Barnes Match Burner bullets

[AccelR8]

Any updates on the 145s? They were a train wreck for me out of 1:8, but 140s are outstanding. 8.4 to 1k, 11.3 to 1200 and managed a 1st and 2nd round hit on the 1500 IPSC last week. Definitely making the total switch over from Hornady BTHP Match right around 900 is where the Barnes leaves it in the dust.

Mini-report; shot the rounds loaded as described in the last paragraph of post #33.

Results were not spectacular. I haven't crunched numbers yet but velocities look fairly consistent. Extreme spreads not too big. The best groups, .010” jam and .040” jump, were .9 MOA and the worst group was 1.5 MOA.

I may play with jumps in the zero to .040” range, I don't know. I have about 140 or 150 of these bullets remaining.

Something I've noticed; I've never seen copper in a barrel like these things leave behind. In this rifle I've shot Nosler, Sierra, and Hornady and never seen more than very light copper deposits (with the 50-dollar-wonder bore scope) after many rounds...maybe a hundred...cleaning patches come out a pale green if anything. But these Barnes, heavy-heavy copper after 40 rounds and cleaning patches bright, vivid green. I know Hornady says they use a gilding metal jacket, which would be a copper-zinc alloy. I don't know about the others. It makes me wonder what's different about the Barnes, is it the alloy used or maybe it's pure copper they use for their jackets. It would be interesting to find out.

 

[chootem]

Interesting on the copper I've not noticed any difference from ELDM/Hornady BTHP that I typically shot b/f the Barnes. I also don't clean much about every 5-6 trips b/t 50-75/trip. Actually cleaned last trip and it only took a few patches, brush pass, couple more to finish out....didn't notice any copper fouling....will keep en eye on it though. Sorry the 145's didn't perform.

 

[Monday shooter40]

I'm not putting the barnes 145 MB bullet down by any means, but I have 2 rifles that will not stabilize this bullet. Both are 8 twist 24" barrels in 6.5 CM. I've run it up to 2700 fps with no luck. I had high hopes. Just my experiences here in Florida.

 

[chop house]

When I opened the first box of Match Burners I weighed ten of them and measured base-to-ogive of the same ten. The extreme spread for weight on those ten was .35 gr. and the standard deviation was .12. Average weight was 145.1 gr. The b.t.o. measurement averaged .752 inch. The b.to. SD was .003 and the ES was .008.

Something I've never done before; I measured the base to ogive for an entire box of 100 and sorted them into 3 groups, just for fun. The shortest b.t.o. was .747" (only one in the box) and the longest was .755", again only one. All the others fell within the range of .748" to .754". Probably 70% of them were between .748" and .750".

i shot some 6mm match burners in a 6x45 and liked them. therefore i wanted to try .224 52 grain bullets. none to be found for months.... then i finally got a box off gb (sealed) and loaded a quick seating ladder in my .222. i could not get consistent coal and first blamed the seating stem. targets were at the least inconclusive and at most confusing. then, i pulled out the surface plate and was shocked... shocked i say!

the bullets were two distinctly different bto... by 0.010" 'exactly'. of the remaining 80 in the box 12 were 0.010 shorter than the (?) norm. imho if you are loading near the lands and not sorting these bullets, you're spinning your wheels.

and, like i said, i was happy enough with the 68 grain bullets in 6mm to wait a long time to get 52's. i had no reason to doubt. now, i need to go back and check those lots i suppose....

 

[grendellvr55]

Well, maybe I am reading this wrong but here is the statement from Barnes website:

When selecting the cartridge overall length (COAL) we recommend starting with a minimum “jump” of .050” off of the lands. You can test different seating depths and find a “sweet spot” that your particular firearm prefers. We suggest working in at least .025” increments as follows seating the bullet deeper to allow a further jump. Your test plan could look something like this:

1st group- .050” jump
2nd group- .075” jump
3rd group- .100” jump
4th group- .125” jump
5th group- .150“ jump
6th group- * see below

This length can be determined by using a “Stoney Point Gauge” or other methods. You do not have to seat the bullet at, or on one of the cannelure rings. Remember there are many factors that may control or limit the seating depth for your application. You may find that you need to start at around 0.150” off the lands and are not able to get any closer due to limiting factors including proper neck tension and magazine length.

*In rifles that have long throats you may be limited on how close you are able to get the bullet to the lands. In these instances, it is not uncommon to find the best accuracy with a jump of .200” or more.

YA THEYRE JUMPERS, DEPENDS ON RIFLE AND BARREL BUT IN MINE I FOUND .055 WORKED BEST FOR ME

 

[grendellvr55]

Thanks for your input. After 3 years of 6.5 and 6mm CM shooting I have settled on H4350 and 40.5 with the Hornady's 140 (6.5) and 105 (6mm). Bergers and Sierra's just didn't work for me and gave me close results as the Barnes did.

Haven't measured the weight and length of the bullets. Just got them and loaded up 24 rounds to see how they did.

As i said before I was not impressed with the results but also have not really tested them with just this first try. I was kinda hoping for the Magic bullet with the higher BC than what I am using now and the A-MAX bullets are out of productions and i am running low on them. Was looking for a replacement.

I guess my next try will be on the 300-600 yd range to see if maybe they will stabilize on longer shots.

I was hoping that some one has been using these and found the sweet spot on velocity. I am close to your FPS, maybe just a bump on the powder will help.

THE 140S ARE AWESOME BUT REQUIRE .040 JUMP MINIMUM. I LOAD MINE TO 2.80 AND SHOOT BUG HOLES WITH 41.8 GR OF R-16

 

[grendellvr55]

I THINK THE 145'S ARE BETTER SUITED TO THE 6.5 PRC, THEY PERFORM WELL AT 2950 AND WILL REACH OVER A MILE SUPERSONIC. THE JUMP REQUIREMENT DOSENT ALLOW ENOUGH POWDER IN A CREED CASE TO MAKE IT WORK OPTIMALLY. THE 140 ARE VERY GOOD BTW AND SHOULD NOT BE OVERLOOKED.

 

[Ernest T]

I've gotten good results loading 140 Grain Barnes Match Burners to the lands in my Savage 6.5 CM. I hand load them because at 2.300 CBTO, the COAL is over 2.920 and way too long for a magazine.

 

[mauser284]

When looking at all of this it seems like you guys in general make a lot of assumptions and expect reality to reflect your beliefs.

I think to many of you guys burn through componets and barrels being too incremental. I start out at 0.020 off the lands. I move in 0.010 increments longer and shorter and see what I see. Then I make powder adjestments. Depending onwhere I start on the load I make 1-2 grain adjustment and see what I see. Only after I see what the trending data is do I try to dial in on the absolute sweet spot.

You do not need to move 1/4 of a grain at a time from the word go and you do not need to make jump adjestments in such small amounts initial. It would be like putting 1/2 of the volume of oil your car or truck requires and then adjusting oil level only once up to operating temp 1oz. at a time until at the full mark only a moron would change their oil that way. Sure you will get there in the end but what why waste time and energy doing it that way???

I laugh at times when I hear about some guys weighting cases or bullets to the extreme they do knowning that the scales they are using are not accurate enough to do what it is they are attempting to do. Knowing how large the noise floor is on the gear they are using reguardless of the price they paid for it!

I routinely use analytical scales that need to run for at least 24 hours minimum before you can use them with any accuracy or use occilators tied to GPS satalites where the longer they run continiously as in months, years, decades the more accurate they become. Precision and the pursuit of it is grate but it becomes a fools foly when you do not know the limitation and variance of the measuring equipment you are using. All of you guys with your gear that is not even certified by any governing body and would not stand up in a court of law or in any scientific journal worth a darn! All of my gear had to be certified anually to be used in a court of law as an expert witness!

The actual numbers most of the elite toss about as almost stupid when you know the limitations of the gear they are using compared to the numbers they are tossing about. What is not a waste of time is the attention to detail and the attempt to control all variables. I think though that ignorance is bliss and a lot of the elite are in a state of bliss not understanding the limits of the tools they are using! Attention to detail, having a solid routine that you always do over and over again and rechecking all of your work pays off more than any actual belief in the numbers you are generating. Repeatability is the result of of a consistent routine and attention to details!

This is the reasons we see so much variation in loads, velocities, SD, extreme spreads from one person tot he next even if they are getting similar results on target. That is why we have all seen loads that on paper should suck but down range just plain produce the results we want. Likewise we have all seen loads that look fantastic when looking at the numbers but do not produce results down range. On the other hand we also see a patern where most match grade barrels with a match grade reamer assembled by a really good machinist or gunsmith will all like a similar load with usually not more than 1gr of powder plus or minus some magic number like with the 6BR.

At the end of the day all that matter is what shoots great in your rifle. Chasing precision is fine just make sure yo do not fall into the cult of magic this that or the other. It is fine to start with a norm but at the end of the day you need to let the target tell you what is true not your belief structure!