6.5-300 Wby Published Data COAL Difference

I'm working up a series of loads for my 6.5-300 Weatherby. One of my bullet choices in the 127 LRX, which should be good choice. I was reading Brian Pearce's article in Handloader on the caliber and he shows a COAL for the 127 LRX at 3.50", while Hodgdon lists 3.59" and Barnes lists 3.58". None of the other loads in Pearce's article are that short, the closest being 3.53" for a much shorter bullet.

3.50" seems like it would be a lot of jump, even for a Barnes. That's something like .26". Also, QuickLoad, which can certainly be off some, shows this load at something around 75,000 PSI!

I sent an email to Handloader, but I don't expect an answer. I sure wonder if that 3.50" is supposed to be 3.58".

Thoughts?

By the way, for our sponsor, the 140 AB provides me .55 MOA consistently in this caliber.

I just measured a 130 factory Sirocco and it is 3.50 in., I don't have any 127g but believe they are the same. I am running my 140 accubonds at 3400fps, 3.535 OAL. That was where my best groups were.

Barnes likes jump and speed. My 257W with 100gr TTSX bullets has over 1/4" jump and puts 5 shots into one ragged hole.
Swift bullets like jump also.