I have taken many deer sized game and a couple elk with my tried and true 30-06 over the years. I have been reading about the Barnes Tipped TSX and they have piqued my interest. I have heard regarding the TXS that the lighter bullets for a given caliber perform similar to a heavier lead core. Meaning a 150 or 165gr TSX will give similar penetration as a 180gr lead core bullet in the same caliber. Is there any truth to these statements. What kind of results could I expect shooting a well placed 150gr TTSX on elk? Would the velocities produced expand the bullets as advertised? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I am currently reloading 168 grain TTSX for my elk hunt this fall. It is also for a .30-06. The TTSX will follow the same direction as the regular Barnes TSX bullets, generally able to drop 1 or 2 sizes for a given animal. From talking with Barnes and other folks, the 168 gr TTSX/TSX in .30-06 for a pure elk hunt seems to be the best choice.

There isn't a ton of experience on the TTSX yet, but it was to resolve the chance that normal TSX's from opening up and penciling through. A 150 GR TSX has proven to be great on elk and will work with a '06, no problem.

I also plan to load some 130 Gr TTSX for my antelope and whitetail deer hunts. I would choose the 150 GR for larger, nothern whitetails/mule deer/caribou size game.

If you were looking for an all around bullet size, the 150 TTSX would be a good choice.

Shooting lighter for caliber bullets with the TSX is the correct choice. My hunters using the TSX in a 30/06 shoot well in excess of 100 big game animals a year. These have been with the original TSX, not the new TTSX (plastic tipped) bullets.

There should be no difference in performance. I'm not convinced yet that the tipped bullets will work any differently then the originals. I've not experienced any fail to open conditions on game with the TSX.

I've used the new ones since early last summer. Everything looks like this is another winning offer from Barnes. I'll use them for the season in RSA again this year and by June I will know quite a bit more about the internal performance.

I can say for 100% certain, that the 165 TSX shot at 2900fps from a 30/06 is plenty for big game. It's the load we shoot in my rifle in Africa. I've never seen a reason to change from this combination.

Thanks for the replies.

JJHACK what size game have you shot with the 165 TSX, are they similar to our large deer and elk sized animals?



I was thinking along the same lines. I am having a tough time wrapping my brain around a 150gr TTSX performing similarly to a 180gr lead core, but every thing I have read supports it. That would be a great do all setup!!

It's not complicated to understand.

instantly after impact a lead core and jacketed bullet begins to seperate, crumble and lose it's weight. It may continue ahead, and it may not. It may curve, stop, or it may lodge into bone. the reduced weight has as much to do with further penetration as the lost velocity. Retaining weight increases penetration. The greater the inertia the deeper the penetration. Combine that with the more rough edged or maybe more accurately stated the lack of a soft round conventional lead mushroom, and it's able to poke through the exit side of the skin far more often.

A TSX opens perfectly into 4 petals and retains 100% weight and then exits leaving two holes in the hide for you to follow the dripping blood.

There is nothing special needed to kill a Deer. They die about as easy as any big game alive. They have a minimal will to live when hit properly with about any bullet, and they are quite soft.

The African Game we hunt is much more like NA Elk and Mtn goats. Tough as nails and with the herd instinct they will travel a hella long way to stay with the group, even dead on their feet.

Regarding animals size comparison, to answer your question more directly, a 2000lb bull eland can jump a 2 meter fence from a standstill without a running leap. We have seen this a number of times. A bull elk will not jump that fence at only half the body weight. Nor will an American Bison which is also equal in wieght to the eland. So to compare what has been killed with the 165grain bullet Yes we are killing far tougher game then deer and far bigger game then elk.

Here is an older page of notes I published here in the past:
--------------------------------------------------------------

I have recovered and recorded a lot of information on the bullets used this season from my loaner 30/06 rifle.

First some of the facts and details regarding the loads and the gun used.

Rifle: Model 70 Winchester PacNor 23� barrel in standard 30/06 cartridge

Winchester Brass
Federal 210M primers
IMR4350 powder 58 grains
Chronographed at 2900 plus at 55deg F

Game shot by 7 different hunters six male one female

6 warthogs
12 impala
6 Kudu bulls
1 Kudu cow
5 Zebra
3 waterbuck
6 wildebeest
4 Red Hartebeest
4 Blesbok
2 Nyala
1 Steenbok
1 Gemsbok

51 total animals. One was not recovered, a Blue Wildebeest was lost although a confirmed hit with a short blood trail.

Shortest shot was a impala at about 40 feet, longest shots were a Zebra at a laser measured 237 yards, Blue Wildebeest at 198 yards, Kudu Bull at 225, and Impala at 177 yards all measured with my LRF 1200.

35 were shot with the Barnes TSX bullets. 7 were recovered
6 were shot with the Federal Fusion factory loads
6 were shot with Hornady Interbonds
4 were shot with the PMC factory loads

My unbiased assessment is as follows. However I must first say that I was admittedly very skeptical of the Barnes bullets based on my prior extensive experience with the original X bullet design. I must also admit to not being very impressed with the Fusions lack of velocity at only 2700plus fps. The PMC bullets were on hand and used to share the difference between factory cup and core bullets and premium handloads. The Interbonds were already a well known performer and had a lot of respect from me.






My rifle was zeroed with the X bullets and shooting hole touching groups at 100 meters. Prior to departure I shot a three shot group to foul the barrel. Upon arrival I shot a 2 shot group to prove the travel did not compromise the scope adjustments. There were 5 shots now through the barrel. Each hunter using this rifle also shot it before their hunt started. The Fusion, PMC, and Interbond bullets would shoot into about a 3+� group mixed POI's with the settings used for the TSX bullets.

The Federal Fusion Bullets: Underpowered for bigger game. The lack of velocity and the unpredictable bullet shapes left me unimpressed. Although they held together they under penetrated and fell short of my desired performance hopes. It�s an excellent inexpensive deer and smaller big game bullet but does not have the kind of killing power I expect with a 30/06 using other loads and bullets. A good choice for deer, impala, blesbok, but I would not likely choose them for anything bigger or even on the tough little warthog. I stopped using this bullet for further shooting on game based on the early limited performance on the recovered game and bullets. With the shallow penetration and oddly shaped mushrooms I was not confident to shoot game as tough as wildebeest, gemsbok and zebra with these bullets.

PMC Bullets: As can be expected with these bullets being Cup and Core design they will kill about like the Fusion bullets. If everything is perfect they work fine, but when something goes wrong they will not provide the edge I would like to see in my bullets. All of them failed to stay in one piece and all lost much if not all functional weight retention.

Hornady Interbonds: Work flawless and 100% predictable 4 out of the 6 were recovered and all had massive expansion with great weight retention. Another hunter used these bullets in his 30/06 AI and had identical performace and recovery percentages as my standard 30/06. The AI version was about 90fps faster at 3000fps. A better bullet would be difficult to choose. I have already posted dozens of pictures and text on these bullets in the past. This years experience is the same. It's a class act by Hornady and difficult to choose another bullet over this design.

The Barnes TSX bullet: Well this was the one that drove this project for me. Although I am very pleased with the performance. I am very happy with the results of so many deadly shots on big tough game animals. I�m still skeptical about some of what I have seen. The 7 recovered bullets look almost identical and have from what I can see 100% weight retention. Not a single petal was broken off and all expanded from the close range 40 yard shots to the longer near 250 yard shots. Some exits were massive and the blood was flowing freely. Others showed me a bore diameter hole and not a drop of blood from the exit. I�m stumped as to how these bullets exit with an exact bore diameter hole? Yet some others have a huge exit hole. I had about a 20% recovered bullet rate from these bullets. The lowest recovery percentage of any bullet I have ever used. Exits are the norm with the TSX. I had a bullet zip clean through the shoulders of a Big Zebra at 237 yards which included the vertebra and one scapula above the shoulders. This is enough mass that I have seen it stop a 270 grain Swift A frame from a 375HH plenty of times. Yet a 165 grain TSX from a 30/06 passed through. 4 zebra were shot with the 30/06. One needed a follow up shot, all 4 of the TSX bullets passed through these zebra. Only the one follow up shot was inside one of them. Zebra, Gemsbok, and Blue Wildebeest are about the best bullet stopping plains game we have. All three species were shot clean through with this bullet. Few provided a good blood trail often due to the bore diameter exit holes. Those that had good blood trails when recovered always had good exit holes too.

Here is an Impala with a noticeable exit hole but you can clearly see there is no blood flow.



I have 4 other TSX bullets I could photo and post here. However they are identical to the first two in this photo. They would be difficult to tell apart had I not marked them before I left! The only oddball in the group is the one from the zebra. It was recovered inside the heart. It has a wrinkled petal which you can see in this photo. All the others are exactly the same.


The rifle was not cleaned, barrel swabbed out, or oiled during the entire trip. On my last evening I hunted hard for a warthog. I walked from 2:30 PM til dark about 6PM I was hunting alone and looking for a whopper warthog I had seen twice in the prior several weeks I had been hunting here. In the closing moments of light about 5:55 I saw what looked like a shooter. At 75 yards he was trotting parallel to the road I was on, and slightly quartering away from me through the bush. When the warthog cleared a bush and left me with a fleeting moment between bushes I leveled the upper crosshair and touched off the trigger when it was layed behind the last rib. It appeared as if I rolled him over but the muzzle flash was too bright. I walked to the spot and saw a spot of blood. Then there in the flashlight beam just ahead he layed dead. The blood flow was significant and the exit was through the opposite scapula.

Several times I tested the accuracy during the week with targets. Each time the bullets were into the 1� square �bullseye� on the target at 100 meters. With nearly 60 shots fired during this trip and no cleaning I trusted this rifle and bullet combination on the last moment shot at the warthog. There was simply no fouling problems with these TSX bullets and this PacNor barrel!

I would certainly feel a whole lot better if the exits looked like they had more consistency in size. However I have also come to another probably arguable conclusion with the TSX and the 30/06. I would much prefer to have a 30/06 with this bullet and a rangefinder then a 300mag of any make without a rangefinder. I feel 100% confident that these bullets will penetrate and shoot accurately as far as I would like to shoot. Say 400 yards or so. If you know the distance with the rangefinder hitting the target is not complicated or risky with low wind. These 165 grain TSX bullets in a 30/06 will out perform a 300 magnum with a standard cup and core bullet every time. Sure you can up weight with a 300 magnum and use the 180�s. However if the 30/06 killed 50 of 51 tough big game animals I�m not sure moving to the 300 mag is a practical choice if you want more power. I think moving to the 338 is much more logical. If shooting long range 450 yards plus is the reason then would I agree. However a rangefinder with a 30/06 is still a very do-able shot with these TSX bullets on a calm day.

So do I switch now from the Hornady Interbonds I love so much to the TSX bullets? ����..Wow talk about a tough choice! The TSX shoots a tiny bit better in Accuracy, the tips don�t deform, they seat very tight in the brass with the groves. They don�t have the 100% internal damage consistency that the Interbonds have, but they are close and I cannot explain why the exit holes are bore diameter on some of the game. I do have a photo coming of the exit on a zebra. It looks like the stallion was shot with a small broad head. It has 4 slices about �� long each. It�s a brilliant exit hole. Why don�t they all show this? Maybe 35 big animals under nearly identical conditions is still not enough information? I will say that If I only saw 10-12 of the best exits I would swear these were the best bullets on earth no question, hands down, end of story. I may yet agree to this statement. However there were those few that leave me wondering why a tiny little exit hole as if the bullet did not open or the petals all sheared off? ( no petals ever found inside) I will continue to use them until the first time I find one that is unopened inside an animal. If that does not happen I may not use anything else in this rifle. I think they make a better large big game, Elk, bear, zebra, wildebeest, gemsbok, eland, waterbuck, moose, etc bullet then the Interbond because the exits at least in theory should provide more blood flow. I think the interbonds will provide much more explosive impact and internal trauma on deer sized game like antelope, sheep, blesbok, impala, etc.

They do not have a similar POI or load to shoot well from my rifle. They are as incompatible with a single scope setting as possible. I will have to pick one and stick with it. So for now I�ll stay with the TSX. As far as I�m concerned the TSX does more with the available power of the 30/06 then the Interbond does. The much higher frequency of exits is a benefit to good blood trails. I know my weakness as a confirmed bullet recovery junky even though I know they should all exit.

I�m not sure you can make a mistake in choosing between the 165 grain AFrame, Interbond, Accubond, TSX, or Partition, The one that shoots best in your barrel and gets a minimum level of functional velocity should do fine. I guess having to choose between the 165 grain Interbond and the 165 grain TSX for me is actually a good problem to have.

Great information!! Excellent Post!! Thanks for taking the time to put that together. I am going to load up some 150gr and see what kind of results I get. Thanks again.

I ordered some .270 cal 110 grain federal loads this week just to try into a 700 .270 they should smoke!

Are the tipped TTSX shooting about the same as the older TSX with the same loads? Are you finding that it requires a complete new load work up to make the switch?

I've not shot them in the same weights yet. However with a slightly different shape I would not start at max, rather a bit under and see how things look first.

On the other hand I would use the same loads for the TTSX as I have for the TSX, in fact I have for several rifles.

I may work up some loads this spring for the TTSX as well as the new plastic tipped Trophy Bonded, and see if they are moe accurate for me. If not I am perfectly happy with the TSX.

I'm not 100% convinced that the end result of the TTSX will be much different then the TSX. I've not experienced any trouble with the TSX, and they are as accurate as any bullet I've ever shot. The TTSX adds another piece to the puzzle, but that should not be a problem, plastic tipped bullets have been around a long time and worked fine.

They have a larger internal cavity, and the ogive is quite different. I have them on hand this year for my loaner rifles in Africa. I'll have plenty more details to share when I come back!

Please keep us informed when you return.

For the information of any who wish it, Barsnes makes a 165 gr. TSX and a 168 gr. TSX in .30 caliber. The 165's are for the .300 magnums and the 168, with a slightly longer nose and higher BC, are designed for the 30'06 and the .308.
My much more limited experiences with the Nosler Partition, the Hornady Interbond and the X and TSX are pretty similar to what others have found. Including the fact that the lighter X/TSX bullets penetrate much like the conventional bullets of 15% more weight, at least.
I've also noticed that the Hdy IB's open more and don't penetrate as well as the NP's or the X/TSX's. But, like the man said, they are all excellent. One of the reasons why I quit using magnums for hunting. E

JJ. - - I too had some early recovered Barnes-X�s (225grs from my .340 Roy) and they typically had the perfectly-formed �X� shape in the petals after expansion and retained weights in the high 98+ % range. These were launched just above 3,000 fps and were recovered from �lengthwise� elk, shot from 150-400 yards, where the impact velocity was even less. When measured, their diameter was almost uniformly 2 times the caliber in both directions, with all 4 petals intact and �neatly� folded back (each petal bent almost in a loop) so the tip of the petal just kissed the bullets shank.

However, over the last few years of shooting the 168gr TSX�s in my ATT rifle (.300 Wby), launched at 3,400 fps, I�m seeing a big difference in the shape of the few bullets recovered. If you look closely at the recovered TSX from my recent Utah bull (Big Game Hunting thread: �Recovered 168gr TSX�) you can see that the nose (petals) of the bullet are no longer in an X-shape, but rather wrapped tightly back, folded against the shank. So far back, that it creates a nose on the bullet that is rounded and �soft�, in comparison to the usual Barnes �X� expanded bullet ad photo.

I believe that this is a result of two things ... Increased velocity ... and what the boolit hits (or goes though) on its penetration path.

If your TSX enters the chest (without smashing a rib, shoulder or leg bone) and is opened by the hydraulic forces alone, working on the bullets nose cavity, then the petals come out (bloom) as if the bullet had been shot into a homogenous water tank and it produces the photogenic �X� pattern pictured in the Barnes ads. This perfectly expanded bullet is slowed and stopped, by its larger frontal area and by the soft tissue that �catches� it.

If instead, you up the velocity another 300-400 fps and smash that bullet (early in its penetration path) into a major bone or tough tissue (like a dense/tensed ham), then the petals are driven back �tightly� against the bullets shank, greatly reducing the frontal area (and any cutting capabilities). Since the bullet still retains a high percentage of it�s initial weight, it continues to penetrate .... and with this smaller frontal area, penetrates even further than a conventionally expanded Barnes �X� shape would. This additional penetration is what leads to enough bullet travel to exit the animal, leaving closer to a caliber-sized exit hole .. rather than a fifty-cent piece sized exit-hole. Since we never (or rarely) recover these pass-through bullets, we don�t have a large sample size to lay-out on a table and visually compare the shape/expansion of these TSX�s that exited with �small� exit holes, to a table top full of TSX�s with 4 nicely spread petals in an �X� shape that didn�t exit.

So, with the TSX ... fast is good ... and it means even deeper penetration ... but if the petals fold completely back, the bullet can exit with a small diameter Gaz-outta hole.

That�s my hypothesis .... n� I�m stickin to it ....

... Silver Bullet

�If ya only got a $10 head ... buy a $10 helmet .�
(Evil Knieval�s answer to a dumb-blonde reporter, who asked why Evil planned to wear a $750 helmet, on his Snake River Canyon jump attempt ).

JJ,
This is about as comprehensive an article I have ever read on terminal performance. I wish you would have had some experience with the Swift Scirocco's too. I have settled on the 7mm 150 S2 and so far I love it. Like your apprehension with the Tsx, I too have an apprehension with the Scirocco. My brother in law shot an Axis buck with a 300 Wby at 40 yards with an S2 180 loaded to 3200 fps. The bullet did not penetrate and I recovered it in the 2nd "grass sack". Someone here commented that if the grass sack was full, which it was, that hardly any bullet would penetrate that from a frontal brisket shot. Still the bullet penetrated roughly 20". I have it here and it weighs exactly 80% less than what it started out as. It entered the front right shoulder, splitnered the joint, the bone fragments cut the top of the heart off, punctured a lung, made mince meat of the liver, penetrated the first stomach which was STUFFED with wet grass and came to rest in the second stomach intestinal tube.

Thinking like you, I considered that had the animal took off, tracking may not have been optimum. I'm still gonna use them until they give me a reason to quit though. Although, with that much damage he wouldn't have gone far. The shot spun him 360 degrees around, he stumbled to the ground, got up to run but hooked his antler in an old roll of fence wire which held him down for the roughly 3 seconds it then took for him to expire.


Anyway, after years and years of countless articles from gun magazines, which I haven't purchased since 1990, this is one of the best reports I have seen on the subject.

I, too am a recovery bullet junky. Keep up the good work.

Silver Bullet,

I would like to interject two points of interest in your theory.

One, the folding back of the petals makes sense due to high velocity. However, JJ states his 30-06 lacks that capability of the increased velocity.

Two, JJ also stated that his pencil through exit holes were on animals where no extra petals were found within had they sheared off and remained in the body.

I am not arguing or disagreeing with you. I have no personal experience with the Barnes Tsx's. I will soon begin load development with the 120 & 140 TTSX in my 7 Wby.

WOW!!! great read... thanks guys!

JJHack

Whats your opinion of me running the the 210TSX's outa my 338WM. I'll be using that combo on griz (hopefully) this coming spring and can only imagine it will break chit with a vengance!

To better that combo would require a 375 with 270 TSX's

Gotta think driven to max speed you're gonna get his attention one last time.

Yeah at about 2950 fps I'm thinkin it oughtta work! grin

Hopefully I'll have some reviews to give.

JJ, you've used partitions on African game. Well, How do you like them? What about trophy bonded bear claws?

Thanks

Partitions have no dust on them, but they are no longer the top of the line.

Bearclaws are awsome in just about every way. They solve a lot of problems with the rear section being solid. Probably would be much more popular if they were a component bullet.

How bout interbonds?

I use the 130 gr TSX's out of my .270 for deer and elk since I started using them a couple years ago. To date, they've taken 2 elk and a big old muley buck.

I'd typically opt for a heavier bullet for elk (150 grainer in the .270), but given the TSX's excellent weight retention, went with the 130's instead.

First elk my son shot. Spike taken at 270 yards. Lunged him, and he went 50 yards, complete penetration.

Big muely buck I took with a quartering towards shot. Through the front part of the shoulder area, boiler room, and exited just forward of the hind quarters. He dropped right there.

Last elk I shot at 170 yards. Broke the nearest upper leg bone just below the shoulder joint, between ribs 3 and 4, through the lungs, left a nickle sized hole through the top of the heart, though the 3rd rib on the far side, and out the shoulder area on the far side. Now THAT is some serious penetration. With a little ol' 130 grainer out of a .270. Not sure what more you can ask for than that. As a bonus, it was not hard to work up a good load to get .75 moa accuracy either, something I was never able to do with 150 gr. partitions.

I imagine I'll keep using this combination for everything from couse to elk until I find a reason not to.

Partitions have never offered great accuracy for me. However they work so good I was always satisfied with the performance on game. They shoot good but not great.

The TSX is simply a great hunting bullet wrapped in a benchrest body. I've never struggeled to make them shoot perfectly, and they have done the job on big game equally well.

JJ have you used or had clients use GS Custom HVs on your hunts? What are your thoughts about these bullets when compared to the TSX?

I have, and they have worked fine. I prefer the TSX at this point for the same reasons I prefer Aframes over Woodleighs.

I like easy access to the ammo I use. I don't want to have them out of stock, and difficult to come by. Once I develop a load I want to use that load, not have to switch to something else and begin all new load development because the bullets I want cannot be found anyplace.

GS Custom has a functional distribution system in place now, we will have to see how that works. Seems to be a growing business too. They also came up with the idea to reduce pressure by putting the bands on the base of the bullets. These folks pretty much have it figured out where making bullets is concerned! It's kinda like the South African Version of the TSX. I'm not sure what the future holds for mass sales of the GS Custom in America with the Barnes product here and on every sporting goods shelf.

I had a great woodleigh load at one time, then battled to find them. So I switched to the Aframes, and I never went back. Why? Aframes are easy to get and work at least as well. They are probably my all around favorite bonded core bullet on the market today.

JJHACK,
Terrific real life, real experience information. It would take a lifetime of hunting for most of us to accumulate that much knowledge. Appreciate the effort and insight.

Sorry to necropost but I have a few more questions. I was never able to load the 150gr TTSX to hunt with this year because I decided to throw arrows this year.

JJHACK you seem to hold the 165gr Innerbonds in high regard. I was thinking for North American big game I don't need to shell out the extra money for the TSX over the Innerbond. If both shoot well in my rifle what would you choose for Deer to Elk sized game in North America between the 150gr TSX or TTSX and the 165gr Innerbond? Thanks for the info.

Can't speak for JJ, but I really like the 165 gr. Interbond in my .30-06 for whitetail:

On animals from whitetail to moose, I've found the 130 TSX from a 30-06 -outpenetrates- a good 180 C&C from the same. The 150 TTSX will most likely penetrate as well or even better.

AC, The interbond is an awsome bullet for smaller big game or sub 3000fps velocity in my opinion. It's a flawless choice for deer for the 308, 30/06, 270, etc. However it's been the softest of the bonded core bullets I have used and seen used. I've had them almost turn inside out!

To suggest that you want something for both elk and deer under all available hunting conditions....... you gotta plan for the worst case scenerio. That means witht he 30/06 using the TSX bullet in my opinion. It's why I choose them over the bonded bullets for the hunters using my rifles in Africa. Whether the animal is 200 pounds or 2000 pounds, and if it's 50 meters, or 300 meters the TSX is the most likely bullet to provide a lethal result I know of.

I would not pick the Interbond with the 30/06 for a bull elk as a first choice. I have killed a great big bull using one, however I would have prefered an exit hole on this shot, and certainly would have had one with the same weight TSX. The end result was good, but I learned from this as well.



Hornady interbonds, note: bullet on far left is expanded back to the edge of the base, nearly inside out and still intact! I really like these bullets on lighter game are moderate velocity. They are dirt cheap and work excellent for this range if use. I would not use the 165, or 180 grain at Magnum velocity on bigger animals. I think there are better options today.



165 grain Interbond Bullet recovered from this elk.



You can see the resting place of the bullet under the skin near the point of the scapula where the hair is roughed up.

Well I guess it's each to his own.

Personally, I've never had a problem with Nosler Partitions, either with the end result, or accuracy. My safe is filled with different caliber rifles that will all shoot Partitions with sub .75" groups.

Granted, I spent a lot of days working up different loads until one was found that shot, but when found it's a keeper.


Until I see a vaild reason for change, I don't see a reason for change.

Respects,

Richard

Thanks for the information. With the above information stated, would the slightly tougher Accubond be a good all around choice?

There you have it...

I prefer exit holes, so if all else is equal I'll usually go with the one that makes the exit hole the most frequently.

A lot of other thought goes into this, like species, range, habitat etc.

Why settle for a single bullet for everything? That's fine for an all around moments notice situation. But If I was heading into mule deer season shooting open grasslands the Interbond would be a great choice. If I were hunting blackbear from a treestand over bait, I could easliy live with the Aframe or the TSX. If I were Mtn goat, bison, or elk hunting then the TSX wins that every time.

I'm not really a brand loyal guy, I've owned Ford, GM Dodge, Jeep, and Toyota trucks, I have a yamaha ATV and outboard, I have three Honda Motorcycles, and onan generator and a Honda generator. I shoot Swift Aframes, Hornady, and Barnes bullets. I own three different makes of rifles, Ruger, Winchester and Montana.

I've got no vested interest in what you choose or why. All I can do is tell you what I choose and why. Then how it performed with the experience I had.

Many of these threads get under the skin of folks who have a lifes goal to convert every perosn willing to listen into doing or using what they say or believe in. I simply don't care what anyone buys or uses. However when somebody asks me I'll tell you what I use and how it worked for me. Hope that helps

Thanks for the honest and unbiased opinion. I was looking for information based on field experiences and that is what you provided. Thanks again for the time and information, I may just have to step up and give the TSX a try.

Very good read! Thanks for posting.

I'm liking his theory, and in JJ's case, it's not because of added velocity. I would think, that it would be because of case 2.
I don't think that the petals sheared off, but instead, the bullet hit something of substantial resistance quickly after entering the animal, and the petals were folded back against the shank of the bullet. I've seen recovered TSX's that looked this way.

I dont reload, does any of the ammo companies offer the tipped tsx in the 30-06?

Not in 30-06 - yet anyway, but Federal does load the TTSX in their Hyper-velocity ammo. Ironically, it is offered in 270 but not '06.



It would seem natural that the 30-06 would appear, probably as a lightweight, in 30-06 if they develop the line.

REALLY enjoyed everything you wrote, and the work you put into writing on this thread. I love to see another " bullet digger" and an opinion, if biased, that is based on fact and performance...
Your experience with different brands of bullets so exactly mirrors mine that there is nothing to add. Thanks for a true voice of reason and experience.
Ingwe

JJ,

I have been shooting the 100TSX out of a 257ROY, getting excellent accuracy, usually around .5 - .6". Only took one deer with that combo, which was a neck shot on a doe, which really isn't a valid sample...

Anyway, I bought the 100TTSX to try out and what I have found is they appear to reach higher pressure with the same load as the TSX and in my rifle, have not gotten them to shoot anywhere near as well as the TSX.

Just wondering what your observations have been using the .308 version....

Tony

Hopefully federal offers something in a 30-06. That 270-110gr looks interesting. I wonder how the 110gr would work on elk?

How about the MRX? Improved version of the TTSX? They are currently offering this in the 06

I have seen the MRX, and its about $20 more that other highquality ammo. What are the major improvements that the MRX has over the TTSX?

Tungsten core, higher BC, shoots flatter with less wind drift at long range. Is it better than the TTSX? I would say no. It, along with every other bullet with a core, has the potential for core separation. I would say the TTSX is a better bullet for targets with a lot of resistance.

I would say that anyone who wants to try MRXs or likes them ought to be buying them now. Based on what I have seen with Barnes' products, I think it is likely that the MRX will not be around long with the advent of the TTSX. AS far as that goes, I am holding out for buying quantities of the TSX when they are phased out in favor of the TTSX.

+1 on that....boolits are like any other business. Sales drive the industry. MRXs aren't selling....
Ingwe

I have been shooting the MRX for a few years now, 180 in 30-378. they pre-date the TTSX, or i wouldnt be using them.

when the snow melts i will be working on a 180 TTSX load, the MRX'x are nearing 40$ per 20 around here, i too believe this bullet will be discontinued.

also, at least in the 30 cal 180, the B.C is higher for the TTSX! so much for the maximum range stuff.

after testing for years with the partition(great bullet)the TBBC(also great) accubond(still great), I beleave i have found the greatest big game bullet of all in the barnes, imo of corse. i have taken around 12 head of game, pronghorn,deer,elk,moose,bear, from ranges between 20 and 760 yards, dont think i could have asked more from a bullet on any of them kills.

Yes they do Corbon has loaded ammo in the DPX LINE FOR 30-06.THEY OFFER 168 and 180gr TSX'S for the 30-06.

Nice read.
You might enjoy it too.

Oh heck, it needed to come up for some air..

Have a great day.

I used to shoot tons of the Jack Carter Bear Claws. They work! I have some new tipped ones I need to try. I use the 168 TTSX in my 300 Win mag, 150 TTSX in my 06’s. They are quick killers.

I did not know that. When I started reloading for my .300 Weatherby in 2009 I chose the 168 gr TSX because of its slightly higher BC. Same in 2012 when I switched to the 168 TTSX. Both bullets gave me sub moa accuracy and have performed very will on everything that I have shot with them.

Having used the Barnes bullets since they first came out. Starting with the original X bullet & then transitioned to the now TSX & TTSX. As a6.5 shooter I use the Barnes 120gr TSX to take elk each season. Every one a complete pass thru. I have observed friends using the 308 & 30-06 using the Barnes 130g on elkr. I understand your skepticism, but these 130 gr will absolutely amaze you . They take elk cleanly with complete pass thru. With a velocity of 3300FPS safely from an 06 the Barnes 130gr TTSX truly will amaze you.

I just bought some 130 grain T-TSX .308 caliber to try in my 308 Win. 84M I didn't plan to shoot them in my 30-06. It's just a thought. The 150 and 168 T-TSX shoot very well in my 30-06.

You all have a good weekend.

I need to try the 130’s in my 308’s

I shot original Barnes through my 7 mag many years ago. They worked great and I killed several elk and three Oryx with them. I quit with Barnes, when I got a second rifle as I had to back off a bunch on the powder, to get them to shoot safely in the new rifle. It must have had a tighter barrel and did not like the copper. I never went back to them in any caliber, as I never saw a need to. I have always shot Partitions at elk and Partitions and Interlocks on deer and antelope. Barnes bullets are not cheap and for what I hunt, they kill no better than any other bullet.

That being said, if I ever decided to use one of my 6.5s on elk, I would seriously consider the 127lrx. I don't think that there is anything that will consistently out-penetrate a Barnes. I just do not feel that I need Barnes penetration on deer and antelope, or even elk, when using higher-caliber rifles. I have not, to my recollection, caught ANY 160 Partitions in elk shot with my 7 mags. I shot a couple antelope and around a dozen deer this season using Hornady Interlocks and ELDM in the .260 and cm and never caught a single bullet. The results were predictable.

If I was just starting into the hunting game, instead of on the back side of it and only had one rifle, then it would be a no-brainer to use the Barnes bullets.

Morning Sid! memtb

Yes, you do. They work as advertised! Varget & CFE-223 have been good for me in two .308 Win rifles.

Ed

Yes, There is truth to these statements. A .30/06 handloaded to potential with a 150gn or 168gn Barnes TTSX will eliminate the bragging rights of just about everything in the gun rack. There are some people who would step down to the 130gn TTSX for most game and I have even seen Aussies use they older version in 300 Winchesters back there with impressive results.

Bullets are like ice cream, designed to attract every taste bud, but the Barnes TTSX is rapidly becoming the Chocolate whereas the Partition is Vanilla and the Woodleigh is Chocolate Chip. This simply means that is is perfectly OK to like them all.

John

Tag

I use the 168 TTSX in my ‘06 and .300 Weatherby with great results. I also shoot the 150 TTSX in my 7mm Weatherby with equally impressive performance. I’m working up some 150 TTSX loads for the .308 so perhaps I should try them in .30-06 also. Happy Trails

I use the 168 TTSX in my ‘06 and .300 Weatherby with great results. I also shoot the 150 TTSX in my 7mm Weatherby with equally impressive performance. I’m working up some 150 TTSX loads for the .308 so perhaps I should try them in .30-06 also. Happy Trails

Running 168 TTSX in a 30.06 , using .70 off lands and it's looking great. I was using H414 but now experimenting with IMR 4064. This load will be my all around load. Have not shot anything yet but this season will hopefully give it a try on elk. Partitions are very sensitive to seating depth. I get my best accuracy .20-.30 off the lands.

I started using the Barnes X bullets when they came out in the 80's and loaded them for my .338 Win. Mag. and our 30-06 rifles. I like them so much I left the Partitions, which are a great bullet. Now days I load the 225 TTSX in the .338 with Hunter powder and the 168 grain TTSX with H4350 and use Norma brass for both of them.

For several years we shot the 200 grain Partition into moose and caribou and went to the 180 grain X bullet in the mid 80's and shot through moose with it. Last year I switched to that 168 TTSX load for my Pre-64 Mod. 70 Featherweight and it worked wonderfully on a caribou it shot through. I also have a little 6.5 pound Husqvarna 1640 in 30-06 and will use the same TTSX load in it.

I have not noticed one bit of difference in the killing power of the lighter TTSX bullets compared to the heavier Partitions and both bullets work very well. The TTSX bullets penetrate further then the Partitions and retain more weight, but dead is dead. I also will never shoot enough criitters to be able to prove much of any thing about bullets.

Here in Alaska Partitions cost a bit more then the Barnes X bullet, but not much and both are easy to find if you roll your own.

An Auzzie by the name of Bob Penfold did some culling work for the Auzzie government. I hope my memory is correct as I recall reading him and some others did this for about 10 years and over 20,000 donkeys, buffalo, goats, camels and you name it were shot. They shot so much stuff they were replacing the barrels on the .308 Win. chambered rifles. They used .375's, .338's and others and his favorite, a .340 Weatherby. Many bullets were used to include Woodleigh and Barnes X. In his opinion, and by then he certainly had been in on enough gut piles to have one, the Barnes X bullet killed the best. Works for me.

Penfold was a guide and the original Barnes X bullets were tested there by Ross Seifried who used 165 grainers in a .30/06. Because Ross was favoring the .340 Weatherby magnum cartridge in that era, he reported that the X bullets elevated the.30/06 to the same/similar effectiveness in the field.
John

We use 168g TTSX in .30-06 for elk, deer and antelope. Have yet to recover one. Unlike the original 'x' bullets we have not seen any evidence of failure to expand.

And I"ve yet to see a non tipped one not expand either, but then we probably didn't shoot more than 50-60 deer with them before moving to the tipped ones as they came out.

Never been to Africa, hope to see it one day. Pretty ignorant to all things hunting Africa. After reading your post, I had to google an Eland..that's a brute..do lions mess with Eland bulls? Seems like a fair amount might take a nasty goring.

Thanks for your in depth posting, I always enjoy reading and learning from them.

JJHACK. May have just posted the most useful bullet test/review I have ever read on this or any other forum. No arrogance , no bias, no making fun of other people. Just a great collection of pictures , facts and observations. Thank you very much for taking the time and effort to post what you posted for all of us to read. Well done.

Capt Kirk

So xtra penetration not xtra frontal area of .30cal projectile elevated it to .340 Wby performance...

Finn Aagaard made 165X his go-to bullet in his FN .30/06

I wrote to Barnes a few years ago asking what is the difference between the .308 165 and 168 TTSX. Here is their reply.

Hi John,

Great question! The 165gr versions incorporate a short nose profile, often referred to as the ogive, to accommodate cartridges that require a short COAL (Cartridge Over All Length) requirement, such as the 300 Win Mag and 300 WSM. The 168gr TTSX has a longer ogive than the 165gr TTSX and it provides a more efficient, more streamlined design that allows it to retain its velocity and energy better. We test each bullet and assign it a value that rates each bullets ability to overcome air. This is referred to as the BC or Ballistic Coefficient. The higher the BC value the more efficient it is. So you’ll see a slight downrange advantage to the 168gr versions with their higher BC’s when they are incorporated in cartridges such as the 30-06, 308 Winchester or 300 RUM that can accommodate the a longer finished cartridge length and magazine requirements.

The 165gr TTSX requires a minimum impact velocity of 1800fps for bullet expansion and the 168gr TTSX only requires 1500fps.

I was just directed to this by a fellow member. Thanks folks...... your respect of my opinions here is never something I would take for granted. Capt_Kirk thank you!

I too read this "article" just now as if somebody else wrote it. I believe it's quite old now? I cannot recall the time line exactly.

If there was a follow up statement on this presentation from me it would be that I have not used anything else except the TSX/TTSX in 165 grain weight since writing this and have no reason to even consider anything else. I've been blessed to have had a life to shoot a lot of big game in my career. I don't owe anybody anything for this "blessing" but still feel compelled to share what I find with others. It is after all you folks that ultimately created my success in this business over the last 30 years.

Regardless if I have ever met you, hunted with you or even spoken you any of you. It's all you folks that buy gear, want the best stuff, and by your spending habits and financiial support allow manufacturers to entrust my research and opinions for their products. That is not something I have ever taken lightly. I have after all been canned by a number of them for writing the truth, and not what they wanted to hear. Oh well, be careful what you ask for!