Tikka 6.5CM Superlight, Barnes LRX 127gr ...

[philcox]

I am starting to develop a load for my TIkka T3X Superlite in 6.5CM. I REALLY want the Barnes LRX to be my bullet, as I want the long range expansion characteristics of it. This is my first load development and a buddy is helping me. I am currently using:

• Superformance powder and RL16
• CCI primer
• Remington brass
• Obviously the LRX

I am curious if anyone has this same gun/bullet mix, and if they have found a better powder to use?

I have the following (5 ea) I will test once the weather improves where I am at:

• Superrformance @ 43, 44, 45
• RRL-16 @ 40, 41

Any other input is appreciated.

 

[Rieckman]

I don't have that exact gun, but I'll be loading that bullet in the near future for 6.5CM. Hopefully I can find a load with staball 6.5. On their website they have it laid out on depths to start with. I would try and find the jump the bullet likes in your firearm. my 25-06 ended up at the top cannalure.

Their customer service is always been great to me as far as questions and responses.

 

[slingerHB]

I don't do handloads but I have the exact setup and my tikka loves the factory 127gr lrx. I have had great performance with that bullet on antelope and whitetail as well.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[philcox]

I don't do handloads but I have the exact setup and my tikka loves the factory 127gr lrx. I have had great performance with that bullet on antelope and whitetail as well.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using TapatalkI

i tried the factory loads, and the hornady Outfitters with the GMX were my tightest groups. I am hoping a hand load on the LRX will get me where I want to be.

 

[Muley Buck]

Just a suggestion, but if you are looking to kill with a mono out the furthest the Barnes probably isn't the best choice. I'd take a hard look at Cutting Edge, Hammers,Cayuga and Lehigh. They will more than likely perform better at a lower velocity than the Barnes.

 

[renagde]

I'm waiting on some nice weather to workup a load for my Tikka 6.5CM with the same bullet. I will be using IMR 4350, H4350 and maybe try some RL 23 or 26. From my research so far, it seems like they like an .050 jump. I'm starting there and will do some ladder tests and see what I can come up with.

 

[Brewski]

I don't do handloads but I have the exact setup and my tikka loves the factory 127gr lrx. I have had great performance with that bullet on antelope and whitetail as well.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Same but add mule deer. I bought a case of the 127 LRX so im stocked up for the next 20 years.

 

[mvrk28]

In my experience the LRX has been a very unpleasant bullet to load, I've only ever seen good results with that bullet in a pair of Savage rifles and a Kimber. Every other rifle, Tikka's included, have hated it.

I've gone Hammer exclusively for Mono bullets. IMO best monos on the market.

 

[handwerk]

I load the 127 LRX for 3 different 6.5 CM, it's been an easy exercise. I settled on 43 grains of either RL 16 or 17 depending on the rifle.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I use h4350 for the LRX with my tikka.

 

[Adam Gibbs]

Those using H4350 and the LRX, how many grains of powder are you using? Trying to see if there's a pattern...

 

[KClark]

Tikka T3x Lite 24" SS
127gr Barnes LRX
Starline small rifle brass
Tula standard srp
44gr H4350
2.875 OAL

Developed the load with F205M primers and it sucked, 3" for 3 shots. Switched to Tula primers and fired 3 consecutive 1/2" 5 shot groups.

Used it second half of last season to take a large bodied muley hybrid, a 225lb black bear and a coyote. Performance was what you would expect at short ranges, 75 yards, 15 yards and 200 yards respectively, all heart shots. Deer fell on impact, couldn't get back on his feet and tumbled down the hill. Bear ran 30 feet and hit a lone fence post head on and keeled over. Coyote dropped in it's tracks.

 

[Adam Gibbs]

Tikka T3x Lite 24" SS
127gr Barnes LRX
Starline small rifle brass
Tula standard srp
44gr H4350
2.875 OAL

Developed the load with F205M primers and it sucked, 3" for 3 shots. Switched to Tula primers and fired 3 consecutive 1/2" 5 shot groups.

Used it second half of last season to take a large bodied muley hybrid, a 225lb black bear and a coyote. Performance was what you would expect at short ranges, 75 yards, 15 yards and 200 yards respectively, all heart shots. Deer fell on impact, couldn't get back on his feet and tumbled down the hill. Bear ran 30 feet and hit a lone fence post head on and keeled over. Coyote dropped in it's tracks.

Is Barnes' load data on the really low end for book max? I'm showing 40.4gr as book max.

 

[KClark]

That's what their online data shows too but like your mama always says "Start low and work up". Probably the only component I have in common with their load data is the bullet so max pressure is obviously going to peak at a different point. Plus Tikkas are known for long throats so longer seating depths drop pressure from their laboratory settings.

At 44grs the case is full to slight compression and there are no pressure signs in this rifle. Switch powder lot #s and that may change.

 

[philcox]

Just a suggestion, but if you are looking to kill with a mono out the furthest the Barnes probably isn't the best choice. I'd take a hard look at Cutting Edge, Hammers,Cayuga and Lehigh. They will more than likely perform better at a lower velocity than the Barnes.

I will try the 124gr Hammers, but could not find the min expansion velocity on them. Hard for me to believe they'll be much lower than the 1600fps of the LRX.

 

[renagde]

I will try the 124gr Hammers, but could not find the min expansion velocity on them. Hard for me to believe they'll be much lower than the 1600fps of the LRX.

If you're looking for a mono with a low velocity expansion, Cutting Edge advertises some of theirs down to 1200fps.

 

[Muley Buck]

I will try the 124gr Hammers, but could not find the min expansion velocity on them. Hard for me to believe they'll be much lower than the 1600fps of the LRX.

Steve at Hammer
"We test all of our bullets down to 1800 fps. Once we have a good test at 1800 fps or lower, we don't continue to see how low they will go. This is the only place that we let our opinion influence the use of our bullets. We feel that 1800 fps is a good min vel for clean kills. Larger calibers have more leeway when it comes to this just because of caliber displacement. A 45-70 is a different animal than a 6.5 Creed. If someone is comfortable with lower vel impacts on game then we suggest doing your own testing to verify your comfort level."

There is no way I would shoot at an animal knowing my impact velocity is at 1600fps with the Barnes. I don't care what they say, the bullet design spells it out and tells me otherwise.

The Cutting Edge 120gr MTH has a recommended minimum expansion velocity of 1600 as well. The Lehigh 122 Controled chaos Copper is at 1500fps minimum. I wouldn't use those on game at that those velocitys either, for different reasons though. They may actually do just fine at those minimums but I'm not willing to chance it on an animal. Personally, I would add at minimum 100-200fps to those recommendations. The big difference between these bullets (CEB, Hammer, Lehigh, etc) is that they are all designed to fracture and the Barnes is designed to only expand. The bullets that fracture will always be the winner in my book.

 

[Muley Buck]

I know it's a small sample size but I took a deer at 437yds with the Lehigh 122gr CCC with an impact velocity of 2120fps. Hit broadside behind the shoulder the deer was lights out DRT. The bullet completely fractured and destroyed vitals and the lungs were jelly. I have two other (deer) kills that I have witnessed that were the same result one at 270yds and the other 80-100yds.

 

[sneaky]

I know it's a small sample size but I took a deer at 437yds with the Lehigh 122gr CCC with an impact velocity of 2120fps. Hit broadside behind the shoulder the deer was lights out DRT. The bullet completely fractured and destroyed vitals and the lungs were jelly. I have two other (deer) kills that I have witnessed that were the same result one at 270yds and the other 80-100yds.

Any mono hitting a deer at 2120 is going to kill it. I've never had a Barnes fail me at any distance out to 500 out of multiple calibers. May try some Absolute Hammers one of these days, but right now isn't the time I'm going to do load development and testing. It's going to be a long time before the component and ammunition market stabilizes.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Muley Buck]

Any mono hitting a deer at 2120 is going to kill it. I've never had a Barnes fail me at any distance out to 500 out of multiple calibers. May try some Absolute Hammers one of these days, but right now isn't the time I'm going to do load development and testing. It's going to be a long time before the component and ammunition market stabilizes.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I agree, any bullet for that matter can and will kill at those velocitys. I suppose my point was to suggest how a mono frangible bullet will more than likely create a larger wound channel versus one that is not designed to. I don't have reams of tests to prove any of this, but it is my belief that if anything can be learned from the other threads about "target/match" bullets vs "hunting/bonded" bullets is that a bullet that fragments kills more effectively and efficiently and creates larger wound cavities. I have no reason to believe that, that idea or line of thinking changes under these circumstances.