Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only 300 vs 350 gr 416 TSX for buffalo/ DG

From my 416 Bee I have shot the 300 TSX at 3160 fps on all sorts of NA game. Never recovered one. Huge wounds!!!

The 270 in 375 flavor still penetrates more than enough. With higher speed, there's the bonus of greater chance for hydrostatic shock.

I want to add that in my experience, within a given caliber, going lighter and faster with monolithic has never hurt, and usually helped speed the kill.

Being old school and a born again skeptic I was reticent about trying the Barnes X bullets but a couple of decades of using them has completely changed my mind . They perform !

Barnes used to make a 325gr. X version in .416; I ran them up to 2,800 in my Rigby.

I use the 300 TSX and X's in .411 caliber on hogs at all angles and have yet to catch one...

Phil, I’m glad to see you didn’t wait too long. I’m glad they’re working for you. I was told about them and tried them in the early ‘90’s....I’ve yet to be disappointed! memtb

Sectional Density was an argument back in the black and white days, but when talking modern bullet structure, is less relevant today. An example would be comparing a Hornady 400gn SP to a 300gn Barnes X in .416 and it is good night, fat lady has sung and she's already home with a pot of tea brewing. No contest. SD is sometimes an irrelevant wast of thought.

I used a number of 416 rifles over a dozen years and tried several Barnes X bullets including the 300gn, 325 grain, 350gn and 400gn. Although I mainly used them for culling medium game I often lined them up for multiple kills to see how game bullets would perform and the X's in any weight out penetrated some bullets people drool over such as the original Trophy Bonded Bear Claw.

If I was starting from scratch, I would recommend the 350gn but never refute the now discontinued 325gn or the 300gn if a rifle was already set up for them. The way I would load with 300's is to put a heavier weight lower down in the magazine but would be surprised if you needed it apart from a traditional insurance shot when it is already down and bellowing.

In .458 caliber my love was always the 400 grain X bullet which I could win a lot of money on at $100 a shot from my .460 at the range if I had any takers. The accuracy challenged the best of them. I got 5 feet of penetration with that bullet at .460 velocities and it sends a message about the same bullet range as the caliber decreases. No-one challenges anyone who uses a 168gn TTSX in their '06 or .300 because it is reliable and predictable. The same applies as you increase the caliber. The light to middle weight 225's impress everyone in .338 and .358, 250 or 270 in .375 caliber and to the .416 caliber.

Because buffalo hunting incorporates back up and very enthusiastic backup on occasion, use what you like and it will dig deep and cause several feet of penetration in the recipient. The 300gn would also assist in recovery for a backup shot if it is still standing.
John

Well, a single 300 gr TSX bullet from my daughters .416 Remington worked as well on a large dugga boy as they have on bears, moose, caribou and Dall sheep.

Outstanding to hear !

Congrats to the young lady! So.....in spite of not following my great advice, she was successful! Remarkable! memtb

I always go by the idea that a SD of close to 300 is desirable for big game. But as Aussie pointed out this is from the days when bullets were not as good now.

I asked Kevin Thomas the author of "There's Something about Buffalo" if he thought the 350 grain bullets upped the potential for the 375 H&H. He wouldn't go so far as saying they were better just that at least the 350 Rhino performed exceptionally well.

Have not used them but I would go 350 grains in the 40 calibers unless it hit a recoil threshold for me and if it did then I would drop back to the 325 or 300 grain bullets.

Kevin was a big proponent of heavy for caliber bullets, but as the late Don Heath, (Ganyana), put it. You don't need bigger bullets, just better Bullets. And Don liked the Barnes TSX bullets
Since SD is a factor of weight and diameter, and expanding bullets typically loose weight as they expand, it is not unusual for a 300 gr TSX bullet that retains 100% of its weight to out penetrate a heavier bullet that looses much of its weight.

Agree completely. When I was using both 120 and 175 grain X bullets in 7mm I thought the heavier bullet had better straight line penetration. This may be more my imagination and a couple of the 120s that hit bone and veered or tumbled. So few bullets of either weight were recovered I can't verify if any actually tumbled or not. Also hard to say which killed better but I might give the advantage to the 120. This was mostly on deer, hogs and plains game. Nothing larger than Elk or Kudu.

I finally read Kevin Thomas's chapter on guns and bullets. In this chapter he defiantly said the 380 Rhino's upped the 375s potential.

This is an excellent book. It is geared to the first timer which is as it should be, but everyone contemplating a buffalo hunt should read this book.

With the 40 + caliber rifles almost any premium bullet will be stellar regardless of weight.

The 300 grain 416 TSX is a great bullet for the 416; flat trajectory, high velocity and very effective

The old dagga boy my daughter shot agreed. On a quartering frontal shot at 40 yards, her bullet entered by the shoulder, passed through the lung and ended up buried somewhere in the massive stomach. The bull was dead within 120 yards.

It took me awhile to learn but the mono’s work very well lighter than lead core jacketed bullets.

Congratulations to your daughter. Hope you and your son all had a successful hunt.

Just returned from six weeks in Africa. Used .375-270 TSX on five buffalo. All were taken with a single shot. Distance of shot and distance traveled are as follows: 85/25, 25/15, 105/85, 85/10, 18/105. The bullets worked perfectly at mv of 2675 FPS. All expanded to .800”.
I have been an advocate of the .416 bore but this has caused me to revise my thinking.

Cool report! Sounds like the 375 is alive and well with the super bullets we have today!

Thought I would re-awaken this thread with some update material. I have done what I wanted regarding 416 Ruger internal (load data) and external ballistics (changed iron sights) using 300 and 350 TSX (and 350 TTSX). So for terminal ballistics tests I chose as my test - passage and expansion through 2 1-gallon jugs of water, followed by 4 mil plastic tarp to keep sand dry two 8x8 inch boxes filled with construction sand backed by another 8x16 inch box of sand. I shot from 15 yards and bullet passage would include layers of cardboard as well as the sand. I had no idea what to expect but I dog-eared the boxes.

My control bullet was a Hornady factory loaded 400 gr DGX @ 2400fps, and my test bullets were 300 gr TSX @ 2500fps, 350 TTSX @ 2500fps, and Buffalo Bore 350 TSX @ 2600fps all by the same chronometer. The jugs all exploded spectacularly. The 300 gr TSX penetrated midway through the first box or about 4 inches of sand. (I shot this one first to see if I thought I had enough sand boxes lined up.) The 350 TTSX just touched the back card board wall of the first box or about 8 inches of sand. Both of these were beautifully mushroomed @ .785 and .720, respectively. The BB 350 TSX penetrated midway through the second box or about 12 inches of sand but all of the petals were gone (squared mushroom) @ .600 point to point or .500 flat to flat. Finally, the bonded 400 DGX was fired and it came to rest at the same place as the 350 TTSX or about 8 inches and fully mushroomed at .610. Though bonded, no lead was on any of the 6 petals.

The results suggest sand is a tough medium on bullets (no bullet entered the 8x16 inch box and 3 were restrained by the first 8 inches). I fired only one bullet for each load and still had enough water and sand on me to appreciate the beach. The BB350TSX lost petals and might have faired better in flesh. Velocity seemed to be its enemy. I am pretty confident that the 300 TSX will penetrate most critters, precision grouping has been impressive, and recoil noticeably reduced.

The question is whether the 350 TTSX (or a TSX @ 2500fps) should should be considered to perform as well as the 400 gr DGX @ 2400fps, or actually better, because of larger expansion?

Thank you for the test report.
In regards to the question of better, I certainly would view the Barnes equal to, if not better.

I am a monolithic fan. I don't sweat whether the petals are retained or not, on the Barnes type bullets.
The CEB & Hammer types which are designed to shear, I would definitely prefer that they perform as designed.

I personally would choose one of the Barnes 350's over the 400 grain DGX. I am not bashing the Hornady DGX. I think it is now also a good bullet.

I have been fortunate to have experienced good to very good accuracy with the Barnes in 338's, 375's, & 416's. Maybe, I am stuck in a rut. Though, I am anxious to run the 416 Ruger with the 325 Shock Hammers & 325 CEB Maximus over the chronograph and on target.

Edit: I think the higher BC of the 350 TTSX also adds to the flexibility of this bullet.