270 LRX in 375 Ruger on game up to Buffalo

[hoytcanon]

I understand your thought process however I disagree comparing it to an Accu bond LR. The reason for this is cup and core bullets operate on a completely different philosophy/physics. The Barnes bullets, regardless of when they open will always penetrate deep. I don’t think a bullet can open “too soon“, when it penetrates over 30 inches into animal or ballistic gel. just my two cents. In gel testing the LRX and TSX/TTSX open up right about at the same distance, the only difference being the LRX will reliably do it at lower velocities where the TSX becomes basically an FMJ past 2-300 yards for a velocities we are talking about in these medium/large bore rifles.

I am not comparing the bullet construction of the LRX to the LRAB, I am comparing the design philosophy. Both were created to expand at lower velocity, ergo, over expansion at higher velocity, that is physics. Since you are not hunting buffalo at long range, use a bullet that has a stouter nature to deal with the stouter animal and higher velocity impacts.

 

[generalzip]

I am not comparing the bullet construction of the LRX to the LRAB, I am comparing the design philosophy. Both were created to expand at lower velocity, ergo, over expansion at higher velocity, that is physics. Since you are not hunting buffalo at long range, use a bullet that has a stouter nature to deal with the stouter animal and higher velocity impacts.

Have you seen a Barnes bullet “over expand”. I guess that’s my point. If it’s not shedding all its pedals and still penetrates adequately and more than any cup and core bullet, what’s the downside except increased disruption in the vitals (4-16”)?

 

[hoytcanon]

Have you seen a Barnes bullet “over expand”. I guess that’s my point. If it’s not shedding all its pedals and still penetrates adequately and more than any cup and core bullet, what’s the downside except increased disruption in the vitals (4-16”)?

Why did Barnes create the LRX? So it expands at lower velocity but doesn't expand sooner, it defies physics with a sprinkle of pixie dust... you are right, I'm switching to the LRX.

 

[generalzip]

Why did Barnes create the LRX? So it expands at lower velocity but doesn't expand sooner, it defies physics with a sprinkle of pixie dust... you are right, I'm switching to the LRX.

Not trying to stir an argument. Genuinely trying to understand your position and perhaps I’m ignorant to something. When I spoke to the Barnes rep they mentioned nothing about poor performance at higher velocities so I’m genuinely curious if you’ve seen reported failures of the LRX at higher velocities and closer ranges. I could understand this in a 300 Norma mag or something when the bullet is leaving the muzzle at 3100+ fps but most Africa rifles are shooting under 2800 at the muzzle some much less where I don’t see failure of an LRX a valid concern. If you have field evidence of this I’d love to know!

 

[Philip Glass]

Asked Barnes if the 170 LRX is adequate for use on Cape Buffalo. Below is their response:

" Over on the 24 Hour Campfire.com forum, RickBin, the owner has posted his “now” preference for the 270 gr LRX in his 375’s. He’s taken a multitude of Cape Buffalo with many 375 cal bullets. I’d have zero issues giving the go ahead for the 270 gr LRX in your Ruger for Cape Buffalo. Both the 270 and 300 gr TSX’s have an impeccable reputation for all the big game you intend to hunt. "

Based on this I've chosen it to be the bullet I will use for all of Africa hunting from plains game up to cape buffalo. A single load is a lot better and easier than worrying about changing Zero. It's also got good BC and penetrates well and holds together allowing further shots to be more accurate on PG and still adequate for DG.

Anyone have any load data? I have RL16, 4831SC, Varget, and IMR 4064. Trying to obtain around 2750-2800 with this bullet.

It's is what I shoot out of my .375 Ruger. I Do prefer my double for buffalo however.

 

[hoytcanon]

Not trying to stir an argument. Genuinely trying to understand your position and perhaps I’m ignorant to something. When I spoke to the Barnes rep they mentioned nothing about poor performance at higher velocities so I’m genuinely curious if you’ve seen reported failures of the LRX at higher velocities and closer ranges. I could understand this in a 300 Norma mag or something when the bullet is leaving the muzzle at 3100+ fps but most Africa rifles are shooting under 2800 at the muzzle some much less where I don’t see failure of an LRX a valid concern. If you have field evidence of this I’d love to know!

You cannot have it both ways... physics is a thing. If you design a bullet to expand at lower velocity, it will expand more rapidly at higher velocity, if it expands more rapidly, it will penetrate LESS.
The question then becomes, does it penetrate "enough." I can't answer that, but were it me, I would be maximizing the margins for success, not intentionally choosing a component that is working against the objective. You can decide what you want to do with that, I wish you luck.

 

[generalzip]

It's is what I shoot out of my .375 Ruger. I Do prefer my double for buffalo however.

I wish I could afford a double… happy for you to have both

 

[generalzip]

You cannot have it both ways... physics is a thing. If you design a bullet to expand at lower velocity, it will expand more rapidly at higher velocity, if it expands more rapidly, it will penetrate LESS.
The question then becomes, does it penetrate "enough." I can't answer that, but were it me, I would be maximizing the margins for success, not intentionally choosing a component that is working against the objective. You can decide what you want to do with that, I wish you luck.

I’d implore you to look at gel tests of these two bullets. The difference in distance of expansion is only like 2”. Assuming they expand to the same size (like all Barnes bullets typically do fairly consistently) you only be looks at 2” less penetration all other things equal (velocity, twist rate, etc). I’d happily give up 2” of penetration for more consistent and reliable expansion especially at further dinstances. This should in theory at least make the 270 LRX a one bullet Africa load for any game you would encounter. Would do more trauma on the thinner skinner animals but still provide adequate penetration for the big game.

 

[hoytcanon]

I’d implore you to look at gel tests of these two bullets. The difference in distance of expansion is only like 2”. Assuming they expand to the same size (like all Barnes bullets typically do fairly consistently) you only be looks at 2” less penetration all other things equal (velocity, twist rate, etc). I’d happily give up 2” of penetration for more consistent and reliable expansion especially at further dinstances. This should in theory at least make the 270 LRX a one bullet Africa load for any game you would encounter. Would do more trauma on the thinner skinner animals but still provide adequate penetration for the big game.

Sure, give it a go... and hopefully report back, rather than the walk of shame. Good luck.

 

[DLSJR]

I’m planning to try that bullet in mine as well. Once I can acquire more brass I’m planning to start load development.

Quality Cartridge just made a bunch of .375 H&H brass. Ask for Pete and he will get you taken care of.

 

[generalzip]

Quality Cartridge just made a bunch of .375 H&H brass. Ask for Pete and he will get you taken care of.

This thread is about the 375 ruger which brass is non existent for at the moment. I had to buy Hornady ammo to get some

 

[pilar]

I’d implore you to look at gel tests of these two bullets. The difference in distance of expansion is only like 2”. Assuming they expand to the same size (like all Barnes bullets typically do fairly consistently) you only be looks at 2” less penetration all other things equal (velocity, twist rate, etc). I’d happily give up 2” of penetration for more consistent and reliable expansion especially at further dinstances. This should in theory at least make the 270 LRX a one bullet Africa load for any game you would encounter. Would do more trauma on the thinner skinner animals but still provide adequate penetration for the big game.

Yep! Both are designed to expand to +/- 2x of the diameter and retention of 90-100% of the weight, LRX @ approximately 400fps slower, ( 1600fps vs 2000) , both are adequate for Bovine at +/- 2000fps distance’s, , imo the 375 is marginal on provoked bovine, but is a happy medium caliber for medium to large game , the 350gr TSX in a faster, properly twisted format to stabilize them is better medicine! ( but that is a different discussion) , since a mono metal preform better at slightly lower weights and barns agrees the 270gr LRX is appropriate in a 375 for buffalo , run it. Or consider talking with your PH to get their opinion.

 

[baxterb]

If anyone recognizes the Walterhog bullets they will know that they almost invariably lose every petal (over-expansion?) and kill everything they are put into.