Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Bagged The Elusive Recovered TTSX! 100Gr 6.5mm

Just got around to getting back here.

I understand where Calvin is coming from because my response is usually the same, calling a bullet a "failure" after recovering from a dead animal is silly. Generally I agree.

If everyone had read carefully I said this "particular" bullet not TTSX's or TSX's in general. Like I said this wasn't my first game taken or seen taken with TSX's.

BBERG's comment was really was I was getting at, this was not typical TTSX performance from my experience with them.

Thanks for the lesson Flinch, I know a little about how Barnes bullet act. Sure didn't know the XLC's were "softer"? I found them to expand less than TSX's or TTSX's. The only reason for the coating was to reduce fouling, when they incorporated the rings they did away with the coating because the rings cut down on fouling themselves by reducing bearing surface. At least this is what I thought, but I've been wrong before...

Bill

Bill, you just need to drink more Koolaid. Mix with vodka, all will be right with the TTSX in the morning...

100g TTSX work great in my Bob and I'm building development loads for my .280 using the 140g TTSX.

Great minds....

354yds is my longest! I might top it next year, I might not.. Who knows.

Thanks for the pictures Bill...

That bullet was traveling approximately 2650+ on impact at that yardage FWIW...

Part of the problem (note to those who may be offended: I did not call this a "failure") is that they've gone with a skinnier ogive on many of the TSX type bullets. People complained that the old XFBs wouldn't shoot, but they sure opened and killed well when they hit fast enough - and they were generally opened to a nice X on the frontal surface when they were recovered. A skinnier ogive means less mass to aid centrifugal forces in the instantaneous moment of expansion (which may be part of the reason why you often see TSX type bullets opened incompletely to a tiny curled bonnet). It also prevents petal loss - the second big complaint that seemed to be popular among non-using nit-pickers of the early designs. But a small frontal area by design seems to make petal loss a very paltry criticism in my view.

I'm sure the challenges of building with "pure" copper are many though. I can't imagine the trouble that must result when the new batch of material comes in and "we're going to have to watch the anneal real close on the .32 wire. It must have traces of zinc, or calcium, or etc in it and it acts brittle." Etc.

Great penetration, dicey expansion considering the circumstances IMHO.

Another dead deer bullet failure. sheesh. You want massive expansion, shoot a cup and core at the higher velocities. You want to eat up to the hole, use a TSX/TTSX.

What I think is "dicey" about this is the length of deer it penetrated for the amount of expansion. We'll never know where it expanded... was it early in the wound path, at the end, progressively the whole time, we can't know.

But I see that bullet after what it did and think, I'd hate to shoot a deer broadside through the lungs and not catch bone! And in fact, the OP mentions seeing some pretty minimal damage on a pig broadside. A dead pig, granted.

Since I've personally shot an Accubond lengthwise through a deer, starting at the (ahem) rear shoulder, I'm not seeing the penetration problem, that would compel me to seek a solution, from a bullet with expansion issues.

Elk? Sure. I've loaded them for elk. Deer? Not seeing it- for me. YMMV and all that jazz.

Classic..

It matters. If it isn't expanding much early, then it isn't expanding much in lungs broadside. Know what I mean, Accubond-user? Thinkin' you do.

I'm thinkin' you have a hard time ordering a cup of coffee, let alone get out of the house in the morning..

You're thinkin' wrongly <g>.

FWIW...

I shot 3 deer this past year with this same bullet and never recovered a single one so do not have pictures to show expansion.

However, I can say without a doubt that the damage done by this bullet to these three deer were MUCH more than with vanilla TSX's and on par with softer C&C offerings....

There was no eating up to the hole with this bullet on these 3 deer, at least if shoulder shot. I salvaged some front shoulder meat but lost a good bit on the offside shoulder.

Sample of three but the damage was consistent.

Is this a make or break for me? Heck no...

If you've not shot anything with the TTSX's, give them a go and report back.

Greg,

The phone conversation you and I had and your experience on your three deer makes me wonder if it's the particular batch of bullets I got.

The internal damage I got was nothing like yours, I think you trust that I know what typical damage from a bullet C&C or all copper looks like. I trust yours too, and thats what has me wondering about this box of bullets.

Bill

cliff,

Read the whole post plus my recent one before commenting next time. I know damn well what a Barnes bullet does, I've killed with them before and witnessed game taken by others with them, and I'll use them again. This was my first time with this bullet as it was brand new when I loaded them. These particular ones didn't follow what I consider typical performance from them.

Its amazing, all some hear is "he said something negative about a Barnes bullet!", all the while stomping their feet red faced, doesn't matter what else was said.

So predictable.....

Bill

You are right, we can never know. From what I�ve seen with TTTSX, however, expansion happens very quickly. One of the antelope I shot was hit high, actually above the spine. TheTTSX made a �U� shaped channel the size of a baseball through the animal�s back above the shoulder. The only bone hit was a process bone on top of the spine and the channel started well before that . The bullet was a 168g .308� running a calculated 2450fps or so at impact. Not good placement, for which I accept blame, but the animal went straight down and never got up. I�ve yet to see antelope or deer hit in the chest with a TTSX where the lungs weren�t a mess.

My guess is the recovered TTSX expanded quickly enough and just slowed to the point where further expansion wasn�t possible unless bone was hit. Further, I don�t know how further expansion would have helped as the diameter would not have changed significantly.

Just my thoughts and I could be completely wrong, but so far the deer and antelope we�ve shot with TTSX and MRX have all gone straight down except for one antelope that made it about 25 yards before collapsing.

Bill,

I know partner. I trust you more than I do myself.

Maybe your blue tip was funky or something or maybe we're just gacking? grin...

I couldn't have "over-analized" this whole thing do you think Greg? A rifle looney would never do that! <laughin>

Never, ever Bill...grin...

I will say that from the damage I've seen and looking at your bullet I am/was surprised...

Maybe shoot some more stuff?