advice - let's settle down a bit. You're sounding just a little frantic.
This is where a chronograph starts to pay off. Start here. Given identical bullets, driven at identical velocities, under identical environmental conditions, and launched to the same point of aim - they should theoretically go through the same hole in the target. Introduce any inconsistencies in the above factors, and they won't. Different points of aim result in group sizes opening up. A wind shift can result in group sizes opening up. Differences in velocities will result in group sizes opening up.
Obviously, aim is the shooter's issue. If you could predict the weather between the rifle and the shooter you'd be an overnight billionaire. But velocity is primarily a product of your ammunition.
My reloads never amounted to much (other than using "better" bullets) when I was starting out. It wasn't until I ran factory loads through a chrono, followed by my reloads, that I started to see just HOW different my reloads were. Not only a different average velocity, but a much wider extreme spread and higher standard deviations as well. Conclusion - my reloading process was junk.
I started being more deliberate. In doing so, I watched those numbers begin to narrow. I'm to the point now where I can record the data from a five-shot string and from the numbers predict the group size downrange, based on prior strings.
Now, there are times when I just can't get as consistent a velocity out of a given loading as I would expect to. Those are the loads "my rifle just doesn't like." But on the other hand, I've NEVER gone downrange to find that a narrow spread and standard deviation had produced a poor group (unless I, the shooter, knew I'd contributed to it).
Here's a recent example doing load development for .22-250 using Varget, CCI BR primers, and 50gr V-Max:
Load #1 (35.4 gr)
Average Velocity - 3607.8 fps
Standard Deviation - 61.9 fps
Variation Coefficient - 1.7%
Extreme Spread - 146 fps
GROUP SIZE: 0.991"
Load #5 (37.9 gr)
Average Velocity - 4075 fps
Standard Deviation - 33.2 fps
Variation Coefficient - 0.8%
Extreme Spread - 78 fps
GROUP SIZE - 0.367"
I think you'll find that if you use chrono data to measure your reloads rather than group size, you'll be able to more quickly isolate out what isn't working, and you'll be able to assess what the changes you make to a load REALLY do to it, things like seating depth, etc. If your only feedback is your target, you're limiting what you can see.
This is where a chronograph starts to pay off. Start here. Given identical bullets, driven at identical velocities, under identical environmental conditions, and launched to the same point of aim - they should theoretically go through the same hole in the target. Introduce any inconsistencies in the above factors, and they won't. Different points of aim result in group sizes opening up. A wind shift can result in group sizes opening up. Differences in velocities will result in group sizes opening up.
Obviously, aim is the shooter's issue. If you could predict the weather between the rifle and the shooter you'd be an overnight billionaire. But velocity is primarily a product of your ammunition.
My reloads never amounted to much (other than using "better" bullets) when I was starting out. It wasn't until I ran factory loads through a chrono, followed by my reloads, that I started to see just HOW different my reloads were. Not only a different average velocity, but a much wider extreme spread and higher standard deviations as well. Conclusion - my reloading process was junk.
I started being more deliberate. In doing so, I watched those numbers begin to narrow. I'm to the point now where I can record the data from a five-shot string and from the numbers predict the group size downrange, based on prior strings.
Now, there are times when I just can't get as consistent a velocity out of a given loading as I would expect to. Those are the loads "my rifle just doesn't like." But on the other hand, I've NEVER gone downrange to find that a narrow spread and standard deviation had produced a poor group (unless I, the shooter, knew I'd contributed to it).
Here's a recent example doing load development for .22-250 using Varget, CCI BR primers, and 50gr V-Max:
Load #1 (35.4 gr)
Average Velocity - 3607.8 fps
Standard Deviation - 61.9 fps
Variation Coefficient - 1.7%
Extreme Spread - 146 fps
GROUP SIZE: 0.991"
Load #5 (37.9 gr)
Average Velocity - 4075 fps
Standard Deviation - 33.2 fps
Variation Coefficient - 0.8%
Extreme Spread - 78 fps
GROUP SIZE - 0.367"
I think you'll find that if you use chrono data to measure your reloads rather than group size, you'll be able to more quickly isolate out what isn't working, and you'll be able to assess what the changes you make to a load REALLY do to it, things like seating depth, etc. If your only feedback is your target, you're limiting what you can see.
03-24-2014, 01:48 PM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Eastern wv
Posts: 3,650
A little friendly advice - let's settle down a bit. You're sounding just a little frantic.
This is where a chronograph starts to pay off. Start here. Given identical bullets, driven at identical velocities, under identical environmental conditions, and launched to the same point of aim - they should theoretically go through the same hole in the target. Introduce any inconsistencies in the above factors, and they won't. Different points of aim result in group sizes opening up. A wind shift can result in group sizes opening up. Differences in velocities will result in group sizes opening up.
Obviously, aim is the shooter's issue. If you could predict the weather between the rifle and the shooter you'd be an overnight billionaire. But velocity is primarily a product of your ammunition.
My reloads never amounted to much (other than using "better" bullets) when I was starting out. It wasn't until I ran factory loads through a chrono, followed by my reloads, that I started to see just HOW different my reloads were. Not only a different average velocity, but a much wider extreme spread and higher standard deviations as well. Conclusion - my reloading process was junk.
I started being more deliberate. In doing so, I watched those numbers begin to narrow. I'm to the point now where I can record the data from a five-shot string and from the numbers predict the group size downrange, based on prior strings.
Now, there are times when I just can't get as consistent a velocity out of a given loading as I would expect to. Those are the loads "my rifle just doesn't like." But on the other hand, I've NEVER gone downrange to find that a narrow spread and standard deviation had produced a poor group (unless I, the shooter, knew I'd contributed to it).
Here's a recent example doing load development for .22-250 using Varget, CCI BR primers, and 50gr V-Max:
Load #1 (35.4 gr)
Average Velocity - 3607.8 fps
Standard Deviation - 61.9 fps
Variation Coefficient - 1.7%
Extreme Spread - 146 fps
GROUP SIZE: 0.991"
Load #5 (37.9 gr)
Average Velocity - 4075 fps
Standard Deviation - 33.2 fps
Variation Coefficient - 0.8%
Extreme Spread - 78 fps
GROUP SIZE - 0.367"
I think you'll find that if you use chrono data to measure your reloads rather than group size, you'll be able to more quickly isolate out what isn't working, and you'll be able to assess what the changes you make to a load REALLY do to it, things like seating depth, etc. If your only feedback is your target, you're limiting what you can see.
This is where a chronograph starts to pay off. Start here. Given identical bullets, driven at identical velocities, under identical environmental conditions, and launched to the same point of aim - they should theoretically go through the same hole in the target. Introduce any inconsistencies in the above factors, and they won't. Different points of aim result in group sizes opening up. A wind shift can result in group sizes opening up. Differences in velocities will result in group sizes opening up.
Obviously, aim is the shooter's issue. If you could predict the weather between the rifle and the shooter you'd be an overnight billionaire. But velocity is primarily a product of your ammunition.
My reloads never amounted to much (other than using "better" bullets) when I was starting out. It wasn't until I ran factory loads through a chrono, followed by my reloads, that I started to see just HOW different my reloads were. Not only a different average velocity, but a much wider extreme spread and higher standard deviations as well. Conclusion - my reloading process was junk.
I started being more deliberate. In doing so, I watched those numbers begin to narrow. I'm to the point now where I can record the data from a five-shot string and from the numbers predict the group size downrange, based on prior strings.
Now, there are times when I just can't get as consistent a velocity out of a given loading as I would expect to. Those are the loads "my rifle just doesn't like." But on the other hand, I've NEVER gone downrange to find that a narrow spread and standard deviation had produced a poor group (unless I, the shooter, knew I'd contributed to it).
Here's a recent example doing load development for .22-250 using Varget, CCI BR primers, and 50gr V-Max:
Load #1 (35.4 gr)
Average Velocity - 3607.8 fps
Standard Deviation - 61.9 fps
Variation Coefficient - 1.7%
Extreme Spread - 146 fps
GROUP SIZE: 0.991"
Load #5 (37.9 gr)
Average Velocity - 4075 fps
Standard Deviation - 33.2 fps
Variation Coefficient - 0.8%
Extreme Spread - 78 fps
GROUP SIZE - 0.367"
I think you'll find that if you use chrono data to measure your reloads rather than group size, you'll be able to more quickly isolate out what isn't working, and you'll be able to assess what the changes you make to a load REALLY do to it, things like seating depth, etc. If your only feedback is your target, you're limiting what you can see.
RR
03-24-2014, 03:22 PM
#6
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
For what components cost today (when you can find what you're looking for), a chronograph is even more important. Remember that your targets also record your errors as a shooter and changing environmentals as well as the quality of your reloads. The chronograph helps you isolate the latter variable out.
03-25-2014, 01:40 AM
#7
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 516
I will definitely look into getting a chronograph at some point maybe in the Fall, as I just spent a lot of money on the reloading kit, bench, dies, and all the other stuff. I know it is a good piece of equipment to have and agree with you RR and HB
04-30-2014, 10:14 PM
#9
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West TN
Posts: 847
