JO no doubt has "won" another arugument here on the campfire and the original poster will probably never ask another question. Sad that he simply wanted to know if a triple shock would kill a deer.
I think it was a stand-off. There is obviously the odd TSX that fails to drop the animal within a few yards, and the odd AB which fails to penetrate adequately, but as a rule JO said (in effect) "The AB penetrates plenty, so why do I need the TSX?", and the rest of us are saying "The TSX kills lightning-quick, so why do we need the AB?"
Which also answers the OP's question quite tidily...
I have stayed out of this one, but can't stand it anymore, so will address the heading of this thread: "Barnes Triple Shock in Whitetail": I have never been able to find a Barnes Triple Shock in a whitetail.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
I have stayed out of this one, but can't stand it anymore, so will address the heading of this thread: "Barnes Triple Shock in Whitetail": I have never been able to find a Barnes Triple Shock in a whitetail.
JO no doubt has "won" another arugument here on the campfire and the original poster will probably never ask another question. Sad that he simply wanted to know if a triple shock would kill a deer.
Jimmy.
You are making the classic, classic Campfire mistake here. You are saying that vigorous discussion of a topic is somehow BAD. You are demonizing the person who took a position other than yours. This is similar to recently when YOU ASKED about .260 vs. .358, then proceeded to tear me a new one for doing my best to take a position and flesh it out. WTF, dude? Why even ask if you don't want to hear both sides?
Jimmy, what is it you think we are doing here?
For your edification, THIS is the original poster's question. Now I ask you point-blank: did I, or did I not, seek to address the poster's question?
Originally Posted by herschel34
I was curious to hear the opinions of using 165 gr Barnes Triple Shock in a 308. I have a new rifle that shoots them better than any other bullet I've tried (i.e sierra BTSP, Ballistic Tips, Accubonds, Etc).
I guess my thoughts are that it may over penetrate and not deliver as much energy to the deer. Although, if I have got to track one, I would like to have an entrance/exit wound.
Thanks for the opinions.
Here's my first reply to that question. Notice I said, "rock on"!
Originally Posted by Jeff_O
Its going to ridiculously over-penetrate on deer <grin> but if that floats your boat then rock on. You'd probably want to hit bone on the way in with that bullet to really get it working right, and keep you impact speed up there, too.
That's how I'd load a .308 for ELK, to put it in perspective.
You could mos' def' load a better bullet for deer than that in a .308; a 150 or 165-gn Accubond comes to mind, but there's probably 20 better bullets than the 165-TSX for that job.
Ducking for cover; the TSX Nazis just can't handle the TRUTH!
There was never the slightest doubt that a 165-gn TSX will kill a deer. That would be idiotic. What IS worth debating, and what the OP ASKED FOR, was a discussion about whether it was the best bullet available, and whether the way a TSX works- particularly a heavy one at moderate velocities- was "the best" for the intended game.
Until guys like you learn that just because someone takes another position than you in a debate, doesn't mean the world is ending and it's time to horn up and have at it, this forum will continue to be one big pissing match when it comes to this kind of question.
I was curious to hear the opinions of using 165 gr Barnes Triple Shock in a 308. I have a new rifle that shoots them better than any other bullet I've tried (i.e sierra BTSP, Ballistic Tips, Accubonds, Etc).
I guess my thoughts are that it may over penetrate and not deliver as much energy to the deer. Although, if I have got to track one, I would like to have an entrance/exit wound.
Thanks for the opinions
I just can't stand it anymore myself....the classic mistake that I made was telling a guy who's rifle shoots the tSX better than any other bullet to just go use it and stop listening to foolish pontification from people that don't know anymore than he does.
I was curious to hear the opinions of using 165 gr Barnes Triple Shock in a 308. I have a new rifle that shoots them better than any other bullet I've tried (i.e sierra BTSP, Ballistic Tips, Accubonds, Etc).
I guess my thoughts are that it may over penetrate and not deliver as much energy to the deer. Although, if I have got to track one, I would like to have an entrance/exit wound.
Thanks for the opinions
I just can't stand it anymore myself....the classic mistake that I made was telling a guy who's rifle shoots the tSX better than any other bullet to just go use it and stop listening to foolish pontification from people that don't know anymore than he does.
I'd say that the classic mistake you made, and are making, is that you are bustin' chops on someone who attempted to specifically address the OP's question from a perspective different than yours, and in process getting yourself mad enough about it that you take it to a personal level when this was really not necessary, or helpful to the discussion.
He said, and you underlined, that he was concerned about overpenetration and energy transfer. Those concepts are often abused and rightly mocked when they are, but, in point of fact a bullet has the energy it is carrying, no more and no less, and that energy can be used to do work, and that work can be manifested in a variety of ways. It could be manifested in explosiveness- a smoking crater on the surface of the deer. It can be manifested as partial explosiveness- fragments spinning off, with the remaining energy being used by the bulk of the bullet as it penetrates. Or it can be used for pure penetration.
Where energy gets silly as a metric is in comparing DIS-similar cartridges. The 22/250 - 45/70 comparison is a common one. But when comparing IDENTICAL bullet weights at IDENTICAL speeds, it becomes useful. One bullet "wastes" energy by massively overpenetrating. Another bullet doesn't penetrate as much, but uses some energy to propel fragments into the surrounding flesh. Etc. In either case, by the time the bullet is at rest, all energy has been used (practically speaking). In the case of the over-penetrator a significant part of it wasn't used to wound the deer... it was used to put the bullet 6" deep into the oak tree behind the deer. That floats some guy's boats, but it bugs others, and the OP was apparantly of the latter camp since he mentioned this concern explicitly.
I'd say that the classic mistake you made, and are making, is that you are bustin' chops on someone who attempted to specifically address the OP's question [i
from a perspective different than yours
No Jeffy Boy, people don't really have a problem with the other perspective, they just expect it to come from someone with ACTUAL experience with the item in question. NOT from someone who read it on the internet, or heard a writer say, or read it in a magazine.
You see the problem is you have NO experience with said bullet on deer, so basically, your opinion means NOTHING on the subject.
I think the real problem is you can't except that.
That don't stop dipshitt Jeff, he don't need no stinking experience to tell folks how it is. Regardless, the amount of experience he has an anything is less than he has on Barnes.
I think the biggest thing in the original question that I would consider is whether you need to be choosing a TSX based on the best accuracy of the choices. At the distances (speeds) where the TSX is most ideal, that accuracy may not be needed assuming we're not talking 1 1/2" vs 3" or something. If indeed we're splitting hairs with loads comparing accuracies of 5/8" vs 1" or something along those lines and we're looking at distances where one might actually need such precision differences, then I think I'd opt for a bullet that has a greater likelihood of expanding well out yonder, while also being sufficiently tough at nearer distances. I really think it is as easy to wrongly choose too hard a bullet because of great accuracy as it is to choose too soft a bullet for the same reason. If all you're trying to do is place a shot at 200 yards though, use whatever bullet you like. The extra accuracy probably won't matter a whit, and neither will the bullet you choose. The original Xs proved that you don't need super-duper accuracy to get the job done.
Sometimes, the air you 'let in'matters less than the air you 'let out'.
Good news is, everyone (me too) agrees that the fellow is well-set for deer from his .308. He'll poke 'em, they'll die. Rifles are pretty cool that way.
I'm certain the original poster is sleeping well knowing he has the good house keeping seal of approval from a blithering azz shoot' in know nothing do nothing buffoon...
I was curious to hear the opinions of using 165 gr Barnes Triple Shock in a 308. I have a new rifle that shoots them better than any other bullet I've tried (i.e sierra BTSP, Ballistic Tips, Accubonds, Etc).
I guess my thoughts are that it may over penetrate and not deliver as much energy to the deer. Although, if I have got to track one, I would like to have an entrance/exit wound.
Thanks for the opinions
I just can't stand it anymore myself....the classic mistake that I made was telling a guy who's rifle shoots the tSX better than any other bullet to just go use it and stop listening to foolish pontification from people that don't know anymore than he does.
I'd say that the classic mistake you made, and are making, is that you are bustin' chops on someone who attempted to specifically address the OP's question from a perspective different than yours, and in process getting yourself mad enough about it that you take it to a personal level when this was really not necessary, or helpful to the discussion.
He said, and you underlined, that he was concerned about overpenetration and energy transfer. Those concepts are often abused and rightly mocked when they are, but, in point of fact a bullet has the energy it is carrying, no more and no less, and that energy can be used to do work, and that work can be manifested in a variety of ways. It could be manifested in explosiveness- a smoking crater on the surface of the deer. It can be manifested as partial explosiveness- fragments spinning off, with the remaining energy being used by the bulk of the bullet as it penetrates. Or it can be used for pure penetration.
Where energy gets silly as a metric is in comparing DIS-similar cartridges. The 22/250 - 45/70 comparison is a common one. But when comparing IDENTICAL bullet weights at IDENTICAL speeds, it becomes useful. One bullet "wastes" energy by massively overpenetrating. Another bullet doesn't penetrate as much, but uses some energy to propel fragments into the surrounding flesh. Etc. In either case, by the time the bullet is at rest, all energy has been used (practically speaking). In the case of the over-penetrator a significant part of it wasn't used to wound the deer... it was used to put the bullet 6" deep into the oak tree behind the deer. That floats some guy's boats, but it bugs others, and the OP was apparantly of the latter camp since he mentioned this concern explicitly.
your a complete tool and not worth further investment of time. go back to where you have been.
