Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting GMX, XP3, E-tip, TTSX? What experience have you had?

Totality of the circumstances.


I've not found monolithic type bullets best for me

My experience is with TSXs and TTSXs, about ten head of game from warthog on the small end to zebra and bull elk at the top. I've no complaints -- all were humane and quickly deceased but my feeling is they work best with higher velocity than less.

In attempt to simplify life, though, I've chosen TTSXs for all my big game rifles (just four) because of their accuracy and I know they'll work off the barrel to 400 yds. But it's the longish ranges where there might be more dependable, expanding choices. I'm not sure. I still recall the Lost River Tech 225-gr .338 homogenous (bronze-copper alloy IIRC) that killed a bull right at five hundred yards but just penciled through. But i believe they were much harder than the Barnes versions. Still, the unleaded slugs at longer ranges make me a little nervous.

I will go for the most accurate bullet in my rifle.
200 gr flat base TSX shoots 3/4" from my .300 Wby. It allows to load a little hotter and faster without high pressures than lead core. This must be because the longer design allowed them to put in the grooves that reduce the bearing surface. As a bonus I would swear I feel lower recoil with them, especially heavier ones.
225 gr TTSX shoots 3/4" in my 338 RCM. Love it, and the recoil is noticeably lower than factory Superformance with 200 gr SST.
180 gr FailSafe shoots 3" groups from the same .300 Wby. But it shoots 3/4" groups from my 7.5-55, and the bull I shot with it came down as if the dirt was pulled from under its feet. Poleaxed, not even a twitch, just one shot at 90 yards. It is all about where and how they are hit, more than the bullet construction I think.
I can't get Hornady bullets to shoot any better than good in any of my guns. From the fact that their sitting depth is always a bit different (2-4 thousandths) with the same die setting I conclude their ogive is not highly uniform. In comparison, Bergers seat to within 0.001" all the time.
This is inconsequential for 8" accuracy often quoted for big game but I personally have higher confidence when I know my rifle will hit more or less exactly where I aim it.

Five whitetail so far with the 168 TTSX from a .300 WSM. Four of the five dropped within a few steps of where they were shot. One, a very small doe, ran about 50 yards. Well, actually she was recovered about that far away. I think a good portion of that was tumbling and sliding down the hill towards the bottom.

They shoot sooooooo well in that rifle and give me the closest I've found to a do-it all solution.

Well, I suppose this is enough gun and penetration for whitetail. Where they all behind one another when shot?..

So many bullets, so many calibers, so-o-o many options. I love it!

My experience with TTSX and MRX has been positive. No elk with them so far but mulies and antelope have dropped on the spot and penetration has included front to back and out on a mulie. None recovered so far.

Two bulls may be less than a comprehensive study, but I've had very good luck with a 168 TSX BT in a .308 at just over 300 yards and a 130 TSX BT in a .270 Win. at no more than 125 yards. Quick kills with complete penetration and little meat damage.

One of my concerns with the TSX was the reliability of expansion - this after a bad experience with Barnes XLC bullets (blue lubricated X bullets). My experience with XLCs was they ***COULD*** expand rapidly, then other times they seemed to pencil through with no expansion at all. As a result I cold never bring myself to use TSX bullets on game.

No such problems or doubts with the TTSX or MRX. I hit an antelope high (went for a high shoulder shot, forgetting that the bullet would be 3" high at the given range) and hit above the spine. The 168g TTSX only went through a few inches of flesh before exiting. Examination of the wound channel showed expansion was very fast. I've had one antelope go about 25 feet after being hit with a 100g TTSX and my son-in-law had one go maybe half that distance after being hit with a 168g TTSX. Everything else we have shot dropped straight down including the one I shot poorly as discussed above. (That one did require a finisher, though, as nothing immediately vital was hit.)

Coming in the next few weeks I am going to buy some TTSX and some Superformance GMX and see which shoots the best. Ended up getting a
30-06 instead of the 270, so I will be using 180gr. The TTSX seems to be the popular choice and I may give the XP3s a chance to impress me on a range, still intrigued about the design.

Speed. You want all the speed you can get with monos!


This is a 120 TSX I shot from a 7mm-08 into a caribou at ~200 yards. I would have hoped for more expansion and/or penetration. It wasn't especially impressive. (And I have been very impressed several dozen times when monos, many of them the early variety, worked well. Unfortunately, sometimes they don't.)

Here's a link I just posted today regarding a test I've been working on for awhile:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...0_grain_30_06_bullets_tested#Post6642638

While I have not used the TSX on Elk, I have used and seen used all the versions of the Barnes X (X, XLC, TSX, TTSX) used on game from Coyotes to large Mule Deer. The bullet I have used the most is the .308 cal 150gr out of a .30-06, only have recovered one since 1994 when I started using them.

The one I recovered hit a whitetail buck quartering away in the near hip, smashed the hip joint, continued up through the vitals and broke the off shoulder, stopping under the hide. Range was a little over 300 yards with a .30-06. That is more than enough penetration for me. Retained 85% weight, lost two petals.

Deer are not Elk, but the performance I have seen with them over the past 18 years and lots of game shot, I will trust them. They are not a magic bullet as there is no such thing. If I could not get them to shoot out of a rifle (hasn't been an issue) I would use Partitions with equal confidence.

I shot a big bodied Colorado mule deer with a 140 TTSX out of a 280AI at 389 yards. Muzzle velocity was right at 3200 fps. The first shot was quartered slightly away and went in about 10 inches behind the shoulder and stopped under the hide on the off shoulder. The second round was a raking shot as the deer was disappearing into the oak brush almost straight away. The bullet broke about five ribs on the one side and exited. I found the deer still very much alive, jumped up on me and took off. You should really turn down your scope below 14X before you find the deer at 20 yds. Little to no blood on the ground. After I found him for the second time a quick shot to the neck finished the job. The bullet I recovered looked just like the one posted above and the damage to the inside looked minimal. It is a sample of one so take it for what it is worth. However, I am back to accubonds and partitions. If I was going to use them again I would push them as fast as possible in whatever caliber I was using.

Andy

From what I have seen with the monos they do indeed kill "slower" than conventionals, as Muledeer said, in so many words. My only reference with monos is with whitetails though. I use Trophy Bonded Bearclaws, Accubonds and Partitions on elk. I have never recovered a Partition from any elk I have shot, but have recovered several TBBC's and one Accubond. Below is a typical TBBC for reference...this one was from my biggest bull, which was taken on a "quartering on" shot. It smashed the shoulder and was found in the pelvic canal! Other recovered TBBC's have looked pretty much like this one. The Accubond behaved as advertised, retaining 55% of its original weight and a nice decent mushroom. My TBBC shots seem to all be quartering shots, while my Nosler shots all seem to be broadside, which will partly explain the pass throughs with the Partitions and recovery of the TBBC's.

I wouldn't mind trying the TBBC but they are amazingly expensive if you can even find them as a component bullet. Not really worth my time. If you are shooting factory stuff they might be worth it.

I also am still considering the TBBC, particularly the p3006tt4 loading. The only problem is I can not find those locally, only the others though they still make my list of top 4 to try. Last year I took a small 2x3 mule deer with a 165gr accubond. It was a broadside shot at 230 yards, it did the job but failed to exit which surprised me. So that's when I started pondering other options even though the accubonds are typically reviewed well.

I have a stash of 30 cal 180's and 200's from Jack Carter...the original recepie. I hand load mine.....try to find you some to load at gun shows, etc....I love the way the old ones perform. I have seen it in print before, that the Norma Oryx and the North Fork bullets are the closest thing to the old TBBC's, so take a look at them if you can't find old TBBC's. Norma factory has loaded ammo.

I will look into the Norma offerings. I have not started to reload so I am left to the factory offerings. The TBBC seems it would give good, quick expansion but still has a solid base to help with penetration. Whatever I choose will be for elk and mule deer, so I want a good compromise between expansion and penetration. The etips showed a good result in a test in the reloading section.

GMX - NO

I live and hunt behind the copper curtain, so I have had to switch most of my rifles over to lead free loads. To promote reliable expansion with the lead free stuff I generally step down 1 bullet weight to increase velocity. For example, in my 7-08AI, I swtiched from 140 lead to 120g TTSX. My .260 is running a 100g TTSX. My hunting partners and I took 4 deer last year. 1 with .243 85g, 2 with 7-08 AI 120g TTSX and 1 with 7-08 140g TSX. All 4 were well placed shots, and dropped in their tracks. I understand elk are different, but suspect same principles apply.

I shot this deer quartering with my 7-08AI 120g TTSX at 3150. Bullet broke several ribs before entering check cavity. As much as I hate having bullet selction dictated, a lesser bullet probably would not have penetrated.