Years ago I tried these in my 7mm-08 Browning A-bolt micro-medallian and after shooting a few the groups started opening up. The barrel also seemed to be getting excessively hot. When I checked the barrel the gun was severely copper fouled. It took what seemed forever to get that copper out of the barrel and I never used them again. Has Barnes changed the copper alloy they were using on these early bullets and did anyone else experience this in "the olden days"? I've stayed away from copper bullets but they seem to be getting popular. I see some are coated.

Give me some thoughts on the new copper bullets please. I don't re-load anymore but have been a lifelong believer in Nosler partitions.

My response is pertaining to Barnes only! How many years ago? Where these the “old” original Barnes X.....if so, the mono’s are a longer bullet with much greater surface area to barrel contact. The newer bullets, are grooved, much like a cast bullet! Less surface contact area, less friction.....less heat! Also, better accuracy, generally higher velocities, and much cleaner to shoot.....less metal fouling! Win- Win- Win! memtb

warbirdlover,

You're way behind the times. Barnes solved the fouling/accuracy problem when the introduced the Triple-Shock X-Bullet (usually called the TSX) in 2004. It has grooves around the shank of the bullet, which not only reduce fouling enormously, but allow it to shoot more accurately in most barrels.

But being a lifelong believer in Partitions also works. In fact, unless you hunt game bigger than deer--or deer at longer ranges than you typically shoot them in Wisconsin--I wouldn't bother switching.

They have gotten better, I still have some of the original Barnes X bullets, it was a Bit*h to clean the Sako after a range trip with them. Accuracy was pretty good, but the newer ones are much better.

The only way I could get the original X bullet to shoot reasonably well was to coat them with Moly.

Now that they have brought out the TSX and TTSX, I have not had any rifle I have tried them in not shoot well. Performance on critters from whitetails to eland has been great in calibers from 243 to 300WSM.

I never used the original ones, but have had nothing but good results with the tsx and the ttsx bullets in four different rifles.

I have always been puzzled by the fact that Barnes bullets were "pure copper", then kept hearing how the alloy was changed. (I was no whiz in chemistry.)

Design changes, and my understanding, they changed methods or degree of tempering! I can’t swear to that....I just know they work! memtb

If you decide to try Barnes in your 7mm-08, the 120 gr. TTSX is the way to go. It’ll do all that needs doing with that chambering and then some!

I tried Barnes X bullets in my Savage model 99 in, .243 Win. I loaded them rather tame, but to my surprise, they caused very high pressure so I only shot 2 out of my 20 loads. The primers were mashed totally flat, cratered, and one was pierced. I had ejection problems and nearly had stuck cases. I came home and pulled all the rest of that batch. The very same powder load in a Hornady lead core bullet, showed zero excess pressure and shot great.

That's because they are a totally different bullet. The original X was all copper and had no grooves so it was "stickier" in the bore because it had lots more contact area in the bore than lead core bullets. All of that changed with the TSX. Different alloy and grooves to lessen contact area. The TSX gives stellar accuracy, no more fouling than conventional bullets, and great terminal performance. As Memtb said, win, win, win.

The "pure lead core/pure copper jacket" ( Old School Barnes/Hawk Bullets, others) also had to be treated different in load workup. they worked just fine on game, but the were "sticky" and "bumped up very fast" . I was just as frustrated with the XLC as I was with the original X, ha. But heartily agree, the 'grooves" are a hit! I think the TTSX are the best.

My wife has had fantastic luck with the 90 grain tipped bullet in her 243. Factory loaded from Nosler!

Blacktailer,

The Barnes site says the TSX, TTSX and LRX are 100% copper, the same as the original X's--not a different alloy.

Whelenman,

The E-Tips are indeed another good monolithic--a little different than the Barnes bullet in that Nosler uses the same basic mild brass "gilding metal" they use in their lead-cored bullet jackets. They came up with them by making a coreless variation of the Ballistic Tip. My wife has used the 90-grain 6mm quite bit, mostly in the .240 Weatherby.

That addresses my original confusion - how can 100% copper be an alloy?

The 120 TTSX is a winner in the little 7mm-08. We've killed a lot of stuff with them and never recovered one.

The original X bullet was too picky for me, but I only tried them in a couple of rifles before I moved on.

Their Safety Data Sheet lists the following:
Lead 2-3%
Zinc 35-36%
Copper 61-62%
Don't know if this has changed but the old X bullets looked different, more like copper pipe. The newer bullets look more like gilding metal.

see
section 3
https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-co...es_Copper_Alloy_Bullets_US_ENG_Final.pdf

Understand my confusion?

On a side note, long-time subscribers to the Wolfe publications know who to thank for the ring-tailed Xs.

I think "100% copper" and "Lead free" are marketing terms. ...grin....

Good because I have 100 of them molycoated and ready for my 7-08. Also have 100 140gr AB's. They're squaring off....

Back in the late 80's I read about a shooting trip to Australia Ross Seyfried took and another article by an Aussie guide and outfitter that was part of a culling operation that shot the heck out of over 20,000 critters. Water buffalo, feral donkeys that were big and other big critters were shot. One thing stood out in my opinion, their praise of the performance of Barnes X bullets. They drew conclusions from a bunch of gut piles, more then any other source I am aware of. Very few places left on earth have the "opportunity" or need to harvest that many critters. When you shoot so many critters you are replacing barrel's on a .308 you are getting after it!

I think some of the calibers were .308 WIn, .338 Win., 340 Weatherby and 375 H&H, maybe more. The 225 X bullet out of a .340 Weatherby gave stellar performance, better then the Woodleigh in the opinion of the Aussie author. This was a killing report, not a accuracy or barrel cleaning report. Any way, I tried them in our .338's and 30-06 rifles and eventually left the Nosler Partition. But, I could easily go back to that bullet if I was shooting deer and antelope, but the X bullet is a great bullet for Alaska's big game. Eventually I went from 250 to 225 grain TTSX in my custom .338 Winny and 180's in our 30-06 rifles. But, the 200 grain Nosler Partition was a great performer in our 30-06 rifles. I now load 175 grain LRX and 168 grain TTSX bullets in my two 30-06 rifles.

I had one Pre-64 .338 that was a copper fouler and my old Pre-64 30-06 takes longer to clean then my other barrels. Lapping and Dyna Bore Coating has helped the 30-06 and the old .338 was traded off. Other then that our barrels clean up with out to much effort. My custom Mod. 70 has a stock barrel and it loves every X bullet I stick in it, from the original 250 grain version to the blue coated 225 grain version to the current 225 grain TTSX. In fact the rifle has only shot some flavor of X bullets since I put it together. Our 30-06's also shoot the X bullets well, as did the .243 and my 6.5 Creedmoor.

Most of my hunting friends shoot X bullets and I don't see them switching. Some experimenting with seating depth often helps to shrink groups. They are not the only good killing bullet, but they are a great killer of big game. Bullets and their performance on paper and on critters has always been the subject of many a conversation and I doubt that will ever change. One thing is for sure, just as smokeless powder forever changed our thoughts on cartridges, so has the Nosler Partition and Barnes X bullets.

They are accurate in the rifles I use them in. If I had to get down to one bullet, it would be a TTSX.

The ones that gave me the pressure spikes in my 99 were the new style TSX bullets. That's why I was surprised. They might be great in other rifles, but not in my Savage.

As one WI. 7mm-08 deer shooter to another, why do you want to switch from something that is working to something (in my experience shooting TSX bullets) that doesn't work as well? We don't get to shoot very far here and I am way more concerned about getting a quick humane kill than glint edge accuracy in a paper target. I too thought that my deer deserved to be shot with a premium bullet, but they ran away farther and bled less with those TSX's than they did with Core-Lokt's, Partitions, Accubond's, Interlock and SST's. In fact the only deer that ever got away was with a TSX. Reading here has me using 140 grain Ballistic Tips currently. Never again a Barnes TSX. Maybe a TTSX, but why? Barnes wouldn't have invented the TTSX if the TSX was a great deer bullet.

Read the SDS. For Barnes Banded Solids and MPG and MLE frangible bullets not TTSX or tsx.

So, now that the note about the Students for a Democratic Society () has been brought into the discussion, I am once again confused: are the TXS and TTXS bullets pure copper or are they an alloy? To clarify my quandary, way back when, I remember reading numerous articles about how the original X-Bullets, which were advertised as being pure copper, had been improved by tweaking the alloy.

I don't recall any talk about changing alloys, but I do recall that Barnes changed copper suppliers to get more consistent product, in an effort to increase expansion reliability.

Their site claims 100% copper but the newer bullets don't look the same as the X bullets. The X's were more red like copper pipe and the newer ones look more brassy. Also their is no SDS for 100% copper bullets? Whatever, they work for me.

The mule deer I got this year, I shot it with my 6mm rem shooting a 85 TXS . Went 50 yds. Food him belly up on a pile of rocks.

My experience with the original "X" and "XLC" mirror above. Difficult to get to shoot, and excess fouling.

Ran into one of the guys from Superior Ammo at the local range when they were still based out of Sturgis. He told me to try the TSX's and I would not be disappointed. He was spot on. Easy to develop loads, great performance.

Have not had any of the dreaded non expansion issues like some have reported. So now, when I am working on a hunting load, I start with Barnes T/TSX. Whichever shoots the best is my load. My latest endeavor is with a couple of 338-06's. Tried 185gr TTSX, GMX and 210gr TSX. Both of the Barnes outshot the GMX. 200gr Ballistic silvertips, accubonds, and SST's all outshoot the GMX too.

In going head to head with GMX's, the Barnes usually come out on top in the accuracy dept. I have one 270 that prefers GMX over Barnes and my 222 also likes the 55gr GMX over any of the Barnes offerings. I really wanted to start using GMX's as a go to, but the Barnes have performed better.

After this last round, I am done "trying" the GMX. I will go to it if I cannot find a Barnes that shoots.

Whenever I have used any Barnes, in any caliber under 30, I try to take out a shoulder, or even High shoulder or base of neck. Now, I did shoot a 80 pound shoat tight behind the shoulder with a 50gr XLC in a 221 fireball CZ 527. Right at 75 yds, made a 50 caliber hole all the way through. It dropped and kicked a bit, done. If the LRX ( that I have never used yet) are softer nose, easier opening as they claim...then I'm in love! I have some 129 LRX for my 270 and waiting on some ordered 175 LRX for the 300WM. Jazzed.

Jordan, that's exactly what Randy Brooks told me.

I mentioned that I'd found the standard, ungrooved shank X-Bullet had consistently started shooting well during the last few years of its existence. Randy said that as the bullet became more successful, they could afford to buy more consistent copper--which I understood to mean the older bullets were made of copper that wasn't nearly as pure, containing traces of other metals. As a result, the later X-Bullets were more consistent in both diameter and expansion. I had great results with them in several calibers--except for fouling. They still fouled barrels quite a bit, though more in some barrels than others.

That was probably during the half-dozen years before the TSX was introduced in 2004.

Partitions, or really any cup-and-core lead round, are categorically inferior to quality copper monos for hunting when said copper is used correctly. Basically, run them at 2200 FPS or faster and there are no downsides.

Pictured: 168 gr. TSX @ 2850 FPS

John,

Thank you. That’s what I was referring to. I wonder if some confused that with tweaking the “alloy”.

I remember the original Barnes "X" bullet fouling so bad it prompted Barnes to introduce their own line of copper fouling remover. Industrial grade ammonia worked too, just use in a very well ventilated area, don't leave it in the bore too long and don't get it on the finish of the firearm if you had any interest in keeping said finish! Only tried the industrial stuff a couple times. I've been using the Barnes bullet since the originals and now, pretty much, use them exclusively in everything from 223 Rem to 338 WM, coyotes to moose.

That Barnes copper remover was nasty stuff!

I still keep the old Barnes copper cleaning solution. Sometimes I buy a used gun that was neglected. The CR-10 works wonders. But mostly I use Ed's Red because I keep up on my own guns. Run a wet patch immediately after shooting at the range. Or when I get home from hunting. I like the Barnes TTSX for most shooting except in pistols. I like to use a bit of everything in my short guns. Be Well, Rustyzipper.

Guess again.

"I still keep the old Barnes copper cleaning solution."

I still have the bottle of the industrial grade stuff. Made the mistake of opening it in my shop, I think it's getting stronger as it ages! LOL! Now what to do with it...

While the is no doubt that the original X Bullet fouled bores....they didn’t excessively foul “all” bores. My first use of the Barnes X was in the early ‘90’s, fired thru a rifle with a “match” barrel. And while accuracy wasn’t great, and I couldn’t push them quite as fast as cup and cores of equal weight.....they produced minimal fouling! With several other rifle, after polishing the bores, the fouling was substantially reduced and accuracy rather dramatically improved....dependent upon how rough the bore was originally. Just my observations! memtb

I used them in my 270,35 Whelen and the 7x57 and did not have any problems getting them to shoot.

Same goes for fouling have not had a problem.

guess i was just lucky.

I thought the original X's sucked......terrible fouler, so-so performance (didn't appear to open up every time), decent accuracy at best IME. They sucked so bad in my Mannlicher rifle I searched and found the CT Failsafe's........mucho improvement for me. If I were forced to use a Barnes nowadays it would undoubtedly be the TTSX.

No downsides?

At least for my application(deer)

1) more expensive
2) don't kill as well unless you aim for bone, which means less meat

I agree that they may be superior in many cases, but certainly not in all. Use the right tool for the job.

We’ve had good luck, on “small” big game (antelope/deer) at longer (430 yards) ranges with TSX’s/TTSX’s with rifles of much larger caliber than generally used on a typical Whitetail! We always go for behind the shoulder shots.....less lost meat! True, they don’t kill quite like a conventional cup and core, with their rapid expansion and greater tissue damage and do in fact appear to debilitate a bit more slowly.... but are ultimately reliable to perform as designed! Just say’n! memtb

Tried the X's in a 257 Weatherby years back and groups would double or triple after about 6 rounds. Thorough cleaning and I'd be good for about another 6. Went to mollied Partitions and the issue went away although those are quite explosive on close in game. Not been near Banes since.

We’re these the original X’s, or the newer, grooved X’s? I feel the same way about Sierra’s, for use on game. But, I would send someone else to the gun store to buy them for my varmint rifle! Maybe you could do the same.....find out that you’ve been cheating yourself! memtb

I think many of the negative results were due to the uncertain purity of the copper wire that Barnes used at first. After they secured a better product most of the issues of erratic performance were gone. Some barrels just didn't like them but virtually all of the rifles tried them in worked out. The TSX and TTSX are completely different and reduced fouling and pressure significantly. I had a similar bad first impression of the Nosler ballistic tip being too frangible. I wouldn't use them for years but now they are one of my favorite bullets for deer and medium game. I never had a Barnes of any type"pencil through" only a few have lost petals or I couldn't tell because I have caught so few of them.

Some excerpts from Dave Scovill's "Reloader's Press" column in Handloader #220:

"... Randy admitted the copper alloy used to make the early X-Bullets lacked uniformity."

"The problem was eventually traced to the supplier of the copper alloy wire."

"Considering the early problems with the copper alloy wire...."

That pesky word "alloy" keeps cropping up.

*Kept cropping up. It's been years since the fouling or uniformity issues this thread have been talking about have existed. A quick internet search will show that TTSXs are now widely regarded as one of if not the most consistent hunting bullet on the market.

I'm not questioning the quality of the bullets, I am still dancing with this business of pure copper being an alloy.

I used them in a half dozen rifles and didn't have accuracy or fouling problems, either. I guess we're both just lucky fellas

Perhaps Scovill just used incorrect terminology.

Jordan; I have had similar experiences to you with the barnes from .243 to 45-70 and lots of places in between.With one exception an 8x57 that fouled so badly with every bullet you see the fouling near the bore with the naked eye, obviously a barrel issue.

I think ( whether or not I am right ) they give me the option of more shot angles than other bullets. The shoot excellent as well!

Fair enough. Truly, I'm no metallurgist, but as long as projectiles look like this, group fantastically, and have no other negative side effects, I'm not too concerned about what percentage metals are combined to make it happen.



(80 grain Barnes GMX out of a .243, for those wondering)

Barnes GMX. ?????

A new hybrid? Lmao

Was about to say, with the amount of petals it looks more like a Hornady GMX than a Barnes.

The Barnes X I was using was the old Blue Meanies. The .308 150 Gr in a Sako L579 F/S. Over a medium load of Varget in Lake City cases. I shot a whitetail doe on the other side of a small pond. It didn't drop her immediately but she was struggling over the fence and got into the corn field. As I looked for the blood trail there was a Osage orange sapling shot in half. It was about 3/4" in diameter and absolutely shattered, I hadn't seen it in the scope with the color similar to the doe. The doe was maybe 20 yards in the unpicked corn. That was the poor performance I always had with the Barnes X. The TTSX are even better. I never had trouble with the originals either. I did have to clean the bore to bare metal. If any fouling was left it seemed to suck the copper in and then it was a mess. I like my bores squeaky clean unlike some guys. Either way Be Well, Rustyzipper.

How did you recover the bullet? I've been using them for about 30 years and have never recovered a bullet except the ones from the berm behind my target stand. Mostly deer, some elk and a bunch of plains game.

I’m wondering if barnes should move to more pedals and maybe it would make for easier opening ? As in less force required to bend the pedals back ?

That's what the plastic tips in the TTSX are for.

I have recovered a number of them.

Trust me, I understand that.
But you can’t argue if there were 6 pedals, that is less force required to bend/peel them back vs 4.
Maybe not optimal up close. But further out...maybe a good thing.
Insist to be clear.
Not picking on Ttsx! I use ttsx exclusively for elk in my 06. Never recovered a single bullet. From 40-400 yards. It’s my go to.
I also load it in 270 and and LRX in 6.5 CM

On the other hand more petals means they are less resistant to shedding than the heavier 4 petal design. Just playing devils advocate as like others I have caught few Barnes and no Hornaday or Noslers so far. Barnes does use more petals on their muzzle loading and pistol bullets and a few others like for slower velocity cartridges.

I think Hammer has combined the best of all the monos into their design. The relief groove or driving bands are tapered on the ogive side for less wind resistance, most have six petals, the BC on their heavier bullets is pretty good for not having a polymer or other tip. Most reports are they are extremely reliable.

Quote: Most reports are they are extremely reliable.


And Accurate......rumor has it! memtb

Blacktailer,

My wife and I have also recovered some Barnes X's over the years, from the original model to TSXs and TTSXs. In fact Eileen got two 100-grain .25s back in a row one fall, from a cow elk and doe pronghorn she killed with her NULA .257 Roberts. The pronghorn, of course, was a lengthwise shot, from the front.

Also have a pretty good collection of other recovered "petal" bullets, including the Combined Technology Fail Safe (which Eileen and I both used a lot more than the very early X-Bullets, because they were more accurate), Hornady GMX and Nosler E-Tip. Oh, and a 40-grain Cutting Edge Raptor that Eileen used to drop a pronghorn with a .22-250.

I’ve recovered TSX, TTSX and LRX bullets. 160gr TSX from a 7mm Rem Mag, 175gr LRX from a .300 WSM, 225gr TSX from a .35 Whelen and even a 250gr TTSX from a .375 Ruger. All from Moose.