A week or so ago I started trying various 300 Win Mag loads out for accuracy in my TC Pro-Hunter. This rig will be going with me on a Utah elk hunt. I wanted an accurate (1.5 moa or better) loading that would shoot reasonably flat and retain quite a bit of weight upon and throughout impact. Federal offers a 130 grain tipped triple shock loading for this caliber. Velocity is listed at 3500 fps. This shows to be one flat shooting combo, but I wondered about accuracy and bullet integrity. I lined up (5)plastic one gallon milk jugs filled with water at 100 yards. In between each milk jug I placed a magazine / periodical. The impact and destruction caused by this round on the first milk jug was extremely impressive. I don't know if I will ever get all the plastic and paper pieces picked up. The bullet continued penetrating up through one side of the 4th milk jug and stopped. Call it 19"-24" of penetration through water and dry newsprint. Remember there were periodicals sandwiched between each milk jug. The bullet presented the perfect four petal mushroom we've all seen pictures of and weighed in at 130.0 grains. Accuracy for me with this loading at 100 yards for 3 round groups is running a very consistent 1". I am very happy with the results so far and plan on trying this combo out on some Axis deer shortly. From all indications thus far, and if this load performs as well on live game as I am beginning to believe, I think my quest for a good elk round may be over. Anyone else tried this load yet?

You might, just for grins, run the wind drift numbers out at ranges where that flat trajectory matters... Compare it to (say) a 200-gn Accubond (BC .588) at 2900 fps or so... The heavier bullet will blow around a LOT less at ranges where flatness of trajectory matters.

Many ways to skin a cat <g>! I hope you shoot a big boy with that load and report back. Very interesting load!

A 130gr. bullet of any brand would'nt be my first choice for a 300 mag on elk. JMHO

I admit that a 130 grain bullet for elk sounds strange. I sure have read alot recently about 25-06's, and smaller, being adequate for elk. If that is the case, and those folks don't have some kind of "super 25-06" that pushes a bullet close to 130 grains to close to or better than 3500 fps, how can the Federal 130 grn TTSX not be equally adequate? Not casting stones here at all, just wondering out loud...
I am tracking on the heavier bulles drifting less at far ranges. 300 yards though, is a long shot for me. I started out bow-hunting so I guess I still feel that need to get up as close to 'em as possible and pick my spot. This load looks like a laser out to 300.

Any load out of a 300WM, with proper sight in, looks like a lazer to only 300 yds.

I guess I did not realize that there were that many loads out there that would put the bullet's impact no more than 3" above or below the point of aim out to only 300 yds.
I will pull the reloading manuals back out in a few days and look this trajectory stuff over again.

That 130gr TTSX should be a wicked bastid on elk or deer! Good luck, and post photos of your kill!

168 or 180 TTSX would be my choice.

what unit are you hunting?

The .308" 130 TTSX is bigger than it "should" be. With 100% weight retention it kinda changes the traditional rules.

Here's one beside a 180gr CorLokt,

For me. I'm more inclined to go with a bullet that retains more energy out a ways. I also like bullets that the wind doesn't push as much.

I have no doubt you'll be pleased with the results with your 130 grain TTSX.

But - having said that - I'd be shooting a 165, 168 or a 180 TTSX.

But - life IS about choices - good luck!

I would be more concerned about ft. lbs. of energy at 300 yards versus flat trajectory .Not saying the 130s wont kill an elk, but why chance it? JMO

Clay,

Believe me, if you're not going to shoot over 300 yards, something heavier will for all pratical purposes shoot just as flat. And wind can be a big factor in elk country.

I know you have wind in that part of Texas. But it ain't the same as wind that can blow in 2 or 3 directions HARD in 300 yards in the mountain.

There isn't any real problem with penetration on elk using the 130 TTSX, but heavier bullets will land closer to the point of aim at any range out to 300 in any kind of wind.

+1

Shooting 168's out of mine, and better than an inch!

Thanks for the suggestions / info guys. Here is a list of the some of the bullets I've tried thus far. Accuracy was not all that I'd hoped for with some. All groups are 3 shots:

180 grn Trophy Bonded grouped 1.25" at 100 yards.
180 grn Oryx grouped 1.75" at 100 yards.
180 grn Swift Sirocco grouped 2.25" at 100 yards.
180 grn Partition grouped 2.5" at 100 yards.
180 grn Ballistic Silver Tip grouped 7/8" at 100 yards.
165 grn Triple Shock grouped 1.75" at 100 yards.
165 grn Partition grouped 1.75" at 100 yards.
150 grn Ballistic Tip grouped 1.25" at 100 yards.
I've got some 150 grn SST's to play with, but thought they might be a bit fragile for elk...?

We, brother-in-law and I, are planning to hunt near Ogden / Liberty.

When I get more time, I'll try to chrono the Ballistic Silvertip, Oryx, and Trophy Bonded loads. Then I'll see how they stack up when pulled from water and newsprint.

Thanks again,

JB,

I played around with a ballistic calculator and some heavier bullets in the wind. I see what you, Jeff, and Brian are saying. Thanks all.
Please pass along a thank you to Eileen. The "Wild-Tamer Hamburgers" recipe is another reason I'll testing elk bullets on Axis. We've gone through quite a bit of my freezer stock since getting Slice of the Wild.

Keep up the good work and don't be a stranger.

Last 3 rounds from my Vanguard 300 WM...



I took a 6x6 bull elk last season using the 130 TTSX from Federal.

One shot, 80 to 100 yds, through the shoulder, and the rib cage about 6" below the spine, into far shoulder. Went about 40 yds and dropped dead. None of the typical blood splash on the ground through his nose from being lung shot...because I believe the impact and shock was so severe that he literally never drew another breath. Blew the lungs all to hell, but very little ruined meat.

I'll be sticking with the TTSX 130s.

One note...

If you zero at 100 yds, you should be about 2" high at 200 yds. No, I'm not kidding. This combination is a freakin' laser!!!

Does anybody have drift charts you can post, like compared to a 180 Partition factory load?

Look at the ballistic charts in the the Barnes manual. It will give you an idea of comparable drift values for a 10 mph crosswind at various ranges. You can compare those with other bullets of similar weight and BC values at similar muzzle velocities. Also, Bob Forker's Ammo & Ballistics II has values for factory loads--you can usually find a copy at Barnes & Noble. Browse one and find the loads that you want to compare...

Anybody else? Don't have Barnes manual or a bookstore to browse

Handloads.com ballistic calculator

thanks

If you compare that load to Federal�s 165g Tipped Trophy Bonded or the 180g MRX or AccuBond you�ll find out there is a price to pay for little gain in the trajectory department.

Using Federal�s own numbers:

130g TTSX, 3500fps, 3536fpe
165g Trophy Bonded Tip, 3050fps, 3408fpe
180g MRX, 2960fps, 3502fpe
180g Trophy Bonded Tip, 2960fps, 3502fpe
180g AccuBond, 2960fps, 3502fpe

Zeroing all for 200 yards, at 500 yards they look like this with a 10mph crosswind:

130g TTSX = -30.8�, 1383fpe, 7.9� drift
165g Trophy Bonded Tip = -37.9�, 1577fpe, 18.5� drift
180g MRX = -37.6�, 1872fpe, 15.3� drift
180g Trophy Bonded Tip = -38.9�, 1745fpe, 11.2� drift
180g AccuBond = -38.7�, 1763fpe, 16.8� drift

For myself, I don�t consider the 7-8� additional drop of the other bullets to be significant. More important to me is the extra energy they carry. The 130g has less wind drift but again the 3.3� difference between it and the 180g Trophy Bonded Tip isn�t very significant � I�ll take the extra 362fpe of the Trophy Bonded instead.

Here's a good link for looking at drift and drop:
http://www.handloads.com/calc/

hmmm, the 130gr TTSX has less drift and drop, what's not to like? The energy figures don't concern me a whole lot as long as the energy is sufficient to open the bullet and destroy some tissue, which it is...

Energy figures I looked at for the 130gr TTSX showed 1510 fpe at 500 yards. Still less than the heavies, but not quite as dramatic.

Almost looks like this load takes the .270 and extends it's range out about 100 yards. I'll just add 100 yards to where ever the 270 stops being effective on elk and call that the maximum effective range for this load. Where does the 270 stop?

I could say something silly - like "use a 223" (since I have watched it be used to great effect on moose and caribou), or I could just offer a couple of examples of heavy bone encounters...



Second from left: around 200 yards; muzzle vel: 2900 +/- 225 XFB (.338) moose shoulder; second from right: around 275 yards (est); 160 7mm FailSafe, MV 2500 +/- moose spine. I won't bore you with any more re-runs but have similar even from caribou. (Not disparaging copper bullets since most of them do exit.)

Big Bone = Brakes, even, sometimes, for bigger bullets. Lots of things can; doesn't mean they reliably will. Monolithics haven't reversed any of the physics involved in the collective wisdom of the decades. You decide.

I have STRONG suspicions that the 130 TSX at 3500+ fps at the muzzle will do some very serious bloodshotting at anything under 200 hundred yards---deer, elk, whatever. Could be wrong....I was once before ;0)
I'd just as soon have some meat left to eat. If it were me, I'd choose a heavier and somewhat slower bullet.
A 180 (or 200) will shoot flat enough to make 350-400 yard shots a practicle reality.
Just my $.02

-Mike-

glancing at sir springers shot... bullet going into shoulder on close range shot, but no evidence of exits... add that into the the wind drift factor that folks seem to always forget about, I'd pass.... 168/180s for that caliber. Just IMHO.

Want a test before then, use your choice, go a bit south and shoulder shoot a nilgai or at a sweeping angle and see what it does.

Which 270 ? My 270 Weatherby Mag is starting out a 130 gr.
@ 3450 FPS.
AMRA

Which 270 ? My 270 Weatherby Mag is starting out a 130 gr @ 3450 FPS

AMRA

Is that a typo on the wind drift? What bc did u use? I guessed .400 and used the link above with different results but may be wrong. Thanks

This would be taking things to nearly the opposite extreme, but try running the numbers for a 200-gn Accubond at 2900 fps with a BC of .588... I've shot that exact load quite a bit at longer ranges and it really drills through the wind...

The AB is a generally accurate bullet; it's done very well in 6/7 of the rifles I've tried it in. It's lethal as all hell, too.

FWIW, the 130 TTSX is what I use in my very similar 30 Belted Newton rifle. So long as you are shooting an Elk in the chest and not trying to go end to end the 130TTSX is a great choice at all sane hunting shot ranges. If one needs to push a bullet from end to end on an Elk, the 180TTSX is without peer. BTDT (On a KUDU, but the need for penetration is nearly identical). For Elk out to 400 or a little longer my preference would be the 180TTSX but the 130 would be great for the more common shot presentations.

Ogden/Liberty "area", i take that to mean Rulon Jones property?

Rosco,

That's correct. Having never hunted there before, any firsthand accounts would be appreciated.

My ballistic calculator shows a drift of 18.2 inches for the 130 grain bullet, and 16.9 for the 180 accubond - at 500 yards. The accubond carries about 250 foot pounds more energy at that range.

Jim

How much flatter does the 130 shoot at that range?

How much flatter is the 130 at 500 yards - I'm showing about 9 inches, but I may have over estimated the ballistic coef of the 130 (I used 0.385).

Jim

18.2 minus 16.9 equalls 1.3 inches. Anyone here want to bet they can really tell or notice that kind of difference in the real world of shooting at an elk? the 9 inches flatter trajectory, though is discernable. Folks tend to forget that speed can often help overcome wind drift to a large degree. When a bullet is out IN the wind for a shorter amount of time the wind has less opportunity to do its evil.

Don't the reputable programs account for time-of-flight rather than distance? (One would think.) I do think that there is an advantage for the speedier projectile when shooting moving targets. (ie. Those speedy 130s would probably be great on a caribou meat hunt, taking some of the guess out of leading skittish animals if necessary.)

Yes they do, which is why the real world difference in wind deflection is so small despite lower BC's for shorter lighter bullets but a lot of shooters just look at the high BC's and assume that they would be drastically better in the wind without taking into account the lower start up speed / time of flight for the heavier high BC projectile. Real world differences are usually small if both bullets are a good aerodynamic design and both are loaded to their max speed for the cartridge in question. Good point RE the running game benefits. There is a reason that ballistic progress has gone toward higher and higher speeds and we are not all still shooting 45/70's and such.

I've used 130 TSX on deer and a lope out of an -06. They have expanded well out to over 400 yards when started out at only 3000.

I've never recovered one either. I think they would do fine on elk out to 300 yards.

OTOH, the only real reason I can see to use one is that they recoil less. If recoil is a non-issue for you, then why not just use something heavier anyway? They really don't flatten things out that much, and to 300 yards it is meaningless in comparison.

No doubt.Good luck on your elk hunt.

Ran some numbers through exbal 200 accubond at 2900 and the 130 ttsx at 3500. Elevation at 500 yards for the 130 is -35.9, 200 AB is 46.4, Wind drift at 10 mile hour 130 is -20.7, 200 AB is 14.4, energy for the 130 ttsx is 1353 lbs, 200 AB is 2067.

1. 130 ttsx shoots 10.5 inches flatter than the 200 AB

2. 130 ttsx drifts 6.3 inches more than the 200 AB

3. 130 ttsx gives up 714 lbs of energy


Looking at these numbers I'll take the accubond every time

jc

You think???

MD: how about an article actually comparing drop, penetration, and wind drift between a 130 grain monolithic (Barnes) and a 180 grain jacketed (Partiton, for example) bullet?

I think many would be very interested in seeing side-by-side comparisons. I've often used lighter for caliber bullets such as Barnes with outstanding results, in spite of criticism from others that heavier bullets are necessary.

Lighter bullets drift more, but they're faster so that makes up much if not all of the difference. We can all read ballistics charts, but do they tell the truth? When I've compared, the results are very close.

You don't do much long range shooting I can see that...

When comparing bullets where the BC is as different as it is in this case, I most assuradly have seen a difference in wind drift. At longer ranges than the OP's 300 yards, though. It's not subtle.

At 300 on in, which is what the OP said, I say heck with it.. the guy wants to try an experiment, let's not talk him out of it! Go shoot an elk and report back.

Not trying to talk him out of it. But longer ranges got brought up and stubby little bullets just don't cut it.

Lets define long range a bit. For most hunters, say 99% of us, 300 yards is a LONG ways out there. Very few should shoot out at 400 or even 500 yards. Even for those who practice at such ranges very few shots are offered at ranges past 200 yards in the real world of hunting and a 300 yard capable rifleman will bring home a lot of game if he or she is also a good hunter. As was said a moment ago, OP stated out to 300 yards or so which is a reasonable limitation and a practical limit for all but the very best game shots. For HIS question, and THIS application, the 130gr TTSX at 3500fps will perform wonderfully. OP can sight in to be dead on at 300 and still be within just a very few inches of line of sight or hold all the way there or a bit past that. Buy 'em, load 'em and go slay a BIG freakin elk with with said ammo!

130 monos do veryGooD out of 308win & .30/06

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/bgeer.html

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/galrynokruger.html

so there must be some sorta hex on the 130mono/.300mag, to make it no good...

For quick reference...

http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=750

At 300 yds, from a 300 WM, a 130 TTSX is toodling along at 2667 fps, and still packing 2053 lbs of whack.

At 400 yds, it's still doing 2421 fps, with 1692 lbs.

http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=221

At 400 yds, the 300 WM 130 TTSX is about par with a 25.06 115 Nosler Partition at 200 yds...although I'm sure anyone would be more comfortable with the extra 15 grains and wider body of the 30 cal. 130.

At 300 yds, the 130 TTSX matches the 25.06 at 100 yds.

And at 200 yds, the 130 TTSX is pretty close to the 25.06 at the end of the barrel.

Now, people will argue here all day long...and then some...that the 25.06 is an entirely capable elk round. I shoot one myself, and to a point I'd have to agree.

Point being, if a 25.06 is a capable elk round, a 300 WM or WSM loaded with 130 TTSXs shouldn't even up for debate.

Certainly not out to 350 or even 400 yds.

I like 'em 'cause they shoot flat to 300, which, IMHO, ups my odds with regard to judging distance. Aiming about 6" high, which still is well within the kill zone, if I'm 50 yards shy of the truth in my guess work, I should still have a dead elk on my hands. If I still shoot under, then I'm an idiot for taking such a long shot in the first place.

Until the actual loads are run over a chronograph, it's all speculation.

3469 fps ten feet from muzzle on 6-10-09.
1.5" high at 100 yards yielded a 300 yard group centered 1/2" above the bull.

Now THAT is flat shooting!

Thanks for the range report, I still say use 'em. Can you shoot at 350 and or 400 yards at your rifle range? It would be interesting to see what kind of actual drop you are getting there, as well. Looks to me like a load that is capable of a dead on hold out to 350 at least on most game animals.

I'll be away for about 2 weeks. When I get back, I'll move targets back to 400 and 500 to see what kind of drops I get. I am still saving up milk jugs and magazines for bullet integrity tests on the Oryx, Ballistic Silvertip, and Trophy Bonded. Deep freeze went out yesterday, so my Axis test is also backed up a bit. Oh well, makes the summer move along faster when have things to try out / discover.

Those are great groups and would be very useful if you are aiming for the elk's eye. They look great on paper, but you have to ask yourself what you are really trying to acomplish. Are you trying to split hairs or kill an elk? I'd stick with a good heavy 180 or 200 and put the crosshairs right on his shoulders. If you miss by three inches...your elk is just as dead and he will look just as good on your wall.

Actually, when I'm shooting at a critter with either my bow or a rifle, I am aiming to split a hair. I don't see anything else in the sight picture...

Carry on...

Absolutely...



jc

The question that might also be considered in this (since the bullet in question has been compared to a similar weight in the 25-06) is: can hairs be as easily aimed for, hit, and split at said distances with either? As has been pointed out by many on many occasions, what one gives up - among other things- when using lighter, smaller stuff is the ability to be a little bit off in shot placement. Smaller and lighter require greater precision. Can one expect that at said distances?

I'd take a good look at that 180 trophy bonded bearclaw. 1.25" at 100 yards with that big heavy strong bullet? That sounds like a dead elk to me.

Killed mine last year with 30 cal 200 grain trophy bonded bearclaws. 200 yards...landed right where I wanted them. That elk didn't care how fast those bullets were or weren't going.

Calculator Max Point blank range is 333 yds when zeroed at 287 yds.
Range
yds Path
in ComeUp
clicks Velocity
fps Energy
ft/lbs Momentum
lb ft/s ToF
sec Windage
in Windage
clicks Optimal
Game Wgt
Muzzle -1.5 Infinity 3469 3474 64.42 0.000 0.0 NaN 1058
25 -0.5 7 3393 3323 63.01 0.022 0.0 1 990
50 0.4 -3 3318 3179 61.63 0.044 0.2 1 926
75 1.1 -5 3245 3040 60.27 0.067 0.4 2 866
100 1.5 -6 3173 2906 58.93 0.090 0.7 3 810
125 1.8 -5 3102 2777 57.61 0.114 1.1 3 757
150 1.8 -5 3032 2653 56.31 0.139 1.6 4 707
175 1.6 -3 2963 2534 55.03 0.164 2.2 5 660
200 1.1 -2 2895 2420 53.77 0.190 2.9 6 615
225 0.4 -1 2829 2310 52.53 0.216 3.7 6 574
250 -0.6 1 2763 2203 51.31 0.243 4.6 7 535
275 -1.9 3 2698 2101 50.11 0.270 5.7 8 498
300 -3.5 4 2635 2003 48.93 0.298 6.8 9 464
325 -5.4 6 2572 1909 47.76 0.327 8.1 10 431
350 -7.6 8 2510 1818 46.61 0.357 9.5 10 401
375 -10.2 10 2449 1731 45.48 0.387 11.0 11 372
400 -13.1 13 2389 1648 44.37 0.418 12.7 12 346
425 -16.4 15 2330 1567 43.27 0.450 14.4 13 321
450 -20.2 17 2272 1490 42.19 0.482 16.4 14 297
475 -24.3 20 2215 1416 41.13 0.516 18.5 15 275
500 -28.9 22 2158 1344 40.08 0.550 20.7 16 255

Elk hunting can require shots in excess of 300 yards. If you are willing to give up shots past 300 yards then by all means shoot the 130 grain TTSX.
For me I would take a 180 grain accubond in the 399 WM

Anyone happen to have any of these Federal 130 gr TTSX bullets laying around collecting dust? I would like to buy 10, or so.

Thanks!

Reducing wind drift would be a top priority to me. You can laser to estimate bullet drop, not so for wind drift. I much prefer 180gr in my 300 WSM just for that reason.

Did you ever bag yourself a bull with those 130 T-TSX ?

I agree with the concerns over an elk sized animal, and wind drift. The BC of the barnes is .35......but the buggers do penetrate well for their size might be good for deer?

I'd really like to know how that turned out as well.

Looking at the OP's posts, it appears he never went on that elk hunt and sold his .300 WM back in 2010.

Wouldn't a 130 tsx moving that fast likely blow right through an animal taking much of its energy with it?

That is the unknown element to bullet penetration (at least to me).
If the penetration was made in the thoracic cavity the suction effect (Hydro static shock) of the rapidly exiting bullet could be effectively devastating to elicit effective harvest of the animal.
This effect in my mind would need a highly vascular environment to occur such as the lung field.
In essence there is a secondary lethal effect of bullet energy that does not need to be absorbed by the animal. However this Hydro static shock does not occur at slower bullet velocity's. My understanding is less than 2000 fps. But I by no means am an expert.

If it dumps half of its velocity, it dumps 3/4 of its energy. The cult of the non-exiting bullet is a crock.

I've not used them but my hunting buddy use's the 130TTSX in a -06 in WA, ID, and Africa and kills the crap outa animals! Not a 300win or wsm but it doesn't matter they still retain more weight than a 180 gr partition...And hit a critter going faster. I mean really? It's all just winter ballistic gack. The average hunter kills everything at under 300yds anyway.

What did I step in?

I am no means anything close to an authority, but I was under the impression that this subject matter was also related to the age old argument of .45 vs 9mm

Do you also disagree that a .45 moving heavy and slow, seems to have more knockdown power than a 9mm traveling light and fast?

Conventional wisdom on bullet weight flies out the windown when discussing monometals. There is no reason to run a midweight or heavy-for-caliber monometal, unless there's some sort of ballistic concern (with grooved bullets, not usually the case...).

45 vs 9 is irrelevant.

Awesome necropost reanimation!

Timely too.

I'm going on a 1st Rifle Colo. hunt this fall. My brother is concerned abt my using the CTR .260 as ranges on the ranch we'll be on can be up to 500+ yards.

He's wanting me to instead use an old Tang 77 .300 WM we've got in a McMillan stock w. 3.5-10x50 on top. I've only agreed to bring it along as a BUG so far.

Bought two boxes of Barnes VOR-TX 150 TTSX for $20 off retail at a local big azz sporting goods chain. Gonna clean the ol gal out & see how she prints. I like the published data.

If it shoots bug holes I might zero it dead on at 500, and have him pack it for me (he's guiding) while I tote the .260 for shots out to 400.

I have only shot 9 elk. 7 of those were with a 270. 150 gr. np. The other two were 30-06 and 180 gr. hornady. Having said that, I can't imagine a better elk load than a 165 grain barnes tipped in a 300 mag

Unless you are concerned with the ballistics part of wind drift.... and that can start to apply at 300 yards easily in wind. Most folks don't need a mag though, have no business shooting past 200 generally speaking if that far, and are overgunned for most parts. But I digress.

I run mono and still run fairly heavy for caliber and have yet to see a failure. At least in the larger rounds. Smaller rounds with mono, speed seems to help.