Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 150 Barnes TTSX

Anyone use these out of a .308 for elk? My gun will push them to 2897fps and they match the 300 and 400 yard dots in the long range duplex. I am not apposed to moving up in bullet weight, but these shoot so well I would like to use them. They have worked well on 200# pigs out past two hundred yards and deer well past that.

Baldguy

I killed a very large old bull with the 150 gr TSX out of my 308.

First shot at 50 through the shoulder passed through and dumped him on his nose without a step.

I quickly ran a second through him (pass through as well) for insurance, but he never got close to getting up.

My MV was about 2,900 as well.

Your mileage may vary!

I am considering taking my 308 out elk hunting next fall. Will likely use the 165/168 TTSX, FWIW.


Tim

I wouldn't go any heavier than the 150 in the 308. There's no need for more weight and with a Barnes, the more speed, the better.

I've had better luck with the 168 TSX BT in my .308 and it works well on elk. I was hoping the 150 TSX or the TTSX would work, but I haven't been able to get the accuracy of the heavier bullet, at least in my rifle.

My buddy has dumped a few bulls with them in his .308. I also watched him tip over a fair-size moose with them with no drama.

Dave

I've used them in my 300 WBY. They work well.

Nuff said!

Let us know how it works. When do you anticipate getting a tag to put these to good effect?

Good advice.

I have yet to capture a 130gr Barnes using my 270win,or any Barnes for that matter, and I have been using Barnes exclusively for big game since 1992

I have tried most weights in Barnes TTSX bullets in .30 caliber in my 30.06. The 150 gr. is all you need as they retain almost all their loaded weight....If and when you can find them.

Hunterapp

The plan now is for Montana in 2017. We are still working out the details and checking out options but it will be two old guys trying to minter two young bucks. May well be my last elk hunt as I will be 72 when it goes down but I am really looking forward to it. If it looks like the country will be fairly open the .308 will go. If it will be thick stuff then the 9.3x62 will get the call.

Like a lot of hunters I like the Barnes TSX, mostly 7mm 140's in the 2 7-08's we have but has anyone looked at the difference in the TSX & the TTSX? Going on a Montana elk hunt and wondering if the TTSX would give a little edge. The 7-08's will be the go to weapon but will have 06's as backups. Thanks

I would rather use the 168 gr TXS over the 150 .

In the .308 Win, I'd run (and do run) the 150 TTSX.

Just chrono'ed some loads this wknd with 51.0 gr CFE-223 and 3,000 fps was easy-peasy in a 22" bbl.

And 3,150 was a breeze with CFE-223 and the 130 TTSX.

I had a knowledgeable hunter and gun writer inform me that Barnes had a bit of inconsistency in mushrooming with the TSX and thus went to the TTSX to ensure consistency.

Sounds like a great set up! If anything I'd go down in weight. My good friend hunts WA,ID,Africa with a 30-06 and 130TTSX. Hammer of Thor his words. I use the 150TTSX in an -06 at 3040fps.

But again if your .308 with the 150TTSX works with your dots I'd say your good to go! Enjoy your hunst!

Hard to beat a monolithic 150 from the .308 for elk-sized game--but hard to beat the 9.3x62 as well! Good luck on your hunt.

If you want to use a 150 mono, be sure to give the Nosler ETip a try. It has a higher BC than the Barnes version.

Myself, I just use the 130TTSX in 30 calibers.

The 150 E-Tip is what my wife uses as her BIG game load in her .308. Works really well.

A 150 mono would give me no pause in the 308 or 30-06 on the heavy-boned moose we hunt up here.

M M - that's impressive for a 308 Win.
That gives me a new 'appreciation' for a 308.
Salute.


Jerry

Since I don't have a 308 now--- THAT looks good to me.
How about a load suggestion ?


Jerry

62grs H4350
Horn Brass
Win LRM primer

Thanks Shag-

I just need some 150 TTSX-es.

I appreciate it.


Jerry

I have been trying to work up a load for my 30'06 with H4350 and 150 gr TTSX's as well, however there is NO WAY I can fit 62 grains in the case and seat a bullet.

I am using Winchester brass as it has more capacity than the Federal or Remington that I have tried, but 58.5 grains is a heavily compressed load when seating the TTSXs to be 50 thousands off the lands.

The throat on my rifle is not that short ether as 180 Partitions are just at max magazine length when jammed.

More case capacity would be nice but I can't believe switching to Hornaday brass would do it.

Thanks.

Below is what happens to a 150 TTSX from a 308 Win when it hits a cow elk in the shoulder at 70 yards and decides not to open. Bullet was launched at 2,820 fps, hit the cow, failed to open and tumbled. Found it in the offside shoulder facing backwards. No, it didn't hit anything like a branch or grass prior to hitting the cow.

This was a far bigger problem with the original X and the TSX, so it surprised me with the bigger cavity of the TTSX. I've seen enough similar problems with various mono's that I've sworn them off for Partition's or Accubonds.

When the mono's work, they work well, I'm just of the opinion they fail more than many think, and definitely fail more than controlled expansion cup/core lead bullets ala Nosler Partition.

That is the exact same velocity that I am getting from my 308 using 150 gr TTSX. I am using Varget and getting nice groups in this velocity range.

tcp -

Have you tried a long drop tube funnel?

A longer drop and less volume of powder at the same time will allow the powder to load closer (denser) or compact. I've used that method w/4831. & 7828 in 270 win cases.

Good luck


Jerry

Brad,

What would you do if "lead free" became law of the land in your hunting grounds? I've had limited experience with the LRX's, but that limited experience was very positive. The LRX's seem to open easier than even the TTSX's.

I've been looking at the Cutting Edge Copper Raptors. I must have been a raccoon in a past life because I'm easily drawn to all things bright and shiny. Despite the painful prices and the extremely good performance I've had with my lead core bullets, I ordered some to try:

https://cuttingedgebullets.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=ER_J120_CU_RAPTOR

If they shoot well, I may try them hunting this year.

David

David, if lead-free became the law of the land, I'd use up the 1000's of Partitions and Accubonds I have first. Then I'd die. Government here in Montana is on the slow side... happily.

Though I'm not kidding about the above, I do understand the seriousness of the question for some. If I lived in CA I'd play around with as many mono's as I could and use the one that shot/expanded best.

In fairness, I could have gotten TTSX's from a bad batch. I can only imagine improvements in mfg are often introduced.

Thanks for all the info. that has come out of my question. Based on all that has been said and a great tip of my hat to Brad, who seems to be a real elk killer, I think I am going to look at the 165's even if they shoot just a bit less than my 150's. I can keep the 165's under 6" at 400 yards, and at 2750 fps I think they will kill elk.

Thanks again to all.

Cliff

That's an amazing picture of a Barnes. All the ones I've shot have resulted in textbook mushrooms. I would definitely call them and let them take a look at it. Maybe you could save someone else a failure?

I've found them to be good to talk to.

I held the same views for a long time. However, then I started thinking about exposing my kids to lead.
I know one thing for for certain when using monos. They simply do not kill as fast as lead and copper slugs and by a wide margin.

I agree 100%, but you do realize you've just blasphemed!

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed that. With all the chatter on the 'fire about how monos kill like a lightning bolt, I was beginning to think I needed a CAT scan.

This is really no mystery and my observation is backed by others like JB who are in the know.

The old XFBs that had few fans were really good expanding bullets - when they expanded, and nothing put stuff down and dead faster than those bullets would - when they found a path that held significant bone. The bullets I recovered when they were around were more typically classic mushrooms than are the more recent versions.

Expecting copper to expand as reliably as much softer lead defies logic.

The reason the don't kill as abruptly is because they expand to a smaller frontal area in many cases and they also don't fragment much if any. The resulting wound channels are narrow and long.
I popped a cow elk in the shoulders last year with a 180 ttsx with a mv of 3400fps and it ran off like nothing happened with no blood trail. The same shot with a 180 nosler BT would have been a bang flop at best and 15 yard death stagger at worst.

I've been saying the same thing on this forum for over 10 years... I really don't need more convincing.

That sounds good to me.

Should be noted*

Barnes are what I use when I have to. Other than that, I like Nosler Partitions and AccuBond bullets.

I'm also thinking about trying CFE-223 in my Kimber 84 .308 looks like some nice velocity.

My experience with Barnes has been very positive. Never had an animal go far before going down. Only recovered one, against offside (very thick) hide of a waterbuck. It had opened up to .75" and did massive internal damage.

Interesting. One of the only two 260-grain ABs that I have recovered was in a waterbuck, making a bulge just under the surface of the offside hide.

I don't know how to improve on the performance of the 160 TTSX. Internal damage is fantastic, and they are exceptionally accurate in my rifle. They open wider than any other bullets I've tried, and yet still penetrate quite well.

Here's the bullet from the waterbuck. Not a great shape for penetrating the far hide, which I'm guessing was nearly .5" thick. Much thicker than elk or even kudu.

The frontal area of the Barnes,by virtue of the petal shape is most times less than a lead and copper bullet expanded to the same diameter.
Monometal bullets in general wound much less. All the guys bragging about eating up to the whole bear this to be true.
The fact of the matter is proof of a bullets performance lays not in how a recovered bullet looks, but rather the reliability and authority by which it kills. Barnes are mediocre in both these regards IME.

There was nothing left of the forward rib meat and lower shoulder on this waterbuck. The elk I shot with it was the same. More damage than the 180 BT I used this past season.

David: Anectdotal only on the lead free question.....but my pal is not far away since he posts here and has several dozen African animals with the 129-270,and 145-7mm LRX on all sizes of game. That does not include several HUNDRED with every good bullet you can think of in 270 and 7mm...

He has good things to say about the 129 and 145 LRX on everything.....especially the 7mm 145 showed excellent expansion, penetration and wound channels on a par with 200 gr Partitions from a 300 WM..(!)..


yeah I was surprised too but Rick has shot far more animals than most who post here so LRX is how I would roll in lead free country.

After trying several brands of bullets I settled on the one my rifle prefers: Barnes LRX 6.5mm 127 grain.

Ben,

How many TTSX bullets have failed you, that you were sure of? This thread seems like a lot of bad-mouthing because of one pic of one bullet that Brad had the unfortunate experience of firing into an elk. I've also seen a couple of pics of failed Partitions, and if we're saying the TTSX is mediocre based on one pic, then I guess that applies to the PT, too. I've not seen more than a couple of pics of failed TTSX bullets on the entire interwebs. That's not a bad track record considering the huge number of them that have been used by internet users worldwide.

The fact is, TTSX bullets expand more aggressively, and exhibit some disintegration more often, than prior generations of the X bullet. I'm not sure about you, but I've been in on the killing of about 130 big-game critters now using Barnes bullets, and from what I've seen, send them through bone, and things go quiet real quick. Based on that modest sample of dead stuff, the reliability aspect of the X/TSX/TTSX has been stellar.

This moose died "with authority" when hit by a 140gr 7mm TTSX. The only bone hit being ribs. The wound channel speaks for itself- about a 4.5" hole through the lungs, the bullet entering just behind the onside shoulder, and exiting just in front of the paunch on the offside.





I've seen this kind of performance over and over with the TTSX. IME it definitely does more damage on average than the TSX did.

I have not had one fail to expand that I know of. I just don't think they kill that quickly. I HAVE recovered some that looked perfect, but this is of no consequence to me. Efficient killing is what I place value on.

Thanks. They're definitely quicker killers if you like to put them through the skeletal structure.

If that skeletal structure includes the spine or by breaking both legs I woukd agree. However I have had an elk that took one through the shoulder from a 300 rum and ran off like nothing happened. A deer with a 25-06 that did the same.
Also seen some crop damage deer shot with them and when you compare many 20 or so animals shot it's pretty apparent they don't kill all that fast.

Ballistic Tips blow up on the surface of deer. Good thing Brad didn't hit that shoulder head on with a BT. That bull might have never been found. The Campfires own JJHack makes a living killing African Big Game by the "Ark Load" annually. He much prefers the TTSX in his experience, especially on herd animals. This is an Elk forum. Elk can be big tough and mudddy and are often found in a herd. I believe JJ uses a 165-168 in his loaner -06. I seriously doubt he'd have issues with using a 150gr TTSX...

Oh, bull shat. I have shot elk with a 180 ttsx out now a 300 rum and they worked perfectly. And no Barnes dash after the shot.

Make that another person that uses Nosler Partitions.

A 100 TSX launched from a 25-06 at 3200. Shot was ~ 75 yards. Bullet went through both shoulder blades and didn't break either. I shot another deer that year with same load/gun/distance. Deer 2 flinched a bit at the shot, then stood there with her head down. I watched her through the scope. She stood for 30-40 seconds then laid down heavy. Her head sagged and she kicked a few times and died. Elapsed time: 5 minutes. I'm hoping they've improved since. Needless to say I'm not a fan.

What sort of BS doth thou spout here?

Why do some bullets poke through shoulders,and others smash/break them?

Still a little early for an April Fools.

Haha not even kiddin! BTDT. I suspect in the past there have been far more BT failures than TTSX. Every bullet has failed at one point or another. Your failed TTSX killed that elk.. Didn't look right in the end, but. Dead is dead and I see why you don't prefer them. I'd prolly feel the same. I know you've killed with both and prolly prefer the BT. Just wanted to Let the OP know that a TTSX isn't the only bullet that can fail. Personally I'd use a 130TTSX in a .308. Or a Partition..

Deadly accurate, hell on game.




Hard to beat the Barnes TTSX.

I have used the BT more than any other bullet, including the early versions. I don't have to guess. I have never had one fail or fail to kill quickly.

I had one blow a football sized patch of hair off a buck one day. It was as if someone cut a patch of hide out. Not a single piece of that 165gr NBT from my Ruger #1 30-06 in Federal Primeum Ammo penetrated any meat. Totally exploded on the hide. Now granted that was 15 years ago and supposedly they have beefed up the NBT. That and the bullet proof buck was the all mighty Columbia Blacktail. The deer died. But it was a partition from my friends rifle. I still have't conned myself into giving the new improved BT a try. Funny how a guy has one failure and all faith is lost when clearly so many have great success/performance with "loser" bullets.

Sakohunter264,

You picked a hell off a place to down a bull!! Nice Moose!

I'm not a big fan of caveats when it comes to arguing which is better. Kind of takes the wind out of your argument.


I'm not exactly anti TSX or TTSX. I use them in some guns. But I don't buy into the hype and usually expect a longer tracking job.

Using other people's experience lends your opinion zero credibility. Welcome to the "do nothing gang"

I think you mean BT not TTSX?

I have. I guess it's a mediocre bullet

Nope, no caveat. It's pretty simple, and applies to any bullet up to the task- you want DRT, break heavy bone. Period. It's not like the TTSX won't kill unless bone is hit...

The TTSX kills quickly enough with lung shots. See my moose pic above. He traveled about 45 yards and collapsed. Shot a bunch of mulies and WT deer with nothing but lung shots using X/TSX/TTSX bullets. The TTSX is the quickest killer of the bunch.

I don't buy into the hype, either. The TTSX is simply a fantastic bullet, akin to the PT. It's not magic. But I feel some responsibility to say something when the "anti-hype" starts flying around

Disagree. It's not as good as first-hand experience, but it does say something. People quote JB all the time, and it does add some credibility to the discussion.

Bob - I can't explain it. The hole is slightly bigger than caliber size - you can't put your pinky finger in it. Interestingly I had a bad experience with a 7RM and 140 TSX the year before. Deer shot through the lungs no bone hit and it ran off like I missed. I found it but it looked like it was shot with a field tip arrow, just like the the second deer I shot with the 25-06 the following year. I haven't used them since.

I do believe they were working the bugs out because I'm not the only one that experienced similar results with the TSX in those years. I'd really like to try the LRX in my 270 but every time I think back to watching that deer die over a 5 minute period, I come to my senses and buy more Partitions. I've heard of Partition failures but have never seen one in 40 years of hunting. Most of the guys I hunt with use Nosler products and most use Partitions. These guys hunt all over the globe and shoot 10-50 animals per year. Never a bullet issue. Some poor shot issues on occasion but not the bullets fault when you misplace a shot.

I shoot mostly Barnes TTSX bullets. I have yet to shoot an elk though. Plenty of white tails and a couple mule deer. I reload for a 25/06, 260 Rem, 7mm mag, and 338 win mag. I can not get any of those rifles to shoot a partition bullet worth a darn. And have really struggled with the accubonds. Finally have the 25/06 shooing accubonds and the 338 shoots them ok, but all my rifles shoot the TTSX bullets MUCH better. The only bullet I ever recovered from a Barnes was the TSX. Had a double doe tag, six ran by, shot one that stopped to look and then shot another as it ran away. Yup thats right, as it ran away. Shot thru the back leg ham and ended up cross body just under the skin in the opposite front shoulder. Bullet traveled approx. 26-28 " Perfect expansion just like you see in the Barnes adds. Shot a nice mule deer this past fall with the 260 with a LRX. Only a .264 hole in and double that on the out side, just what I expected. My buddy shot his with a BT in a 270. Tons of blood shot meat, what a mess, mine hardly any, both hit in the same area, both the same range, both dead. Shoot what you are comfortable shooting and enjoy life.

JB has had some if the same observations as I have had......

Personally, I've never had a NBT "fail"... every one expanded, penetrated and did the job. I started using them in the 1980's. The newest BG incarnations have wonderfully thick jacket bases.

OTOH, I've had and seen many expanding mono's "fail"... ie, they didn't open, but acted like a FMJ.

The red-herring the mono-fans use is; "at what point in the animals death did the bullet fail?" This is a disingenuous argument that misses the point intentionally. If a bullet fails to do what it is designed to do, it failed, full stop.

If I wanted to shoot an elk with a FMJ, I'd have just bought and used them, much more cheaply... and yeah, FMJ's will kill.

I'm of the opinion TSX/TTSX's fail far more often than the TB's think (true believers).

But like the guys said, use what makes you happy. It's all fun and games anyway.

Yes, and JJHack has been one of Barnes' biggest advocates. My only point is that referring to the experience of others can serve a purpose, especially when most NA hunters are limited in the number of big-game critters they can test bullets on every year.

Taking advantage of the experience of other credible sources only makes sense.

If scientists couldn't build on the experience of other scientists, but could only rely on the results of their own studies, science would progress slowly, indeed.

what would be the point of a forum like this if we could not learn from the experience of others??

I absolutely want to hear from those who hunt hundreds of animals each year. I may not always agree for one reason or another, but their insight is always considered. FWIW, the PHs during my safari were luke warm regarding monos. To say they were curious about a small 338 shooting 160s is an understatement. The lack of need to track and massive internal damage changed their opinions. However, given their druthers, they still prefer a heavy for caliber, tough bonded bullet launched at moderate speeds. In fact one thought a 225 swift A-Frame launched at ~2400-2500 would be a perfect plains game cartridge for the area we hunted.

Inconsistent and bad experiences with the original 'X' bullets (in the blue coated 'XLC' version) left me unwilling to try the TSX on game, even though they were accurate in my rifles. Results with the MRX and newer TTSX have been 100% positive with as many or more antelope/deer/elk straight-down DRTs in my group as not, with no animals going more than a few yards at most.

I suspect that much of the belief that the TTSX do not kill as fast as copper/lead bullets is a hangover from the X and TSX days and a tendency to lump all monos into the same basket performance-wise. That said, and in spite of only positive TTSX experiences in my group, there are still the occasional lingering doubts in the back of my mind. Brad's recovered bullet is one reason. Witnessing two tips jam up the bolt in a friend's rifle is another, although that was largely his fault.

Its not a hangover. I HAVE seen it with my own eyes and I am not basing this on one or two kills.

B: JWP475 on here commented during a phone conversation that it takes frontal area to "smash" and break bones on game animals. I never gave that much thought, and he may have been talking heavy animals but the comment made me go...."Mmmmm".

What you might have seen with the 25/06 Barnes shoulder shot is the lack of fragmenting and smaller frontal area of yje 25 cal slug. Which also maybe points out the limitations of smaller calibers in generating wound channels compared to larger calibers.

We like to think there's not much difference there, but....I think it matters at some levels.

As to the 7mm/140 TTSX I have not used any Barnes on any animals, I have too many Bitterroots and Partitions to bother.But IME a heart/lung shot with about any expanding bullet has the potential to produce a "runner".

Years back I handed a companion my rifle as we slithered within 400 yards of a pronghorn buck,which was a target of opportunity. Load was a 130 BBC at 3100,hit was a solid 1/3 of the way up the chest. The bullet expanded, cut the heart and exited off side ribs,and exited with a nickel-sized hole. Hardly dramatic on such a light animal with a bullet clearly designed to be used on elk or grizzly if you want.Much like a Barnes from what I;ve seen.

But the pronghorn staggered in a small circle and collapsed.

Years later, same load, I crawled within 350 yards of a big mule deer and shot it broadside through the lungs. It sagged, staggered, and spurted downhill 30 feet or so. A second shot through the onside shoulder back into the lungs dumped him on his nose. Oh....BTW both those bullets exited again with those nickel sized holes.That seems as Barnes-like as you can get as well.

What's all this prove? I dunno but like someone said if we are going to use lung shots we have to expect animals to run off to some degree, and won't get many DRT type kills without involving the running gear as well as the vitals.

Bob,

Interesting idea. Just a bit of theorizing on my part here, but I would agree with the well-established notion that soft tissue suffers greater damage from being penetrated by a projectile with greater frontal area. Hard and brittle materials, however, behave differently than soft/elastic material.

Soft, flexible material can absorb concussive shock without permanent damage much better than can hard, inelastic objects. Consequently, these soft types of materials need to experience more direct contact in order to be permanently damaged, as where harder objects can be destroyed by indirect contact, due to the concussive force transmitted through the material's close and rigidly arranged molecules/atoms. To illustrate, if you can imagine taking a small piece of 2x4 lumber, setting it on the ground, and then placing a steel punch in the middle and hitting it with a hammer. The only place on the 2x4 that retains permanent damage is the small (call it 1/4") circle directly underneath where the punch was. The wood molecules are loosely arranged and with weak enough inter-molecular bonds, that the impact force from the punch was absorbed without the surrounding molecules being affected. In order to damage more wood, we need to hit a greater amount of its surface (the head of the hammer, swung with equal force, impacting the 2x4 directly would accomplish this). Now, if we do the same thing to a rock that is the same size as our hypothetical piece of 2x4, the entire rock would break apart when we hit it with our punch and hammer. This is because the molecules in the stone are tightly and rigidly arranged, and the material is very hard and brittle, so when the punch hits a small area on the surface of the rock, the impact force is transmitted throughout the molecular structure, so the entire rock is subject to permanent damage. In fact, we're more likely to fracture the rock by hitting it with the punch, as opposed to hitting it directly with the hammer, using the same swing force, because by focusing the force into a smaller surface area, we're increasing the pressure applied on the rock.

The same principle would apply to bone versus soft tissue, such as skeletal and smooth muscle. For muscle to be permanently damaged, it needs to be impacted directly, or at least be very close to direct contact. Thick bone on the other hand, can shatter from a focused impact several inches away. A bullet doesn't need a large frontal area to accomplish this, it just needs to have enough pressure and momentum to fracture the hard barrier, and the thicker the bone, the more momentum is required. Momentum and pressure are why the narrow, but heavy and long 6.5mm and 7mm bullets were such good penetrators and bone breakers 100 years ago, before other calibers caught up, and why a 160gr 7mm bullet at a certain velocity is more likely to break bone than a 160gr .338 bullet of equal construction and at the same velocity.

It's funny how our eyes can see such different things. Just goes to show that there are very few absolutes in this game.

In the last couple of years I've seen a number of lung-shot animals, from deer to elk and moose, hit with TTSX bullets of varying weights and calibers, and all have exhibited massive internal damage, with none going very far at all. I've also seen several animals shot through the lungs with non-mono bullets over that same time period, and if I had to guess, I would say that the animals shot with non-mono bullets traveled further after the shot, on average. I'm by no means brand loyal, but I've personally seen good things from Barnes bullets, as far as wound channels go, especially the TTSX/LRX line.

Jordan: Good thoughts and helpful explanation! I went hunting around for recovered bullets but could not find my stash real quick so am stuck with what's on the computer.

Anyway I have posted this before but here's a bullet that smashed up a lot of bone on a 9ft+ brown bear and came to rest against the off side hide. It was a royal train wreck. Maybe this illustrates your point. I can't see a Barnes that holds its frontal area being much different.








Edited to Add: In line with your analogy, I am thinking that bwinter's 25/06 hit to the shoulder with the 100 gr Barnes represented more of a small area "center punch" to the bone without enough frontal area to radiate damage outward?

Couple days ago I went pig hunting. Shot one in the head so that doesn't count. I was planning to shot the other one in the head but it started turning away so I fired at the back edge of the rib cage. The Barnes LRX 6.5 127 grainer devastated the lungs and exited in the front part of the off shoulder. The entrance and exit holes in the skin were caliber size. The interesting information came immediately inside the skin on the entrance side. There was a hole at the back of the rib cage about 3" diameter. The exit shoulder looked undamaged except for the small hole in it. Not too far from the exit hole was one of the petals and near the entrance hole were two more petals.

The average muzzle velocity runs 3,315 feet per second. The pig was at most forty yards away. It dropped at the shot. After a couple seconds it got up and ran no more than four or five steps and went down for the count. A cleaver person can tell us the approximate impact velocity.

Exactly. In bwinter's pic you can see the cracks in the bone radiating outward from the hole. The bone there is thin enough to be fairly flexible and soft, and behave somewhat like soft tissue. If the bullet had impacted thicker/heavier bone like the humerus, chances are the bone would have shattered, even given equal bullet performance.

My buddy shot a cow elk last year using 06 with 150 ttsx. No bullet recovered.
I have two Bulls with 180tsx out of 06 and no bullet recovered.
I went down to 168ttsx as these retain almost 100% of it weight.
I think 150 would have been fine and I wouldn't go more than that in 308.
Here is how I see it
308-150gr
30/06-168
300 win -180

HORSESHIT. The TTSX is arguably the bullet of choice on safaris nowadays. Safaris, you know where lost or wounded trophies can cost you a bundle. If you like cup and core bullets, that's great, only don't try to tell the rest of us, some with a bit of experience on nonsensical blanket statements like that.

I've only shot 9 things with TTSXs, but every critter died within sight. I don't see how it's possible that copper and lead kill faster "by a wide margin." Internal damage with a fast moving mono is tremendous.

Horseshit, indeed!!!!

If more Internet hunters would actually go hunting for real game once in a while, they might actually be qualified to comment on such things as bullet performance. After shooting dozens of critters. And hitting them in vital spots. Over a lifetime of hunting.

Barnes TSX and TTSX are all I use anymore for hunting, precisely due to a lot of experience using them, on game from little Springbok to Water Buffalo, Sable, Wildebeest, Lion, and loads of NA game.

The list of bullets used looks like this:

.257 Roberts and .257 Weatherby: 100 gr. Barnes TTSX
.280 Rem and .280 RCBS Imp: 140 gr. Barnes TTSX
.30-06: 150 gr. and 165 gr. Barnes TSX
.300 Wby. Mag: 165 gr. Barnes TSX and TTSX
.375 Ruger: 250 gr. Barnes TTSX and 270 gr. TSX

All of these loads have been used very successfully on game by myself for years, and I guarantee I would not be using them if "they simply did not kill as fast as lead and copper slugs and by a wide margin".

I am working on some 168 Nosler ETip's for my 300 Wby. Speeds look good at around 3350. Never taken an animal with an ETip, so I figure it is time to try them out. If the accuracy is there, I think they will open, maintain the frontal area and penetrate well. I plan on shooting them out a few 100 yards this year just to see what they look like. Used a few other Barnes in the past and they have been pretty decent, mainly the TSX in the 300 Win and the 225 in the 35 Whelen. Both did pretty well, but I didn't like how they would break up on bone so easily. Just a nit pick, never lost an animal with one.

Like you, I'm not basing my judgment of the TTSX (and no longer available MRX) on "one or two kills". My group has been using the MRX and TTSX since they became available and as yet have as many or more straight-down DRTs than not and no animal has run more than a few steps.

This cow from 2010 probably had the longest run post-encounter with an MRX or TTSX. In this case it was a 180g MRX. She made it about 10 steps and that is probably generous. The cow was right at 400 yards and the exit is the dark red spot right behind the front leg .


Here are some pictures of the 4x4 mulie buck I took the same year, also with a 180g MRX. Neither the entrance nor the exit holes in the hide were very large. but the insides were a mess. Steps taken: 0.

Exit side first:


Entrance side with approximately a quarter-sized entrance hole:


Exit side again showing much larger exit through flesh than hide:


The other two mulies I've taken with MRX/TTSX also went straight down as have, I think, every antelope my group has taken with them.

While the numbers of animals we've taken with MRX/TTSX aren't huge, we've found them to be very effective with 100% positive experiences. More importantly they haven't disappointed on the first shot as some other bullets have done (a bad omen statistically). Exit wounds may not be as large as with cup-and-core bullets but they have more cutting edge length and internals have always been pretty well destroyed with massive internal bleeding.

Bighorn,

Have shot more than "dozens of critters," and been standing beside other people when an nearly equal amount were killed, partly due to having participated in lots of cull hunts (often specifically for bullet testing) on four continents.

Among the other notes I've made on bullet performance on every big game animal I've killed or seen killed in 50 years, during the past 25 years (when those culls took place) I noted how far animals traveled before falling after double-lung hits.

TTSX's are great bullets, as are similar "petal-type" bullets, but animals of all sizes averaged traveling about 2-1/2 times as far when shot with them as animals lung-shot with what many call "target" bullets like Berger VLD's. In fact, petal-type bullets were indeed the slowest-killing of all bullets used. This doesn't mean animals always go a long ways, since often they drop right there, just that on average they go farther.

And if you want to see REAL internal destruction, use those lighter-constructed bullets. Everybody who thought their TSX's (or whatever other bullet) did massive internal damage has commented on the first animal they saw opened up after being shot with a VLD or MatchKing or Scenar. And the universal comment was something like "OMG."

Mule Deer,

The most devastation I saw on any animal was with a .300 Win Mag. For some reason I don't remember I fired a Hornady target bullet at a deer. I think it was a 168 grainer, but don't remember. I do remember the velocity was 3,117 feet per second. I was shooting five days a weeks at a 100 yard target and guessed the range at about 40% farther than the 100 yard target.

What I most likely will remember the rest of my life is seeing a scapular about forty feet up in the air. The exit hole was 5" diameter with shiny bits of bullet no larger than a BB and some were smaller. I could see almost to the entrance hole. It dropped so fast I thought I missed when I saw two or three deer running away. I didn't realize what I saw in the air was the near side scapula until I saw the slice in the hide on its back.

I don't think there's a bullet out there that can consistently do as much internal damage as the VLD.

Yet another blasphemer.

The scientific method sure sucks if you're a true believer...

Are not what most folks think of when they think of cup and core bullets. How about if we add in bullets like Accubonds or Game Kings?

Here's a 150g AccuBond exit for you. Nephew's first antelope, shot with a .30-06.






[Edited to add...]

Here's what the AccuBond did to the ribs:



That kind of damage might be acceptable for larger game but IMO it is needlessly excessive for antelope.

Son-in-law shot one head-on using a .30-06/168g A-MAX. It raked the strap on the left side, destroying much of the strap and left ham.

And here is one of mine from the same year, 2010, taken with a .257 Roberts and a 110g AccuBond. Less damage but not my much.



I think I'll stick to the TTSX for antelope. They seem to drop just as fast, or so close we haven't noticed any difference, with most going straight down.