In particular, can you comment on this thread? Thanks.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/16648719/1

Barnes recommends minimum velocities for each bullet and the minimums are not the same. This has always been the case.

I have personally never experienced a failure to expand with a TSX not even at 777 yards on an antelope

I have seen TSXs fail to expand in calibers from .30 on down, probably because they have much smaller hollow-points than TSXs above .30. One was a 100-grain started at over 3500 fps from a .257 Weatherby, which I put just behind the shoulder of a broadside pronghorn buck, with the heaviest body we've ever weighed. When he finally fell after loping (not running fast) for around 250 yards, there was no sign of expansion in either the exit hole or the lungs. Had another from the same batch apparently fail to expand, or at least not expand much, on a forkhorn mule deer my wife shot with the .257 Roberts at about 50 yards, muzzle velocity 3150 fps.

Good friends who are knowledgeable and experienced hunters have also had .30 and under TSX's fail to expand, sometimes on game large enough for the bullet to be recovered. One was a 140-grain from a .270 Winchester that barely started to open, but the petals only spread as wide as the bullet diameter.

Haven't had any sign of TTSXs or LRXs failing to expand on any big game up to and including elk size, at ranges out to 400+ yards, even when started at velocities as low as 2800 fps, including broadside lung shots on animals as small as pronghorns.

Dunno about the Barnes numbers, as have seen expansion with Barnes and many other bullets vary considerably not just with impact velocity but where they were hit.

I've had bad experience with 168 gr TSX bullets in a 300 Weatherby. 2 deer lost and a 3rd I was able to shoot 3 times to anchor him. 1st Bullet broke shoulder going in and passed through top of the heart and exited. Internals were completely intact with a clean 30 cal hole through them. He started running on 3 legs after first shot at 175 yards. 2nd shot dropped him but it was because I did not lead him enough and bullet went through hindquarters/hip and broke him down.

Still kicking on the ground, I put a third one through this neck. Ruined a bunch of meat on that deer.

Switched to the 168 gr TTSX and problem solved.

Use the TTSX or LRX and don't worry about expansion. The plastic tip initiates expansion while the hollow point of the TSX relies on hydraulic pressure. The plastic tips are much more reliable.

There's no reason to use a TSX when the TTSX and LRX are available.

The TSX are more magazine friendly, however

Just use a Nosler Partition.

Having never Elk hunted before (going to NM in 2022) and being on the major OCD spectrum, it does not take much for me to over analyze new things. I have been hunting a long time, but never out West.

So, I am using my Rem 700 BDL .30-06 that I bought new in 1973. It seems to be shooting the 168 TTSX around 3/4 of an inch. MV is 2847 fps.

My range goes to 550 yards, but I have only recently worked up the '06 load so have stayed at 100.

It looks like I will be around 2075 fps at 400. Since this will probably be my once in a lifetime Elk hunt, I want to be able to shoot to 400 if need be. Hence my concerns. I really would love to hear that the claimed minimum velocity of 1500 fps is real and 2000 fps at 400 yards is well within max expansion for that bullet's impact velocity.

These bullets do shoot well, but would i be better off with a 160 Partition? Humor me here

Sakoluvr: does your range allow for non-traditional targets? If so get some wine boxes (excellent reason to buy wine 😃) or other similar sized boxes.

Fill them with mixed paper tape two of the boxes together in a way to maximize length. Tape a scrap piece of 1/2” plywood to the back to catch any bullet which makes it through the paper. . Put the boxes into a 3 mil garbage bag. Tape the bag so it fits tightly to the paper box. Fill with water and let it sit for a while.

Place target on the front of the box. Shoot at the range you wish to test expansion at.

Call the shots since the first impact into the box will expand more due to the amount of free water in the plastic bag.

Although there is no test media which replicates shooting animals you will be able to get an idea of expansion at the distances you are concerned about.

I did this test a few years ago and my conclusion was with my loads in my .325 WSM I would not use the 180 grain TSX beyond 400 yards. I would gladly use the 200 grain accubond.

My testing in other calibres and cartridges show much more consistent expansion with the TTSX and the LRX than the TSX. Just like the statements of several posts above.

By doing your own testing it will give your OCD something to chew on and will give you data from your rifle with your loads at the distances you are concerned about.

Just my thoughts.

GRF

+1

Great post, GRF. I was just about to suggest something similar. I'd probably be content to use dry paper, though.

Jordan: the wet paper I find to be a “softer” media stressing the bullet less therefore allowing for less expansion and greater penetration therefore I use it where I am concerned about lack of expansion.

I use dry paper at close distances to “torture test” a bullets ability to remain intact. Sometimes I’ll run a hybrid test combing wet paper, dry paper and bits of plywood.

Too much time on my hands 😃?

Thanks! I will have to ask the owner of the range before I try it. I know he mentioned non-trad targets are not allowed but maybe he will make an exception for expansion tests. I think he is trying to avoid folks blowing things apart and making a mess too.

Great point. Wet paper would represent a worst-case scenario for minimum expansion, while dry paper would be worst-case for the bullet's ability to hold together.

What the hell does Joe Biden know about bullets???







😀😀😀😀😀😀

Curious. I have read a number of threads about certain Barnes bullets failing to expand and was wondering if there was something we could do to ensure expansion like opening the HP cavity with a drill bit to cause quicker / more positive expansion. .

I have some TSX and some older pre-TSX Barnes bullets that may benefit if the bigger cavity works.

Has anyone ever done this?

Did it work?

I doubt you could do that precisely enough not to affect bullet balance, and hence accuracy.

Brilliant - but of course the thread is about monos.

While I prefer Partition's, a lot of good people I like and respect don't wish to have lead pepper in their game meat or ending up in birds of prey...

Here's a couple of 165 TSX's from circa 2005... the left 165 was shot into wet phone books at 300 yards, while the right was shot into a bedded 6pt bull elk at 50 yards. Both from a 21" bbl'd 30-06 with a MV of 2,875 fps. I actually shot the 300 yard through my chronograph set up at 300 yards, but I can't remember the velocity. That gave me enough confidence it would open at that range, and 325 yards is the farthest I've ever shot an elk. Later that fall I used it on the bull.



I did have a 150 TTSX fail to open on a raghorn bull. 308 Win, 125 yards. Somehow it managed to get pinched shut on entry, and was found backwards on the off side. Obviously it didn't work as designed, but it also killed the elk (who wants 150 grains of copper tumbling through their lungs)?



As to the OP, it's interesting and I do wonder if there's any truth to the 168 TTSX being softer/quicker opening than the 150 or 165 TTSX? I doubt I'll care to find out for myself, but someone younger and more intrigued might?!

I really can see the value of the LRX, especially that 127 6.5 or 139 7mm...

Good data there Brad. It certainly would give me second thoughts about a 400 yard shot at a Bull Elk, no? Maybe the tipped version would have expanded more at 300. The 168 might just be the huckleberry for the '06 then out to 400.

The campfire mantra is shoot for bone when using Barnes, at least I read here numerous times.

Brad’s experience is one of the only failures I’ve seen reported with the TTSX, even in the several years since he first reported it. I’d consider it an anomaly and not worry too much, as long as impact velocity is kept up at 2000 fps or above.

I’ve also seen failures reported with the Partition, but I also consider them to be anomalous and very unlikely to occur.

I actually agree with you on the TTSX Jordan, it likely is an anomaly.

However, I have never seen a Partition failure, but have seen dozens of the original X's, TSX's, and Failsafe's fail.

I expect Barnes, Nosler, et al have really improved the mono's over the years, and I actually am fairly persuaded by some of the anti-lead arguments, both for health and the secondary effects on other animals and birds.

I think future momentum is in favor of copper and against lead, and that's probably not all bad.

I think it would be easy to make a jig to keep everything concentric and repeatable. The depth would also be easy to control. I was hoping someone already did it and we could learn from their experience.

Maybe after hunting season is over I'll try a few.

If you try it, would love to hear the results.

But by no means do ALL hollow-point Barnes monolithics expand unreliably. Have only seen a very few instances that could be proven. The examples of TSXs are the only ones I personally know of. Never had one of the pre-TSX Barnes bullets fail to expand, from 100-grain .25s to 250-grain 9,3s. The total is probably over 100 bullets.

JB, Any experiance with these? Going to try them in a 14 twist 250Sav Model 70 I have.

Hey Brad, thanks for the input and pictures I'm sure it is very helpful to Sakoluvr and those of us following the thread with interest.

That is the only issue of the TTSX I have seen or heard of, I agree with Jordan a statistical anomaly and nothing to be concerned about. I have had a couple of cases of the TSX not opening up, fortunately on water jugs and not game, and have heard of others.

Saloluvr I have placed TTSX through the ribs with no big bones hit and everything died, perhaps a few seconds slower than if bone was hit. The TTSX will expand nicely on rib shots. Please let us know if you are allowed to do the expansion test on your range.

Jordan; I have heard about failures with the partition as well, although my assessment would be a combination of using a bullet outside of design parameters and less than optimal shot placement. Again I concur with your assessment, anomalies and not an issue of concern.

sqweeler,

Nope, have no experiences with those.

GRF,

As close I've come to a "failure" with a Nosler Partition was with a 160-grain 7mm started at 2650-2700 fps from a custom 7x57, on a big Alberta mule deer at around 275 yards. Shot the buck just behind the shoulder, as it stood slightly angling away, and it staggered backward a little way and fell over--but when I approached it got back up and started running away. Shot it again, and it dropped.

Recovered the first bullet under the hide at the rear of the ribcage. This may seem like a "failure," but the bullet retained 90% of its weight--by far the highest weight retention I've seen with any Partition under 9.3mm. (The bigger ones are designed to retain more weight, due to the partition being moved forward.)

The only other 160 7mm Partition I've recovered was one fired from a 7mm Weatherby Magnum at 3100+ fps into a 6x6 bull elk at around 150 yards. The bull was angling away, and the bullet ended up in the far shoulder, retaining 64% of its weight. The elk collapsed.

I have several boxes of those and they work in the 25x39 at 3000fps,the 250 sav at normal loads and the 257 roberts AI and the 25-06.

Speeds are different for all but in each they work.

Makes for nice groups as well.

John; the one partition “failure” I’m aware of was a gentleman know used a 180 grain partition from a .300 RUM at less than 100 yards into a Red Hartebeest if I recall correctly. The shot was further back than it should have been again if I recall correctly the rear of one lung was only part of the bullets travel in the animal in front of the diaphragm.

After a long tracking job and a few more shots the animal was brought to bag.

The bullet from the first shot was recovered in the muscles of the offside hip with the partition cracked or split.

The alleged failure was the cracked / split partition despite the deep penetration. The rodeo in recovering the animal likely a result of shot placement.

The outside of design parameters comment was my thoughts on the high velocity impact, my thoughts only and I could be wrong.

I was not present for the event and it has been years since I heard the story. It’s possible I have not recalled some details correctly.

My brother shoots a 180 grain partition out of his .30-06 and .300 Weatherby for years without a single glitch, issue or concern regardless of the distance to the animal.

I agree, Brad. Lead in the meat is a primary reason I like the monos for close-range shooting, where I may not get a perfect broadside shot through the ribs, and the bullet may need to penetrate through some meat either before or after vitals.

I’ve had much better luck with the X/TSX/GS Custom, though, and in about 130 kills witnessed (before myself and my acquaintances largely switched from the X/TSX to the TTSX and LRX), there wasn’t a single instance of bullet failure that I could determine, and I’m kind of a geek when it comes to post-mortem bullet performance analysis. I will say, however, than IME the TTSX and LRX do seem to expand more violently than the previous versions did.

I've read that the 168 TTSX was the prototype for the LRX line which is designed to open at lower velocities. They hadn't decided to call the newer bullets a whole new line (LRX) yet so it was named TTSX like the others, that's why there's a 165 and a 168 TTSX. Don't know if that's true or not.

"I really can see the value of the LRX, especially that 127 6.5 or 139 7mm..."

I'd love to try the 139 in my 7mm-08, if I could find some.

Last week my son shot a mature buck with a 127 LRX out of his 6.5-300 Wby @ approx 160 yards. Handloads right at 3400 muzzle velocity. Hit in the shoulder but no exit wound. I did find a piece of one of the "petals" below the hide on the off side shoulder. Deer took a couple steps and went down for good. Haven't found the rest of the bullet yet but may when the grinding process starts. First Barnes that didn't exit. Not a big mess inside of deer but certainly enough damage done. I like the Barnes and use them in everything except my 270.