Ok just wondering what people been using. I have shot 15 deer with federal fusion 120's and they work awesome. All but 1 DRT. The one was 25 yard death run. But now I am going to start to reload. Some say Barnes is better for larger Bores because they aren't as dramatic as say Fusion or Nosler Ballistic Tips. So just wondering what people have tried and liked.... Shots from 10 to 300 yards.... Thanks for any advice you can give me. I am somewhat new to reloading but am setup pretty well.

I have had good luck with the 129 Hornady PSP Interlock and H4831. That said the next bullet on the bench for test runs are the 120 TTSX and 120 GMX.

If I had that kind of luck with Fusions I probably wouldn't switch, that's a good bullet.

Problem is you can't buy bullets in the fusion. I do have some barnes I loaded up now waiting for a day the range is open that it is not -10 out. I am sure I can get things to shoot. But just wondering what people experience has been with the bullets on deer.

I mean I wouldn't switch from the factory loads. I have a couple rifles I shoot factory in because they shoot it well and I have a bunch of it.

My 129 Hornady experience has been, easy to find a load for and they kill stuff dead, never had one go more than a few yards really.

What kind of speed you gettin from the 129's ?

Never checked them honestly. They shoot usually between .5 and .7 from my pencil thin Mountain Rifle with 47.8grs H4831.


I shoot the 120NBT over 43.5grs H414 for 2911fps but no deer with that bullet, just varmints. It's very accurate too.

100 ttsx, 120 BT, 130 AB,... Find the best for your rig and put them in the right spot.

I started out shooting the Remington factory 140gr load. When I started reloading, I used the 120 Sierra Prohunter, as that shot the best in my Ruger. I tried the 100gr partitions, 140gr partitions, 129gr Interlocks, 130gr ABs and 120gr BTs. The BTs shot almost as well as the Prohunters, so I used both. The Sierra seemed to destroy less meat, so I stuck with them. The last deer I shot with them was a large 4x4, and the bullet was found under the hide of the offside shoulder. That was the year Barnes introduced the TTSX, and I've been using them with good results. This year, I used the Lapua Scenar (139gr) in a new 260 I had built. Next up is the Berger VLD.

I've been shooting the 260 since the year the cartridge was introduced (I'm a big fan of the cartridge). I've only had one animal make it past the 50yd mark with this cartridge, that being a running doe I hit a little far back (140gr corelokt destroyed her liver, instead of her lungs). She piled up in a snowbank on the edge a cattail slough, when it became too deep to jump over. I hunt mainly open country, DRT's aren't as critical to finding mortally wounded animals here - they drop long before they'd have an opportunity to disappear into thick cover.

Of all the bullets I've tried, I'd use them all again (assuming accurate loads) if that was all I had available. Deer aren't that hard to kill, if you put the bullet in the correct location.

Kaiser Norton

Thanks guys.... I think I'll just load a few different loads up an start playing this winter and see what shoots best.

I am really looking forward in shooting the newer Barnes 127 gr LRX through my semi custom rem 700. Contacted Barnes and they said the 8.5 twist in my 22 3/4" Kreiger barrel won't stabilize..... I'll see about that. 9 will stabilize bullet up to 130. This is a 1/2 twist tighter and in 127. But they are the ones that make the bullets. And am sure they have tested extensively. But, did they ever try the 8.5 or just a 9 and 8? Hoping it works....

Hope it works for you too. It's the length that gets you, not the weight.


I'm sure the 127 LRX is a very long bullet, should be a dandy if it'll fly.

Mine really likes 120 TTSX and I've been impressed with the results on deer and hogs.

That was what the guy at Barnes said it was the length.... Glad to hear some have had luck with the ttx 120. Heard so many mixed things about them. I do know from seeing a that went from ass to shoulder in a 7 foot bear from a 7mm they perform as stated. Just a couple people said they don't appear to have the hydronic shock like NBT or Fusion would have... Maybe I'll have to experiment alittle.

What's hydronic shock?

I've been wondering about that too. I ran the numbers through berger's twist rate calculator and can't figure out why an 8.5 twist wouldn't stabilize the 127 LRX. It shows a higher stability factor than either the 168 gr. 7mm LRX in a 9 twist barrel or a 200 gr. 30 caliber LRX out of a 10 twist and Barnes says those will stabilize. If those will stabilize then I can't think of any reason an 8.5 twist wouldn't stabilize the 127 LRX.

I'd sure be tempted to try them. Just because Barnes says so it doesn't really convince me. Many times when you e-mail or call a company like that the person you're dealing with is just a secretary and not someone really in the know. They're just reading from the same chart you can view on the company website.

Sorry auto correct screwed me up. Definition os: Hydrostatic shock or hydraulic shock describes the observation that a penetrating projectile can produce remote wounding and incapacitating effects in living targets through a hydraulic effect in their liquid-filled tissues, in addition to local effects in tissue caused by direct impact.

I have a few and are loaded and will know soon. Looks like way below zero this weekend again. Soon as it warms up ill post some results.

I've used the Nosler 120 BT, 130 AB, and 129 Hornady IL. They all do just fine, but the Hornady's are less money and have been hell on deer without ruining a few pounds of meat on the way through. The BT and AB kill great, but leave a lot of destruction in their wake. I hunt first and foremost to fill the freezer and I butcher my own. I have 400 Hornady 129 gr. ILs on the bench.

Hydro-whatever shock in a deer's ass won't do anything to kill it. Put a good bullet through the vitals and just worry about getting it back to the truck.

I like bullets that do tend to produce a lot of shock value. Works great especially when put right behind the shoulder. Nice when they go bang flop. Like the last 14 of 15 did. 1 was 25 yard death run. No tracking, no chasing.... The fusions in the .260 just work well. Be nice if they made them for reloaders as stated years back on their website.
Thanks everyone for all the info. Gave me some ideas. And answer a few of my questions.

I use 120 gr TTSX

130 accubond

Hydraulic shock is created by finding a bullet match for the game that expends most of its energy inside the game. While retaining as much original weight. With less pass through shots. This type of bullets would be bad to shot a deer in the ass with. Although it will kill it no problem. It will make a complete mess out if the guts. And not reach the vitals. More I understand about hydraulic shock on game in real life hunting the more I like bullets that lend a hand that way.

Glad to see more ttsx shooters say they work. Accubaond was one I was going to try also. From recovered bullets I have seen very nice expansion every time. I saw one Barnes 160 7mm recovered bullet...... Held up just as they say, picture perfect. I like the idea, but smaller wound channel although very tore up. And usually a smaller exit hole. I hunt in a mix of swamp and high ground in Northern Wi. Thick and dense cover. Haven't had to track a deer in many years and don't want to start again. I track deer for people a lot. And usually because they are using a bullet that has a very high SD. Not matching the game to the bullet and getting a pass through shot with little expansion. Now if they hit bone with that bullet then it is massive damage taking out a lot of meat.... .260 and 7mm-08 are great little whitetail guns.

Worry less about hydrostatic shock (though the direct quote on the matter that you used comes from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock Might want to cite your sources) and more about putting a bullet in the vital organs, preferably lungs or heart. There isn't a bullet made for the .260 Rem. that I wouldn't trust to put a deer on the ground within seconds IF shot in the heart or lungs - bullet placement BEHIND the shoulder - not through it.

Plus1. The rest is BS.

Been shooting one and only one bullet out of my 260 Remington model 7 since it was introduced.

The 129gr Hornady SP has NEVER failed me. From 25' to over 250yds, it has killed every deer hit, broken any bone encountered, and groups under .75". Even my stubby 18.5" barrel manages to push them over 2600fps and 2800fps with a 22" barrel would seem the norm.

I can think of no better bullet for the 260 on game up to 400lbs and it doesn't require a second job to buy them.

dmsbandit - you and I have had the same experience with that bullet. The first year I used 120 BTs - lots of meat damage, even more than anticipated. Second year I used 130 ABs - less meat damage, but still more than anticipated. Third year I used 140 gr. Partitions - not as accurate as I wanted, obviously good terminal performance. Fourth year I used the 129 gr Hornady SP and haven't thought about anything else since. 2850 fps from my 22" barrel Ruger, 2550 from 17" barrel Encore. Shoots cloverleafs from both guns with 44 gr. IMR 4350, has penetrated to beat hell. I used it on a whitetail this year, quartering away, dropped in his tracks. Hit him right on the ball joint in the shoulder, thought it blew up. Until I found the bullet under the skin just below the skull. Went through the ball joint, into the spinal column and destroyed 6" of the neck bone. Still weighed 90 gr. when it was all over. I can't ask for anything more than that, and the meat damage is minimal. Not quite as little as cast boolits from a handgun, but we can't have everything, can we?

Ken Waters, who knows more about guns and cartridges than most of us can ever hope to, always said that the 129 grain hornady seemed like the perfect bullet for the 6.5mm guns.

Bone breaking, deep driving power of the 140s and the speed of the 120s were the reasons for his praise of that bullet weight. So far, I've yet to prove him wrong.

The deer in my avatar was shot at 185yds with my 260 and the 129gr hornady. Broke the nearside shoulder knuckle, destroyed the lungs, and was found in the opposite leg after breaking that bone too. Dropped on the spot.

He wanted a definition and I gave him one. I think you missed the part I have shot 15 deer with the .260, and all but one was DRT. The one went on a 25 yard death run and fell over dead. Much of this is do to the Hydraulic Shock the Federal fusion creates. I have waited for shots at almost every angle after the first deer I shot. Of course I did my part as in putting the bullet where if has to go. That is part of the equation. As I stated before I have hunted almost 40 years with many different calibers.... The Federal Fusion in a .260 does a great job.

I knew the supposed definition.

I also know what kills critters.

The term hydrostatic shock describes the observation that a penetrating projectile can produce remote wounding and incapacitating effects in living targets, in addition to local effects in tissue caused by direct impact, through a hydraulic effect in liquid-filled tissues.[1][2] There is scientific evidence that hydrostatic shock can produce remote neural damage and produce incapacitation more quickly than blood loss effects.[3] The debate between proponents of bullets that are "light and fast" versus bullets that are "slow and heavy" often refers to this phenomenon.

Human autopsy results have demonstrated brain hemorrhaging from fatal hits to the chest, including cases with handgun bullets.[4] Thirty-three cases of fatal penetrating chest wounds by a single bullet were selected from a much larger set by excluding all other traumatic factors, including past history.

In such meticulously selected cases brain tissue was examined histologically; samples were taken from brain hemispheres, basal ganglia, the pons, the oblongate and from the cerebellum. Cufflike pattern haemorrhages around small brain vessels were found in all specimens. These haemorrhages are caused by sudden changes of the intravascular blood pressure as a result of a compression of intrathoracic great vessels by a shock wave caused by a penetrating bullet.

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Hydrostatic_shock.html

Just link the Wikipedia article..

I saw a mule deer buck between Deadman's Coulee and the Dearborn Bridge this fall that was hit by a cattle hauler doing about 80, give or take- Would that be an example of hydrostatic shock? Last week the road was still bloody

I'd guess that cattle hauler was direct drive vehicle. My Deere has Hydrostatic drive but I think it goes 15 mph tops, not enough speed to shock anything, unless the blades are turning. But the mower deck is powered by a belt so that probably doesn't count.

Waaaaaay over penetration?

I've shot a few whitetails with the 260 and after burning a lot of power and poking holes in a lot of paper, I've come to like the balance of accuracy, penetration, and velocity potential offered by the 100 grain Partition at 3,150 to 3,200 fps.

I don't shoot much CF factory ammo, so I'm not current on who makes what, but I have long felt that Remington handicapped the 260 coming out of the gate by not offering three "standard" factory loads with 100, 120, and 140 grain bullets. The only "standard" factory load that I recall having been offered is the 140 grain PCL, all others being more expensive "premium" loads. I have always wondered why Remington would load 100 and 120 grain PCLs in the 6.5 Rem Mag and not offer those bullet options for the 260.

Jeff

Because Remington hasn't been run by gun people in many decades. The last good gun they developed was from the 60's, and they've even managed to screw that up over the last ten years.

Been using the 120grTTSX but will be giving the 100grTTSX a shake out as soon as the weather cooperates.

hangunnr

Pstores,

I like to have 1 reload for each rifle. That way they all stay sighted-in for that 1 load and all I have to do is pick the rifle that best fits my hunting plans. That being said:

I can tell your hearts set on trying the 127 Barnes - So go for it. Some rifles like the Barnes solid copper bullets and some don't. So if you don't find the accuracy you want with the Barnes bullets - I'd try those 129 Hornady ILs next. It just don't take a premium bullet to kill deer! That IL will do just fine.

Thanks Ray for the response. I am looking at the Barnes only because they shot so well in many rifles. With that said, I do have a varity pack a very nice gentlemen sent me I will try. I was just look for practical experience. Looks to me nolser and hornady will be a good try. Thanks again do appreciate the quality response.

Yeah, that happens when you hit stuff with those match bullets.

My son has a model 7 .260 that he got a deal on because it patterns with all the factory ammo instead of groups. Tried about everything but screwing the barrel off and replacing it. The. He came over with a box of 95 gr hornady bullets and the first load we tried shot a 3 shot group of .77 He's killed a half dozen deer and several hogs with it and nothing has ever taken a step after it hits the neck

From my .260s, I've killed stuff with 129gr Hornady Interlocks, 130gr Accubonds, 120gr Ballistic Tips, and 130gr VLDs. FWIW, stuff seems to make fewer tracks with the VLDs, but all of the above has worked very well for me.

John

Pstores for what you looking for I would go with the 120 Nosler ballistic tip at below a max charge. Great bullet with stellar reviews. I have used them and 140 grain Sierras with great results. In a 140, ran modestly I figured to get all the penetration I needed in a 'softer', fast opening bullet and even through fair sized hogs this has been the case 100% of the time. Very fast death.

A 120 nbt wound up far side of my biggest buck to date but drt remarkable. I begin to think there may be something to this idea of having energy dumped into an animal. I think the enregy knocked it over when it lodged in the far ribs. Hate it blown through IU think results would still be a dead deer but after a run of unknown distance. I don't see how a Barnes would improve what I am seeing with these current bullets. The 260 , gives me faster drops on deer than my 6mm or 270 in any bullet combo to date. I am thinking of changing to similar thought processes in my other two rounds.

The physics doesn't work that way.

That's not what Wikipedia says...

I've had good luck with the 100g Partition, 120g Pro Hunter, and 120g Nosler BT. The 129g IL should be great but doesn't have a good BC and velocity not too high so maybe not ideal for a long shot.

Do you shoot through the shoulder or behind the shoulder? Seems this is key for selecting the best bullet for your style. If through the shoulder, Barnes are a good option to minimize meat damage but they aren't my first choice for double lung shots behind the shoulder. For double lung shots, the SST, Ballistic Tip, and traditional cup&core bullets work well. Ballistic Tips in general have less blow-up than they used to. 100g Partition does both fairly well......has a front end to do a bit of damage on a double lung shot but since its light for caliber, not so much to destroy too much meat (depending on velocity) if you are presented with that shot and can't wait on a better one.

I shot 3 deer this year with my Ruger Skeleton stock with 22" ss barrel .260 using the 120gr nosler ballistic tips.

The first one was at 60yds looking at me and I hit her in the center of the chest while she was looking at me, she ran 20yds and fell dead. After field dressing her not sure how she ran that far, was hard to tell what pieces belonged to heart, liver, and lungs was all jello.

The second one was at 150 yards in a pretty good run as I had pointed her out to my father-in-law when she was still, then again when she was walking, and when she started trotting I pulled my gun up and right before she went in the woods sent one to her. I had a through and throught at center of the shoulder and she flopped there.

Third one was a big buck at 425yds according to leica. I hit him about 2-3 inches behind his heart but devastated the lungs and liver. Watched him take about 10 steps, back legs started shaking and the rest was a long walk to him.

The 120gr nosler ballistic tips I shot was all factory and was very impressed, I now have a sleeve of 129gr SST to get a load worked up before October

With the 129 gr. IL I'm hitting my 8" disk out to 500 yds - 2850 fps and the .445 BC doesn't seem to hamper it any. For comparison, the 129 gr. SST is .485 BC. I can hear it ding when it connects, but I don't think any hydrostatic shock is happening, plus it just swings back and forth and doesn't fall over - lack of energy do you suppose? What am I doing wrong? At 310 yds the same load killed a nice mulie doe last year, but she went 18 yds. Trying to cut that down to about 1.875 yds for next year.

And my gun likes 120 gr. BTs as well, but I get less meat damage and more penetration with the 129 gr. In fact, it may OVER penetrate, limiting the hydrostatic shock factor.

Learn to shoot real fast and hit the steel twice rapidly and it should fall over dead. That will transfer over to hunting and then you can shoot your critters twice and they will die twice as fast.

So, if I get a left-hand Ruger M77 in .260 Rem., duct tape the two together (though Gorilla Tape may provide a stiffer bond) and custom make an off-set scope mount which tracks for both barrels so that I can pull this double rifle against my chest and fire both at once, I might knock the steel plate stand over? And kill deer twice as fast? SIGN ME UP! (As long as the LH rifle also likes the 44 gr. of IMR 4350 behind the 129 gr. IL) I can't wait to try this for next deer season.

My setup allows both guns to be slightly canted while each rifle is rested on right and left shoulder. The cant allows the use of both eyes open since I have 2 scoped rifles. I also have a bipod on each rifle, that's very important, and then I squeeze both triggers thus creating the double shot and instant death.


Don't use tape, it's too weak. I used a ratchet strap on mine and it looks awesome. Just run it under the see-thru rings.....

Just snorted coffee up my nose. You win! Well played sir, well played.

Loco- exact opposite, if that Wikipedia comment was directed at me. I always thought hydrostatic shock a bad term and bought into the two holes were better logic because it was consensus from this sight. I adhered to that notion and got used to 70 yard runs as a norm. Am ok with that but my limited sampling suggests dropped animals and DRT results when the bullet stays inside the critter and perhaps can be felt on the far side. I have made the mistake of trying to 'correct' things that were working beautifully in the past because of buying into well explained theories here before but as I get older find myself being ok with trusting my own eyes more and more. If results change I will observe and adjust accordingly.

I'll take a wild guess and say the Rancho Loco was agreeing with you, but sarcastically taking a shot a Pstores and his use of wikipedia definition of hydrostatic shot.

I took a cow elk this year at 220 yards with a Barnes 120 grain TTSX bullet. IT hit her in the chest looking at me, and she dropped immediately.

I run the 130 AB in my 260 at about 2900 fps. It worked extremely well on a whitetail I shot with it a few years back. Shoots 1/2 moa from my Christiansen carbon tube.

Bb

Hi Selmer- yeah I sort of thought that was the case. Thanks for chiming in on it. Rancho is ok in my book. Happy New Year to you both.

He has a dry sense of humor from what I can pick up. I like it.