175 LRX velocity’s from shorter barreled 300 WSM

[Jaegerr]

I’m trying to decide on a rebarrel on my tikka 300 WM I picked up. I’m building the rifle out for a do all western rifle out to 500~ yards and I’m set on using monolithic bullets out of personal choice.

I’d like to throw a 20” 300 WSM barrel on it and rock a suppressor on it. I want to ensure I can maintain above around 2,000 MV out to the 600 yard mark to give myself some cushion to get reliable expansion. I know the LRX is supposed to open down to 1600 fps, but would like to stick to 2,000.

Had anyone worked up a load in a similar rifle? I’m also slightly considering a rebarrel to a 7 PRC but I haven’t done much research into if the COAL of the 7 PRC works well in the tikka.

Thanks for any info!

 

[Andouille]

There are a bunch of recent threads on similar wsm subjects if you do a quick search, and I can share my data. My 20" Tikka WSM gets 2960fps with 175 lrx and Staball 6.5. That puts it at 2000fps at 595ish yards. Group size is somewhere around 1.5 MOA, so I have a little load tuning to do, might drop the speed a little.

 

[ElkSnort]

I’m trying to decide on a rebarrel on my tikka 300 WM I picked up. I’m building the rifle out for a do all western rifle out to 500~ yards and I’m set on using monolithic bullets out of personal choice.

I’d like to throw a 20” 300 WSM barrel on it and rock a suppressor on it. I want to ensure I can maintain above around 2,000 MV out to the 600 yard mark to give myself some cushion to get reliable expansion. I know the LRX is supposed to open down to 1600 fps, but would like to stick to 2,000.

Had anyone worked up a load in a similar rifle? I’m also slightly considering a rebarrel to a 7 PRC but I haven’t done much research into if the COAL of the 7 PRC works well in the tikka.

Thanks for any info!

Consider the 168 ttsx. It's actually the original LRX bullet and has a lower expansion threshold than other 30cal ttsx bullets. Should be great out to 600y.

 

[MCS]

You would need about 3080fps MV with that bullet to maintain 2000fps at 600 yards

 

[Packmansion]

I’m trying to decide on a rebarrel on my tikka 300 WM I picked up. I’m building the rifle out for a do all western rifle out to 500~ yards and I’m set on using monolithic bullets out of personal choice.

I’d like to throw a 20” 300 WSM barrel on it and rock a suppressor on it. I want to ensure I can maintain above around 2,000 MV out to the 600 yard mark to give myself some cushion to get reliable expansion. I know the LRX is supposed to open down to 1600 fps, but would like to stick to 2,000.

Had anyone worked up a load in a similar rifle? I’m also slightly considering a rebarrel to a 7 PRC but I haven’t done much research into if the COAL of the 7 PRC works well in the tikka.

Thanks for any info!

That's basically what I did. I went ahead and did a fast 8 twist and a longer free bore so I could shoot any bullet I want. 300 WSM will get you there for sure especially at Western hunting elevation. I'm in CO and hunt at a minimum of 8000 ft and my 175 LRX load will get me out to 700+ not that I need to take shots that far out. You might want to look at 7 PRC. 300 WSM is great in a Tikka, 7 PRC is limited due to the 3.34. you can get 3.4 with MT mags but you won't get the 3.6+ that you would with a Remington 700 LA. If you shoot copper the 7 PRC basically loses its advantages. 30 cal has a lot more bullet options for copper and the 300 PRC (1:8) is going to make it viable for bullet makers to start making more high bc bullets for the faster twist. If you want to squeeze every ounce out of the 300 wsm with a fast twist check out Cayuga bullets and Apex Outdoors. Those copper bullets work well in Tikka 300 wsm with a fast twist and and a lot of bc over the Barnes bullets. The Cayuga and Apex are also designed to shed pedals like the hammers. 7 PRC was tempting for me but at the end of the day it offers most of its advantages past 500 yards and further. I'm all in on Tikka and I have a hard time cramming a long action into a medium, I love running short in a medium much more. I also have just decided I'm sticking with 223, 6.5 and 308 calibers. Best bullet selection and availability and I'm just not interested in spending money every time the new sexy cartridge comes out. I don't need more bullets dies powders etc in my life. If you do not reload I would stay away from 300 WSM. I'd keep your 300 WM barrel though always nice to have something you can easily get store bought ammo for. Realistically you won't get much advantage out of a 300 WSM over the WM. I have a Tikka 300 WM and it's darn accurate. You might want to look at a Tikka 6.5 PRC or even better a 6.5 creedmoor. If I'm hunting mule deer, pronghorn or cow elk I'm taking a 6.5 creed.

 

[Andouille]

Consider the 168 ttsx. It's actually the original LRX bullet and has a lower expansion threshold than other 30cal ttsx bullets. Should be great out to 600y.

That may be an oversimplified generalization and perhaps misleading. I've read and heard otherwise in recent podcasts interviewing Barnes employees. My understanding is that the Barnes X lead to the TTX, then TTSX, and the latter was re-designed as the LRX with a longer ogive and lower opening velocity (1,600 fps) than the 168 TTSX (1,800 fps). The re-design seems substantial enough that the LRX is a distinctly different bullet.

I don't see any reason to go with 168TTSX with a lower BC and higher opening speed over a 175 LRX for 300 WSM. The LRX will not have any COAL magazine sizing issues even when seated fairly far out of the case, I've tested this in my Tikka. If you're going to burn WSM quantities of powder, then might as well shoot a bullet with a longer effective range to make the most of it.

LRX is discussed at 15:50 min

 

[Packmansion]

Lower velocity expansion gives you a lot more range and better performance.

 

[ElkSnort]

That may be an oversimplified generalization and perhaps misleading. I've read and heard otherwise in recent podcasts interviewing Barnes employees. My understanding is that the Barnes X lead to the TTX, then TTSX, and the latter was re-designed as the LRX with a longer ogive and lower opening velocity (1,600 fps) than the 168 TTSX (1,800 fps). The re-design seems substantial enough that the LRX is a distinctly different bullet.

I don't see any reason to go with 168TTSX with a lower BC and higher opening speed over a 175 LRX for 300 WSM. The LRX will not have any COAL magazine sizing issues even when seated fairly far out of the case, I've tested this in my Tikka. If you're going to burn WSM quantities of powder, then might as well shoot a bullet with a longer effective range to make the most of it.

LRX is discussed at 15:50 min

I only suggested the 168 because Jaegerr was concerned about keeping velocity in a short barrel. I do get the higher bc of the 175 lrx.

Maybe it's an over simplification... but I got that explanation regarding the 168ttsx directly from a Barnes employee at the hunt expo. So if my info is incorrect, it's because that's what he told me.

 

[Packmansion]

I only suggested the 168 because Jaegerr was concerned about keeping velocity in a short barrel. I do get the higher bc of the 175 lrx.

Maybe it's an over simplification... but I got that explanation regarding the 168ttsx directly from a Barnes employee at the hunt expo. So if my info is incorrect, it's because that's what he told me.

I have heard the same thing from others that the 168 ttsx was the first LRX. While Ogive might be improved on what is actually considered LRX I have been told the minimum expansion velocity of the 168 ttsx was 1500 or 1600. The 168 was designed for 30-06 and 308 hence the lower expansion velocity of coarse add at least 200 fps for copper.

 

[Jaegerr]

I have heard the same thing from others that the 168 ttsx was the first LRX. While Ogive might be improved on what is actually considered LRX I have been told the minimum expansion velocity of the 168 ttsx was 1500 or 1600. The 168 was designed for 30-06 and 308 hence the lower expansion velocity of coarse add at least 200 fps for copper.

I’ve heard some conflicting opening speeds. I found a forum where someone got it straight from the horses mouth. I’ve seen a number of combinations of 300 WSM 20” barrels running the 175 between 2900-3000. At sea level I should be at 1900~ out to 600 yards and at 500 and in I’m above 2000 FPS. Hell, I may just load both bullets and see which one shoots better!

 

[Andouille]

Discussion of TTSX velocities shows a reply from Barnes stating that the 168 TTSX minimum velocity is 1,500 fps. That is an overly optimistic value based on a lot of recovered bullets posted online- just do a Google search and you're unlikely to see anyone happy with expansion at <1,800 fps. Many users post that 2000 fps is the minimum velocity to achieve good expansion, most might consider this 1.5x bullet diameter. This video from Frontline Rejects shows poor expansion at 500 yds into water jugs (yes, it's not flesh) which should be about 1,800 fps based on their muzzle velocity of 2,666.

Personally, I have recovered a 168TTSX with what I consider barely adequate expansion from a caribou I shot at only 243 yds. Bullet diameter was 0.485" (1.57x bullet diameter). Impact velocity was approximately 2,340 fps. The bullet passed in and out of the neck and lodged in the back quarter (front quartering shot from downhill) so it had plenty of tissue and bone to travel through.

I see no reason to shoot 168TTSX when 175LRX are available if the LRX shoots well out of your gun- this is my personal opinion and you are free to disagree, but please consider the following. My 30-06 had higher muzzle velocities with the factory 175 LRX load (2,823 fps) and the ballistic coefficient of the LRX (0.508) is appreciably higher than for a 168 TTSX (0.470). Those factors combined with the similar opening velocity of "1,500 fps" (per Barnes in this thread and as discussed in video I linked above) provide sufficient data for me to consider the LRX a superior bullet. The only caveat I can think of for the LRX is that it is a little longer than the TTSX and therefore may not fit shorter magazines without seating deep into the case. Assuming expansion is similar between both bullets upon impact at a given speed, I'd rather have 7 grains more mass behind the bullet.

For some hard numbers, we can plug my muzzle velocities into the Vortex Long Range Ballistics Calculator at standard atmospheric conditions and 0 ft elevation we see a slight velocity (62fps) and energy (160 fpe) advantage to the LRX, which begins to pull ahead increasingly with distance, especially with crosswinds.

168 ttsx 2,816 fps muzzle velocity, 0.470 BC
450 yds - 2002 fps - 8.6 MOA drop - 1,495 foot pounds energy

175 LRX 2,823 fps muzzle velocity, 0.508 BC
450 yards - 2064 FPS - 8.3 MOA drop - 1,655 foot pounds energy

Note that I stop at 450yds as that maintains a velocity >2,000 FPS which I personally consider necessary for sufficient expansion for these bullets.

I now shoot 175LRX from my 20" WSM at ~2,960 fps, giving me a 2,000 fps velocity out to just over 575 yds. Plenty for my needs. My 30-06 now sports a 18" barrel and shoots 150 CX at ~2,910 fps.

 

[Tricer]

Consider the 168 ttsx. It's actually the original LRX bullet and has a lower expansion threshold than other 30cal ttsx bullets. Should be great out to 600y.

my favorite bullet