I am a lucky guy! Barnes provided me with a dozen new .277 129gr LRX bullets to test! I'm like a kid with a new toy and having trouble sleeping. I had written Barnes 3 years ago asking if I could work with them on a low-drag, long-range hunting bullet for the .270 Win. Here it is! Its 1.346" +- 0.001" long and 9 our of the 12 were precisely 129.0 grains - best consistency I've seen from any of their bullets. Below is a picture of it with several other all-copper bullets of the same caliber. I included the Berger 150gr VLD so you can see how much heavier a lead-core bullet is of similar length plus it has the best BC of any .270 hunting bullet I am aware of - 0.531. No BC from Barnes yet on the LRX. Besides a better BC, the LRX should reliably expand down to 1600 fps. I will test and compare terminal performance with the Hornady 130gr GMX (BC 0.453) and Barnes 130gr TSX (BC 0.428). Note the 130 TSX is from the older production run that had the higher BC than the ones they are currently producing. Thought you HuntingNuts would be particularly interested.

Cant wait for the results.

very good man. all your testing is paying off for you. cant wait to see the results.

just found them for sale on trademe.... ONLY $75 per box of 50.....

Elvis, it may be another 60 days or so before I start testing. Nosler ia coming out with a 150gr AccuBond with a BC over. 6. I'm going to test them together.

www.nosler.com/Bullets...Range.aspx

at the price they are it will be a plurry long time before I do!!!!

Elvis, we will just have to wait and see if the benefits in terminal performance is worth the cost. It might take me 3 years to shoot up 100 bullets. Looks like their cost will be:

$75/100 for the Barnes LRX ($37/50)
$50/100 for the Nosler AB LR

now I just want to cry!!!! man you dont know how good you fellas have got it. I will probably wait till a 15 sample pack is available and go that way.

This post has been update, 22 Jul 2013. During analysis to better understand the dynamics of monolithic bullet expansion, I found a significant error in my test data. I had mistakenly switched some of the recovered bullets when they were pulled from the trap. The picture below has been updated and the analysis revised. Additional analysis showing that kinetic energy, not velocity, is the correlating factor determining expansion can be found here.

My apologies to Barnes Bullets and my fellow forum members. A revise report follows.


I finally got out and did some testing with the new Barnes 129gr LRX. I did a side by side performance comparison with the Barnes 130gr TSX hollow-point (no ballistic tip). The new Barnes .277 129gr LRX with a ballistic tip is advertised to have a lower opening velocity, down from 2100 to 1600 fps as a result of a new expansion cavity design similar to the 6.8mm 95gr TTSX which has demonstrated excellent expansion in my testing and hunting. These tests were conducted at 100, 300, and 500 yards. The LRX showed excellent accuracy at all ranges shot from my Tikka T3 Lite, < 1 moa. I expected the LRX to out expand the legacy TSX and I was not disappointed as you can see from the picture below. The 130gr TSX does well but the 129gr LRX does better and provided the largest recorded expansion at all 3 ranges of any monolithic .277 bullet I have tested, an impressive 0.611" at 100 yards and still doubling in size at 200 yards. I've got another box on order so I can get ready for elk season this fall.

hmmm food for thought....
seems price may determine which is better then???

The LRX is about $2 more per 50. The LRX has a better BC but the TSX expands better, IMO. To me, its which one shoots best in your gun if you can afford to try them both. If you can only choose one ... that is a tough one. I think the TSX will be more accurate and will still have an effective range of 400+ yards for deer.

very nice mushroom both of them.
I would tend to get the more accurate ones if I am shooting them.
Price of them means nothing if each of them harvest a deer.

Great test Slim...what was your target medium mate?

I wonder if the same performance will be applicable to the 6mm in a .243 Win? Hmm...food for thought.

Vince, I've mature a bullet trap to test terminal performance. Started with .223 bullets and kept on going.

www.huntingnut.com/ind...cle&sid=84

I now use a gallon jug of water in front of a foam-core board glued to one thick phone book and 15 magazines in a cardboard box backed up with paper filler. The foam core records the bullet's expansion and energy transfer before it enters the phonebook/paper trap (see pix below). The foam-core also clearly shows yawing and any fragmentation patterns. Most HP and OTM yaw and break-up (fragment), they don't "expand" like advertized or you think of as expanding (like the TSX and LRX did).

I have shot enough game now and recovered bullets to verify it is a valid method of testing and much easier to do than ballistic gel. If a bullet reaches 1000 pages in the phone book, it should be a broadside pass through on a southern sized deer. Into the magazines is over-penetration. Into the paper stack after that is just stabbing them with an ice pic (believe it or not, some "hunting" bullets do just that).

Of course mate...I'd forgotten about your "test box". Sorry mate.

I like the idea of the foam...that's a brilliant idea mate.