Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa Penetration on african plains game with the NP and the Swift-A-Frames

I had an opportunity to discuss the TSX philosophy, if I can call it that, with a Barnes staffer at the SHOT show last January. Tim Janzen was his name I believe. The long and the short of it was that the mono-metal bullets are tougher, and hold together at higher velocities, yielding deeper penetration than older cup and core (and even bonded & partition designs)because they didn't loose weight. If you do the math, energy at the impact is pretty much weight and speed based. Lighter and faster didn't work as well because the bullet failed at some speed. But now it doesn't fail. They open wide and punch a big hole, and go real deep, break bones and usually exit for better tracking. Logically, it makes sense. And most of what I read here confirms it's real world fact.

Ruark tossed his 4000 fps pea shooter because the bullets blew up on the shoulder of a warthog or Gazelle- results would be different today I guess.

I figure it's more the Indian than the Arrow (gotta place it right)!

I so want Phils Lon Paul 30-06, but try as I have, no dice so far! Guess I'll build one like it..I just restocked my Win. 95 30-06 with a shotgun butt an it sure feels better now. It will be shoot with only 220 gr. Noslers, Woodleighs and Sierras. I like the softer Woodleighs and Sierras for deer. The Noslers will take an elk going away without a problem, I know that for a fact.

Phil did find me a geat little Brno 21 a couple of weeks ago and it turned out to be a real collector so Kudos on him..ONly problem is that it's a collector and I'm too hard on a gun to have a collector, and being a round top and not D&T for a scope, so I probably need to swap it off for another Brno 21 or 22 with the double square bridges, that should not be hard as this one is really a nice collectable gun.

Vagabond,

TSX's are great bullet, but would like to comment on something in your post that's a common misconception. Retained weight is NOT the most important factor in penetration, everything being equal in a bullet. Frontal area is. If a bullet opens into a big, wide "mushroom" it won't penetrate nearly as deeply as a bullet that doesn't open up so widely.

One of the reasons TSX's (similar bullets such as the discontinued Combined Tectnology Fail Safe and Nosler E-Tip) penetrate so deeply is that even if they do open up to a certain diameter (and usually it's not all that wide, especially when compared to some bonded-core bullets) there are spaces in between the petals. This the big reason they penetrate so deeply. Retained weight is also important, but a secondary factor. I have seen bullets that retained 90-95% of their weight and didn't penetrate all that deeply, because they opened up so widely.

The fact is that there are indeed some bullets that will, for all practical purposes, penetrate just as deeply as a TSX, even though they lose some weight.

Thanks Mule Deer. I enjoy a good discussion! In good spirits, of course. There is so much to consider when evaluating bullet tech - keeping mind that different game makes different design more desirable.

Those bullets you mentioned that didn't penetrate deeply because they opened too wide, that is a "failure" - We'd agree I suppose that the "controlled expansion compromise" is the goal, not maximum diameter. Bullets that expand too much or quickly don't reach the targeted organs to be effective. That's why the high velocity calibers got a bad rap originally, they delivered the projectile faster than the design of the projectile could stand. Bullet tech catches up to Roy Weatherby! Partition and A-Frames both use a barrier to stop expansion at some point- other brands use different techniques to stop "over expansion failure". But these designs give up weight, and that is not a good thing.

You ended with a "fact" that I have to question:
(I assume we aren't including solids/FMJ's because they don't create a good wound channel? They lose virtually no weight and penetrate really deep compared to expanding bullets.)

"The fact is that there are indeed some bullets that will, for all practical purposes, penetrate just as deeply as a TSX, even though they lose some weight."

ONLY IF THEY HAVE LESS EFFECTIVE FRONTAL AREA !!
Think about it. I assume we're talking equal weight and velocity to start? Given what you posted, I surmise they penetrate as deeply in spite of lost weight because they present a smaller frontal area, and therefore a smaller wound channel? And this is advantageous in what fashion? Bigger is better in wound channels I think. As I understand inertia, lost weight at a given point in time, will yield a bullet that slows faster than the bullet that lost none or less at the same time. Less inertial "kinetic" energy to carry it forward if resistance is the same, so resistance has to be reduced to go as far or farther. Correct?

You didn't miss the fact that the TSX has a smaller "effective" frontal area because of the petal design, but don't overlook the big wound channel because of the size of the widest point petal to petal. This, I think, is a good thing.

As to the expansion of the TSX, I can't tell you numbers on the bonded core bullets, but I can tell you that a recovered .308 TSX BT that killed a wild hog measured .6655 (my measurements with digital calipers). That is a 216% of original diameter. "...not all that wide..." Really? What can we expect from bonded cores?

I figure the increased initial "hematoma" from the higher velocity combined with a 5/8 inch hole deep into the vitals or completely through will work for most PG. I hope I'm right, cause TSX it is for me on my 2010 Africa trip!

I look forward to your thoughts!

"Aim small, miss small"

You will do fine with the TSX on your safari. They are great bullets.

My main point was that bullet performance is more complex than the simple theory of extra weight retention makes it sound.

Some weight loss usually results in a bigger wound channel INITIALLY, on the side of the animal the bullet enters. This results in a bigger hole in at least the near lung, and maybe the far lung, even if the bullet does eventually end up with a smaller frontal diameter. And a bigger wound channel in vital organs is what kills, not hematoma.

I have also seen TSX's (and bullets like them) open up to more than twice the original diameter, but in general they don't create the tissue destruction of bullets that open up wider, or even lose some weight. This is on average. There are always exceptions to average peformance with any bullet.

But I have seen bonded-core bullets open up to three or even more times their original diameter. It depends on the deign of the bonded-core bullet. Again, a lot of people like to make up "rules," such as bonded-core bullets open up to 3 times original diameter (or extra weight retention means more penetration). There is a wide variety of frontal area between a typical expanded North Fork, Trophy Bonded and Woodleigh, for instance.

You are mistaking one phenomenon with what might be called "pre-premium" bullets (the failure to even penetrate any vital organs) with what wider-opening or partial-loss premium bullets do. I have yet to see a Woodleigh, for instance, fail to penetrate the vitals of a big game animal no matter how widely it opened--and they will indeed make a bigger hole than any bullet that doesn't open up that widely. This is assuming, of course, a reasonable match between bullet, cartridge and game.

My final point is one that I've made before: If penetration was the entire "secret" to bullet performance, we'd all be using solids, even on whitetail does.

Vagabond: Good post and good exchange between you and MD;thought provoking stuff!

What can you expect from Bonded Cores? Like MD says, it varies with type and design of bonded cores,but here are some examples taken from some I recovered.I'll cite starting velocity,distance at impact, and approximate penetration to give perpsective:

1)7mm 160 Bitterroot Bonded Core(BBC)-3100 fps mv;into back of neck,just forward of shoulders(from behind) of bull elk at app 175 yards.Recovered under chin.

Retained Weight(RW)-157 grains.
Expanded Diameter(ED)-.604

2)7mm-140 BBC- started at 3300 fps,into on-side shoulder of large mule deer buck at app 75 yards.Recovered against hide just forward of off-side rear ham.Buck DRT.

RW- 132 grains
ED- .660

3)7mm 140 BBC- Started at 3100 fps from 280;into ribs of 300# black bear at 60 yards,into off side ribs,and recovered under hide.Bear down at impact;did not get back up.

RW- 136.9 grains
ED- .709

4)250 gr BBC,375H&H started over 2900 fps through shoulders bones of Alaskan BB at app 175 yards.Two others fired, one into lungs and into shoulders;both exited with large exit wounds,not recovered.

RW- 243.7 grains
ED- .861 to .909;depending on where you measure the frontal area.

I'd have to say that in each case,penetration was quite good despite substantial frontal areas,the bullets only being stopped by the stretchy off side hide.Might add that none of these have petals torn off from impact.And wound channels were very substantial in each case.

Good discussion on a complex subject due to no end of variation in bullet construction and materials, impact velocity,target resistance, etc.Large frontal area and completely sufficient penetration are not mutually exclusive characteristics,I think.

I suspect this is what you are both saying

Mule Deer,

"My main point was that bullet performance is more complex than the simple theory of extra weight retention makes it sound."

I agree with your main point, and after the "novel" I wrote I suppose it'd be silly to say otherwise! I was enjoying the exercise though.

What I didn't bring up backs up your point even more: Over penetration carries potential wounding energy out of the vitals area. I think a bullet that breaks the "off" shoulder and stops has done it's job to it's best potential (or some similar wound). Punching a hole on the "off" side only helps the tracking, not the killing, generally.

We're on the same page. I think for PG, there are several good bullets that would work in the real world equally well. My informal research amongst PH's opinions (at SHOT and on the net) seems to indicate they like clients to use the "new" Barnes bullets more often for PG than any other named brand, but the Nosler Partitions were frequently mentioned. Also mentioned were "bonded" bullets, "core locked" (Remington Core-Lokt?) and "premium". The focus in every case was placement, over any talk of bullets or calibers! They have probably seen a lot of gut shot game. Indian, not arrow.

RE: Barnes TSX use.
Barnes staff indicated a preference for lighter and faster over heavier and slower for PG. I had indicated that I was going to use a 180 gr or heavier TSX and the Barnes guy specifically indicated a preference for going to a 168 gr to pick up speed. Aside from the obvious aiming implications, I gathered the design worked better at higher speeds. BUT the floor of the SHOT show was filled with opinions that heavier is better regardless of the engineers reports! Seems your John Locke quote is at play here.

The 168 gr TSX BT shoots nice, consistant groups from my gun and behave well at 3100 fps or so. Thats a load right out of the Barnes manual, toward the low end (range is 88.0 to 96.5 gr of H1000, I'm at 90.0). I think it's all I'll need for my intended targets.

Later!

Steve

I tend to agree about lighter/faster with TSX's to a certain extent, and the 168 is pretty deadly from a .300 magnum in my experience. The higher velocity tends to create more damage inside.

But I also think that we have SO many good bullets these days that it's hard to make a big case, most of the time, for one over another. This is a result of having used just about all them some myself (and some of them a LOT), and also seeing a lot of animals killed with them. Was on a PG hunt a couple of years ago that was also a large-scale culling deal, along with a number of other hunters that I often accompanied. Was in RSA a month and got to see many animals taken.

The two primary bullets used were TSX and AccuBond, as I recall with 11 rifles shooting one and 11 shooting the other. There wasn't more than a scattered representation of other bullets, I'd guess because of the publicity the TSX and AB have gotten in recent years.

All I really noticed was that if the animal was hit well then it died! Both bullets worked very well, on animals from springbok to eland, with lots of the mid-sized PG taken: gemsbok, wildebeest (both kinds), kudu, waterbuck, zebra, etc. The guy who had the most 1-shot kills used 225 AB's in a .338. He had something like 12 1-shot kills in a row, before he tried to get fancy with a couple of head-shots (for skins) toward the end, and ended up with a couple of misses. But before that was deadly--mostly because he shot really well. But the TSX's also did fine, one guy shooting them really well out of a .270 WSM on a wide variety of animals.

We are lucky to have so many fine bullets available these days, and except for certain specialized purposes we could just as easily just pick one and go hunting. If we place it right the animal will be dead!

JB:
I just priced the Nosler AccuBond in .308 and they are quite a bit less expensive than TSX bullets. I'll have to consider them for the next trip! I agree that they are probably equals in the real world of practical purpose. Right now I'll load my .300 RUM to .300 WinMag levels with the TSX - it seems to like them. And...I already have a few boxes of them!

BobInNH:
I had not seen the Bitterroot Bonded Core brand before (I've lead a sheltered life down here in "South New York City") so I studied a bit on line -found a good article at http://www.dakotaarms.com/DakotaMag/DMsummer05/page46-48.pdf about these bullets. I think they confirm the Barnes philosophy a bit - velocity increases possible with premium bullets are a good thing! I didn't price them, but after this excursion I will check them out!

Great data on the RW and ED - I did notice all the examples had some heat coming out - 3000+ fps in each of them - and 2900 from the 375-- isn't that on the "fast for caliber" end of the spectrum?

I'm not a Weatherby kool-aid kid yet, but I do like the speed over the weight in general. I guess the "heavy for caliber" camp would disagree, who knows, maybe they'll convert me! And I haven't a clue about DG, so don't flame me for that - I believe that is a different discussion!

Steve


Steve

Vagabond:Unfortunatley they aren't made anymore.I'm an older guy(59) and only mention them because I laid in a substantial stash of them during the 80's and continue to use them.In truth their performance is kinda on a par with the Aframes and the Northforks today.

IIRC Bill Steigers started to make them in the late 60's or early 70's.There were few real premiums back then other than a Partition,and guys like John Wooters and Bob Hagel thought very highly of BBC's, wrote them up.They were the first bonded bullet to make a splash,but were handmade, expensive, and hard to get.You could only order 200 max at a time.

If you have access to Handloader and Rifle magazines from the 70's,there is a great article by John Wooters when he and Jack Carter used them in Africa.

They were the inspiration for Jack Carter's TBBC,and the Swift Aframe by Lee Reid..

They have very heavy pure copper jackets and pure lead cores; no partition. Steiger was very fussy about the materials he used because he felt it was essential to the bullet's performance.

As to the velocity thresholds,the faster you push them, the better they work.Steigers always emphasized this velocity thing and said you can push them very fast without concern.IME he was right.Bill always told me to use the 250 in the 375H&H, as it could be pushed faster and would work better than the 275 due to higher velocity. I have an aquaintance that has used the 250 gr in the 375AI at 3100 fps in Africa on Cape buffalo with good results. The 165 gr 30 caliber driven over 3200 in a 300 Win Mag is a great elk load.

As you can see they lose very little weight,and the copper jackets and cores are so well bonded they support each other;you very rarely see a petal torn off from high impact velocity,regardless of impact speed or nature of animal anatomy they hit.They are very rugged and reliable under all conditions,particularly well suited to high velocity..

They may not penetrate like an X type bullet,but IME always as far as you need,and are noted for early expansion and wide frontal area,especially at high impact speed.At long range(say 400 yards,as far as I have used them)they still expand and do a great job,but not as fully and will generally punch through due to smaller frontal area,unless started very fast at the muzzle.

They were a great bullet,even by todays standards,but no longer made,and in truth we have very good bullets today that more or less duplicate their performance.But they started a trend that continues today.

Hope this helps and gives some historical perspective FWIW.

Just got back from an Oryx hunt in Texas where I used 180gr TSXs out of my 300 H&H @ 3000 fps MV. Took a nice (35") Oryx at a lazered 200 yards. Quartering away shot so I placed the bullet abaft the last rib and angled it forward to the opposite shoulder. Complete penetration and about a 40 plus caliber exit hole. LOTS of devastation inside as I suspect the bullet expanded dramatically as it traveresed the paunch and into the vitals. Animal walked about ten yards and dropped. jorge

Jorge:
Congrats! That's a big bodied animal as well, how long do you think the pentration channel was before it exited?
Funny Story about bullet selection:
I read a post on Big Game Net I think, of a guy who said he was not ever going to use TSX again. I guess he was going for a Texas Heart Shot. He shot an Elk and the 180 gr went from the hindquarter to the neck along the spine, messed up the loin meat and stopped in the spine at the neck. Dead Right There! So why was he upset? All the petals came off the bullet (he even posted a pix of it IIRC). If the bullet would come apart that way, it can't be trusted...and I would add you can't fix stupid! I hope to heck he was kidding...he has a gun...

Steve

Toss aside the non-sense that the slower heavier is better with the TSX. Shoot them as fast as possible while retaining accuracy. Use the lightest bullet you can shoot great.

The difference is significant, TSX + high Velocity = devastating

They are far better then what we all grew up using cup and core technology!

This comes from seeing many hundreds of plains game killed with them over the last 5 years now.

JJHACK,
You have some pretty good engineering talent in agreement with you - the ballistics guy from Barnes, Tim, said pretty much the same thing! Of course they only have field reports of Barnes users, so their sample is biased. I happen to agree, but my experience is limited.

They of course, went a tad further, explaining why they were better than "bonded designs", but they already had my attention. I suppose the mono-metal camp got stonger when Hornady came out with their "me too" product- it'll be hard for them to run down mono-metals from here on out....and "bonded" really is an attempt to make different metals behave as if they were one...there I go stirring the pot! BUT Barnes muddied the water with the MRX line, no longer a mono-metal...I imagine someone out there right now is pushing for a max velocity load of a 165 MRX in .308 - more room in the case...or in .375!

Where do you think the tech will be in 5 years? Or has it topped out?

some well published gunwriters have made the same claim !!!!

I have seen all the petals come off not only Barnes X's but some other petal-type bullets. In each instance tha animal died really, really quickly--which is why I have published statements along the line of "Who cares?" When they lose their petals it's generally because they hit some big bone (often the spine), and even if they do the front end is always expanded beyond the initial caliber anyway, so acts as as a wider "flat-point," which is very deadly itself.

One of the monometals, the G-S Custom, is even designed to lose its petals at normal velocity ranges, and kills very well indeed.

Vagabond,

Just noticed your post on the SHO. No, they aren't all that big--about like big mule deer--but they are tough animals, as all oryxes are. And delicious!

John, you of course, are not who I was referring to.

I've had similar discussions with folks over the years who claimed that Nosler Partitons were no good either because the front half always came apart. They always seemed surprised when I told them it was supposed to do that and that all the pieces that were shed continued to do damage and created a wider, more lethal wound.

Yeah, Phil, I knew you weren't referring to me! In fact, I believe I know who you were referring to.

Still dunno if we are going to make it to any of the shows. Are you and Rocky going to travel further than SHOT and SCI this year? There is always more research that needs to be done beyond the hunting fields.....

JJH, and others. If barnes tsx fast = devastating. How fast is fast and how light/ cal do you go? I am sure how light/ cal. you can go depends on what it is you are shooting.
I guess maybe a better way to ask the question is what would be your target velocity? For example I have a 7mm-08, 280 ackley and 7mm weatherby. Should I pick the 120 tsx and go for max vel in each? Or pick the bullet that reaches a certain optimum vel. for each case?
Just like everthing in life I would imagine you try to find a nice balance. 120 for the 7mm-08 and 280. 140 gr for 280 and 7mm weath.
Dean