175 Barnes LRX in 308 Win?

[Ringbill27]

Does 3040-3050 fps sound like the speed you've gotten good results with?

I’ve loaded my wife’s 308 w/ the 130ttsx to 3150fps with no pressure.

 

[BringBackThe80s]

The 175LRX has a min extension velocity of 1600fps where the 168TTSX is 1800fps. For the extra 8grs of bullet you at gain better expansion at slower speeds. I’d get the LRX a go.

That was my thought, as well. I've seen both 1500, 1600, and 1800 fps reported as Barnes's "unofficial" answer on minimum expansion velocity for the 168 TTSX. But the 175 LRX is always reported to open down to 1600 or 1500 fps.

So, higher B.C. + additional K.E. with the same or better expansion despite marginally lower velocity? Seemed like a pretty easy choice to me.

 

[Ringbill27]

That was my thought, as well. I've seen both 1500, 1600, and 1800 fps reported as Barnes's "unofficial" answer on minimum expansion velocity for the 168 TTSX. But the 175 LRX is always reported to open down to 1600 or 1500 fps.

So, higher B.C. + additional K.E. with the same or better expansion despite marginally lower velocity? Seemed like a pretty easy choice to me.

From what I’ve ready and been told the LRX line is design to expand reliability at longer ranges then the TSX or TTSX. No idea how faster the ol’ 308 will push them but I’d say the 175 should out range the 168gr expansion wise and with that larger BC.

 

[BringBackThe80s]

From what I’ve ready and been told the LRX line is design to expand reliability at longer ranges then the TSX or TTSX. No idea how faster the ol’ 308 will push them but I’d say the 175 should out range the 168gr expansion wise and with that larger BC.

I had always wondered why Barnes made a 168 TTSX boattail and also a 165 TTSX boattail at practically the same weight but a much lower B.C. In the last year or so I've read (again, not from Barnes directly) that the 168 used to be sold as the 168 LRX with the same expansion envelope as the 175 and other LRXs. Allegedly, the 168 was later moved over to the TTSX line without any changes to the design or materials, allowing it to open at the same speeds as the 175.

In my pressure tests, I obviously could not push the 175 as fast as the 168, but the higher B.C. and weight/speed ration results in less drift and more retained energy--and even higher velocity in the 175 by 300 or 400 yards.

 

[North of 60]

It is a bit disappointing that we do get some varied responses form Barnes on minimum velocities for expansion.

In my last phone call with the Bares tech guy about a month ago, i was told that if the 130s didn't do well in my short barrel .308, to try the 168s because the minimum velocity for the 168 grain bullet was 1700 fps (or 1900 to be safe).

And as many have said, the added 10% regardless is wise for expansion.

To the OP, inside of 200yds, either the 175 or 168 should do just fine on deer.