Barnes Re-designs the 130gr .277" TSX

[Mountain Goat]

I spent a little bit of time working up a load for a new Tikka SS fluted in 270 Win. Since a spring pig hunt in California is a possibility, a monometal bullet was my first choice, so the 130gr TSX got the nod. A couple range sessions showed that 58.5gr of H4831 was a very consistent load. So, I went down to the local Sportsman's Warehouse and picked up another box of 130gr TSX's, this just a week and a half after the first box I purchased at the same place.

To my surprise, there is a notice inside the box stating that they have made design changes to this bullet, and if you have loaded this bullet in the past, you may need to make adjustments to your load (paraphrased).

There are no idications on the outside of the box or their website that this bullet is not the same as it was previously. The nose profile is considerably different, as is the overall length. I'm assuming this will change BC, bearing surface and distance to the lands measurements.

I have zero interest in reworking a load for the same bullet. My work was done, and it was time to get some finished hunting rounds loaded. This bullet is so much different in profile that I feel my efforts were in vane.

I understand that companies are continually trying to improve their products. This isn't a simple jacket-thickness change or the adding of a polymer tip. This is like taking a VLD type ogive and changing it to look more like that of a Swift A-Frame.

I emailed Barnes asking for the reason(s) for the design change, the new BC, and should I be concerned about the performance of the previous bullet.

As Barnes provides details, I will keep this thread updated.

 

[Laker_Taker]

This is really interesting. I actually have a .270 BEE that will only shoot those. I wonder if it will apply to the TTSX as well? Keep us posted on what u hear. This id kind of annoying as I just developed this load after trying my different power/bullets combo's to trigger work and floating the barrel.

LT

 

[Desert Fox]

Which one is the new version? Left or right.

 

[Mountain Goat]

The new version is on the left, and I think it matches the profile of the TTSX. Perhaps production cost is the driving factor?

The old version is on the right, and it is actually more sleek looking in person. This is a last-second phone pic of poor quality.

 

[Guy Miner]

I'd recommend switching to Noslers... :wink:

 

[Desert Fox]

It looks like the only changes that is obvious is the ogive shape. The shank looks about the same, so I think your old data will be okay. The BC however will change.

 

[Mountain Goat]

I'd recommend switching to Noslers... :wink:

I considered trying the E-Tip,but I don't think Nosler is done with development on those yet. They have the same issue as the original "X" bullet did with building pressure. Even Nosler suggests using the mi-range load as maximum for the E-Tip. That doesn't fit with my OCD and puts my universe out of order, so it makes no sense to use a bullet design that is destined for a re-design. It's not important that my load ends up at or near max, but I don't want a bullet's design to be the reason for not doing so.

Barnes has a history of design changes and discontinuing items without announcing it to the consumer. I find that a slip of paper inside the product to be unprofessional and shows a real lack of concern for their customer.

This is a rather small issue, but it's probably enough for Barnes to lose a customer over.

Okay, time to force-feed some E-Tips. :|

 

[Mountain Goat]

It looks like the only changes that is obvious is the ogive shape. The shank looks about the same, so I think your old data will be okay. The BC however will change.

The BC change doesn't concern me as much as why they made the change. Did the old style not open reliably, or was there other performance issues? That's what I really want to find out.

The bearing surface changed by about .050" according to the few that I measured, so that shouldn't be a huge issue.

 

[Guest]

I can speak a little to the E-Tip issues you mention. I don't know that Nosler will do a redesign. I've shot a lot of E-Tips (I need Nosler to make a run, so I can buy some more seconds!) and found they can be pushed to about the same velocity as traditional, lead-core bullets, just at lower powder charges. I've got zero trouble making 3420-3460fps out of my E-Tip load in my 270Wby, and I got, at best, 3450-3500fps with lead-core stuff. That 3500 was too hot in 100deg heat, and I've shot the E-Tip load in that same heat with no pressure signs, so I think it's closer than the gap might suggest, if you consider actual pressures. I've been able to safely generate 3200fps out of my 300Wby, as well, with 180gr E-Tips and below max charges.

The trick is all in the powder selection. I've found the slowest powders appropriate for the cartridge are the best with the E-Tip, and accuracy comes (just like the TSX/TTSX) at shorter COL's.

From an on-game performance standpoint, I've had excellent results from the E-Tip at 20yds and 175yds. I'm going to try to take a 300yd shot on a doe through the lungs if I can get it this season, and if that goes well, I'm all sold.

Enjoy the E-Tips, and be patient, as they can be tough at first, but when they get right, they get right.

 

[Mountain Goat]

Barnes was very good in providing the driving reason behind the re-design, but I still let them know that I didn't approve of the slip of paper inside the product as the vehicle.

There were too many accuracy complaints with the Secant ogive design, apparently. :?: (BC was .430 and is now .374) All other TSX's have a tangent ogive or have been changed to a tangent ogive. This leads me to believe that it's possibly a production cost issue. Regardless, the customer service rep was very nice and understanding. He will mention this in the next meeting, according to him, that this could be a consederable cost to someone that has to drive hours to a shooting range just to test the new style bullet. This isn't the case for me, but for many it very well could be.

I think Barnes has done all that they can and have weighed all costs associated with a product change. This will make me make a product change, too. Hello, E-Tips!

Thanks for the info regarding the E-Tip. I'm not a velocity freak or need to load to the max, but it's nice to hear that you are getting good results with the E-Tip. I don't mind the additional effort needed to tweak the E-Tip. That's part of the fun. I just didn't want to be restricted due to a "high pressure" design.

 

[SJB358]

I can't wait to try the ET's in the 300WSM. Never shot one of them, but now that loading for them is pretty much understood, I don't think it should need magic to make it work. Good luck MG. Hope the ET treats you well. It does seem to be proving itself every year it is out. Just wished they had a little more selection in the other cartridges. Scotty

 

[Antelope_Sniper]

MG, IMO the new design looks superior for a couple of reasons.

First it should have a much higher BC. The old Barnes BC was suprisingly low.

Second, It has less mass up front, which might help with some of it's "failure to open" issues.

 

[Mountain Goat]

MG, IMO the new design looks superior for a couple of reasons.

First it should have a much higher BC. The old Barnes BC was suprisingly low.

Second, It has less mass up front, which might help with some of it's "failure to open" issues.

The BC actually went down from .430 to .374. I do agree that the secant design probably had a more difficult time opening consistently, or sheared off petals more frequently. Of course, this is just speculation since Barnes did not provide any performance issues other than accuracy complaints. This new design may or may not be an improvement, but I do know that it's not my first choice, given the entire situation.

 

[Desert Fox]

It's harder to make the secant ogive bullet to shoot accurately, especially a
Monolithic one... They needed faster twist. If this is the reason why Barnes made the change, then they're telling you the truth.

 

[Guest]

This isn't the first time Barnes has told that story, so at least they're consistent. When they switched from the X & XLC bullets to the TSX design with the grooved shank, I talked to Ty at Barnes about the .243cal Barnes bullets (I didn't have my 270Wby yet) and he said the same thing - they changed the ogive design to give accuracy in a wider range of rifles. Hornady is just about the only secant ogive devotee in the main bullet makers, although Berger is using it in a lot of their VLD stuff, as well as a new hybrid design that's a combination of secant and tangent ogives, apparently.

for what it's worth, you can get a better BC with the Tipped TSX, which is the exact same bullet as the "new" 130gr TSX you've bought. But I didn't like the amount of copper they left in my bore. Accuracy was great (<.5") for about 12-15rds, then began to open until at 30+ rounds it was well over an inch. E-Tips were harder to get to group, but once I found it, they're consistent. And they don't foul more than any other gilding metal jacketed round does, in my rifle.

 

[Mountain Goat]

Thanks, Dubyam, that's good info. Barnes is always making changes, which is both good and bad, but I don't like how they announced it via slip of paper inside the box.

The difference in BC between the TSX and TTSX is negligible, .374 compared to .392. The secant design was .430, still not enough to make a huge difference, but enough to mess with my confidence.

Trying Shit X number of times until we get it right, Barnes.

 

[Desert Fox]

I encountered the same issue when I was developing load for my 300 Weatherby. I started with the older version of the 180 grain TSX with 3 band and ended up using the newer version with 4 band. I have to tweak the load a bit on the new version to make it to shoot as tight as the older one. But as soon as I found the sweet spot, I have no problem getting the new one to shoot. My BC probably increase because the newer version is much longer than the old one.