Barnes TSX for the 375 Win

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:16 am

Since Barnes doesn't make TSX bullets for the 375 leverguns, and since Kalifornia made it illegal to hunt with lead bullets, in much of the state, starting july 1, I had to come up with something on my own.

So a month or so ago, I started a project and with the help of Marlinowners 375win (known here as NewPighunter) I began work on it.

The first donation came from Barnes themselves. They sent me 5 of the 375 cal 235gr TSX bullets. I did some experimenting on my new lathe. After ruining 3 of the 5, I found a solution. I posted my info on MO's forum and was waiting till I got the funds up to buy a box for my experiment. NPH came through with a donor box. He'll be somewhat compensated, but can't say how, as I do not want this to seem like a payment or as if I'm trying to sell anything here. Just wanting to do research for other levergunners in CA.

Anyway, I finally finished lathe turning all but a few of the new box. Some were messed up as part of a learning curve. Of those, some were loaded by me and tested, some will be returned to the donor and some will go the Barnes, for a hopeful project they will undertake.

Let me start the range report with load data.

The 235gr spire point bullets were not suitable for use in leverguns, so I cut the tip off (about 3/8") and trued up the new, flat nose. Next, and this is where some of the experimenting went on, I cut a new profile for the nose.

I loaded up a dummy round without changing the nose profile, to see if it would feed in my Win BB, but it would not. It would chamber, but the sharp nose got caught and wouldn't feed into the chamber.

So I profiled the nose to a more round ogive. Some of the bullets, as you'll see in the pic, were given a straight taper. Both designs seemed to feed without issue. All bullets came out at or near 185gr.

The two designs are shown above next to a 200gr factory loading, for profile and COAL comparison.

After the profile was cut, I used a machinists starter drill and drilled the center of each bullet out to a hollow point of approx 3/8" deep to allow the bullet to expand, since cutting off the tip removed the main section designed to initiate the expansion. The Barnes rep seemed concerned that a flat nosed bullet might not open up, so I addressed this issue with the hollow point.

Next I loaded 16 rounds using H4198. Using the Hodgdons load data for the 375 Win, they list a max charge of 38gr of 4198 for a 200gr bullet. Noticing a distinct pattern of charge increase with coresponding drop in bullet weight, I decided it would be safe to start near the max 200gr load charge, with the lighter 185gr bullets.

I started at 37gr and went up in .5gr increments to 38.5 to test for accuracy, and velocity. Here are my results.

The test rifle is my model 94 BB Winchester, chambered in 375 Win. Range was 50yds, with Williams FP peep sight, with which I'm not a great shot. Field elev approx 3000, temp 68 deg, wind calm.

Here are the posted velocities, the most accurate of which seemed to be the 37gr.

Bullet Barnes TSX, 185gr
Powder H4198

37.0gr

2438
2389
2458
2391

Avg vel 2419

37.5gr

2408
2427
2457
2469

Avg vel 2440

38.0gr

2485
2474
2511
2503

Avg vel 2493

38.5gr

2530
2501
2512
2524

Avg vel 2516

Here's a pic of the 37gr load.

As you can see three shots were very close and the forth a flier. One thing I DIDN'T do, wish I had, was grouped them into nose profile groups, to see if that made a difference, duh.

The squares in the target are 1".

I plan on doing the same thing, eventually, to the heavier offerings for the 375 and on some of the heavy 458 dia bullets, so something heavier than 300gr in non lead is available for my 1895GS.[/b]

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:00 am

As a side note, I checked Hodgdons load data and the 308 Win with a 180gr load maxes out at 2660fps, starting in the mid 2400's, right where this load performs best.

I'd venture, if there was more room in the 375 case (the 38 and 38.5gr loads are compressed) it could match the 308 at the top loads. But it wasn't worth the push to me.

new pig hunter · Post by **new pig hunter** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:53 am

Handi,

Great Stuff here for all us Kali hunters who will soon be in desperate need of lead-free ammo for our leverguns.

Cheers,

Carl

Post by **Old Savage** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:56 am

And when might I see some of these - at the Leverguns get together? This could actually be an advancement over anything that was available.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Old savage, I'll make a point to bring some along. I was going to load the rest up but will bring some loaded and some not to see how they fit.

As you can see they're crimped in the second groove, I discovered that it kept them short enough to cycle and allowed a bit more room for powder. That's a good thing since these are a bit long for the weight. Somethin WE have to get used to I suppose.

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:09 pm

Hmmmm....

Can these bullets be swaged by a strong press? One could make a hollow point and an ogive that a way if they had enough pressure.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:45 pm

I don't have a clue. I'm new to the lathe even and this was all an experiment.

I did see something in "Reloader" magazine that looks interesting to me. There is a case trimming tool that is bench mounted and looks sortas like a pencil sharpener. I have been wondering, even before I saw this tool, if a similar type cutter could be made and put into the lathe to cut the ogive precisely the same way each time.

That would make it a real quick and easy job. All one would have to do then, is drill out the HP part and good to go.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:53 pm

Great work I look forward to seeing them next weekend.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:50 am

I'm looking forward to seeing the results on game.

Rhys.94.375 · Post by **Rhys.94.375** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:18 am

wouldnt it be nice to see more offerings in factory ammo!

good experiment you are doin mate, i too are interested in seeing the results on game too!

cheers

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:01 pm

Rhys.94.375 wrote:wouldnt it be nice to see more offerings in factory ammo!

cheers

Hopefully since CA has done this more ammo companies will step up to the plate, in making non lead and loading other companies' offerings.

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:27 pm

I wonder about using tungsten, but brass is better I guess.

I'd be willing to bet Barnes is going to develope a bullet for you if one of the bigger manufacturers doesn't do it with factory ammo.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:28 pm

Interesting test. I remember your work from several weeks back. I would say you were getting close with the 38.5gr load. How was the accuracy? E.S. was pretty good. Maybe another primer or a smaller diameter expander might shrink it even more. 1886.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:37 pm

handirifle wrote:I'm looking forward to seeing the results on game.

Yep thats the real test right there.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:00 pm

I am confident that the results on game will be superb. 1886.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:34 pm

Yea I feel pretty sure they will have a lot of smack on game as well.

1886, by getting close, did you mean to the max charge, or to 308 levels? Maybe both.

I was getting more fliers at higher levels, but at this point I'm not convinced, bullet or more accurately ogive, design didn't play a part in that as well.

I'm currently looking into some sort of tool that can be made or bought, that will work like a pencil sharpener to give consistant and repeatable results. The gears are turning, slowly, but still going.

Scott
I never thought about tungsten, I think cost would be too high though.

Barnes uses brass for their "Banded" solids, I called and asked. I can't remember, but I THINK brass is just a hair lighter than copper, so those would be even longer. The 185gr TSX is as long as a 200gr lead bullet, in 375 cal.

I was stuffing RL-7 in 38-55 brass and using the Hornady bullet that I discussed on my web site (250gr) and was getting 2150fps with it. If I used 38-55 brass with these I might be able to actually match the 308 velocity, but honestly, not sure I want to bother. The 38.5gr loads were causing the rifle to have so much muzzle flip it actually hurt my face at each shot.

That took some of the fun out of that load.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:36 pm

You might take a look at the offering here.

http://www.sommatool.com/catalog/cuttin ... .tools.asp

These are cutoff tools intended to also apply a radius on the cutoff end. Maybe you could jerry rig it by holding them at an angle to obtain the nose shape you want.

Fair warning, copper is terrible to machine and it will not take kindly to removing large areas of material with a single bite. It is going to try to grab the part and rip it out of the chuck. That's why what you really want is the CNC control of a single point. Also copper is cut much better with a lot of top rake on the tool. For single pointing, a tool made for aluminum works very well. A flat top rake, as for steel, works very poorly with copper.

Good luck.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:42 pm

Well scratch that, those are circular tools, meaning they are meant for screw machines that have holders for such items. They will actually look like a doughnut or a very think washer. You will not be able to hold it with conventional lathe tool holders.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:22 am

I already have a system that works, and yes I have discovered copper does like to grab the cutting tool. That was part of the learning curve.

Can you explain a bit more about the "rake"?

1886 · Post by **1886** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:20 am

Handirifle, I was referring to ballistic consistency. I am confident that load will be devistating on game. Best Wishes. 1886.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:23 am

1886
Gotchya,
I think, too, it was about maxed out in effeciency like you say. I think due to bullet dia it would be more devestating than the 308 at close range, say out to 150 or so.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:27 pm

http://www.cda.org.uk/megab2/costeff/tn44/sec42.htm

The bottom right drawing shows a 4 to 8 degree top (or as they call it "back" rake).

For cutting copper anythng much below 5 degrees will not work well. More than 10 degrees does not seem to be of any benefit.

Top rake controls the angle of presentation of the cutting edge to the material. The top or back rake angle (positive or negative) is dependent on the cutting qualities of the material. Some exotic and/or hard materials actually prefer a negative top rake. Soft (and gummy) materials such as copper or aluminum prefer that the material be "peeled" from the base metal. Don't confuse any turning instructions on brass with the turning of copper. They have no common relation in how they cut what-so-ever.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:13 pm

leverluver
Thanks, I understand. I had cut my cutting tool with about that amount of "rake", finding that worked best, but never knew why really.

So you're saying the top rake should be positive or neutral?

When I cut mine it was coming off like peeling an apple. Very very fine though.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:46 pm

Top rake for copper should always be positive and 10 degress always worked well for me. The long nasty chip is one of the main problems when turning pure copper. It is nothing to wind up with a chip 3 feet long. Major pain in the butt. Chip breakers or other devices will not work on copper. The only recourse on CNC is to "peck turn" but that has it's own problems with surface finish, even though it does break up the chip. Every stop point will be seen on the finished product.

71fan · Post by **71fan** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:00 pm

I appreciate the work you are doing...it looks interesting.

I just wanted to note that Barnes just a few years ago made a 200 and 220 gr x-bullet for the .348. It has a gaping hole in the nose. So it seems like they already have the know-how, and the two are so close in size that I wouldn't expect too much redesign necessary. I guess I don't really understand why you have to do their R&D work for them (except that it is probably very interesting and educational).

I have several hundred of the .348 200 grainers, waiting for a rainy day. If you haven't already seen them, I'll bring a box to the shoot so you can see what they look like.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:18 pm

Leverluver wrote:Top rake for copper should always be positive and 10 degress always worked well for me. The long nasty chip is one of the main problems when turning pure copper. It is nothing to wind up with a chip 3 feet long. Major pain in the butt. Chip breakers or other devices will not work on copper. The only recourse on CNC is to "peck turn" but that has it's own problems with surface finish, even though it does break up the chip. Every stop point will be seen on the finished product.

Yea it's not been too big an issue for me mainly cause of the technique I use, it's done in many passes, so it automatically cuts them. Sometimes I touch them up with a flat file to clean rough edges before I take them out of the lathe.

71fan
Not really doin it for them, since they don't make them, it either that or the BB becomes a safe queen. Can't have that.

Yes I'd like to see them. I have some 300gr loaded for the 1895GS and someone, correctly, referred to them as a "flying trash can". Mine aren't quite THAT bad.

I plan on trying similar on HEAVY 458 bullets to make a non-expanding bullet, like the Garrett loads. Kinda, just because, kinda because they'll be cheaper than Garrett's.