8.6blk- Barnes 185gr TTSX, Minimum Velocity Expansion Test in Clear Ballistics Gel Block.

[@e.l.robbins5614]

Thank you for your videos. Looking forward to the rest of this series. I have a Q Fix in 8 inch version. I know what a 210 grn Barnes supersonic does to deer. I will reserve my comments, because of some of the posts by your viewers that are not shooting an 8.6 Blackout.

[@PeteMiller]

Those results are very interesting! I'll be watching for the 210TSX results, as I have a few boxes of those that I'll be using to dial in the AGB on my 8.6BLK SBR for supersonic rounds (whilst I await my suppressor approval).

[@PatriotPaulUSA]

Looks like the Barnes TTSX is a great Supersonic bullet but a no go for subs as we imagined. There are many other options for big heavy subs that expand. Pretty interesting to see that below 2000fps its not gonna expand. Nice job!

[@markminer7390]

Definitely interesting. I would think if Barnes offered an "easier expansion" engineered version of the TTSX (internal groves inside where the tip goes, or widen the channel and have a larger core on the tip) these would work better at lower velocities. Hard to get down into the subsonic range with the weights Barnes offers, but would be nice to have more distance with what they do.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@markminer7390 agreed. I’m waiting on one of the big manufacturers to offer a new all copper supersonic bullet design for this 3R twist.

[@Snailz5]

They have the Tac-TX line for the 300 blk and the Grendel that expand reliably in the 1400’s. Now the 33 ARC is out, they might expand their lineup. 8.6 blk is too much of a black sheep cartridge for many big manufacturers to fuss with, but with the big red marketing machine pumping out a very similar cartridge, the bullets may start rolling out. Maker bullets makes low velocity monos that do well in 8.6 blk.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ I’m running the Rex 350gr in subs but the spin will open the petals up prematurely if pushed much faster than sub velocities. I haven’t looked at their other offerings for super loads yet.

[@nikos6220]

Great test. So bottom line, fast twist helps somewhat with expansion but it doesn’t change coppers need for speed. If I shoot TTSX, 2200 ft/s is my magic number for determining the max range. E.g. for my 30-06 150 that’s 340 yards.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@nikos6220 actually, 2,000 fps was the breakpoint for definite expansion. Expansion became questionable between 1,995fps and 1,898fps on the chart at the end. 😉

[@nikos6220]

@ 200 fts insurance sounds about right. Plus I still think the fast twist should help with expansion. So my 30-06 1:10 might need more speed. Btw if you really want to get down that rabbit hole, finding a slow 338 cartridge with a 1:10 twist and loading it to 1950 fts would solve that puzzle

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ i’m going to do this test with a few more bullets when I get time. I’m not convinced the 3R twist is helping with expansion, possibly even hindering it. that’s what more testing will attempt to figure out. 😉

[@Snailz5]

Different weights have different designs. If you’re shooting the factory 150gr load, you can go way lower since that bullet is designed to expand down to 1500 fps. The reloading bullet is designed to expand down to 2000 fps. I’d recommend the 168gr or 175gr LRX since those are the same bullet between factory and reloading bullets. The 168gr is designed to expand at 1500 and the 175 1600. 2200 fps impact will work for all, but if you reload the 150gr you can get better expansion by bumping up grain weight since the impact velocity vs minimum threshold vs velocity loss at the muzzle pretty much always favors the 168 and 175 over the 150. But at the end of the day, if you have a load and it shoots and you have no desire to shoot further, then keep on keepin on and happy hunting.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ I have a box of 250LRX but haven’t loaded any yet. Not enough time in my days. Lol

[@venatici-canes3293]

Hello I’m John I met you today at Tractor Supply. I messaged Kentucky Ballistics to try and get you two on a video together to do Kentucky roulette on his channel hopefully he sees it. He has responded to me before. You should also try and get in touch with him if you want to blow your channel up

[@allthingsconsidered3211]

a 480k rpm, .169 radius gives you 708fps angular velocity. (2000 fps 1-3 twist 8.6 blk) a 1-8 (338 arc @ 2k fps) gives you 266fps angular velocity. you can calculate angular velocity to see if it hits the 2k fps to give you an idea of what combo of angular and linear velocity gives you results. weve relied on 1-8 and 2k fps for reliable expansion, 1-3 and 1900 fps might be the results but id be curious on how a slower twist performs

[@bigracer3867]

8.6 is a bomb when it hit something🎉🎉 awesome is the word🎉🎉yea going to get a 338Arc too🎉🎉😂😂. Can use lead core with subsonic loads. Bit cheaper🎉🎉. Been loading 338 projectiles for 30 years🎉🎉 greal caliber🎉🎉

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@bigracer3867 Still undecided on the .338ARC. I’m in pretty deep on dies, brass and gauges for 8.6 so unless I see something to convert me over I’ll just keep watching. Lol

[@ravissary79]

Yeah i have a hard time imagining the 338 sub-x is nearly as good as the 8.6 subsonic hunting loads​@@kentuckyrangetime But it's possible you could load maker Rex 300 gr subs designed for 338 spectre in them. Those would perform beautifully if they can be loaded. For a supersonic load, the 160 gr maker copper monolithic expanders as well as the Barnes 165 gr bullets would probably do great. Lehigh used to have a light weight 338 chaos load with a long aluminum tip that was incompatible with 8.6 because it couldn't handle high spin. But it's in their old library. You could probably special order a large batch custom since the R&D is all done already. It would be a savage defense loading.

[@jmb5543]

Not a physicist but I believe the rotational velocity does not slow down as fast as the forward velocity. Just look at the vids of people shooting bullets into ice that keep spinning after the bullet has stopped. I think you need to start them all at your top velocity and hit the gel at longer distance to get valid results.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@jmb5543 I agree that would be a much better test but there’s way too many variables with this caliber, for me, to shoot a 6x6 block at those longer distances. Getting a clean bullet catch would be difficult.

[@Snailz5]

You just explanation contradicts your conclusion. The rotational energy is functionally conserved throughout the trajectory therefore lower starting velocity should approximately mimic longer range impacts. RPM is much more a function of twist than starting velocity. There is some loss, but it doesn’t seem like it should matter. Plus, I’ve seen videos testing the same bullet at various velocities and twist and there was little difference between 1-10 and 1-8, which is likely a larger difference than 1-3 with 200-300 fps muzzle velocity difference. Unless there is some hard threshold where rotational energy overcomes some resisting force holding the bullet together or keeping tissues in tact, this degree of difference shouldn’t matter. Now that threshold could very well be a thing in some instances, but not for this particular bullet that was designed for supersonic applications and normal twist rates.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ I’m still pondering the possibilities, considering the viewer comments and trying to draw conclusions. Barnes said this bullet should open up to 1.7x down to 1,700fps. I’m sure the rotational energy would expedite expansion once the petals start opening up but now I’m also wondering if somehow the fast spin at the tip of the bullet, where the centrifugal force is much less, is influencing it’s normal expansion process? 🤔

[@ravissary79]

I'm genuinely shocked this did so poorly. But seeing this reminds me of something I've heard Q, possibly Kevin himself, say early on: After testing they didn't like TTSXs, only TSXs. That's why the earliest loads were: 1)- 300 gr subsonic Sierra matchkings as a target load 2)- 210 gr Barnes TSX for a supersonic hunting load, reportedly heavily tested in Africa on all kinds of things at lots if different ranges. But it's typically slower than initially advertised.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@ravissary79 I wondered about the TSX but had already picked up the sampling of TTSX. Yet another fork on the path I’ll probably end up investing. 😉

[@ravissary79]

@kentuckyrangetime part of why I was so curious about this experiment: the TTSXs have MUCH better BCs, the 210 gr TSX has terrible BC for its general profile/length. The 8.6 has an overabundance of space for a high BC ogive, but it seems it has a lot going against it to maje good use of it unless manufacturers step up and engineer more bullets that fit this form factor better, but expand at the ideal speeds and twist rates provided. Hypothetically, you'd think you could get a 185gr bullet MADE for this cartridge, to go over 2000 fps, maybe 2100, and have a high BC so it retains velocity and expands from 2400 down to 1600 so it performs at maximum ranges and different bbl lengths. Development has been so slow. Thank God for Gorilla and Maker. Lehigh and CE and Hammer need to step up. Barnes makes the 210, but the profile is wrong. They should redesign it as a 205 gr with a much better BC and improved loading/feeding/expanding. CE does make a 200 gr MTH that would likely work, but I've not seen anyone test it online. I bought a batch of 225gr "lazer" bullets but I've never used them, their bullets often require special techniques to handle properly and I never made the leap and got busy. (That's my excuse).

[@nikos6220]

In the series - what turns a Barnes into a 8.6 copper solid - I wouldn’t be able to help myself and try the 250 LRX next

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@nikos6220 The LRX is a copper solid. I have some on the shelf, just haven’t loaded them yet. 😉

[@nikos6220]

@@kentuckyrangetime that sounds promising, would love to see what that tipped expanding copper wonder thing would do 😁. If I remember correctly your 225 topped out at about 1800. so if the the softer LRX gets expansion down to 1600 it might be worthwhile

[@PatriotPaulUSA]

Im still not convinced that the 1 in 3 twist gives us more energy on target than say a 1 in 7 . I believe it takes power to make that bullet spin that fast that may be better used in forward momentum. I hope to get a slower twist 8.6 Blk barrel someday to check. We will see in the future someday. I cant be the only one to imagine this.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@PatriotPaulUSA good point. I can see the advantage of the added rotational velocity with the big expansion of the sub bullets like the REX and still getting 25” of expansion but the advantage may very well be lost on the supers, especially if they’re not expanding.

[@edwardlance2379]

Don't be convinced, because it doesn't. I got into this argument some time back. Understand it was based on Kevin Brittingham's claims that the 8.6 Blk puts more energy on target from a 12" barrel than a 308 does from a 20" barrel (he claims it on his video). Unfortunately for him, the math doesn't math. Bullet energy is calculated as FPS x FPS x Bullet weight in grains divided by 450,240 = energy in ft-lbs. In other words, "muzzle energy" is translational energy only (i.e. horizontal velocity and weight). Rotational energy is not part of the equation...however...I have done the math to calculate rotational energy based on the twist rates for 8.6 Blk (1:3) vs 308 (1:12) and taking into account a bullet weight for the 8.6 of 185 grains and velocity of 2200 FPS vs 308 with a 168 grain bullet at 2700 FPS. Calculating the rotational speed based on the given twist rates, the 8.6 Blk provides approximately 32 ft-lbs of rotational energy. The 168 grain 308 projectile is around 9 ft-lbs of rotational energy. Now, muzzle energy for a 168 grain bullet at 2700 FPS is 2719 ft-lbs of translational energy. The 185 grain bullet from the 8.6 at 2200 FPS is 1988 ft-lbs...a full 731 ft-lbs LESS than from the 308. Even if we add the rotational energy to the 8.6 it is still nearly 700 ft-lbs less than the 308. Sorry Kevin, your math ain't mathing. Super fast twist rates are a gimmick and arguably, spinning a bullet too fast has detrimental effects on accuracy at distance. If very fast twist rates were magical, like Kevin seems to claim, you can be sure the major manufacturers would have done this a long time ago. Kevin isn't the first person to try it.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ lol. And that’s part of the great debate between the 3R and 5R barrels. I see no benefit to the faster twist without really good expansion up front as a way of transferring the rotational energy into the target. From my understanding, 8.6 was designed to do maximum damage with sub rounds out to 100yrds. Rotational velocity and linear velocity combined with an 1.5” expanding projectile or the explosive release from a tumbling projectile. Having a good performing super load would be nice but is stretching the original design premise. Wild hogs haven’t quite made it to my area of Ky yet so I’ll probably keep tinkering with this for a while and move on to something new or back to one of my other calibers. 😉

[@edwardlance2379]

@@kentuckyrangetime There are already bullets on the market that splay wide open at sub speeds. The question is, will a few more potential rotations inside the target really create massively more damage? I don't think it will. As for what the 8.6 was designed for, I can only by what Kevin himself claims.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@ maybe, maybe not, but I’d say my gel block test with the 342gr Gorilla and 350gr REX definitely makes a good argument for the extra damage with a 3R twist. 😉

[@goatzega3006]

All I can say, is the 210 Barnes will drop hogs and deer. I loaded them to about 1500 FPS, and the damage looked like you hit the animals with a magnum. This 1-3 twist rate increases damage on target.

[@me2ontube]

Do they drop instantly

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@goatzega3006 yes, expansion or not, it’s still a big hole. I’d say hitting bone would also help open it up, or just shatter and help with the permanent wound side channels.

[@ricosroughnecks1223]

I feel like 338 aac is going to eat their lunch.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@ricosroughnecks1223 it’ll definitely have a much larger selection room of bullets. 👍🏻

[@ricosroughnecks1223]

ARC* 😂

[@bd65shooter]

I'd be curious to see what happens if you removed the tips and annealed a couple as test. Use one of the lower fps loads that bounced off the steel plate as a test.

[@kevinkerr2847]

Great video but you stated the rotation velocity at 55,000rpm when it’s actually 500,000 rpm.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@kevinkerr2847 thanks for the correction. I thought I’d heard the 55K number a few months back but apparently didn’t remember it correctly. 😉👍🏻👊🏻

[@mikedeckard8845]

What twist rate of your barrel? I have the same don't tread on me tumbler. Got it at Buc ee's.

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@mikedeckard8845 the barrel is a Ballistic Advantage 3R twist. My son gifted me the tumbler from the Bu Cee’s at Richmond Ky. 😉😂👍🏻👊🏻

[@tombraley3212]

Hey Matt. Did they take down your affiliates link?

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@tombraley3212 I didn’t but Linktree had a liberal knee-jerk the day after the election and restricted my account for adding a new affiliate link for Breek Arms. It may be temporary but I’m in the process of starting my own webpage. If you’re interested, I can send you a direct link to any of my affiliates until I get the webpage up and going, just let me know which ones. I’ve registered my webpage, kyrangetime.com but still need to find a firearms friendly server to host me, and then get a page designed and up online. I’ll be working with one of my friends from work who does our IT stuff to get it all done over the next week or two.

[@venatici-canes3293]

I also sent a direct message on Facebook

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@venatici-canes3293 thanks John👍🏻😉

[@williamlumpkin7189]

Why everyone gel test at 10 feet

[@kentuckyrangetime]

@@williamlumpkin7189 For me it’s 10-15 trips out to the block each video, and the ability to get good catches. Also placement in the block to “try” to keep wound tracks from overlapping. Also bullets coming in from a higher trajectory are less likely to stay in the block for a clean run.