You guys who hunt Africa, what do you think of the three following quotes from another forum?

"I know an African guide who says there is no bullet as good as the Barnes TSX 270 grain from a .375 H&H and the Barnes TSX 165 grain from a .30-06. He participates or observes scores of kills every year. He told me, "At first the Barnes were junk." He went on to say, "Within a couple years they were the absolute best bullet as far as I'm concerned. I have my hunters use either of my rifles on any size game when I can get them to. I have many returning customers who used magnums come back the next time .30-06 and Barnes 165 grainers."


"I have talked to two guys about building rifles who hunt Africa regularly and their PH's both started recommending Accubonds over TTSX because their loosing more game, though that was interesting."

"Barnes in a 375 and larger are a much different animal that the lighter cals, though you hit an animal with a 520 gr solid lead bullet out of a 45-70 vs a Barnes and the lead will scare you what you'll shoot through!"

I had a very well respected veteran of many African hunts, and a member here tell me that the tales of how tough African plains game are often exaggerated. Now I've only killed a touch over 30 head over there, nothing the size of eland yet, but my conclusion is that he is correct. Well placed 7mm accubonds and partitions kill them stone cold dead.

Poor shooting, not bullet failure.

I had zero issues with Barnes bullets in Africa and any place else I used them.From Springbok to Eland. My PH loves them and way happy to I was using them

On my one and only hunt so far in Africa, my brother and I borrowed our PH's Sako 30-06 loaded with Barnes TSX 165 gr. bullets at about 2800fps. Every one of the 16 animals we shot well died quickly. The Eland I shot badly at about 300 yards needed several more shots. The Mountain Reedbuck that my brother shot too far back needed a finisher. All the others, including another Eland, a Zebra, a Wildebeest, 2 Kudu and and Oryx were quick one shot kills.
It's the only bullet that particular PH uses any more. He really has faith in them.
But I'd be just as happy with 180 grain N. Partitions, A frames, or several other good bullets.

Barnes are nothing short of excellent on African game.


But so are a lot of other bullets......

I'm always pleased to see my hunters show up with the TSX, two holes trump one in about every case I can think of.

Accurate, dependable, solid penetrators. I just don't see a downside to them in any circumstance. I know that plenty of other bullets work with stellar results. I'm not even gonna debate that other bullets don't perform well.

For my money and with my 20 plus years doing this, the TSX bullet is the best game in town.

I've used Barnes in 4 of my African hunts.

One trip to Zimbabwe and South Africa with 300 grain TSX bullets in my .375 RUM used on 5 animals from bushbuck to buffalo.

One trip to the Eastern Cape of South Africa with 270 grain TSX bullets in my .375 RUM used on 13 animals from steenbok to eland.

One trip to the Limpopo Province of South Africa with 168 grain TTSX bullets in my .300 Weatherby used on 5 animals from a klipspringer to a sable.

And on one trip to Mozambique with 168 grain TTSX bullets in my .300 Weatherby used on 5 animals from a baboon to a leopard and a sable.

Ranges varied from 20 to 348 yards, and all of the bullets performed very well. Most of the bullets passed completely through the animals, and the ones that we did recover expanded to the advertised Barnes mushroom retaining almost 100% of their original weight. Only a couple of the recovered bullets were missing one "petal" that were evidently broken off when the bullets hit major bones.

I have been fortunate enough to make two trips to Africa in the past 5 years.

On the first trip to the RSA, in 2000, in the Limpopo Provence, I killed 10 plains game animals with my Remington, Model 700, in .338 Win Mag, and 210 gr Barnes TSX.

In 2015, I returned to the RSA for Cape Buffalo with a .416 Rigby and then on to Namibia for plains game with the same .338 Win Mag. I took another 12 plains game animals with the .338, with the same bullet.

I am a firm believer in that combination. No misses and no lost animals.

donsm70

I've used the 300 grain Barnes TSX in my 375 H&H on three hunts in Africa and can't complain about their performance on game from Cape Buffalo to Steenbok.

Saying that, I'm taking the 200 grain CEB Raptor ER bullets for Nyala and bushbuck in April because of their flatter trajectory.

We have been to South Africa twice, using 300 Winch Mag 165 TTSX Barnesk, 340 Weatherby Mag, 225 TTSX, 375 H&H 300 TSX and again in June, Rose will use the 375 300 TSX again and I will use 500 Gr TSX in my 458 Win. All of these have been accurate and performed well on gamae from Lioness to Eland to Springbuck. Honestly, I wouldn't use anything else, except for the Nosler Solids were bringing. Patrick

I've used 180 Accubonds out of a 300 win and 270 and 300 grain TSX out of my 375H&H. I've shot springbok up to cape buffalo. In all cases bullets performed exactly as advertised.

I did shoot an eland with a 180 Accubond on my 1st plains game safari and although they worked the eland was not impressed and required several follow up Accubonds. I would have much preferred to have used either of the 375 TSX rounds on eland.

On my 2nd trip I used the 375 exclusively with 300 grain bullets. Worked fine on plains game, leopard, and cape buffalo.

Properly applied on game either bullet works extremely well. I think the key is to make sure that the caliber and bullet is adequate for the game you will be hunting.

I will agree that African game animals are seriously tough critters so my thoughts on caliber and bullet weights are bigger is better.

I've killed an ellie with a .400 gr Barnes solid and used the same bullet for my second and third shots on a charging buff with great results.

Other than that I have used a .400 gr Swift A-frame for my first buff. It died fairly quickly from a single shoulder shot from about 30 yards. The PH recovered the bullet and stated it retained about 85% of its weight after smashing both shoulders (this was in a .416 Rem Mag).

It looks like I might be using Federal TSBs for my solids on my next safari.

BH63

Between me and my father, we put 6 cape buffalo in the salt with 400 grain TSX bullets in our .416 Rigbys (carried solids for follow-up). I would hesitate to recommend anything else for a bolt-action rifle for buffalo. If you are wanting to shoot a double, that's a different story (country was too open to bring these out of the case this year).

In a 300 caliber rifle, it's hard to go wrong with Barnes, AccuBonds, or Partitions. If you put it where it needs to go, the trackers will come through on their end of the bargain.

If you are a handloader, give Peregrine Bullets a look. We gave them some field testing in their development and they are a nice bullet.

I used a .338 160gn TTSX at ~3050fps and they worked really well. Shots were 50-200 yds, animals were Impala, Blesbok, Gemsbok, Waterbuck, and Kudu. None went far, no follow-ups required. I aim for heart shots, so no DRTs, but no real tracking involved either. Zero complaints from me or my PHs.

The PHs were not big fans of Barnes bullets. Didn't hate them, just not their first choice. They had enough occasions where they felt the way the bullet hit bone caused the tip to bend closed and thus not open resulting in a rodeo.

I've used plenty of TSX's myself in Africa, and been alongside hunting partners who used plenty as well. They work great, but in general I've found the smaller-bore models, .30 and under, tend to kill quicker when pushed at least close to 3000 fps. With the bigger calibers velocity doesn't matter much.

I used a .375 H&H with 300 grain TSX bullets in Zimbabwe on a variety of game from impala to buffalo and they worked great. I plan to use the same on my next Africa trip.

338-06 and 210 TTSX will always be with me in Africa.

I've used TSXs on all my African hunts, in one caliber or other. I've also killed several hundred animals with them on 4 continents. Obviously they work.

"Working" is one thing, "best" is another. Since every bullet has a blend of different characteristics which often work against each other, and people have different ideas of what optimum is, best is just a matter of opinion. One man's best is another mans adequate. Passion to one is poison to another.

I can well imagine some PHs preferring a good bonded, hard hitting bullet like an Accubond over an extreme penetrating mono-bullet and just as easily can see others liking it the other way around. I myself fell out of love with TSXs a long time ago. That doesn't mean I hate them, but do prefer others most of the time.

Barnes TSX/TTSX > North Fork SS/PP?

Headed back to Namibia this Fall and have been giving a lot of thought to bullet selection. Leaning towards the NF but have found this thread to be quite informative regarding Barnes bullets.

Believe JJ and believe Ingwe. They know!!!

I use TSX for everything except my doubles.

Partitions work - done that. RWS H-Mantals are great but you can't find them. Accubonds are Partitions+. You won't go wrong with any of them but TSX work every time!

I'm highly suspect of anyone who states XYZ bullet brand is hands down the best and all others are not as good.

Usually that person either A) doesn't have much experience or B) deduces weird conclusions from shoddy data.

YMMV

"Quicker" as in about on par with lead core bullets?

IME, monos never kill quicker than an appropriate lead core bullet and if used in the wrong situation, kill MUCH slower.

Ringman, I will play devil's advocate here. When it comes to penetration, there are no bullets that can match bullets such as the expanding solids.e.g. Barnes, GS Custom, Peregrine etc.
Does it bother me when someone bring Barnes TSX, not in the slightest.
My rental camp rifle is a Ruger M77 in .300 Win Mag. I choose to shoot bonded lead core bullets in that over expanding solids such as Barnes.
Not that it is a negative, but let's call it a negative with the expanding solids, is that your shot placement has to be spot on with these bullets. Forget about the size of the perfectly formed mushroom for a second. All that does is that it enlarges the wound channel, which makes the animal expire quicker on a well placed shot. (Well placed shot).
Now, we are talking in a trophy hunting sense here, not meat hunting. If we were talking about meat hunting, I would not be using the .300Win in the first place, not to mention with lead core bullets.
I'm sure many have seen the bruising that is caused by a .300Win Mag, the very reason not many guys use them for meat hunting. This is exactly why I use it for trophy hunting...with a lead core bullet.
A bonded lead core bullet will usually throw it's nose, and you will have some copper jacket and core shrapnel flying in different directions upon impact, followed by the bonded core moving in a straight direction. Should the shot not be 100% placed, it is the shrapnel that might just catch the back of the lung, liver or any other vital part and give you that "second chance".
The shrapnel from breaking up plays a big part in the bruising. Bruising means, body trauma, which in essence means that it is just another step towards either slowing the animal down, which certainly helps our dogs, or ultimately the animal expiring.
If we were into meat hunting, it would be a different game, but we are here to find our hunters' animals.
So, I can totally relate to point number two.
Barnes is a great bullet, and many here know how "pro expanding solid" I am.
Like I said, certainly not against them, but I believe that this is a "horses for courses" scenario.
For your hunts, your ammunition is probably the smallest investment that you have to make per animal. Always use the best. I have never had a Nosler, whether Partition or Accubond fail on any of our safaris, but strange things happen. Saw a Swift A-Frame fail the other day for the first time. Not one of my own hunters. I believe they are very near to the top of lead core bullets when it comes to quality. One fail does not make them a bad bullet. At the velocities that bullets travel, anything can happen.

I used Barnes 286 grain bullets last year in a Ruger #1 9.3X74R. Launched at only 2300 fps, they worked absolutely perfectly. I killed 10 animals plus another couple whitetail this fall. I have used A-Frames and Northforks with great results, too.

I'll stick with Woodleigh in 375 and Orxy in anything smaller.

Could you explain in what way that the A-Frame failed? What happened?

bellydeep,

On average, I've never found a monolithic that killed as quickly as most lead-cored bullets when using rib shots, given the same bullet weight and velocity.

But give a mono some real zip and they can do pretty well! One of the most spectacular kills I've seen occurred when my wife shot an average-sized mule deer buck with a 100-grain TSX started at 3550 fps from a .257 Weatherby. The range was about 160 yards, and Eileen put it right behind the shoulder. The next thing we saw was four hooves waving feebly above the sagebrush.

I know a lot of people who think monolithics (or similar bullets such as the Fail Safe, which worked exactly the same way) are quick killers. But I've been using them since the late 1980's, when the first Barnes X's appeared, and prefer not to use any from .30 caliber on down unless they're started out pretty fast.

Let me check if I c find the photo and story behind it.

Your experience is exactly as mine. It's why I tell the folks to step down one bullet weight with the TSX

Example 165r in the 30 calibers and 270 grain in the 375, or in the case of my work rifle the 450 grain with the Lott.

These lighter weights generate a more obvious impact then the standard weight bullets. The visual impact is the most consistent difference between an animal hit with a bonded core and a TSX. I cannot begin to count the amount of game that has run after being shot without a sliver of visual impact. Yet they were drilled clean through the chest. By comparison the bonded core like the swift A frame will usually stagger or create a shudder and a hind leg kick upon impact.

That is about were they differ the most. From this point, the bonded core will in most cases remain inside and provide an entry hole. While the TSX will have exited and provided two holes.

I've killed a lot of game with the Swift A frame. They were supplying me with bullets for several years to use in Africa. I have probably 75 plus here glued to a board with the details written next to the bullets. On that same board I have maybe a dozen TSX of all calibers as an example of recover percentages.

I have never liked the minimal impacts so common with the TSX, but that is a fair exchange for the two blood flowing holes provided.

A fella that hunts with me in Africa frequently uses a 300 weatherby Mag 26" barrel and shoots the 165 TSX. I never personally chronographed them and he did not either. I would guess they were 3300-3400? Those had instant impact reactions way more often then not. Impalas displayed the red mist so common with prairie dogs! Even tougher game like Zebra and wildebeest met their match with that high speed TSX bullet.

There is no question in my experience that the faster the TSX is driven the more spectacular the impact reaction. I'm not sure how low in weight you can go? I did load some 225( iirc) into my 375HH they were at 3000fps. PG was just crumpled with this bullet, however I could not get very good accuracy with those bullets. I'm thinking there was a twist and bullet length mismatch at the higher velocities?

I do think you could go down to the 150gr in a 30 caliber and be just fine. I stubbornly stuck with the 165's because they just worked so good. After all a 165 TSX at 2900plus is a far better killer then a 300 win mag with a 180 grain factory load shooting a cup and core bullet. That's not a bad rifle to hunt with, mild recoil in a old an boring 30/06 with the lethal potential of a 300 magnum using cup and core factory ammo!

John,

I have yet to see them beat a lead core bullet, even once, but haven't given up yet.

Lately I've been launching the 80gr TTSX in a .25-06 and the 150 TTSX in a .300 Wby.

I would think that would be fast enough?

I'll keep trying with the monos from time to time. But so far, I haven't seen any real spectacular kills with them.

Can't agree with that.


Killing Power figure at 100 yards:

.30-06 Springfield (150 grain at 2920 fps) - 37.3
.30-06 Springfield (180 grain at 2700 fps) - 49.2

.300 Winchester Magnum (180 grain at 2960 fps) - 59.5

Here are my limited killing power numbers
185gr TTSX .338-06 @2950 fps
8 for 8 on game with 4 DRT others short track and plenty of blood
Bullets recovered from Eland(359 yds)Wildebeest(310yds)Zebra(300yds)

You have not considered the retained weight and penetration difference.

How many cup and core bullets have you recovered with even 50% weight retention at 300 mag velocities? They crumble and go to pieces.

The 165 grain TSX will still be 165 grain when ( if) you can find it! There is absolutely no comparison in performance on game. Maybe with some type of math formula but not where the rubber meets the road with actual game experience.

I've used Barnes TSX on three trips and in .308 and 9.3 to harvest about three dozen animals. The only issue I have is blood trails are a few yards befor starting if there is a blood trail at all. Had a well hit Wildebeest leave no blood and was found the next day. A broadside lung hit waterbuck went a long ways and only left a blood trail the last 10 Yds. Except for my Montana Mule deer I've used TTSX on deer, boar, antelope and coyotes for the past four years.

Not quite sure what lead core bullets you have over there? 50%?
The .300Mag hits harder than any .30-06 any day of the year.

The bullet is not 50% of the weight by the time it reaches the animal. The pieces get dumped inside the animal. By that time, the animal has already been "hit"
As I said, the 300 hits harder than any 30-06.
I've seen the 300 break the shoulder on a Blue Wildebeest at 210yds, and still exit on the other side, and that was with a lead core bullet.

Regarding penetration, I don't argue. Nothing beats an expanding solid for penetration. It still has nothing to do with the hitting power.

Any reports on the 250 TTSX from a .375?

Carry on, you've missed the point entirely

Play nice this isn't the optics forum

DVD,
Those photos that you've posted is exactly what you would expect from a Barnes. All of the Barnes that I have recovered looked like that.
Unfortunately, I just never could get them to produce acceptable groups in my rifle, so went back to the GS Custom.

Marius as you know bullet placement trumps all
this is how my rifle shoots those 185gr TTSX's

3 shot group

Barnes bullets...like Porsches, there ARE no substitutes...

I have a 308Win. What would be the recommended weight barnes bullet? 130gr ttsx?

Yes. With Barnes speed is your friend, moreso than weight.

I'd work up loads with 150gr TTSX

That group needs to get tighter....

Are you kidding me? That group is just ridiculous for any hunting rifle.
Great stuff. Very happy that they perform for you.



I think you are on the right track. Check your twist rate, it will pretty much tell you where you need to go. Might very well have been my mistake by going too heavy.

I've had great luck with 150TTSX in my .308. I've also taken game with the 168TSX with the same DRT effect.

Ok I have access to 120 acres of prime whitetail country in NW Montana.

I will pay the NR license fees for anyone who can show up and demonstrate a DRT with a Barnes bullet in a lung/heart shot deer.

If the deer isn't DRT, you owe me the cash in the same amount as the license fee.

Because quite frankly, they don't DRT with Barnes unless you hit shoulders or CNS. And any bullet will DRT them in that location.

I'm tired of everyone acting like Barnes is some magical bullet. Time to put your money where your mouth is.

That escalated quickly...

Bullsh.it!! I have witnesses that the last 4 animals (3 deer and an elk) didn't take a step. They went down in their tracks. Your experience may be different and that's fine, but to say it's impossible is not only extremely ignorant it's a lie.

That's what I thought.

Who ever said anything about a DRT with a lung or heart shot?

I've driven 140 TSXs up to 3500 in the STWs, 100s at the same speed in a couple .257 Weatherbys, and the 80 grain TTSX up 3950 fps in the .257 Weatherby. When are they going to start working as well as lead?

Granted, they do work quite well for shooting through things lengthwise, and do OK when plowed through both shoulders with maybe a chunk of spine taken out. Never mind that you can say the same thing about a 100 year old .303 British with military hard-point. That would just confuse things.

I would go with what John B recommends that in .30 caliber and under use TTSX over .30 doesn't seem to matter.

One thing is most PH's recommend on the shoulder shots and this is where the Barnes doe's its best work. This is where a tougher bullets shines regardless of the myth or fact of which game is tougher.

The Barnes may not kill as quickly as some but I would rather have the dependability and confidence vs. dramatic drops but erratic performance of the more frangible bullets.

My limited experience on Barnes and other bullets on African plainsgame...

7mm 140gr from an STW Sako 75 chrono'ed at 3396 fps, dropped a Mt Reedbuck in his tracks. Hammer of Thor.

Same combo shot a White Blesbok at 278 yds, angled shot, took one step and fell over.

Same combo on a Fallow Deer running up a steep hill away from me at 250 yds, entered left hind quarter and ended up under the skin of the right front shoulder... traversed about 36" of body and the deer instantly fell over. My only recovered TSX, it was missing 3 petals, only had one remaining and it was sticking straight out.



Same 140gr combo on a Black Springbok... shot head-on through the lower central part of the chest, he wobbled for about 20' and fell over.

.30 cal 168gr TSX from 300WSM at 3127fps.... Shot a large Brindled Gnu at 255yds through the bottom of the lungs and hit the heart... he ran 100yds blowing huge red clouds of blood mist and keeled over after running out of oxygen to the brain.

Same 168gr TSX into a Red Hartebeest... took 3 steps and keeled over.

I've also used a .30-06 with a 180gr Nosler Partition at 98 yds on a Kudu, angled shot, took 5 steps and fell over. Recovered bullet was missing everything ahead of the partition and weighed about 100grs, iirc.

Just to point out this for others. Your 180 grain lead and copper jacket bullet lost about 80 grains. Almost 50%!

Curious, have you ever noticed a Barnes TSX bullet losing this much weight after recovery?

But, in all fairness, that is what a partition is designed to do.

I just dug out these bullets and re-weighed them.

The Barnes TSX 140gr that went through the length of a Fallow Deer, that came up missing 3 petals, weighs 117.8grs. 84% retention.

The 180gr Nosler Partition weighs 108grs for 60% retention.

I have one other recovered bullet... a 150gr Winchester PowerPoint that was shot from a 270WSM and took a Black Wildebeest. It weighed 112 grs for 75% retention.


All of these bullets did their jobs. I have never had a "bullet failure" from any type of style or construction. They all worked. But this is only my very limited experience. A PH or guide would see a lot more bullet terminal performance results.

Buying the extra "T" is never a bad thing. Just as with powders, you're getting the "extreme" line of bullets which produce more consistent results and less sensitivity to temperature and speed. Not surprisingly, the TTSX emulates the Partition in many cases by shedding a portion from its front. Bullets which open very consistently, yet penetrate deeply - even after the loss of the initial 'bloom' and at the expense of some mass, have a very long track record for reliability. Those who hunt in warmer climes may not notice these advantages as much.

Klik, with all due respect, how does a bullet like the TTSX that typically retains near 100% (I hear, but have no actual experience with them)of it's weight, emulate a partition that typically sheds 40% of it's weight?

The TSX is good for near-perfect weight retention. From what I have seen or observed in seeing what others have found however, the TTSX appears to be the better bullet even at the not-infrequent expense of some petals. Even the plastic tip in the larger front opening can't overcome the hardness/toughness that copper has versus lead, but it seems to be a significant move in that direction.

I was a big copper fan for a number of years until I was turned off by a number of factors. One of the big complaints leveled against early Xs was the idea that they lost petals and penciled on through. The TTSX seems much more inclined to lose its petals when challenged, yet people seem to be okay with that. Fickle bunch we are, huh?

Many of the early Barnes X's (pre-TSX) also lost their petals. Hunters complained, for whatever reason, which puzzled Randy Brooks somewhat, because he hadn't found petal-retention made much difference in the way they killed or penetrated. But he decided to make customers happy, so fooled around with the design until they retained most petals, most of the time. This made people who judge bullet performance on weight retention happy.

I've shot a bunch of X's, TSX's and TTSX's into big game animals, along with various other petal-type bullets, some actually designed to lose their petals. Like Randy, I never noticed much difference in on-game performance, but no doubt many other people will disagree.

Cutting Edge Raptors lose their petals by design.

What I've seen is pretty impressive, they work.

DF

I was likely one of the most outspoken PH's against the Barnes X bullet for the first decade or so they were made. I never experienced more bizarre and horrible performance in all other bullets types combined!

When the TSX was introduced I had hunters use them with 100% perfect results. It left me wondering if they finally had the metallurgy correct, the bands cut into the base to ride the rifling, and possibly the way the tip was made to increase the way they open.

I had the fortunate opportunity to visit the Barnes plant in Utah and met with the folks there. They had me take a few boxes to load and try on the African game to see for myself. I did this in 30/06, 458 ( for my Lott) and 375HH

Accuracy was perfection, even out to very long 500 yard shots with the 30/06! 5"-6" groups were normal! Barrel fouling was absent, what a huge improvement compared to the effort to clean a barrel after the original X bullets I had used in the past.

Performance on game for me that next season was 100% flawless. This was for many dozens of animals of my own and likely another 50-100 for my hunters that used the TSX bullets.

About this point in my career I have gone from the worst marketing nightmare Barnes could have had, to a 100% converted fan of the TSX product. There was a very important element that came about with this migration. Lighter then normal bullets for the cartridge size driven as fast as possible provided a much better level of performance. Especially with the visual impact of the bullet on big game.

We all know, or should know that the heavier the object the harder it is to slow down. With this, it seems contradictory that I would suggest a lighter projectile. Here is the interesting part of this. With a cup and core bullet, you need to start out with a reasonable weight. As we know those bullets will shed weight at the moment of impact and typically fail to 50% of the starting weight. In some cases much less then that if bones are struck. As the bullet begins coming apart it's mass diminishes and it's penetration begins to slow to a crawl. Sure there are fragments that may cause additional internal damage but they will not provide the bone crunching immobilizing power that is needed to anchor a big animal. Those secondary fragments will often be absolutely lethal over some time period. Where a solid mass has the immobilizing effect instantly with broken bones

So shooting a 180 grain bullet at say 3100fps from a magnum cartridge would have significant "additional velocity" above the design threshold of the .308 diameter bullets originally designed velocity window. It's high velocity impacts will really shatter the integrity of the bullet and cause it to crumble and go to pieces at a far higher rate then the same bullet from say a .308 winchester at 2600fps. Since all .308 diameter cup and core bullets are designed with a velocity window that suits the majority of cartridges used, the 300 Magnums are at the highest end of the velocity design spectrum. What this means is that a 300 magnum needs the toughest bullets made to allow them to stay together long enough to drill through the chest of a big game animal and stay together.

When the TSX came on the scene, They gave the handloader the benefit of stepping down one weight in bullet, and driving them as fast as possible. What this did in most cases was increase the lethal power of standard cartridges into the light magnum category. Take the 270/7mm mag, the 30/06-300 mag as an example. The 7mm mag with a cup and core bullet hitting an animal at 100 yards would in most cases cause that cup and core bullet to explode into countless small bits scattered throughout the body. I've witnessed this more times then I can count. Large diameter wounds that are usually shallow and with brutal visual effect!

Same with the 30/06 and the 300 mag. The 300 mag has astonishing killing power. However it also had the reputation of frequent bullet " failure". Meaning it was very hard to keep bullets intact at close range. I've recovered well over 100's of pieces of copper jacket in lots of big game animals with no piece of lead big enough to pick up. Just lead shrapnel inside the skin and meat.

Enter the 165TSX bullet that is going 2900+fps VS the 180 grain cup and core bullet from the 300 mag going about 3100fps. Here we have only a 200fps difference between the two projectiles. Yet after impact you have the 180 grain cup and core bullet disintegrating and the 165 grain TSX bullet staying fully intact. After personally witnessing hundreds of animals shot with both of these, the 165grain deep penetration and bone breaking power easily trumps the fragmented cup and core projectile of the 300 magnum.

Even when you lose the folded back petals of a TSX bullet, the shank alone continues to drive straight through and bash it's way across and out the exit side. Sometimes all we find is a copper petal or two of the TSX bullet, but there is an exit hole. That is not something you will typically find with a cup and core bullet. Once they begin to disintegrate they don't often have enough remaining mass to exit.

It's easy to imagine then what the power capability is of a 300 mag with a 180 grain TSX bullet driven to max velocity would be! I've seen them use the 165's with spectacular results as well. Now shooting that bullet to 3250-3300fps with near full weight retention is another level of power you have to see to get the full understanding of.

As far as the TTSX is concerned. I'm of the opinion that that little plastic tip is a comforting visual effect. For those nervous about the rumors of old that the Barnes X bullets don't open up all the time. I've never recovered a TSX that was not opened, sure the majority don't stay inside, I agree and understand that. However of those that exit, the damage path and the occasional copper petal show that even those that exited opened up and created a significant trauma path through the body.

I find no flaw whatsoever in the TTSX, I however continue to use the TSX with 100% confidence in them .

Great report, JJ.

Thanks for sharing.

DF

I think one of the reasons the early versions may have lost petals may have been due to the fact that they tended to open wider and flatter - there was more 'meat' in the ogive on them.



...like this 225 gr .338 XFB

The later ones moved toward a sleeker ogive which seemed more inclined to curl tight and small..



...like this 100 gr .284 XFB

This latter bullet had an ogive shape very similar to the TSX which followed it and they seem to be less inclined to open as wide. Some have suggested that the problem in opening that I have seen might have to do with the not-infrequent use of them that we see when the temps are colder. I'm not sure that I buy that since 100 degrees is hardly much when considering metals and metalurgy, but who knows? I'm glad that they seem to work well in warmer climates for whatever reason(s). I still like the idea of their tipped versions for greater consistency and reliability, as well as the concept of shooting bones with them. They are hard to improve upon for shooting bony structres.

Klik,

You may be right about the ogive shape.

I started using more X's with the advent of the blue-coated XLC, partly because the coating did reduce the fouling issue, though it didn't always solve the accuracy problems, by any means. But by the late 90's Randy had come a long way in solving the copper-supply variations, and the bullets themselves were also far more consistent. My rifles started shooting far more X's accurately, and I never experienced any problems with expansion even on pronghorns at 400 yards--though unless the bullet were coated the fouling problem remained.

The TSX's solved the fouling problem, but I did see a few fail to open, but only in calibers from .24 to .30, apparently because the hollow-point was so small it could be closed by recoil-slamming against the front of the magazine. Have never seen any .224 TSX's or over-.30 TSX's fail to expand.

Have been using TTSX's, E-Tips and GMX's since 2007 with zero expansion problems. The only time any has lost any petals was when they hit heavy bone.

Something that has always puzzled me when reading about X-Bullets in the various generations are references to metallurgy/composition. The ads always state "100% Copper". Being a complete ninny when it comes to chemistry (among many, many other often-demonstrated things), I don't understand how the metallurgy/composition can vary.

It can. Not all copper is the same.

Bill Steigers of Bitterroot told me he had to reject as much copper as he accepted,because it did not meet his specs.

I'm no metallurgist,so can't say how it differed but apparently some stuff was not as malleable as others.It can affect how the bullets behave,expand, etc.

Speaking of metallurgy and malleability, isn't the LRX a bit softer, opens easier than the TTSX?

DF

I think it varies. As a general rule, yes. But, some of the standard TTSX are not the same as other. The 30 cal 168 TTSX comes to mind. Barnes quoted a minimum opening velocity of 1500 for that bullet. Others 1600, 1800, and even 2000. They are all slightly different as quoted by various Barnes techs.

I would imagine that copper, like many other metals, can be "100%" pure by some definition of purity, while yet having .04% - or whatever- of something which might affect the character of the metal. Certainly things like cartridge brass can be affected by the simply by the presence of fumes of materials like ammonia. Granted, brass is an alloy, but similarities might apply. Trace materials can be very damning when it comes to chemistry. And then there are factors like heat treatment of the metal. There is no easy way to harden copper alloys that are dead soft without cold-working them. Coils of copper wire that are supposed to have a specified hardness might be quite unsuitable if they are delivered in dead-soft condition. Then again, wire that is delivered too hard could be annealed, but that would add more expense. It might also depend on the entire batch being consistent throughout to start with.

Thanks Klik. It was all explained to me but too long ago and I have forgotten the details.

I do know Bill was very fussy about the materials he used which is one reason the bullets behaved so consistently,even caliber to caliber.

I used the 250 gr. Barnes TTSX in my .375 Ruger on the last African trip.

First critter I shot with it was a black Wildebeest, at a ranged 250 yards. A double lung hit with this bullet dropped him in his tracks, so fast we had to search a bit in the tall grass to find him. Bullet exited.
Used this same bullet on everything from little Springbok to a Sable, with great results, although the only DRT was the Wildebeest.
I have used the 270 gr. Barnes more frequently, and a couple of years ago took a Nilgai bull at 200+ yards, again with a sudden DRT result. The ranch manager I was hunting with said it was only the second time he had ever seen a Nilgai drop in its tracks.
Barnes bullets get used in everything I shoot at big game, either TSX or TTSX. They just work.

Fellas,
In 100 years, when all of us have returned to dust, this argument will still be going on. They will still be arguing about the best caliber as well.

The all copper bullets certainly have an advantage when it comes to penetration and it is without a doubt that they hold together much better than a lead core bullet. I don't think anyone in this thread will argue that. That is the basic laws of science, and you certainly don't have to be a physicist to figure that out.
To me, a Barnes losing its petals mid body of an animal is more a positive than a negative. Those petals, moving at that speed internally, are causing havoc, cutting through flesh, arteries, valves, and organs away from the temporary wound channel causing internal bleeding, with the solid shank still penetrating in a straight line, with the most probability of exiting. This is what I want from a bullet.
To put it into Layman's terms, the Barnes however, is almost too good for what I want it to do. It holds together almost every time, with the odd bullet losing it's petals and bits of shrapnel flying all over internally. (The trait that i am looking for in a bullet.)
If every shot from every single one of our hunters were made with 100% accuracy, on the shoulder, through the vitals, I would shoot Barnes. This is not the reality. Somehow, hunters get shaky in Africa, with strange animals around them, unfamiliar conditions and the desire to not make a mistake on his once in a life time hunt. Hunters get the fever and make less desirable shots. It's part of reality. Therefor, I use a bullet that first and foremost, has the quality to kill effectively when the bullet is placed in the correct area. For this, you need a high quality projectile with a strong construction. I also require a bullet that will cause the most body trauma, when the shot is not in the right area. Only a lead core bullet will give me this consistently. (Call it "controlled" failure" if you want.)
I shoot full copper bullets in some of my rifles. They have their place. I fire a 130gr expanding copper solid from my .308 now, at 2900fps. It yields almost 100% weight retention every time I recover a bullet. Does it hit harder than a 30-06 with a 165gr lead core? Never. It penetrates better sure, but just because the .30-06 loses 40gr inside the animal, does not make the .308 hit harder.
A simple example would be, to put yourself in the shoes of a meat hunter. What do most guys shoot for the least amount of meat damage? Full copper, expanding solids, or lead core bullets? It is without a doubt that the full copper bullets cause less meat damage than the lead core bullets. Meat damage, means body trauma. Body trauma slows any living being down, which increase our chance for recovery exponentially.

The only way that I can achieve what I am looking for in a bullet consistently, is to shoot a high quality lead core bullet from a powerful magnum caliber , such as Swift's, Rhino's from RSA, Accubonds etc from a .300Mag.

You do not get deader than dead!

3100fps from a .300Mag? Send me some of that powder and I'll send you lead core bullets that yield better than 50% weight retention.
I've had pass through s after breaking the shoulder on Blue's at 200yds with that .300, and all of the recovered bullets that we have managed to pull from the animals were between 75-87%. These are from the Federal Fusion range, which I try and shoot as far as availability is concerned.

The best that we get out of my .300Mag at safe operating levels with 180gr is 2880fps. Bare in mind, our powders are way behind the USA's availability and quality.
I would not shoot anything lighter than a 180gr in a .300Win, just as I would not shoot anything heavier than a 165gr in a .30-06. I think those are the two sweet spots on those two calibers.

Good luck chaps. There are very few actual bad bullets on the market today. I've said it before, one failure from a bullet manufacturer, does not make it a bad bullet.

Yeah, also had a hunter shooting that combo. Those 250's are deadly out of the .375H&H. I think it's a great combination between hitting power and a relatively flat trajectory.
I would not hesitate to recommend that combo, should it work in any hunter's rifle from plains game to Cape Buff.

Speaking of petals spinning off, creating havoc, has there been BG, PG reports on the use of Cutting Edge Raptors?

These are designed to have petals spinning off, doing damage while the core bores on thru.

My series of one medium sized hog, purposefully chest shot with a 135gr. Raptor out of a .308 was DRT with impressive tissue damage. Chest shot hogs often run off, this one got nailed.

Cutting Edge bullets seem to be as accurate as TTSX/TSX and other monometals.

DF

Marius: We can routinely get 3150 fps with 180s out of 300 Winchester Mags with NO problems whatsoever, as well as over 3K with the H&H. Like JJ well described, put me in the Barnes column!

Good for you guys. We don't have the luxury of premium powders on this side. We have one producer, which is local. My offer stands, send me some of that powder and I will send you decent lead core bullets. Apparently yours don't hold up very well.

Here is a question. When you buy your powders for any one of your weapons, and you already have your load that works for your rifle, let's say 4064, do you have to check online from the manufacturer, whether the powder is running hot or cold, and adjust your powder measure for that batch, or will each container be the same as the previous one you bought?

I've never called to ask, but wouldn't bet on powder manufacturers admitting lot to lot variation. They'd have to make that admission before giving out that info.

Don't count on it...

We generally find this out thru experimentation, loads clocked and compared.

DF

I am a fan of the TSX, but do not recommend them for cats. My recommendation for lion and leopard is a Nosler Partition or a Woodleigh Weldcore.

I agree, but have seen firsthand, the expanding solids to be devastating on Lion from a .375H&H

Marius,

Thanks for your input.

For some time, we're read very positive reports on the .270 TSX out of the .375 H&H and similar.

We're seeing a few reports of late about the 250 TTSX/.375 combo.

Do you see any difference between the two, or how would you compare them?

DF

DF,
My personal opinion is that those are the two bullets for the .375H&H that should be considered. Nothing wrong with the 300gr, I am just a big fan of the extra velocity with a flatter trajectory. I have not noticed a difference in killing ability between the two.

Lately, most of the guys pitched up here with the 250's , but just for plains game, and they were hammering them across the valleys.
As I mentioned before, I would not hesitate for a second to use those 250gr on Cape Buff. We shoot 200gr out of mine for the Buffalo, and they really put a beating on the buff.
That is without a doubt where I have seen a difference. The 200's are doing 3200fps, and there is a visual trauma upon impact, which I can only assume comes from the high velocity.

I think that 250 TSX/TTSX is as deadly as what you are going to get from the .375 and you can use it on anything.

Thanks, Marius.

I sort of figured that's what you'd say. The 250 TTSX has better B.C.'s and should be a slightly better LR bullet than the 270 TSX and as you pointed out, it's moving faster.

DF

Its too bad that you can't get the good Australian, Canadian and Swedish powders to really make the .300 sing. 3200 is within reach in a good 26" barrel, and 3150fps is my backed off load to save the brass. I've got H4350 load for a 26" barrelled 30-06 that idles along at 2850 fps, 1 grain under the maximum in the Hodgdon's manual.

Marius,

Which 200 gr. bullet are you using in your .375 H&H?

DF


Edited to add, after some on line research, the 200 gr. GSC must be the bullet you're using. I got some load data from the GS web site, seems IMR-4895 is the fastest powder. I was wondering if you had a 'magic load" you preferred.

Absolutely. Then we still have to check every tin of powder online, in order to see if its running hot or cold. The difference is so severe that it could put you at risk from too high pressure and blowing up your rifle. Happened to my 300Win last year, but lucky it is a Ruger. Mentioned to the gunsmith that I was lucky that the rifle did not take away my face, and he said, not with a Ruger. The bolt won't come back on that.
Now, I only use factory ammo for the .300Win in the Federal Fusions.

Yeah DF, it's the 200gr GS Custom. Would love to go to the 250's but that rifle shoots a 3 leaf clover at a 100yds, so don't really want to mess around with it.

Trying to check if I can bring in powder from the USA.

Well, the U.S. brings powder in from Canada, Australia and Europe. You would think South Africa could do the same.

DF

I shot many pigs with CEBs and for the most part they got flattened with a pronounced "whomp" sound. I should put in the disclaimer now that I was using a .458 Win Mag, and got the same results with the other bullets I used too. My experience with the .375 235 gr ESP Raptor is very limited (whitetail and black bear)but my limited observation is that they give a spectacular amount of bleeding on these small thin skinned animals. You wouldn't think an animal could bleed so much. So far that hasn't translated into instant kills, but the sample size is small.

On buffalo I have quite a bit more experience, having used the 425 grain CEBs on water buffalo culls and was able to compare them directly with TSXs, A-Frames and a few Partitions. The CEBs might edge out the TSXs a bit at very close range, but it wasn't by much if I didn't just imagine it. Stretch the range out a bit and the stupidly low BCs dragged the velocity down so fast the TSXs pulled way ahead. Combine that with the fact that brush absolutely shreds them and I'm done with em. Neither the TSXs nor the CEBs beat the A-Frames at any distance, and neither could stay with it as range got longer. The expansion on TSXs was predictably reduced as velocity dropped. Penetration of the three bullets was approximately equal; mostly because you could bet your last box of primers on the hide stopping all of them on the far side.

I've made about 5-6 or so of these boards over the years with recovered bullets from game. This one is the most recent, and I kept the best notes on them. On the back is a paper with more details for each bullet shown.

As you can see there have been quite a few bullets collected as this is about 1/4 or so of them. For the most part it was quite difficult to recover beautiful perfect mushroomed bullets before about 1995. The cup and core bullets available then were typically twisted bits of jacket and little bits of lead!

Once X and bonded core came on the market, well then it got more interesting!

From my vast experience of one leopard, one 168 grain TTSX bullet at 3250 fps in his shoulder at 50 yards from my .300 Weatherby. We found him 19 paces from where I shot him.

Of the 15 or so animals that I've shot with 168 grain TTSX bullets, I've only recovered these three. The other bullets either completely shot through the animals, or I didn't make the effort to recover them.

I think that the one grain weight loss on the two bullets on the right was only the loss of the plastic tip.

These 180 grain Nosler Partition bullets that I recovered from elk each expanded back to the partitions and lost about 40% of their original weight.

Buffybr,
Congrats on a beautiful cat! Love those thick neck toms!

I'm trying to think of a single 168 grainer from a .300 that I recovered that didn't shed its petals. Most exited, but I can think of at least 3 lengthwise shots that I found. One on a moose, one on a musk-ox and the last from a whitetail. I don't necessarily think its even a bad thing, its just what I saw.

I've had a .338 shed 3 out of 4 petals, one .375 lose a single petal (It hit sideways so could be an anomaly) and none from .416 or .458 bullets. With 7mm and down bullets I've yet to recover a single example.

What I have found is I'm farther ahead to look at the wounds and the animals reaction, and leave the weight retention, appearance and measurements and what letter of the alphabet they resemble to the guys that write advertisements.

That makes sense on the 168s. They're constructed differently. They don't test then above 2700 fps. They open all the way down to 1500 fps. When Barnes told me that, I went with the 165 over the 168 for my 30/06.

Exactly why I also choose the 165's

I have also never seen any failure to perform, always with flawless perfection of the TSX

They gave me a pile of the TTSX to try out too, but I never saw that the TTSX was an improvement over the TSX. Maybe just my luck so far? The difference may be in some longer range BC advantage? My longest shots are well under 500 yards so I did not test extensivley for this. My TSX bullets group right at 6" at 500 yards from a solid bench rest. Nothing to brag about but it's just a basic hunting rifle too. I did not see the groups change with the TTSX bullets, they group in the same clump of holes with both styles. I would guess the BC advantage will come somewhere beyond 600 yards, if that's the need of the shooter?

I'm a simple sort too, less is better for me. Just a simple solid chunk of copper without anything fancy like a plastic tip is just fine in my book!

JJ,
I think the plastic tip TTSX was made to give more reliable opening. It seems that in some of the smaller calibers there were instances where claims of bullets acting like a solid and penciling through game were made. I have never experienced this but up until a few years ago, shot nothing smaller than 308cal.
It also significantly improved the BC going from the 235TSX to the 250TTSX in 375cal.
The TTSX's do not seem to offer any accuracy improvement over the excellent TSX, in fact I had some difficulty getting the 250TTSX to shoot well but have solved that problem.

IF I remember correctly, the 168 is made for 308Winchester and the 165 for the 30-06 and the 300 magnums....may explain the difference in behavior...

I shot a Springbok a couple of years ago in the Karoo region of SA, using my .375 Ruger with 250 gr. TTSX. A perfect lung hit exited, leaving a huge, 2" hole. Obviously had no problem expanding! If I were to hunt more small antelope with the .375, it would be with solids, or at least with the regular TSX.

For what its worth this is from Barnes FAQ.

Is the 168-grain .30-caliber TSX the same as the 165-grain TSX? Is it really a match-grade hunting bullet?

These bullets have different ogive geometries. The 165-grain TSX incorporates a shorter tangent ogive in the nose profile. It’s designed for cartridges with short magazines such as the .300 WSM and .300 Win Mag. The 168-grain TSX BT has a secant ogive which lengthens the nose profile and has shown superb accuracy downrange. It offers the best of both worlds because it’s also a premium hunting bullet offering exceptional terminal performance. It is best suited for cartridges such as the .308 Winchester, .30-06 and .300 Weatherby

Well said and precisely why I prefer lead core bullets. The coppers may look pretty and dig deep, but that's about all they have over lead cores. For shorter tracking jobs and good blood trials, I'll take lead cord bullets every time.

The 168, as you mention, is a sleeker bullet that tends to smallish opening:





The bullet penetrated this spruce log in profile after striking a water-filled plastic bottle at around 200 yards; 30-06.



This ogive shape has typically opened wide and flat when I've recovered them. I think this is the shape that is referred to as 'tangent'. Few TSX iterations use such a profile.... unfortunately.

No issues with the 300 TSX on leopard from my limited perspective. my hunting buddy & I both used 300 TSX on leopard. Worked fine.

I'm thinking "how does it get any better than this?"......but what do I know?

buffy, cool deal on the leopard. Great trophy and great picture. Congrats.

You obviously hit him in the right place!

Beautiful cat.

High velocity has a very devastating effect on cats and all predators actually. Much more so than it does on heavy antelopes and buffalo

I've seen some rather small cartridges with blistering speed just flatten some rather big predators in my life!

spot on, as usual

Shock is what kills cats and drops them at the base of the tree. You want shock over penetration in this department.

The quickest elk kill that I ever made was a big 6x6 bull that I shot in one of the Montana Unlimited Bighorn Sheep areas just north of Yellowstone Park. I had backpacked into the unit hunting sheep, so the rifle that I took was my .257 Ackley shooting 117 grain Sierra GameKing bullets.

By the last day that I had scheduled for that hunt I hadn't seen any rams, so when this bull came toward me through the timber bugling, I couldn't resist. He stopped broadside about 75 yards from me and I put one of those little 117 grain Sierras just behind his front shoulder. The bullet went through a rib bone and shredded his lungs, and didn't exit his chest cavity. He simply collapsed dead in his tracks.

The first bull elk that I killed with a Barnes bullet I shot with a 168 grain TSX from my .300 Weatherby. I had spotted the bull and some cows feeding up a hill. I stalked around the hill to about 100 yards to the side of the herd. When the bull stepped into the open, I put the TSX bullet just behind his shoulder and it exited behind his opposite shoulder. At the hit, he spun around 180 degrees, jumped two steps and fell dead.

When I walked up to where he was standing when I shot him, there was blood splattered all over the snow for 15 feet out on both sides of where he was standing and where he ran.

On these two elk, the little cup and core bullet made the shortest tracking, and the mono copper bullet made a 30' wide blood trail.

In the picture that I posted of my Mozambique leopard, the big spot in the center of his right shoulder is where the 168 grain TTSX went into him. It exited just behind his other shoulder. When we went in after him at 12:30 AM, we didn't really see a blood trail, but that was moot as he was lying dead in the open creek bed only 19 paces from where I had shot him.

I think the length of tracking has more to do with bullet placement than bullet construction.

Me too.

I have never gotten good blood trails with the 100gr 25 caliber TSX or the 180gr 30 caliber TTSX. Exits are very small.
Last season I actually shot a very large cow elk with a 300 ultra at close range with good shot placement. The cow reacted to the shot, so I knew she was hit, but proceed to run 70 yards with no blood trail at all. There where a few specs on the snow where she stood when shot, but that's about it. If that had been a Nosler 180gr BT, which I have used alot in the same rifle I do believe it would have either been a bang flop,or in the least some significant blood on the ground.

Exactly my point. Shrapnel causes body trauma. Look gentlemen, all the bullets we have discussed here, kills.

My argument is not that one kills an animal faster than another one, or whether one will make the animal go straight down as compared to being able to penetrate it from the chest through the back legs. That is not my point.
I've grown up, so won't try and change your mind about what works for you, or denounce another bullet. If a guy comes down here with TSX/TTSX, great. I think they are excellent bullets. Maybe the best.
All I'm saying is, that lead core bullets create more body trauma than an expanding solid. I shoot both sets of bullets. Lead core bullets and expanding solids. They each have their place.

When tissue get's destroyed, it sends signals to the brain to tell it, that something is broken, which either creates shock for the animal, or the animal stops to limit the damage. This is just nature doing what it does best in trying to survive.
My dogs will take care of the rest.