Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters .270 Barnes 130 or 140?

For big hogs, close range shots at deer/elk (Timber areas) on bad angles...is there any real difference between the 130TTSX and the 140 TSX? I would push these as fast as I could too. Anyone have experience with either in .270? I used to read great results were had with the old Winchester 140 Failsafe. I shot them in my old BAR .270, had to finish off a friends big Spanish Goat at 15 ft, maybe 20ft. It was a penetrator! No longer made though, but I always wondered if a 130 Failsafe wouldn't have worked just as well?

Have seen all three bullets (130 TTSX, 140 TSX and 140 Fail Safe) used on big game, and couldn't tell from the results which one was used. The only one I remember being recovered from any animal was a 140 Fail Safe from a BIG bull nilgai. Otherwise they've blown right through animals from feral pigs to gemsbok to bull elk.

Thanks sir, I've read some of your writings on the .270/140 Failsafe, very informative. I really enjoyed it. I'm going to let this rifle "tell me" which weight it likes. I am also going to try the 110 TTSX for deer/antelope or Texas exotics and such, but I am too leery of using it on elk, especially in the Timber.

I have seen Barnes 130 and 140's used on elk. Could not tell the difference with none recovered.

I have used the 110 TSX on quite a few deer, antelope, hogs, black buck and Axis deer. They worked, but have since settled on just using 130gr monometals of any flavor in my 270's. I let the rifle tell me which particular brand it likes.

Both will knock the livin’ chit out of elk, or anything else you’d care to hunt.

There's someone who is/was a campfire member who took his .270 with 130gr TTSX ammo to Africa several times with excellent results.

Sorry I don't have more details, but he recommended it quite enthusiastically.

130 will do it all

I've used the 130 TSX for elk and it's worked fine. This bullet and the 140 TSX shoot very accurately in my Cooper rifle. I have not tired the TTSX in either weight, but, as others have mentioned, there is probably no difference in performance in any of these bullets. I'd go with whatever was most accurate in a particular rifle.

Thanks guys. The smallest mono I've used on elk size game was 6mm ( Scimitar Horned Oryx, 85xbt at 243 speeds, 6x47) and it was a wicked little killer on it and some Axis deer. The 240W/90X was a fine one too. I used the 6.5/284, but with Nosler 120/125s, and it was also a fine killer, which made me think the similar .270. I actually had a new Mod 700 CDL, 24" bbl, all tweaked out to 'wring out" the .270 when I got blind sided by Obammacare ( I hate Obammacare, BTW) taxes on my benefits and had to sell it off and my old Belgium BAR .270/others ,everything. I "thought" I had 2 good replacement rifles ( Mod 77 338WM & Mod 70 FWT 7x57) but neither shot worth spit. I have bought a Mod 700 classic in .270 ( I was actually wanting any 700 classic) at a good price. So, I am going to just focus on it for awhile. I don't get to hunt like I used to, but I sure love playing with handloads. I think "I'll be OK", ha

Jim, it’s my understanding that the TTSX expands a little more readily. Probably not a real problem on hogs. However, obviously, the 140 is a bit heavier....which is never a bad thing, on large, heavily built game!

I have always been a fan of a little heavier bullet. I load the 140’s for my daughter’s 270, which is used for deer, antelope, and elk. In our application ( not your concern), the 140 has a higher BC, which can help with the longer shots possible in our hunting environment! memtb

The 7mm-08 with a 120gr TTSX also has an enthusiastic following for use on elk, so I can't imagine 10 grains extra plus another hundred fps out of a .270 would be anything but more of a good thing!

My buddy shot a 360 bull elk with a 100 Gr. TSX out of a 257 wby mag and it went about 40 yards.

CRS. Any problems with the 110TTSX on deer, hogs, etc? My 270 likes it at about 3200. Interested in your experience with its terminal performance. Thx.

I would try the 130 TTSX first for the reasons mentioned previously and the higher BC per weight. The tip I think makes the smaller Barnes more reliable as it has to be a big enough cavity to hold the tip and this helps at longer ranges although I have never had a full on failure with any of the Barnes bullets including the original copper tube style.

I run 130s in my 270 Win. and 140's in my 270 WSM just to be different. Both run about the same speed.

I liked the old Fail Safes especially in 270 caliber but if anything they erred on the tough side. Fine for Elk and similar sized game but they could drill right through a whitetail with almost no reaction. Sometimes there was a blood bath usually with clock work parts on the ground and other times the entire body cavity had to fill up to the level of the entrance or exit before there was much of a blood trail. The animal would drop and then the leakage would be extreme.

Can't go wrong with any of them as always let the rifle decide.

Never had any issues with them. Just got to the point where they did not seem to offer anything over the 130's at my normal hunting ranges. Recovered two of them, perfectly expanded and 100% weight retention after full length wise penetration on mature whitetails. No terminal performance issues at all.

I use 130 ttsx in 270 for elk.
I did switch to 140 SST for deer in the 270.

Did you feel that the 130TTSX didn't kill as fast as the SST?

2 reason.
When I shot my deer with the 130TTSX, I thought I missed as he ran off. It could also be that deer will run 100 yards with its heart blown up.
I just felt the ttsx might be little too stout for thin skinned game.
2nd reason. My TC venture shoots the ttsx and sst very close and I get more trigger time with the cheaper SST .

Dre, the TTSX’s (250 grain), have been very effective on Pronghorns as well as elk. In fact, hitting one antelope high in the shoulder blade....the exit was quite impressive! memtb

270.
Barnes 130 or 140?

Simple answer:

Yes.