Elk Bullets - LRX vs HHT

[HydroMT]

Thanks for the feedback! I take it with that performance, never tried the Hammers or any other Monos?

I haven't tried the Hammers so I can't comment on them. A lot of my friends use them and I haven't heard anything negative about them. For other mono metal bullets, I have tried the Hornady CX, Hornady GMX, and Nosler E-tip. I suspect all three provide good terminal performance but my rifles shoot the LRX significantly better.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Gun to the head, LRX. Barnes gets actual BC from a 300 yd indoor range. There's an article somewhere showing advertised versus actual BC and Barnes is consistent as anyone. Keep in mind an individual rifle is not going to be exact to any manufacturer claim, but some manufacturers are better than others. Barnes being one that I feel is living up to what they claim.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Manufacturers that use drops at their specific location, don't do favors to anyone, IMO. Like putting a hot rod car on the dynamometer and bragging it makes XXX horsepower and XXX torque. How does it work at my 7200 ft of elevation versus the sea level that it was tested at that have favorable conditions? Numbers will be so different as to be irrelevant. However, if ballistic coefficient is calculated from flight time which Barnes does, then atmospheric conditions can be accounted for and not guessed at.

 

[armiller1991]

@35WhelenAI,
Those are great points. On paper, the 160 LRX are a bit better in BC than the 162 HHT. If the HHT I underperform estimates, that widens that gap. I know you need to true/confirm BC yourself, but there something to be said about a mfg providing actual, measured numbers.
I like high BC due to wind deflection (my biggest hunting enemy) and and retained velocity downrange (especially critical with Monos).
Thank you!

 

[Yoteassasin]

Gun to your head, you have to choose one.. LRX or Hammer?

Well that's aggressive ... ha . They are currently equal . Infact I run GMX in my 243 and wont waver there either. I just found a load that works really well in my gun and I don't have the appetite to develop more loads than I need. I will however say the hammers are slicker . Meaning you get more speed out of them and you don't have to jump them to get them to imprint the lands like you do the others . So if I was forced to start over while knowing what I know I would start with hammers for all 3

 

[SDHNTR]

I’ve shot both extensively. I’ll shoot whichever is more accurate in a gun. I HATE installing the tips on the HHT and view that as a significant negative, and the misleading BS about their tipping machine almost being ready for a year or more. And yes their BC’s are inflated. That said, they are incredibly effective and super easy to load for.

No flies on the LRX either, I’ve just had a few barrels that didn’t want to shoot them as well.

 

[armiller1991]

Thanks for the feedback!
I have a 7prc

The sample 162 HHT shot amazing.

I ended up handloading the 160 lrx. They shot well, had higher (and more trusted) bc and I am getting about 3100fps in my 22 inch barrel.


I took the lrx it to Wyoming and shot a bull at about 120 yards. Bull went about 20 yards, tons of blood. Bullet had big entrance and small exit. Pedals all shed and looks like the bullet passed through. Destroyed heart, lungs and slightly peppered the back shoulder. Seems like due to high impact velocity the LRX performed like the HHT is designed.

I'm having a little sticky bolt I can't diagnose, so I think I'm going to try the HHT again. I was happy with the terminal performance.

 

[35WhelenAI]

The above post goes with the general consensus the LRX sheds pedals at higher velocity and shorter range impact. Been shooting Barnes since 1994. Wish list would be 200 gr LRX in .358 for the Whelen/AI. 200 TTSX is superb as it is to 350-400 yds, LRX would only make it more effective. Been perplexed the .358 225 TSX is in the lineup. No better BC vs 200 TTSX, can't be pushed as fast (100-150 fps advantage to 200 TTSX with many powders based on my work), and quicker initial expansion from experience on lighter game such as muleys/whitetails vs 200 or 225 TSX. On elk, 200 TTSX is the holy grail, IMO.

 

[magnum44270]

140maker Trex in my 280ai at 3150. Impact on an antelope at 90yds 137.5g retention, stayed intact no petal shear.
They make a 150 that would do great in your 7prc. Or the 152lrx
If you can keep the 160 lrx above 3100 you should be good out to 600yds

 

[magnum44270]

Gun to your head, you have to choose one.. LRX or Hammer?

Maker T-rex

 

[Howard94]

I would stay away from Hammers. I have never shot them but almost everything I have seen and heard has been negative or speculative. Mainly, real-world reports show their advertised BC’s don’t match actual BC’s when tested and they are not consistent when shooting game.

I don’t shoot the LRX but wouldn’t hesitate too. It is proven on game at this point and I don’t see a dark cloud surrounding them.

 

[SDHNTR]

I would stay away from Hammers. I have never shot them but almost everything I have seen and heard has been negative or speculative. Mainly, real-world reports show their advertised BC’s don’t match actual BC’s when tested and they are not consistent when shooting game.

I don’t shoot the LRX but wouldn’t hesitate too. It is proven on game at this point and I don’t see a dark cloud surrounding them.

One of the dumber things I’ve heard, ever.

 

[Howard94]

One of the dumber things I’ve heard, ever.

Sorry you feel that way. A quick Google search will lead you to many more people who share the same concerns I do.

 

[35WhelenAI]

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Sorry you feel that way. A quick Google search will lead you to many more people who share the same concerns I do.

The internet loves to post mostly the negatives on everything made ever. Don’t judge or toss out opinions unless you actually have the experience. And one kill doesn’t mean anything. If a guy shot 20 elk with a certain bullet then I start listening, IMO.

 

[SDHNTR]

Sorry you feel that way. A quick Google search will lead you to many more people who share the same concerns I do.

I don’t need Google pal, I’ve killed dozens of truckloads of game with them.

 

[Howard94]

The internet loves to post mostly the negatives on everything made ever. Don’t judge or toss out opinions unless you actually have the experience. And one kill doesn’t mean anything. If a guy shot 20 elk with a certain bullet then I start listening, IMO.

I agree. I just decided to stay away from them. Looks like the OP found success so at the end of the day it all panned out.

 

[Howard94]

I don’t need Google pal, I’ve killed dozens of truckloads of game with them.

Ok

 

[TrevN]

I absolutely love the HHT go a little lighter weight and more speed and you won't be disappointed!!! Are they more expensive yes, but they will work better and more accurate them the Barnes at least in my experiences!!! I shoot the 220 HHT in my 338 ultra and it's death by lightning !!!!

 

[Caseknife]

I'm kind of old school, I don't judge until I experience it myself.

I have only shot mono's for 40 years, have no problem with either Barnes nor Hammers. I do drop down in weight considerably. My 20" 7PRC shoots the 140 AH at 3300. Probably have 15 different rifles that shoot mono's, majority are Barnes, but have switched a few to Hammers. One load that kind of surprised me was my XP100 7BR, switched to 67 Stone Hammers, 3200 fps out of a 15" barrel. Haven't shot anything with it yet, but I am sure it will do just fine.