Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters The "Other" Monos

Hey,

This is my first new thread on the Fire, but I've been following and learning from you guys for years. Thanks to all you knowledgeable folks out there who share so much good info.

Would love some feedback on a couple of the lesser-known bullet makers from you guys who shoot more animals than I do. In the past I've done all my hunting with traditional C&C bullets but I'd like to give some monos a try this year. I hunt up in NY, which means primarily Whitetail deer and I prefer to take lung shots. Based on my reading, it seems like the "popular" monos like the Barnes, E-Tip, GMX, etc might not give me the rapid expansion properties and quick kills that I'm used to on lung shots.

Here's my question. Do any of you guys have experience with Cavity Back Bullets or Hammer Bullets? These two brands take different approaches to rapid expansion, but both seem like they would work well with my preferred shot style. I've already developed some loads with the Hammers this summer, and just discovered CBB, but I'd love to hear from those with prior experience before I head out into the woods in a few months.

Thanks.

I would like to know more about the "Hammer" product. I believe they are made in Montana

I have no experience with either but I just returned from Africa where a group of us used the 180gr. GMX exclusively on a variety of plains game animals. Something like 40 animals were taken, varying in size from eland to springbok. I came away extremely impressed with that bullet. I've also used the TSX extensively and have taken an elk with the E-Tip, all are great bullets.

Have used the Barnes TSX, Hornady GMX and Nosler E-Tip on quite a few animals, and have yet to be able to tell any difference in field performance, or appearance of recovered bullets. Can sometimes see a little difference in penetration when testing in "media," but not much.

Some of the other monos are designed to lose their petals, such as the Cutting Edge Raptor and Hammer, on the theory that the flying petals will result in more internal damage and hence quicker kills. Have only used the Cutting Edge, and have not been able to see any difference so far--but the have not been able to tell any difference in "killing power" in TSX/GMX/E-Tips that lose their petals either.

Generally all of 'em penetrate somewhat deeper than SOME lead-core controlled-expansion bullets, but as far as killing any quicker with the same shot placement dunno.

Jackstraw,
As far back as I can remember there have been some bullets on the fringe that promised all sorts of things, but eventually disappeared.
I have first hand experience with 130 gr ETips out of 270 Winchesters on 7 or 8 NYS whitetails. Performance has been uniformly superb.
There are tons of reliable reports of the consistent performance of the Barnes monos on game world wide.
My standard for 40+ years has been the Partition. That experience tells me that another bullet can hope to be a good as a Partition, but I've never seen anything better.
In other words, I consider the TTSX and ETip monos as good as Partitions, which is to say.... excellent.
I've never seen a CER or Hammer. I sincerely doubt they bring any real "improvement" to the hunt. Causes me to wonder if either will be around very long?
When I get a new caliber or bullet, I spend significant time and money developing a "go to" load, preferring to do this with components that will continue to be available.
Yes, I've been called a luddite and curmudgeon, kinda proud of it.
Good luck with your project. Let us know how it works out. I don't mind being wrong.

FWIW I haven'y used anything but Barnes, and all but a couple of those used were .224 caliber. Shot scores of deer, both mule deer and whitetail with them and the farthest Ive had any of them go was 50 yards...with a 53 Gr TSX in .223. That was a lung shot.

Monos do not kill as quickly, in general, on lung shots, because they don't destroy as much tissue because they don't expand as violently.

For pure lung shots, you'd be hard-pressed to ever beat a C+C. Your best bet with a mono for quick lung shot kills will be the Cutting Edge bullets that blow their petals. If you're using a 30 caliber, the 135 grain Raptor comes highly recommended when driven at high speeds. We have not tried the 125 Maximus but that looks good also.

The other great results we have had (and are using currently due to accuracy and lower price) are the Barnes TTSX black tip 120 grain. This bullet is "softer" as it is designed for the 300 Blackout, but when driven at 308 velocities it still holds together but expands wider than the rest of their line. We like it for more mono destruction even on lung shots. We will probably stick with this bullet until something very different in technology comes along. The 110 black tip works the same but with a lower ballistic coefficient.

I have not used the Hammer yet or even heard of the Cavity Back but have been trying the Lehigh Controlled Chaos bullets some and will do more this season. The Lehigh is a petal shedding design and I have used the 17 caliber and the 85 gr. 25 caliber. So far I am impressed and I think that they may drop at least deer sized game faster than the more traditional monos. The reviews on some of the Lehigh's thought they may have a narrow velocity window but this has mostly been with the Black Out and Whisper cartridges. The 25s I am running at 3,600 fps and I limit shots to 500 yds maximum where they are still going 1,900 fps. Have not taken any deer beyond 250 yds. yet so the verdict is still out.

The Hammer bullet only partially sheds petals except for the Dead Blow design which can fragment up to 60%. The CCB looks to be an attempt to get higher BC by making the bullets longer with the base cavity. They only shed about 10% of their weight according to their web site.

I like testing new bullets but I can't help but think you may be going in the wrong direction if faster kills are the goal. More frangible bullets like the SSTs and most other cup and core bullets may drop game quicker. But this is subjective and I would need a cam and a timer on my scope to be able to discern the slight differences, if there are any.

One thing all the CNC bullets I have tried have been very accurate and consistent. There are so many new bullets it looks like they are running out of names for them all.

My opinion as well... Good luck with your project, though. Always fun to play with new stuff.

Last year was the first time I used Hammer bullets. My first impression is pretty favorable. Shot a few doe with 117 grain Sledgehammers out of my 260 chronoed at 2750. Could have gone higher, but accuracy was .68 @100 yards. Several observations. These were easy to get a really nice group with. This was from a gun that if I got .9 group, i was really happy. So if you follow their recommendations for load development, it should be pretty easy. As far as performance, all died quickly. farthest went maybe 40 yards. Not much bloodshot meat, but I did hit offside shoulder in one, and ended up throwing that one away. On youtube there is a guy that shoots a lot of hogs with a 6.5 creedmoor. He tested the 130 grain sledgehammers, and was impressed with how hard they hit. I think they are certainly a viable option, and if I was forced to use mono's I would probably use them in everything. As it is, I plan on using them again in my 260 this year. Disclaimer: I never shot Barnes TTSX or anything like that, so I can't compare them to other mono bullets.

If I had to use a mono because of the regs, I would but I'm curious why you would use them if you don't need to if quicker expansion and faster kill is your goal which it should be. Barnes wouldn't have brought out the TTSX if they thought that TSX was the be all end all. It surely wasn't when I gunned a few deer with them and saw minimal expansion and weak blood trails.

As a follow-up to my previous post, here is a (bad) photo of a series of GMXs recovered from various African animals. The bullets on the left end were longer shots with lower impact velocities, with distances decreasing as you move to the right. The bullet on the far right is an ELD-X.

Great picture, do you have an idea of distance and what they were shot out of?

This discussion took place over a few Castle beers so don't hold me to it, but I believe the left two were around 250-yards and the far right GMX was about 60.

Having shot a maybe 3 dozen with Barnes/GMX/E-Tips in the lungs and found the vast majority of them reduced the lungs to red soup, I will stand up and say the above is BS pure plain and simple. You don't wreck lungs worse than that and what happens after is a result of the individual deer and MAYBE some difference in shock effect but that would be an exceedingly difficult thing to prove.

Certainly, your mileage might vary. But I've shot plenty of deer in the lungs with TTSX, and no they don't always (in fact rarely in my experience) truly reduce lungs to red soup. Sure, they cause bleeding, but they in no way tear up lungs quickly like a more-violent expanding bullet. In fact, I have had more than one lung shot deer not expire quickly when shot with TSX/TTSX due to the minimal amount of shrapnel being thrown around (both the 30 caliber 150 TSX and the 243 80 TTSX have left me with long tracking jobs on minimal blood trails).

For bone shooters, the monos make a caliber seem bigger than it is; for lung shooters, the monos make the caliber seem smaller.

I dunno, but for shooting hogs and deer I prefer a more frangible C&C bullet like a Sierra Game King or a Nosler Ballistics Tip. Hogs aren't elephants and if you hit em in the ribs or even forward of there they usually die fast. Deer the same way. I've killed probably 75 deer with Core Lokt, Game King, and Ballistic Tips. A few years back my son got to experimenting with Barnes and some of the other monos. He went back to Game Kings and Ballistic Tips. He said he got tired of tracking deer in the dark. I would save the tough bullets for bigger game unless you're unfortunate enough to live in a lead free state like California.

Thanks for all the comments thus far.

There are no restrictions (yet) on lead bullets for hunting up here, thankfully. My desire to experiment with monos comes from the fact that my young kids eat a lot of venison and the lead-in-your-meat thing is probably not a big deal... but maybe it is? I don't know and don't really want to start a war about it, the science seams unclear at best. I fully support people hunting with whatever they want to hunt with, I'm just curious to see if I can find a mono that performs like a C&C on lung shots.

The Cavity Back bullets promise over 2x expansion, which is wayyyy beyond what anyone else is promising. That's what caught my eye (don't really care about the actual cavity on the back) on those. Maybe that extra wide expansion will make a noticeable difference in "time of death" and provide better blood trails if needed?

And, as has been mentioned, the Hammers promise fragmentation and a flat metplat on the remaining core, which should cause disproportionate wounding... theoretically.

I wish I could go on a cull hunt and do some experimenting, but I don't want to experiment during the season, as long tracks up in this area of the woods are uncool. I hunt small properties and chasing wounded deer is a nightmare.

I have killed deer with Barnes, GMXs and E-Tips. I can't tell the difference between them so what I have to say applies to all of them. When I shoot deer in the chest it wrecks the lungs. Thoroughly. When I shoot just lungs and do not destroy the heart I see better (more often) blood trails. My belief is that the monos with their tendency toward smaller holes in the hide also tend to get those smaller holes plugged with debris more often. My experience when taking out the heart which reduces blood pressure to zero instantly is that monos and cup and core bullets have similar instances of poor blood trails. The monos tend to always exit, the cup and cores much less often make an exit. The premium bonded core heavy jacket bullets I have used much less. This comes as no surprise, no blood pressure makes it much harder for the blood to get out and no exit leaves one less hole to leak from. I have had one deer with zero blood trail despite an exit and a three inch hole through and leaving the heart loos in the chest. I have had one with a very poor blood trail because the exit was high on the neck and the entrance was behind the diaphragm and plugged by the omentum. I had one poor blood trail because the lungs and heart were completely shredded and despite a fistful of tissue where the deer stood, there was still plenty to plug a very large exit hole. The longest distance traveled by any of the deer I have killed with monos was ~70 yards. I have witnessed just over 100 deer killed with monos I have loaded and I think four made it over 100 yards, three were gut shot and one was shot in the knee. I know of none of those 100 that were shot in the chest and made it more than 70 yards.

Do a decent job putting a mono where it belongs and I do not find they run any further than common cup and core loads. Somewhere between 30% and 40% of the deer I have killed with monos dropped where they stood.

Miles,

I have so far restrained myself somewhat when reading your posts, but I have far more experience with various monolithics at different ranges and velocities than you do--at least from what I recall from your posts, which indicate you usually shoot whitetails at shorter ranges.

I can categorically state, from plenty of actual experience with various bullets at ranges from close up to 500+ yards, that you are absolutely FOS about how monolithic damage innards compared to bullets that lose more weight. In fact I known quite a few professional hunters (both guides and cullers) who have been astonished at the INTERIOR damage done by Bergers, and similar bullets. They have seen FAR more animals killed than you have, with your "vast" personal experience. As in thousands.

Of course, you will respond with something else from your limited experience, and also something about the dangers of lead-core bullets. Go ahead.

I agree with MILES58. I have been a 264 shooter since I purchased my first 260 rem back in 2000. Over the course of those 19 seasons I have harvested without exaggeration over 200 whitetails. It got to the point where I played with different bullets in an attempt to discover the better combo. 120 NBT, 125 NPT, 140 NAB, 140 SST, 130 NAB, 140 AMAX and 120TSX. In all that the 2 standouts for dropping things IME is the 120TSX and the 140 AMAX. The 140 AMAX does a lot of damage. The 120 TSX dropped 11 in row at one point and still does so with regularity. With the 125 NPT things ran the furthest followed by the 140 NAB when things were hit with it on occasion they acted like they weren't hit at all. The 120's just proved to be better IME. The 120 NBT was good but they ran not far but they still ran.

After probably 60 or 70 harvested in the last 5 years of 120 TSX max load of H4350 I would say 40 dropped all but 1 of the rest ran maybe 20 yards or less. 1 I inadvertently hit in the neck and it had a hole in the neck the size of a quarter dropped but was still alive when I got to it. I remember looking at my buds and asking them if they had ever seen a deer try to go anywhere with a hole like that in its neck. You could literally look through it. Every time I've shot one its pretty much the same all kinds of jello lungs completely deflated hearts destroyed all kinds of trauma. I've never shot any of the old C&C bullets and I am sure they would work successfully but why mess with what works but again they're probably going to run. I have been trying to get the 100 TTSX to shoot as accurate if I can find a load that works I will continue the experiment.

But until that pans I will continue to shoot em behind the shoulder and watch what happens

The deer here in VA are probably a little smaller than NY but not much.

Good luck and shoot straight y'all

Wow! 200 animals!

You have never shot any of the "old C&C's."

You have shot 60-70 with the TSX. Would love to hear whether you actually kept track of the numbers, or it's a guesstimate.

Would also be interested in whether you tracked the bullet's path closely enough to determine if it touched the spinal column--or otherwise hit substantial bone. Have seen some astoundingly quick drops with monos that ticked the spinal column, but otherwise looked like pure long shots.

My database involves a lot more than 200 animals--and they were actually each recorded, instead of guessed, as in 60-70.

Well I feel compelled to add to this matter, I haven't been monitoring anybodies posts and I can't say the red soup statement has been my experience. But they drop these whitetails here. I am going to try the 6.5 x 284 with 130 bergers this year if I get a chance. I have found an extremely accurate load with them in my cooper excalibur. I am quite certain the berger VLD will be as traumatic as as any AMAX especially at 6.5x284 velocities. I've never had great luck shooting 130's in my 260's. It will be after winter before I can post any results and probably wont have much to say until plenty have been harvested.

Again good luck and shoot straight y'all

Not out of my 260 and I very seldom hit spines John and all are close range inside 200 yards. I am definitely in the guesstimate range but am being conservative with my numbers as I hunt on damage permits here in Northern VA. I harvest an average of 15 or so per year over 20 last year. I don't count how many I shoot because my superstitious nature tells me that when I start counting them I stop seeing them. Most average about 80 pounds. I am not a gun writer sir and I don't have a data base and I am not going to start one. I've never been to Africa never been to many of the vast number of locations and continents you have been to. Only speaking about whitetails and my experience here in VA with the 120 TSX in my 260 rem CDL SF Limited and my experience with it is extensive.

Again good luck and shoot straight y'all

skottishkat,

Thanks very much for the details.

Will also comment that my wife and I use a LOT of Barnes bullets--though not because we believe they kill quicker. Instead we like them (and other monolithics) because they ruin less meat--which is more important to us in most of our personal big game hunting than other factors.

I am not running down the performance of monos. But according to my extensive records, they do NOT kill quicker than bullets which lose more weight, and there are indeed physical reasons for that.

I was also pointing out that most hunters also do NOT really analyze why a bullet drops an animal "right there."

Thank you Woods

MD I like it when you have an edge on. You exhibit even more "truthiness". Keep up the good work.

And from what I see the VAST majority of hunters will still say “DRT” even if the animal moves a bit, or just stands there until it falls over. DRT means (to me and everyone I know) the butt hits the ground before the chin does. It is instantaneous. I.E.- CNS.


I am well into four digits on big game, and it is interesting that people will say “monos destroy less meat” and “monos kill fast” at the same time. You can not have one without the other. Too often people draw conclusions with small sample sizes, and those that have killed 50-60 animals with the same bullet don’t generally perform even rudimentary exams on wound channels. There is a difference between someone that has killed “one deer 50 times”, and someone that has “killed 50 deer”.

I shoot light for caliber monos whenever possible. Run any expanding bullet through the lungs on a deer and you can expect red soup lungs when you start them at above 3200 FPS and that tends to be what I see. I have never even shot a deer with a mono heavier than 150. Secondly I have never stated or insinuated that monos kill faster than cop and core bullets. But I do not believe that they have killed less quickly than cup and core either. A little over 100 deer with monos is good statistical numbers and can be very predictive. Shooting another thousand beyond that will not contribute greatly to the pattern established by that first hundred. As for Bergers I have never used them and never intend to because I have no need to mess up more venison than necessary. I have an accurate 300 WM that is perfectly capable of doing such should I ever feel the need. Lastly, I respond to posts about monos because I use them and have done so almost exclusively since we got the XLCs Prior to that I used mostly Core-Lokt and some silver tips with a few federals thrown in. I have personally examined the holes in almost every single deer killed with the ammo I loaded and butchered many of them. I suppose my average range with a rifle has been just over 100 yards which may short range for western states but it is also further than most here in Minnesota.

I don't know where you get the idea that that many deer with monos is not a significant number. Probably from the the same mistake bucket that the assumption that I claimed they were no different than cup and core bullets or that I have "limited" experience. I have reloaded and shot deer with those reloads from the beginning. I have tested those reloads in a number of ways from the beginning. I think you will look long and hard to find someone averaging 4 deer/year in Minnesota but for a year in which my eyesight almost prevented me from shooting even one in the last twenty years.

Now, if you believe that lung shots that make red soup out of them are different I am willing to listen, but from what I have observed I start from the position that no lungs is no lungs. Likewise when you blow the great vessels up or destroy the heart. I have killed deer with a bow where the heart was loose in the chest. I have run very large cut broad heads through deer lungs and found the results of both quite comparable to what happens when you do the same with a rifle. A properly placed large cut broad head will put Bambi down pretty consistently in the same 50-60 yards a rifle will with the same shot. That make a decent argument that wrecked lungs is wrecked lungs and that beyond that you get into more shock effect that can also come with much larger than necessary destruction like a 300 WM with a 130 at 3600 FPS.

Wow! Four deer a year!

As mentioned already, I have found that the defintion of "red soup" varies considerably. If you have not seen the results from a variety of other bullets (and you admittedly haven't) then you have no clue.

I stated in a previous post that a LOT of people of who've used a wide variety of conventional bullets( including monos) have been astonished by the lung damage from Bergers. They also do NOT "mess up more venison" than monos, if you understand how they expand and use them accordingly. But obviously since you have never use them, how can you sate so firmly they ruin a lot of meat?

I have also seen the damage from "large cut broadheads" in a bunch of animals from pronghorn to elk, and your claim that it's similar to the damage from SOME expanding high-velocity rifle bullets is laughable.

Again: You have no idea about what you are talking about, due to your limited experience.

The GS-HV.
http://www.gscustomusa.com/products.html

its been awhile.
But I have used them.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/3584811/1

dave

If you want to see red lung soup try a 100 grain ballistic tip out of a 257 Weatherby

I have used Barnes since they first came out with X bullets. IME monos are different. They typically have a smaller frontal area and penetrate more. If you want DRT as in the animal doesn't move more than it's length, you need to shoot CNS. You can drive them fast but be prepared for more meat damage with less than ideal shot placement. I personally use neck shots on undisturbed game out to 100 yards or so. My experience is mostly in the west where shots can be well over 100 yards on deer which typically are not over 125lb but includes other game on other continents.YMMV

Yikes! 200 deer are more than all my hunting buddies have killed combined. (How’s that for specific numbers) I have had pretty good luck with one hit kills on 200 + pound mule deer (I don’t shoot does or forkies) and elk using Barnes TSX / TTSX and Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullets. Most have not taken more than a few steps. The farthest I had one bound away was about 15 yards. Before those bullets, I used Core Lokts and Speer Grand Slams out of my only rifle back then, a .308 Win. I had pretty good results back then with no lost animals and don’t recall any episodes of tracking more than a few yards. I’ll never get to Africa and have found my .30-06, .35 Whelen, 7mm Weatherby, and .300 Weatherby perfectly adequate for anything north of the Rio Grande. Happy Trails

I've killed a few critters with Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets because I love how accurately they shot in several of my rifles. But I have to admit they -- with the exception of the .25 caliber 80 grain TTSX that I used in a 23" 25-35 -- are not my favored choice for the moderate-capacity cartridges I use. I prefer the Ballistic Tips and Accubonds instead. As to the "other" monos, I've found that both Hornady GMX and Nosler E-Tip performed similarly to comparable Barnes products in test medium, though the final expanded diameter of each is generally just a tad less than with the Barnes projectiles. I have not taken any game with the E-tip of GMX. I had intended to, but my health just never permitted that.

Anyway, the two Barnes bullets specifically designed for the Blackout/Whisper line are another story altogether. The 110 and 120 grain TAC-TX AAC projectiles afford true double-diameter soft tissue expansion down to 1800 fps and open nicely all the way down to 1500 fps. Tissue destruction is much closer to that of a cup-and -core bullet than a mono. It's a minuscule number, but seven hogs taken with the 120 grain Barnes and the 30-30 (app. 2600 fps MV ) have all dropped in their tracks -- and none involved impacts to the CNS.

Would love to see Barnes offer a 120 grainer in both 6.5 and 7mm utilizing that same technology for those of us shooting the mild rounds.

The three fully-mushroomed bullets in the photo were the 120 grain Barnes TAC-TX AAC taken from game killed with a TC Contender rifle with both 23 and 24" barrels in 30-30 WCF.

The hog was a 120 grain Barnes victim as well. It's the bullet on the far left in the photo. It very nearly exited but was stopped by the 1.25" gristle plate on the side opposite of impact. The bullet entered tight behind the onside shoulder, centered the lungs, damaged some of the plumbing near the heart and penetrated the opposite shoulder before coming to rest. Lastly, I have to agree completely with JB's comment regarding "red soup" and ribcage/lung shots. I've pushed the 110 and 130 grain Barnes TSX/TTSX fairly hard in a .308 WCF and never experienced anything like that claim by one of the posters. You get damage and blooshotting, yes. But it's nothing like what a Berger will do -- and the lungs certainly are not fully liquified, either.

MD I am a straight up meat hunter myself and one of the things I like about the TSX is less damage. Most of what I know has been from my dad and some Norwegian Red Neck from Montana HAHA. I've read to many of his books and articles to count and have been sending them to dad for years. Most of the deer I harvest here have been between 70 and a 100 pounds and admit to being a Barnes fan because of the damage issue and in general the ease of finding good hunting loads. I have also followed the Barnes family business for years was sorry to see them sell to Remington despite being a fan of Big Green as well. There seems to be a trend toward what I call boutique or specialized factory ammo today and to much marketing big green and federal seem to be deeply into it and I think the Barnes acquisition was probably part of that.

Last year I started on my 3rd box of 120 TSX bullets so include about maybe 30 or 40 for site in over the course of 20 years all the rest have been used to harvest whitetails. Been a regular event for me to show up at my church with a 96 qt cooler full of venison and leave with it empty.

I am not suggesting that what I do works for whitetails everywhere in fact when I go after Canadian whitetails I use my 308 win and 130 TSX which IMO turns my 308 into a 270. I have harvested several 200+ pound whitetails with that combo and am more than pleased with performance as well. I too harvested my first whitetail in the late 70's with my dads 3030 with iron sites and old school cup and core bullets a nifty 160 pound 11 point with a basket rack that is still on my wall despite the fact that I have about 40 bigger ones in my shed.

I would have elaborated further yesterday but I had a glass of scotch and said I'll pick this up later.

Good luck with the upcoming season y'all

BobbyTomek - I like the idea of a softer Barnes. Which of the TAC-TXs are this design? Many of them look the same as the TSXs to me.. The LRX is a good compromise for the faster cartridges.

The only times I got the red soup effect with monos was from light X bullets driven fast that shattered shoulder bones and created a lot of secondary projectiles. It wasn't until I had to clean out an entire freezer full of blood shot shoulders that I decided not to do that anymore. A slow learner but in Africa the on shoulder shot was recommended as the staff did not mind bloodshot meat. My dogs loved me for the blood shot stew I made for them, they would start salivating any time they smelled venison after that.

The 110 and 120 TTSX black tip bullets are of the "softer" design meant for the 300 Blackout. They work absolutely great when run at high speeds also. IMO, they are the way that a mono should be designed.

The 150 grain TTSX loaded in factory Vortex ammo in 308 and 30-06 of recent vintage is a softer design also that will open up better at lower velocity; however, it does not seem to open widely like the black tip bullets do.

Have mentioned this before, but during a hunting-camp conversation with Randy Brooks around 15 years ago, he told me the original X-Bullets tended to lose their petals, and he thought that enhanced "killing power." But so many hunters considered high weight retention the primary measure of a big game bullet (especially 100% retention) that he eventually modified the bullets until they tended not to lose petals--unless, of course, they hit substantial bone.

These days the opinion pendulum is apparently swinging the other way--and not just with the X's designed for rounds like the Blackout, but the LRX. Its front end is "softer" than the standard TSX's, so it will expand reliably at longer ranges, where velocity has dropped off.

Have always wondered how so many TSX users know the bullets retain so much weight, when so many claim they're never recovered one.

This doesn't mean Eileen and I don't use a LOT of TSX's. We do--but we also use E-Tips and GMX's, and a bunch of other bullets. Have found they all work very well--if you understand their performance parameters, and put them in the right place....

But if you're convinced one bullet is The Answer....

John, are you having a bad week? You seem especially condescending on this entire thread. Kind of reminiscent of the Hollywood (elite) talking to the unwashed masses.
Just because you have killed a gabillion game animals on 17 continents and 193 countries does not mean your knowledge of your experience is any greater nor more valid than someone else’s knowledge of their experiences.
Chill out man, it’s just a conversation.
Les

Les,

Thanks for your post--but is it "just a conversation?"

Generally, I try to relate not only conclusions from my experiences but those I've gained both from observing other people--plus long conversations with a bunch of outfitters/guides/African PH's, who've seen FAR more big game taken than I have, with a wider variety of cartridges and bullets. I've gone through considerable effort to gain more knowledge than just my personal experiences.

Have been on a number of "industry" hunts where some of the participants shot one animal, then either caught a plane home or spent the rest of the week in their motel room, catching up on "work." I realized long ago that being there when an animal was taken resulted in far more information, so have often kept going out with other hunters, to observe what happened. This included autopsies of the animals, instead of letting the guide field-dress them, or just haul away the carcass. So no, I do NOT regard only my take of animals the be-all and end-all of experience.

As a result I continue to learn something every year. Which is why I grow weary about conclusions from people like Miles58, who claims to know everything about big game bullets from shooting 4 whitetails a year, at ranges no more than about 100 yards--including bullets he's never used, or even seen used.

I do admit to writing more opinionated (and caustic) posts n the past week or two--but more than one member has stated they missed that from my more "balanced" posts

This forum is named "Ask The Gunwriters," but has long been open to anybody who wants to offer an opinion. In the past few years I've tried to offer a stripped-down opinion based on my experience, in an effort to be an objective reporter. However, some Campfire members have become pretty aggressive toward me, based about what they "know," which is often based on relatively little experience. Miles58 is just one example.

Apparently I grew weary of such repeated "aggressive ignorance," as a good friend calls such opinions--because aggressive ignorance is not "just a conversation."

Thanks for your reply John.
I can certainly understand your frustrations in your work. I suffer much the same in my line of work and I also grow weary and a little testy at times with some less informed or less knowledgeable individuals.
Anyway, keep up the good fight. I’ve been a long time reader and “usually” agree with most of your writing.
Take care, Les

I think another thing at play here (and it can be any one of us), is that our occupation is something most people take seriously. If we dont, we aren't very respectful to our customers nor ourselves.

Every so often in Hunters Campfire I see questions posted about a former occupation of mine. I see half truths, examples of few and just some crappy advise.

I can only imagine how irritating it would be to have an entire blog about something I did for a living...

PS Miles58 is an ass too, which never helps.

RE: Softer monos.

Has anyone experimented with annealing the TSX? Not sure if you could do it with the TTSX with out melting the tips. Might be possible to remove and then re-place the tips.

Ross Seiegfried experimented with cutting a groove in the ogive near the bottom of the hollow point cavity, I never saw the follow up on this experiment. I put a cannelure at about the base of the hollow and it would get some to shed petals. I didn't shoot enough game to reach any conclusion with these modified X bullets. But they did kill game.

Probably better to just buy bullets designed this way to reduce the variables.

Hawk1 & MD thanks for putting up with a contentious bunch and still providing so much useful information.

I have not annealed any monos, but I think that is about what an LRX is. "Softer."

OTOH, the black tips for the Blackout also have a deeper nose cavity which allows the bullet to actually expand wider, which is what I like. It makes a noticeably bigger wound cavity but maintains the goodness of monos (i.e. weight retention for straight-line penetration, and no little lead shrapnels scattered in the meat).

Back to the OP's original question. I am not familiar with the two brands of mono bullets you inquired about. If they make light for the caliber bullet that you can push very fast that should hasten the the death of lung shot deer. I make that inference from my personal experience as I have found that 110gr Barnes TTSX .277 started at 3400+ FPS works faster with similar shot placement as compared to all the heavier bullets of any type I have tried in my, gasp,.270 (you just have to be secure in your manhood to admit to using that chambering around this website).

I don't shoot past 400 yards at big game as I don't dial for elevation, so I admit I am a dinosaur but is my father's hunting rifle so it is even older than I am and it wouldn't look right with a Nightforce or SS on it. I have only been around monolithic bullets since 1993, when my hunting partner shot a spike elk with one. I was impressed but I didn't throw my other component bullets away.

My simple understanding, not backed up by hundreds of animal carcass dissections and Bayesian statistics, is that the same frontal area of expanded bullet creates a bigger permanent wound cavity going through animal tissue when it is going around 10% faster (i.e. a 110 at 3400 as compared to a 130 at 3050). I could be wrong though. The 110 gr .277 bullet started at 3400fps is still going at 2400 fps at 400 yard according to ballistic calculators at my altitude of 7200 ft. It expands pretty well at that velocity still.

Let us know what you end up using and how they perform. Good hunting to you.

JB's assessment of how monos work in regards to the damage done vs. traditional cup and core bullets is spot on.
If you think a barnes TSX or TTSX reduces lungs to red soup I question your definition of red soup.
I might also add that I use monos exclusively now and have been for several years due to the lead issue. However, I am under no illusion that they killas quickly as lead and copper bullets because they dont. The very nature of there design hampers massive damage, which a large factor in how fast an animal expires.

I could be wrong but my conception is that with the X bullets the cavity is the same size say in the 120 and 175 grain bullets, Connie or someone else at Barnes confirmed this when they were fairly new. The 120 going faster will create more of a secondary wound channel due Roy Weatherny's favorite term hydro static shock. The slower heavier bullet acts more like an arrow with a similar primary (permanent) wound channel but less of a secondary (temporary to various degrees) wound channel. The faster bullet is more likely to shed petals and the shorter bullet would have a greater chance of tumbling. I believe I have observed this when a light bullet went through shoulder bones, but this is an unusual occurrence.

I will be shooting the Lehighs this year to see if they are more effective. But I have never lost an animal with monos so how much more effective can they be? I believe the theory and reports from animal control work seem to support the effectiveness of the petal shedding monos.

One thing to consider with barnes mono bullets and others that expand into petals is the fact most people confuse the rough diameter of the expanded bullet as frontal area when in fact it's not. While the expanded diameter of some monos my be similar to traditional bullets the frontal area often is not.

On other thing I have noticed with monos is the fact that if petals are sheared off they are often times found on the entrance side just beneath the hide. With the caveat my sample size is small.

This fact occurred to me and has led me to consider something like the E-Tip or GMX due to its more traditional circle when expanded... at least in theory. I don’t know how the difference in shape relates to effectiveness in the real world.

Monos may not do as much damage as something like a VLD, on average, but they typically do plenty of damage when driven fast, as you know.

A 5" hole through a pair of bull moose lungs, which typically aren't easy to turn to soup because of their shear size. Bullet was a 7mm 140gr TTSX driven at 3300 fps, and impact was about 200 meters, IIRC. The majority of each lung surrounding the wound path was mushy and bruised.

In all honesty that's not blood soup and you are stretching the wound open.. I have shot deer with lead and copper bullets that didnt have much of any any recognizable lung tissue left.

BWalker,

I have also found sheared-off petals near the exit hole, and not just with the TSX but the Winchester (Combined Technology) Fail Safe. Despite its lead core, the Fail Safe's hollow-point front end expanded into four petals, just like TSX's, E-Tips and GMX's.

Let me emphasize a few points:

- This is a bull moose, not a deer. If you have never opened up a moose, you won't have a good reference for just how large those sets of lungs are. Big difference between moose lungs and deer lungs, just like there's a big different between liquefying a prairie dog and a ground hog. I've also turned many deer lungs into unrecognizable chunks of tissue, but I have never done it nor seen it done to a bull moose, even with frangible bullets like A-Max, ELD, and VLD.

- I didn't say that was lung soup, I simply implied that it's plenty of damage, which it is.

- No, I'm not stretching the wound, I'm showing its size by holding it open.

Jordan, I have indeed shot a moose. I am aware that the lungs are indeed larger. The fact remains that's not impressive damage and a traditional bullet would likely do more damage.

John, I have found the same thing as well. In fact I found a single petal stuck between two ribs on the exit tide of last years elk. 30 cal 175 LRX btw.
Like I mentioned my sample size is small. Just an observation on my part.

"Impressive" is a subjective word, so I wouldn't call it a fact. The bull sure was impressed. Based on my experience with dead moose and other critters, I'm not sure a C&C bullet would have done more damage. Perhaps a VLD. Either way, it was more than enough damage to get that particular bull to give up the fight ASAP.

Definately impressive damage in my experience for a Canadian bull moose

I've seen lung soup many times. Mostly from .243's and .22-250's with what most folks would consider "varmint bullets". You don't pull the lungs out of a deer shot with them, you pour the lungs out.. Even a .223 with a typical 55 gr. sp is pretty darn good at the "lung soup" gig if the range is kept fairly short, as was my old .222 with my woodchuck loads using the old 50 gr. Nosler solid base "expanders".

[quote=dave7mm] Parker Ackley over 50 years ago stated that the 220 Swift,with proper bullets, was the best one shot killer of deer and deer sized game animals ever devised.
Those that disagreed had never tried it.
The proper bullet was a bullet of his design called the Ackley CE bullet.CE for controlled expansion.A copper mono bullet with 10g of lead in the nose.If I remember right it weighed 48g.
They did hundreds of tests.Went on hunts and shot deer, goats, and pigs side by side with 06s and 7mm Mags with the bullets of the day.Ackley built many Swift rifles and placed them in the field with his bullets.
The reports always came back the same.
Hands down, the Swift was the better one shot killer by a wide margin.
Not even close.
You can read about it in Ackleys handbook for shooters and reloaders....It makes for pretty interesting reading.

Although im not usuing a Swift myself i've found that light copper mono bullets driven for all there worth put deer down quicker then conventional rounds.
Im reminded of the time I decided to take my 375 H&H deer hunting.A 250g Sierra spbt on a large doe at 130 yards.knocked the doe to its knees and then a 65 yard death run.Chest shot.
You kind of shake you head and go huh?

These days I follow Ackley.
I r

Hola John!

This shedding-petals monos' is an interesting concept and surprisingly effective given the neat, clean wounds they produce.

The left over shank has about the same frontal area of an unexpanded bullet and they penetrate like there was no tomorrow. So much that it has taken a lot of effort, shooting big animals at odd angles in my cull hunts in RSA and Namibia, only to recover a couple of them.

And I am talking about getting a complete pass-through through the shoulders of an eland cow shot at 85 meters, broadside, with a 105gr LM KJG loaded in my son's 7x65R!!

I know these (current models being the MJG and the Flitzer), like Sologne's GPA or SAX´s KJG are not familiar to the North American hunter but, if memory serves, did I read a report from you using GPAs on a black bear hunt?

If you have had further experience with them I would highly appreciate if you could comment us on them.

Kind regards from Spain,

Alvaro

PS: for me it is funny when I read how much meat damage Bergers inflict, or that someone has yet to recover aTTSX, or.... my experience havin been oooh so different!!!

Or a 90 gr Scenar out of a .240 Wby.

DF

Hola Alvaro!

Wasn't me who used a GPA on a black bear!

Eileen and I have recovered a few monolithics--along with one Fail Safe--that have lost all their petals. Some have been designed that way, like the 40-grain Cutting Edge Raptor that Eileen used at 4300 fps from a .22-250 to crumple a pronghorn maybe 5 years ago. The antelope was quartering toward Eileen at about 150 yards, so she put it just inside the near shoulder, and the doe dropped instantly. Found out why during butchering: The bullet had cracked the bottom of the spine and the far shoulder blade, before ending up under the skin. I can't remember what the remaining shank weighed (Eileen has it in her collection somewhere) but Raptors are designed to lose their petals, and it wasn't much more than 50% of its original weight, maybe 25 grain--yet it penetrated around 18 inches.

The others have all been bullets that tend to retain all their petals, One was an original Barnes X-Bullet, the hollow-point, without shank grooves, a 120-grain from a 6.5x55 that I used on a big axis deer. The range was around 130 yards, and the buck was quartering toward me so I shot it through the shoulder. It ran 35-40 yards, on three legs, before going down. The bullet had hit the big shoulder joint, ending up under the flank skin on the other side, losing all its petals and retaining 77.5% of its weight--but even without the petals the front end was "mushroomed," measuring .41 inches across.

Eileen shot a Namibian gemsbok bull as it almost faced her at 200 yards, using a .30-06. The 165-grain Fail Safe cut a carotid artery and crunched the bottom of the spine, so the bull dropped right there. The bullet ended up under the rump skin with all the petals gone, retaineing 80% of its weight--but again the front end was mushroomed (riveted?) a little, and oddly enough also .41 across, even though the caliber was larger than the 6.5 X used on my axis deer.

Eileen's last elk was taken with a 130-grain TTSX from her custom .308 Winchester at about 250 yards. Again, the BIG cow was quartering on, and staggered 20-25 yards toward us before falling. The bullet broke the shoulder slightly above the big joint, and was found under the rib-skin on the opposite side without any petals--though one was found a couple inches from the bullet. Retained weight was 62%, and the front end was also mushroomed a little, to .40 at the widest point.

We have a pretty good collection of recovered monolithic bullets, mostly Barnes because they've been around longest, but also E-Tips and GMX's. I do suspect that we find more than some other hunters because we personally butcher all the animals that go into our freezers, and make it a point to look for bullets--rather than taking the animals to a meatcutter. In fact a few years ago we recovered two monos in a row, both 100-grain TTSX's from Eileen's NULA .257 Roberts, the first from a quartering-away cow elk, and the second from a directly facing pronghorn doe.

The Berger bullets we've used have punched the typical very small hole at the entrance--sometimes so tiny you have to part the hair to find it--which ruins far less meat any monolithic we've used. Then they violently expand inside the animal, sometimes so much they don't exit, though even when they do the meat damage is minimal because they're going VERY slowly by then. Have talked to a very few people who had Bergers break up at the entrance when they hot big bone, ruining some meat, but so far we haven't encountered that in the dozens used to take big game from pronghorns to a red stag about the body size of a 3-year-old bull elk.

Gracias, John!

And sorry fot the confusion about that article... I would have bet it was yours.


Alvaro

I agree. To analyze the "cup and core" vs. "mono" choice without adding variables such as impact velocity is silly, and counter productive. P.O. Ackley was right, and, by extension, Roy Weatherby. Speed kills.

Every since monos came to the mass market, I've been shooting light for caliber monos. Mostly Barnes, some GS customs. Drive them very, very fast and animals at modest distances die like they were pole-axed.

I have a pretty thorough understanding of statistics, and telling someone that their experience with several score of animals is invalid when the external variables such as sd/bullet weight, distance, animal size and impact speed do not vary...... is not credible.

It is very easy to construct a scenario where the mono will kill faster than an expanding bullet (like a cup and core). Just drive a very light for caliber mono very, very fast, and a very heavy for caliber expanding bullet, and the mono will outshine the expanding bullet.

That, and no lead in my meat. The argument that "lead bullets don't leave tragments in meat", is, in my opinion, untenable. Especially someone feeding a young family. The science is pretty well established (see for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2669501/ ).

Dutch, I switched over to mono's because of the lead issue and that is the only reason why.
With that said I have never shot a mono out of anything remotely considered a low velocity cartridge besides 1. That would be the 250tsx out of a 45-70. Most have been out of 25-06AI, 300wsm, 300 win mag, 300 rum, and 270. Even when using these high velocity rounds I havent noticed monos to kill as fast as traditional bullets.

Agreed.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
http://huntingwithnonlead.org/lead_in_meat.html
I didnt eat paint chips as a kid.
Ill pass now to..

dave

I simply wish that Barnes made more of their bullets with a wider expected opening such as they do with the two black tip bullets for the 300 Blackout.

Those two bullets driven at 30-06/308 velocities work great. Hold together, get wider, and kill quicker in comparison to their 130 TTSX.

+1

I figured with the popularity of the Grendel that we'd at least see one in 6.5mm...but no such luck. A 7mm 120 would be sweet as well. I've put the .308/120 Blackout bullet into medium at a shade over 2800 fps (impact speed). The petals looked thinned/stressed but still held together. The expanded diameter at the widest point was eye-popping at just over 0.9". I'll see if I can locate that photo later.

EDITED to add photos:

Dutch,

As mentioned earlier, I have been shooting monos (or the same type of "petal" bullet) since the late 1980's, when the first X-Bullets appeared.
My statistics of how far animals travel after being hit with various types of bullets are from over 1000 examples, and yes, impact velocity has a definite effect. But have seen plenty of animals shot through the lungs in the "pocket" behind the shoulders with various high-velocity monos (and yes, other bullets) that did not die particularly quickly. Others did.

Could give individual examples of each, but that would be pointless. Let's just say that results have varied as much as shooting wild animals usually does.

What I do NOT believe is much of what P.O. Ackley wrote or published. Have been reading his stuff since around 1970, but after reading closely (and considerable experience in the field) realized how flawed many of his experiments were, and how anecdotal his game-shooting examples. In fact cannot remember him ever mentioning shooting an animal himself--or more important, seeing them shot. He was not a hunter, and got his info second-hand.

You should also read Roy Weatherby's journal from his first African safari--where his high-velocity theory did NOT consistently prove itself. It's included in the excellent book WEATHERBY: THE MAN, THE GUN, THE LEGEND by Grits and Tom Gresham.

Yes, high velocity can definitely help, but is not THE ANSWER, just as large-caliber, heavy, moderate velocity bullets are NOT always the answer. There are too many variables in shooting wild animals for any single truth to exist--except shooting big game in right place, with bullets that penetrate sufficiently.

Lead in the meat is another deal. There's also plenty of evidence that hunters have lower blood-lead levels than the general population where they live. Have cited such studies before, but the biggie appears to be that hunters tend to live in more rural areas, where general environmental lead from other sources is low. My wife and I have used about 70% monos over the past 5 years, but even long before (when lead-core bullets were standard) our lead levels were very low. Maybe this was because of careful butchering (we do all our freezer animals ourselves) but due to considerable evidence it's also due to the rural areas where we've lived for over 30 years. Though eve before then we lived in parts of Montana that were very rural compared to the rest of the U.S.

Yes, the science is very settled on kids and lead--which is a very good reason to use lead-free bullets. So are some other reasons--but that does not mean Miles58's claim that they kill quicker, due his limited experience, is valid. While he's shot several dozen whitetails at shorter ranges. that does NOT mean his results are conclusive for general hunting. Hunting is by its very nature more random than that, and far more examples from far more bullets at different ranges (and a far wider variety of animals) provide more information.

Miles also made another statement that shows how little he understands the statistics I've derived from a bunch more animals. He doubt my results because he didn't trust the ability of the shooters involved. That had nothing to do with my results from a bunch of lung-shot animals, because I ONLY included results from solid 2-lung hits, not "marginal" hits. However, my statistical results do indicate that bullets destroying more vital tissue do indeed kill quicker, on average, than bullets that don't--and monos don't,even if they lose all their petals.

Can also cite results from other high-volume shooting of big game, from bullet companies in Europe (where the animal generally belongs to the landowner, and if runs onto another property before it dies is lost revenue) and whitetail culling in the U.S. All I've encountered have concluded that bullets losing more weight killed quicker.

The only Barnes bullet I have ever recovered was a 300gn TSX shot from my 375 H&H into a Bison bull. Under the hide on the offside shoulder after traveling through over 30” of animal. One petal had sheared off, and the bull took about 5 steps before going down. Roughly 80 yard shot with MV around 2650.

Have shot quite a few deer and hogs with TSX’s and TTSX’s in calibers from 223 to 338 and have never recovered a single bullet. I will say that the Hornady 162 AMax does seem to do a lot more internal damage from my 7-08AI than either the 120 or the 140 TSX, and the AMax tends to drop deer a little quicker on broadside shots. I haven’t killed 100’s of deer, probably more like 60-70, and probably 100+ hogs, so my experience is limited.

In this discussion we are talking about double lung shots, and within that limited scenario, I completely agree.

]

I think that it’s very wise to not believe everything PO Ackley wrote. He was human, and made conclusions, some of them incorrect. All humans are prone to that present company included



And here you come so very close. Speed, alone, is not the answer. The only thing that kills animals is holes in animals. Speed with monos increases the initial diameter of the holes. Bigger holes kill better. In that way, fast monos somewhat resemble fragmenting bullets. The difference between the two is the depth of the hole. Because the mono retains mass, it makes a deeper hole. Because the first part of the wound is somewhat similar (with very fast monos) but still the mono wound channel is considerably deeper. Therefore the volume of the hole created by the fast mono is larger. And it’s the size of the hole that makes the point to the critter.

Under very controlled conditions, stand hunting, culls, etc, the variables are limited to the double lung scenario and that’s fine. In that scenario the depth of the wound is not relevant, because the animal isn’t deep enough for that depth of penetration to add to the wound volume.

But to take the numbers from that scenario and suggest fragmenting bullets kill quicker....is not valid when those variables are different, like when you’re shooting at an elk quartering away or a Texas heart shot on a fair sized pig, or when buck fever yanks the shot into the shoulder, or when shooting at a wounded animal waking away down hill, or, or, or........ Fragmenting bullets may indeed kill quicker in some scenarios, but it’s not valid to conclude they “kill quicker” without qualifying the circumstances.

Dutch,

First you say:
"In this discussion we are talking about double lung shots, and within that limited scenario, I completely agree."

Then you say:
"Under very controlled conditions, stand hunting, culls, etc, the variables are limited to the double lung scenario and that’s fine. But to take the numbers from that scenario and suggest fragmenting bullets kill quicker....is not valid when those variables are different, like when you’re shooting at an elk quartering away scenario the depth of the wound is not relevant, because the animal isn’t deep enough for that depth of penetration to add to the wound volume. "

So first "we are talking about double lung shots" and then we're not?

Because of this I am guessing that we agree on the basic points, but you keep jumping around so much in your posts, it's hard to tell. My point about high velocity was that I have never found it to be The Answer. Believe me, I have seen plenty of different bullets used in plenty of different cartridges at various velocities. I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread about how a "fragmenting" mono weighing only 40 grains worked fine on a pronghorn when started at 4300 fps. Have also seen plenty of other bullets (both mono and not) used from various cartridges at VERY high muzzle velocities.

You never told us exactly how you define extra-high muzzle velocities. Is the base level 3300 fps, 10% higher than the 3000 fps most hunters consider the minimum for "high muzzle velocity"? Or would it be 3500+fps? Here's a list of cartridges that I have considerable experience with, using bullets of various weights (not all monos) at muzzle velocities most hunters would consider very high:

.22-250, 40-70 grain bullets at velocities from 3450 to 4300.
.220 Swift, 60-grain bullets at 3650. This was actually the first .22-caliber round Eileen and I used quite a bit on big game, starting in the mid-1980's. The initial bullet was not a mono, but the 60-grain Nosler Solid Base.
.240 Weatherby, 90-100 grain bullets at 3400-3500, both mono and lead-core.
.25-06, 100-grain Barnes TTSX at 3450 fps
.257 Weatherby, 100-grain monos from the original TSX to the TTSX to the E-Tip, all at 3550-3600.
.270 Weatherby, 130-grain bullets at 3400-3500
Various 7mm cartridges, with 120s (both mono and lead-core) started at 3200 up to around 3600.

Often they did result in spectacular kills with double-lung shots. Probably the most spectacular was a good-sized mule deer buck my wife shot at 200 yards with the .257 Weatherby Magnum and a 100-grain TSX at 3550 fps. The buck was standing pretty much broadside in sagebrush, and the next thing we saw after the shot was four hooves waving gently above the sage, because the buck had flipped over on its back. The shot landed in just about the middle of the body, tight behind the shoulder.

But a couple years later I shot a big pronghorn buck at 250 yards with the same rifle and load. (It may have even been the same batch of handloads.) Instead of flipping over, the buck disappeared behind the low ridge it was standing on--and went 250 yards before falling over.
The bullet placement was essentially identical, the two bucks even both standing facing to the right.

The 60-grain Solid Base from the .220 Swift generally exited, but despite obviously fragmenting more than a mono, I cannot remember it dropping an animal right there with a double lung shot. Instead they generally acted very much like they'd been hit with a typical 100-grain cup-and-core from a .243 Winchester, going anywhere from 15 yards up before falling.

Could give plenty of other examples, but simply have not seen consistently quicker kills from warp-speed bullets. Have seen them from fragmenting bullets at more modest velocities. In fact the Berger VLD has produced the highest percentage of pure rib-shot drops of any bullet in my data-base.

This does not mean I consider Bergers the greatest bullet ever, any more than monos. I prefer to simply report on what I see, with a wide variety of bullets on a wide variety of game--partly because I have yet to find The Answer.

Hey Dakotadeer, I think I'm going to try this. What sort of speeds do you drive them to? Looks like you could get up to 3300 or so, but I'm guessing that much isn't needed. I just got off the phone with a rep from Barnes and he said anything over 2700 or so and it would start shedding petals... which I guess isn't a bad thing?

Curious to know what speeds you were driving. Thanks.

I am of the opinion that the star shaped petals and other bullets like the Bear Claw, Woodleigh and Bitterroot, is that the petals or claws do more damage. Again to quote Siegfried he though that bullets like the A-Frame that expand like a wadded pice of bubble gum do less damage.

Who knows the wide round expansion should create more hydro static shock, the petals more primary wounding much like a broad head. Moot point as they both work splendidly.

I am going to try the Black Out Xs in my 300 WM, nothing exceeds like excess and I bet it will drop a deer pretty quickly, maybe not DRT, Red Mist or Blood soup quick but PDQ is good enough for me. Bet I can get them to at least 3,500 fps maybe more.

That bullet looks the way it does because it tumbled towards the end of its travel, which pealed the petals back off the shank IMO.

The petals dont actually cut or touch anything given cavitation.

Tejano,

Sorry, I am not usually a spelling Nazi, but Ross's last name is Seyfried (pronounced SIGH-fred), not Siegfried. But am also willing to believe you were the victim of auto-spell correction.

There is no such thing as hydrostatic shock, as it was first defined many years ago, as resembling brake fluid suddenly and violently going throughout an animal's veins and arteries--and often promoted by people like Roy Weatherby. There is, however, a phenomenon called cavitation that actually exists--which results in more damage to animal tissue, and varies considerably due to expanded shape and impact velocity. I explained the basics in Gun Gack II, in the chapter on solid bullets.

A flat (or even cupped) frontal area results in more tissue damage from cavitation than a rounded front.

Some people use to think that Keith style bullets cut due to the their design. It was latter proven that they didnt for the same reason I mentioned above.

This has been a good read, but I’d like to know what exactly is being debated. To me the phrase “Kills quicker” isn’t specific enough.
I’m not sure if the discussion is about the time between bullet impact and actual death or more about the ability for an animal to travel. In my very limited experience I’ve seen animals that were well hit cover a fair amount of ground and others hit the dirt even though they weren’t incapacitated by a CNS shot. In both those scenarios some were dead when they fell and others weren’t quite finished. Mostly I’ve thought it was usually more about the individual critter. A few seconds difference in actual demise seems negligible for the most part.

Full disclosure, I’ve never used monos of any sort, but I’ve been leaning towards using them for an elk hunt next month which is why I’ve been following.

No, it actually did not, though I can certainly see your reasoning in thinking that.

Velocity beyond the parameters of the design is why it looks that way.

I have used TSX and TTSX bullets on a fair amount of game, but mostly for animals larger than deer where I wanted to ensure good penetration. I used TSX bullets exclusively in my .375 H&H in Africa, and they worked well on everything from Impala to Buffalo. On deer size game I lean toward Accubonds and Ballistic Tips and they have worked very well on that class of game. And of course Partitions work well across a wide spectrum of game. It seems like both designs perform very well and the question is what works the best for a specific hunt. I've mostly had pretty quick kills with both designs, but I wouldn't claim to have enough experience to make any valid statistical comparisons so I'll accept what Mule Deer's database says. My main concern is making good shots and if I do that things usually go very well.

Not chronoed, but given powder charges and expected velocities, they are at or over 3100fps. Don't know if they shed petals or not as we have not recovered any. But by the look of the wound channel, it appears to go straight, deep, out the other side. I like that.

I have zero experience with the "other" monos and do not plan on trying them.

I do have a bunch of on game experience with Barnes, 22 to 423 caliber and GMX in 270. From 1700fps to 3800fprs. I have never experienced the failure to expand but fully acknowledge that it can happen.

I have recovered six
2- Barnes 270 110gr TSX
1 Barnes 270 130gr TSX
1 Hornady 270 130gr GMX
2 Barnes 375 300gr TSX
1 Barnes 423 400gr TSX

I have never recovered a Barnes 53gr TSX out of a 22-250, and we have shot over three dozen critters with it. Found some petals in neck tissue once when my son misplaced a shot. Have found petals a handful of other times while processing. (I process all my own animals).
I never recovered any 180gr TTSX's out of six African animals using my 300 H&H.
I have never recovered any 210gr TSX's out of half a dozen elk, another half dozen deer and couple of antelope out of my 338-06's.

I have recovered a dozen or more C&C bullets during that same time frame. I have also found lead smearing and fragments while processing meat. Although this poses no serious threat, why expose myself and my young boys to lead. This is one of the reasons I started using mono's a bunch in the early 2000's and going forward. My boys are now 21 and 18 respectively.

I think a 210gr TSX out of 338-06 is too much bullet for deer size game. I had much better reactions using softer bullets such as a 210gr NP or 200gr Hornady. My new 338-06's are going to get a diet of 180gr AB, 185gr monos, 200gr SST and NBST, and of course, 210gr T/TTSX

I had a 270gr Hornady out of a 375 H&H separate on a bedded doe. I shot quartering to with the bullet lodging in the hind quarter. In defense it broke shoulder, took out three short ribs, and broke the leg.

Monos do not ruin as much meat.
C&C impact louder from my casual observation.
I do not prefer NP's as I like bullets that are not designed lose their front half. I also have not been able to get them to shoot as accurately.
I cannot wrap my head around target bullets for hunting. Acknowledge that they work.
I like entrance and exit holes.
Bullet technology and manufacturing have greatly improved.

As far as killing quicker, or distance traveled, I have too many instances of one that can both prove/disprove both sides.
I have had monos kill on the spot, and the farthest I have ever had an animal travel after a lethal shot was with a 225gr Trophy Bond out of 338 WM circa 1997.

After hunting, friendly guiding, and bowhunting for close to 40 years. I will take a projectile in the right place over everything else.

Thanks all,

watching this thread with all the interest a California hunter can have.

I'll likely never find out if the monos kill quicker or slower, at least in this State, as I'll be limited to just the lead free version of projectiles, unless using my air rifle.

Thanks to the poster for the link to the GS Custom bullets, another one for me to try.

Geno

That was me I think.
You are welcome.
They used to be a pain in the butt to get as you had to order them in from South Africa.
One of the twins immigrated to the US and now you can get them without feeling like your sticking your neck out.
The bullet they get compared to most often is the TSX.
They are not.
The TSX has its nose split before its pounded into a bullet shape.Thus the petals.
The GS-HV is a lathe turned bullet.With a hole drilled in the end.
Driving bands instead of grooves.
I used them on my 270 STW project.I needed something that would not blow up.Worked well.
Loads. And I do mean LOADS of African animals taken...
Interesting reading on there websight.
They have been around awhile now.
All the deer I shot with the STW with the 110g GS-HV and later the 130g TTSX were all DRT. Bigtime....


dave

Thanks Dave,

I perused their website last night for a bit and bookmarked it for later use.

Geno

I find it highly unlikely that bullet didnt tumble. It's not uncommon for a bullet to tumble toward the end of its travel and when they do they look exactly like the lic you posted.
Excessive velocity will tend to fold the petals against the shank tighter or sheer them off.

BWalker-

I do appreciate your input. But you weren't there and didn't closely examine the wound channel -- nor did you extract the bullet. (And I've tested quite a few of these, both on game and in test medium.)

You are correct in the statement that many bullets do indeed tumble near the end of their journey, and I've examined plenty of wound channels which indicated as much. But that is simply not the case here.

These perform quite differently than typical Barnes bullets. I suggest you get a couple boxes and try them yourself.

I think what goes on with that bullet at higher velocity is that it expands like a "normal" TSX, then because of the velocity stressing the softer bullet, the shank portion begins to expand also, making a sort of double expansion look.

In flesh, they seem to be expanded wide like that the entire way through the wound channel, because they definitely make bigger holes than a comparable TTSX such as the 130 grain.

Just wanted to thank everyone for the feedback. Here’s what I’m going to try this year after your input:

6.5x55 - 118 Cavity Back
7mm08 - 110 TTSX
308 - 120 TAC-TX

If I get the chance to use all 3, I’ll consider myself a lucky guy and we’ll see what happens.