Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Fresh Evaluation of the "Copper Bullets"...

when it comes to monos sectional density don't mean squat. A 110 that retains 95% weight will out penetratey a 150 that loses 50% of its weight

There is a tendency to think that way, it seems. However, while they do seem to be less critical when it comes to weight selection, it isn't exactly true either to think that SD doesn't come into play. You may not see much difference when animals are relatively light though.

That'd be my thoughts as well. I hunted TX last month and there were no shot opportunities past 166yds. If I'm able to go back next year, I'm seriously considering using a 110gr TTSX out of my 30-06. The 165gr Partitions worked well (killed 3 small hogs with 1 shot) but might try the Barnes for R&D next time.

yep, that's not impressive to me either.

I'm a big mono fan. Just a couple related thoughts...

I think the frontal area has more to do with penetration than almost any other factor.

I'm interested in experimenting with the Barnes Long Range TSX as they have designed it to work within a wider velocity window - read: perhaps a bit more explosive in terms of initial expansion????

Waitin' for DeFlave to weigh in on that....

I tested several copper bullets with cow femurs and newspaper.

Etip gmx tsx ttsx

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/7395724/all

I have killed roughly 10 bull elk and various other game with 165 grain X bullets from a 300 Wby. I recovered a grand total of ONE bullet; a mule deer that I shot facing me and the bullet traveled the length of the neck and part of the spine, breaking it in the process. All the rest were complete pass-throughs so I didn't get to see what they looked like. When shooting feral cattle and horses, pass-throughs were not the norm. Generally, a 180 grain X bullet would not exit but I never bothered to dig them out!

They sure do penetrate just fine. I don't think that is ever the question!

Dennis,

Excellent point. Testing bullets in various kinds of media provides some idea of how they MIGHT perform in the field, but shooting animals is the real test.

This is exactly why bullet companies who care about how their bullets perform normally test a new bullet in at least two kinds of media, then test them on actual animals before releasing the bullet for sale. Even then they will probably tweak the bullet further as more information comes in from the field.

There really isn't much point, however, in media testing bullets that have already been on the market for a long time. We know what they will do.

Anymore, I media-test bullets ONLY when something new comes on the market, and then compare the tests to other bullets that might be used for the same purpose. When Nosler introduced the first "heavy jacket" Ballistic Tip, the 200-grain .338, about 20 years ago, I tested it in media alongside the 210 Partition.

The 200 BT penetrated about 90% as deep as the Partition, and made an even bigger hole. That told me everything I needed to know, so I then started "testing" it on big game. It worked great and still does, so I haven't bothered to retest it on media.

When I do bother to shoot a time-tested bullet into media, it's to provide a base-line for a new bullet, as in the above experiment.

With a 300 weatherby you could shoot any bullet out of it and get a kill, different matter for a 30-30>Same goes for my 378 bee. I've shot lots of animals with every produced bullet from all the different manufactures and they all killed them dead.
.

JB: Ive got a question on the monos, specifically the TTSXs...

I find in my .223AI with a 50 TTSX that velocity is 200 feet slower than it is for the same charge behind a 55 grain cnc bullet. I attribute this to less bearing surface and different alloy than gilding metal equaling less pressure.

Does that sound right?


And if so, would stepping up in weight to a 55 or heavier grain TTSX increase the bearing surface and result in a velocity increase???

A very experienced ballistic lab technician told me the bullets he's found that create the LEAST pressure for their diameter and weight are light TSX's. They have the fewest driving bands so have even less bearing surface than heavier TSX's. He often has to go to a faster burning powder with light TSX's to get top velocities.

Plus, the core of a typical 55-grain C&C .224 bullet is usually a relatively soft lead alloy. This can also cause the bullet to "bump up" to fit the bores of individual rifles more closely, increasing pressure.

Less pressure = less velocity.

While 'killing' IS the primary goal of shooting (hunting)animals, 'how' the bullet performs is very important.

I am speaking for a total of one, myself, I demand a bullet to hold together and not to explode or separate in several pieces. When hunting 'stuff' happens and sometimes the bullet does not hit precisely where we want it to hit. Maybe there's been deflection by something unseen. Maybe the animal takes a step or turns at exactly the wrong moment, et.al.

The more violently the bullets opens/explodes the more/greater tissue damage is done. That's fine IF it's in the lungs but I don't want it to pulverize the shoulder, backstrap, or ham. And in some of those instances the death may occur much later and the animal might not be recovered.

We as hunters must determine what we call/determine what is acceptable bullet 'performance'. For ME, just because the animal dies does not mean the bullet performed properly.

Thanks JB!!!

Its what I suspected for an answer....


But usually when I think I have something figured out...well, you know....

For the hell of it I calculated the centrifugal force for you just to see what would happen. Being pressed for time this evening I didn't bother to look into actual rpm values for a 243 and 338, just plugged and chugged with those rpm numbers.

For a 95 grain .243 bullet:
270k rpm = 3,414 lbf
135k = 853 lbf

For 250 gr .338 bullet:
270k rpm = 12,497 lbf
135k rpm = 3,124 lbf

So yes, both bigger bullet and higher rpms yields substantially higher centrifugal force.

I agree with what you say but when you move up to a .375 caliber shooting from 300 -235 grain bullets from all the manufactures, it doesn't really make much difference unless your shooting Rhinos and elephants. Bullet construction seems to come into play more and more as you drop toward a 22 caliber. That is too say -as men become more girly or older they seem to pick up lighter and smaller calibers and try to make up the loss in energy by increasing bullet efficiency. For example-I've killed more than one moose/bears after the bullet had gone through some large trees. Small calibers don't even try.

i dont know if its more girly or taking advantage of advances in bullet construction

Well, I didn't know you had 'flame' retardant suits in Kana-duh .

I agree with your position per the 375. However in the Southern half of the USA we don't have game large enough to NEED 338-458 cartridges. Even using the 8mm RM, which isn't miniscule, you need to use a tough bullet.

How 'tough' is a personal decision.

I hunted with fellas from Los Angeles up here in the great white North. Some packed 458 mag for hunting in heavy brush often encountered in moose and bear country. Depends on the terrain your hunting in I guess, these LA fellas were not girly and didn't smoke dope either, but they sure can knock back the whiskey.

I think there may be something to this notion that a TSX/TTSX spinning fast may assist in internal damage and straight-line penetration. This is the only TSX I've been able to recover, a 62gr bullet from my 1-8" twist 223AI. It went through a lot of meat and bone on a large hog, and while it did not punch through the hide, there was a very good blood trail due to the amount of blood and foam coming out of the hog's nose and mouth. The petals of the recovered bullet were certainly twisted hard in the direction of the rotation.