I've been spending alot of time planning next years elk hunt. Google Earthing a couple new places in both Colorado and Wyoming. In the past 3-4-5 years it seems I spend alot of time hunting and killing elk in the timber. Shots on my last 3 elk were: 50 yards, 50 yards, 30 feet. I used 180 Partition launched by a 300 WSM and 150 gr Partition launched by a 270. All elk were sufficiently dead

The thing I'd really like to see is 2 holes. Two of the three elk above were almost head on - getting an exit isn't likely because asking a bullet to drive through 3-4 feet of elk is a tough ask.

So, I'm chewing on a few things. I'm currently thinking a 200 gr Partition from my 30-06 or 300 WSM might be a better mousetrap. Which got me to thinking about larger calibers/heavier bullets. I've had several 35 wh through the years shooting mostly 250 Partitions. That would be ideal for timber - except a 200 gr from my 300 WSM shoots flatter and likely penetrates as far.

In full disclosure, I never really bought into the whole timber rifle concept as some apply it. I see no sense in using something that can't reach out to 3-400 yards if the situation arises. I'd feel handicapped to carry such a rifle but have done so, especially the 45-70.

I also have developed an affinity for light rifles. Anything over 8 lbs all up is too heavy for my style of hunting which involves roaming 2-3-4 miles from the road.

So for those that have done so, any advantage in timber situation to using a 338-06 shooting a 210 or 225, 35 wh shooting a 225/250, or any other such cartridge, over a 200 gr 30 cal?

I can't really see it but am curious what others think. Plus I like thinking about all things elk hunting!

Ive used the 180 and 200 gr Partition on some nice bulls,from a couple of 300 magnums and gotten two holes from both. The 200 gr penetrates deeper more consistently. I once drove one from the back ribs of a bull aiming for the off side shoulder,and broke it. That's a lot of penetration and the bullet was still able to break the leg bones.But it did not exit.

Still I think the 200 will out penetrate the 180.

After using both I sort of concluded it did not matter though. The 180 had enough penetration for any rational angle,and the elk ended up dead; exit or no exit.

I would not over think it.

Of those you list, I've used the 338 WM, 300 WSM, and 30-06. The 338 WM always got 210 NP's, the 300 WSM 180 NP's, and the 30-06 180 NP's (and one kill with the 168 TSX).

The only DRT kills on bulls I've had, apart from spine shots, were broadside lung shots from both the WSM and WM. Both pushing NP's around 2,950. Both shots under 70 yards. Only the 210 NP exited.

I'm of the opinion, if you want consistent exits (I don't really care), I'd run a 250 NP at around 2,650 from the 338 WM, or a 200 NP at 2,800 from the 300 WSM and 2,650 from the 30-06.

The lightest build could be the 30-06, so that would be my choice of those you mention.

A 200 TTSX would give you even more penetration.

I have been hunting elk for most of my life and I am an old man now. I have killed and seen killed more than I can easily count.
In my years as a hunter, a guide and also a gunsmith with 48 years of experience I have come to a few conclusions about elk rifles.
#1, IMPACT velocity is what needs to be looked at, not muzzle velocity.
#2 bigger bullets impacting "slow" out penetrate most light bullets impacting fast. In this context "slow" means impact velocity of 2500 FPS and all the way down to about 1400 FPS.

Most hunters make far too much out of flat trajectory.
The real truth is this. If you shoot a flat magnum, say a 270 WSM or a 300 Weatherby, you STILL need to start holing elevation at ranges past 350. So the logical question is this:
If you can hold your cross hair up 8 inches, why would it be a problem to hold it up 14 inches? Or 60 inches? Or anything else?

In fact, it's not a problem. The problem is not being familiar enough with your tools.

What IS a problem is poor placement from bad marksmanship and poor bullet performance. In the 4 decades of hunting elk and guiding elk hunters I have seen probably 30 elk killed at "long range" that meaning over 450 yards, and of those 30 not more then 7 were killed past 550. Last year I hunting and killed my elk with an 8X57 Mauser with an 18.5" barrel. No problem at all. I practiced with my rifles on steel targets until I could hit a 14" gong out to 500 yards with certainty.
My shot was at about 200 yards. Nice 5X5 bull.

Anyway, my point is simple. For elk hunting I recommend using a bullet that holds its weight and expands out to about 500 years. These days so many "hunters" seem to think they need to rig up for 800 yard shots. In all my years and years and years of hunting I have never one time needed or wanted to take a shot that far on an elk.

I have some flat high velocity rifles. 2 seasons ago I killed my elk with my 270 WSM. Many times I have used my 270 Winchester and I also have two 300 magnums. I have owned 338 mags and other rifles on the last 48 years of hunting too, so I am talking from experience here.
So I am NOT advising against the use of such rifles.

But it's the man doing the killing, not the gun.

What ever you use, learn to use it well. I have killed elk with handguns and bow and arrow. I have done it with flintlocks. I have killed them with all sorts of weapons.

But guys, it's not technical aspects the weapon you need to focus on. It's your skill level with what every you want to use.

If you are in question about rifles and bullets the choice is not hard. Use anything you like that will drive a bullet clear through. Use the bullet that is most likely to go deep and still expand.

More power does not mean deeper penetration. It means a bigger hole, all other things being equal. As an example, I have found nothing so far that out-penetrate 150 grain Remington CL 270 bullet below a 375H&H. I have used 300s, 30-06, 338s, and 8MM and nothing has shown me better penetration than a good 270 bullet. Now my 300s and the 30-06 with 220 grain bullets and my 338 mag with 250 grain bullets make larger diameter wounds, but they are not deeper.


Bottom line is fairly simple. Use a tough bullet and learn to shoot well. I have friends that kill elk every year with 6.5 Swede and another that has killed more elk than I have, (that a LOT of elk) who used a 257 Roberts for most of them. They both tell me the same thing. Use tough heavy bullets.
My friend that used the 257 is a fan of the 115 Barnes X and my friend that uses the 6.5 uses 160 grain Hornady bullet.
They have never lost an elk either.
If in question, go with heavier construction and if possible step up in weight. Trajectory is less important than you think.

If you MUST have 2 holes, the price in recoil (and perhaps rifle weight) will be high.

Otherwise, the Barnes is your huckleberry.

Given the same rifle, say a 30-06, I don't know which Barnes would penetrate the most critter -- TTSX, TSX, 150 grains, 200 grains, etc. Mine is loaded with 168 TTSXs, mostly because the load was designed for hunting on Kodiak. No doubt a 150 would have killed the blacktail dead enough.

szihn,

Excellent post.

I'm of the opinion the Partition does more internal damage than the Barnes. The Barnes also opens to a relatively large front, slowing penetration. I'm fairly certain a 200 gr Partition will out-penetrate a 168 X from, say, a 30-06. And I personally wouldn't load a heavier than 168 X in a 30-06. Not enough juice to open reliably at longer ranges IME.

Personally I like the shrapnel/penetration combination of the Partition over the mono's. But everyone sees the problem differently.

Bob Hagel did penetration tests with Noslers years ago.. The one that gave the greatest penetration was a 7mm mag. with a 175 Nosler, second only by a bit was the.300 with a 200 gr. Nosler.
When we were in Africa, my pal had a .338 with 250 grain Noslers.. We recovered several of his bullets from angle shots on game.. I use a .300 with 200 gr. Noslers, the only bullet I recovered was from a wildabeast. Shot in the left shoulder the bullet was recovered in the hind quarter on the opposite side..

True enough.

Good posts fellas!

I agree wholeheartedly with szihn on use enough gun and be able to hit what your shooting at being more important than the rest of the gack. I see the current trend toward shooting smaller cartridges in, as I see it, frangible bullets and am not quite on that bandwagon. I'll run into more elk at less than 100 yards than 5-600.

I find it a bit comical when 1 of our infamous posters always tells everyone how FOS everyone else's bullet choice is and then quotes 1000+ yard trajectory "where the smaller cartridge/ABC bullet leaves 'them', pick your bullet, in the dust". I always chuckle and wonder how many 1000 yard animals have been taken, and how many more have been wounded that no one ever hears about. If you limit your ballistic gacking to realistic ranges - say the 95% confidence interval which I'll define as 500 yards, any cartridge shooting a non-frangible bullet somewhere around 3000 ft/sec is viable because as szihn points out, you holdover after ~ 325-350 yards any way. You might use KY windage, use a different reticle line, or twist turrets, but you're compensating in some fashion for bullet drop.

I was hoping one of the 35 whelen guys would weigh in. My Dad has killed a couple moose with the Colonel using 250 Partitions and has penetrated alot of moose on its way to the freezer. I've killed some deer with the 35 just because. A 250 will leave 2 holes in a deer

The 200gr. partition is a plow, even at 30-06 velocities. I shot one head on this year with that set-up and it penetrated. Dead critter on the ground almost instantly... I've also dropped bulls with the 300WSM (180 partition) and 338WM. The 180 partition (fired from 300WSM) was found on the offside hide. I have no doubts the 200 would have penetrated. If it were me, I'd stick with a 30-06 under your weight requirement (very easy to do) of 8 pounds and run a 200gr. partition. Buy up a bunch of them when SPS has the blemished ones on sale. The last bunch cost me $13.45/50. You can do a hell of a lot of load development and practicing with your hunting bullet at that price...

I agree...

Good post. I've shot my 338WM a lot and I'll agree with you that the .30 cal 200gr. partition will out penetrate the 250gr. from the 338. The .338 will open up bigger, thus creating a larger wound channel. By doing this, it actually slows the bullet and decreases penetration... I'll bet if Hagel would have used a 7mm mauser (instead of the 7mm rem mag) in the penetration test, he would have still found the 175gr. partition to be a freight train in the plow department... That doesn't mean I'm giving up my 30-06 or 338WM though...

Those old-timers everyone likes to poke fun at today,knew what you could do with a 7 Rem Mag and a 175 gr Nosler Partition.



They learned by killing BG animals.






Gee.....Hagel never knew what he was doing either.

That's why these conversations are maybe a bit shop worn....the info has been out there maybe 4-5 decades






B: Pay no attention to the loads; trivial distractions. That was the old H4831 which was slower. I know both guys had loads tested for pressure at Remington and HP White Labs. But maybe they used antiquated methods.

Wowza - 68 gr 4831 under a 175! I'll bet that less than 65k psi..... NOT.

Every animal will be a little different but those TTSX's penetrate like no other I've seen , My hunting partners daughter drove a 168 ttsx length wise thru a big 6 point in Utah this year and it was still going, the game we have shot with ttsx's don't seem to drop on the spot save a few compared to Bergers or the Partitions we use in the past, but for the most part they work well and are very accurate!

I have no idea. That's the old H4831. Not really important. What those guys used is not that important...it's just discussion.

How come guys get to chase any old velocity they want today and it's "OK", but if they did it back then they were playing fast and loose with their lives? I have seen crazier [bleep] on here than anything Hagel ever did LOL


At least the guys back then made the effort to know where they stood pressure wise. They were not unmindful of high pressures.

Bob Chatfield-Taylor used to send stuff to HP White Laboratories for pressure testing. Hagel sent his loads for some cartridges to Remington, as did Warren Page.For the day, they guessed a lot less than many of us do today.

Several times in my past hunting career,I have looked at the 35 Whelen and a 250 gr bullet, comparing it to my 30-06 and a 220 gr bullet. I always came to the same conclusion that the 35 won't do much more than the .06.

Anyone looking at ballistic tables will soon find out that most heavy for caliber bullets in typical elk hunting rifles,leave the lighter bullets lacking at any appreciable distance.

I am in complete agreement with szhin and probably have about the same number of elk kills and witness to others killing them. In addition to killing a good number of elk with more than a few different chamberings in different calibers

I dont want to send you in to cardiac by suggesting what i'd probably use today..

But it is too bad a guy cant get TBBC anymore.

140gr TTBC, 270wby. head on shot,only move the elk made was his nose plowing in the dirt 6".





Just to hear myself talk, i'll give my .02 on "raking" shots on elk..Most of the time when they turn out bad is because guys aim too far forward.There seems to be a mental block having to aim pretty much into the guts so you can get to the vitals..I learned this the hard way myself, and i thought i knew better.

seen it many times where the bullet goes in behind the shoulder and punches out the brisket, missing everything that makes them live.

The 35 Whelen is good with 250's.Mine is now a 280AI tho.

Rosco great bull. Stuff like the 140 TBBC worked great. My pal used them in 8 Rem Mag.

On angling shots I learned you held with the vertical crosshair through the opposite shoulder. If your bullet were up to it, you'd break the off side bones.

Yep,applying it seems to be the hard part for some..I've screwed it up myself..one time

Here's a 168 TSX I drove at a hard angle through a good 6pt bull from a 30-06 in "the dark timber"... it caught the bullet. Which only goes to prove exactly nothing.

I tend to think the penetration of the 168 TTSX is about like the 180 NP. Me, I'll take the Partition or Accubond over any mono.

You're already shooting a good combo in both rifles. Shot placement/angle has more to do with your problem that the bullet weight. My buddy neck shot his elk broadside with 160 grain Partitions. The elk dropped in his tracks and the bullet exited.

I would worry about other issues that you may have, cause your rifle/bullet combo ain't one of them. Just my 2 cents.

Should of said the bullet is still going the bull not so much.......I've had good luck with the ttsx's so far but I wouldn't call them my favorite bullet!

I inherently thought of a 9.3x62 for a great timber round...250 TTSX or a 286 grain (anything) would punch quite the hole. Tikka makes a forest which is about 7#. Mine zips a 250 TTSX at 2600 fps and shoots better than I do..
Good luck.

I've had and seen enough failures with monos, including a .308 150 TTSX that didn't open on a cow, that I've sworn them off.

Granted I only have 4 elk. 1 with 180 TSX and 3 with 168 TTSX out of 06. I have not recovered one bullet even though one elk got shot in the shoulder.
only TTSX bullet I have recovered is when the neck shot elk was still looking at me when I walked up to him, I put one behind his head at point blank and dug the bullet out of dirt.
I really like the idea of 35 Whelen. Right now thats my next elk rifle as Ive looked up some load data and some guys are pushing 250 grain pills over 2600.

I can't claim a lot of experience with the 35 Whelen but have killed three caribou with mine and 250 grain Partitions. One took one through the lungs at 250 yards and walked in a big half circle toward me pouring blood out like a garden hose. I kept thinking she'd drop and she probably would have but I put a second shot in to anchor her.

The second was quartered to me at 100 yards and the bullet entered in front of the left shoulder and was recovered in the right hip. It dropped at the shot.

The third a quartering away about 150 yards was hit behind the shoulder and exited just forward of the off shoulder. Dropped at the shot.

In each case the lungs were pretty thoroughly destroyed and the two with exit wounds were right at 1.5 inches with little to no blood shot meat on either the entrance or exit. In the old timer's words, "you could eat the bullet hole."

Three caribou with 250 grain Partitions does not make an empirical test but that bullet had already established its stellar reputation before I ever came along.

I'm extremely fond of my 400 Whelen with 400 grain Hawk or Woodleighs and my 300 H&H with 220 grain Partitions but if I had to be limited to one rifle and load for all NA big game it would be the 35 Whelen with 250 grain Partitions.

MtSmith's post made me smile.
I have a Ruger #1 in 9.3X74R and I am deeply in love with it.
So much that I am thinking I should make myself a Mauser in 9.3X62.

In fact, I am trying to get Green Mountain to make a run of .366" barrel blanks. They wrote to me and said they would do it if I can get them an order for 100. So now I am trying to get them to make the barrels if there are 100 barrels to be sold instead of all 100 going to one buyer. I was told they would bring it up in the next meeting. So if anyone out there wants a 9.3 (X57 or X 62 or X64 or X74R) and can do the external barrel work themselves, contact Green mountain and tell them you'd want one (or 2 or 3 or whatever)
I have so far found sales for 35, but that's a long way from 100.

I have a new Mauser M12 in 9.3x62 that I am completely in love with. 21" barrel, 3 position safety, terribly smooth action, iron sights, 5 round detachable magazine that can be filled while in place, very accurate.... I could go on and on

My own feeling is the "Ultimate Elk Rifle" is a 22" bbl'd 338 WM running 210 or 225 Partitions. 6x36 on top. Under 7.75lbs scoped, with sling and rounds.

I've owned this rifle, and killed elk with it, but I really don't want to pack around the Ultimate Elk Rifle (I prefer something about 1 lb less), and I don't really want to shoot it anymore.

So I just use a 6.5 lb 308...

Barring that, I think the "Everyman's Elk Rifle" is a 21 or 22" bbl'd, plain-jane 30-06 running 180 NP's. All-up weight sub 7.75 lbs.

Agreed. My two bulls and two cows shot with a pre'64 .338WM and 225 NP's were all pole axed immediately but now am reluctant to carry a nearly 9 pounder in the mountains. I should add that a nice 5x5 collapsed immediately with a 165 NP from a .308Win. a few years ago. You know what that means.................

I use Nosler 200gr. Partitions in my 300 H&H and Woodleigh 350gr.PP in my Ruger 375.

Yes I do!

Most of my elk have been shot in relatively open country, but I have killed a few up close...with a bow and rifle

While it is not needed, I really think highly of my 375 H&H with 260 partitions. It is pretty heavy though.

I don't think you'll find any notable advantage of .338 rounds over a 200 grain bullet out of a .308 round, but if it gives a guy confidence then go for it.

bwinters,

Of the elk I've killed, roughly 30 of them have been at less than 100 yards. Mostly with a 270 and 150gr NPt's. I prefer an exit hole too--critters seem to get sick quicker and more obviously with two holes.

I also don't buy into the "big slow moving bullet" timber rifle thing. I never know when I'm going to step out of the timber and look across a quarter mile away and find elk. My primary elk rifle is under 7lbs and a 50ft to 500yd rifle.

Two years ago I shot a cow at 25 yds--twice--as she was slightly quartering away, running across an old skidder trail. The 150gr NPt's didn't exit. Muzzle velocity averaged 2865fps. But I've had plenty of other times when I've had exits with the same load that passed through elk (and sometimes bone) and the bullet had to travel further to exit. Who knows why those things happen.........

The 160, 175, and 200 gr NPt's in 270, 7mm, and 30 cal respectively, seem to all behave similarly--they open reliably with excellent penetration. I've killed elk with the 160gr, and elk and moose with the 200gr, and witnessed elk killed with the 175gr. My observation is they do indeed penetrate further.

But the difference between those bullets vs the 150, 160 or 180, could be difficult to really tell a big difference most of the time.

I went to Alaska twice with a 30-06AI, using a 180gr X-Bullet the first time and a 200gr Partition the second time. Killed a caribou and a moose both times. When I came back from the second trip I used the same load to kill two elk, a deer, and a pronghorn. The 200 gr NPt passed through everything.......even the pronghorn.........

You may want to consider the 160 NPt in your 270--especially with the RL-26 or IMR7977. I'm about to try IMR7977 with the 160gr in one of my 270's.

Casey

The 250 Partition penetrates really far in my water jug tests, about 7 or into the 8th jug most of the time from my Whelen. I haven't been able to keep one in any animal.

That's more penetration than the 300 RUM with a 200 AB does or the 300 WSM with the 200 Partition.

I think once you step in the .338 and .358's 250's at 2600-2800 you'll see a lot of penetration along with wide wounds.

No perfect answer but my 700 CDL Whelen is pretty light and I've never found it lacking on elk. With the right set up it'll reach to 500 with very little problems.

I would think that the 150 in a 270 and the 200 in the 30-06 are going to be about equal in penetration.

If you want a Partition to penetrate deeper consistently, you can circumcise them at the top of the partition. This weakens the jacket enough at that point that the entire top will always break off after mushrooming, leaving a smaller diameter shank to penetrate deeper. Ross Seyfried used to write about this.

You can use a little tiny grinder wheel on a dremel. Or much easier, get a nice new sharp small-diameter tubing-cutter, and you can spin it around the bullets to circumcise the jacket.

I would think that the 200 Partition in a 30-06 treated in such a manner would be about the ultimate do-it-all at every range bullet.

The 180 NP from the 30-06 will out-penetrate the 270 150 NP according to Finn Aagaard's excellent tests, so I kinda doubt it.

The 200 NP from the 30-06 is in a different class than most anything from a 270 I believe.

Not that a 150 NP won't get about anything done... and with less recoil.

The Partition is such a no brainer that I have not concerned myself with how they penetrate in years. But will note that how far they go seems to depend on position of the Partition and how weight stays behind the Partition after the front of the bullets expands and blows off. I have seen generally deep penetration from the 200 vs the 180, but will hunt with either without a second thought. Ive killed bulls with both.

IME the deepest penetration Partition under 30 caliber is the 7mm 160, but I have not used the 175 on anything so would not be surprised if that is the "under 30 caliber best". Nevertheless the 160 is pretty tough. It penetrates as deeply as the 180-30 cal IME.

I would not be surprised if the 270-150 and 160 are not right there with the the 7mm's but only shoot 130's in 270 so don't know.

I've recovered fewer 140-160 7mm Partitions than I have 270 Partitions. A friend who posts here says it's because 270 jackets are drawn thinner than 7mm and 7mm is just tougher. Interesting.

Timber or open I think the 7mm 160 in a 7mm magnum is as good an all round BG bullet as you can get, on par with any 30 caliber with 180's.. I will take it over anything else for western elk.

Yes, I was actually thinking of the 160 in the 270. I think that would match up with the 308-200. I wouldn't know directly, as I've never shot anything with a 270 ever. 30 cal is king in this house!

I am with BobH..

Bob,

Think about this: If the jacket is thicker it will expand larger and/or stay in place longer. That would inhibit penetration.

20 years ago I carefully and diligently sectioned 30 cal 150, 180, 200, and 270 cal 130, 150, and 160 Partitions. The partition was in slightly different positions in all of them.

Here's a quick and dirty example of 270 cal NPt's I just sectioned:

160 on left, 150 on right. The 160's partition is just slightly ahead of the 150's partition.

Casey that's interesting. The 270 bullets look pretty similar.

Ever section a 160 7mm?

Ive shot a lot of 140 and 160 gr 7mm Partitions into animals and have never recovered a single one.

A couple of old timers I know killed Alaskan BB with the 160 NPT in the 270.

One thing for sure is that if you stick any of these bullets into the chest of a bull elk and don't kill him it's because you missed or screwed a shot. Any of them have more than enough penetration and the right stuff to kill a bull elk handily.

Bob,

I haven't sectioned the 7mm's only 270 and 30 cal. And anymore I consider my 06 AI with a 200 grainer to be fit only for T-Rex's and such....... It's actually the lightest rifle I own at about 6lbs 9oz with scope. It has a LOT of muzzle rise.

I cannot recall seeing a different jacket thickness in any Partition I've sectioned. I think moving the partition slightly forward is what "improves" penetration in the NPt's.

Casey

If or when I go to Alaska again I would most likely take one of my 270's with the 160gr. When I went before my partner had already done this kind of Diy trip, and knew we would see brown bears. We saw 15-20 BB's on each trip--that's why I took the 30-06 AI with big bullets. Otherwise I would have just carried my 270 for the moose and caribou!

Casey

I grieved also when I couldn't find any old recipie TBBC's. Then I found North Forks and they made me forget TBBC's. They proved to be much less fouling, much more accurate and as good or better terminal performance. Go get you some...you won't regret it. They are the closest thing to a Jack Carter TBBC you'll see, only better.

Did Aagaards penetration test appear in any of his books or was it only in a magazine publication? If so, can anyone provide a link or date? Thank you.

Very true. Right behind the last rib will generally get the bullet where it needs to be--and this is where premium bullets rule...........

At least half the elk I've ever killed were quartering away. And a few were quartering towards me.

Casey

All this has been very interesting.

The frontal jackets on ALL Partition are drawn relatively thin, and the lead core is the same relatively soft alloy with 2.5% antimony, less than any conventional cup-and-core big game bullet I know of. Both features are designed to allow the front end to expand easily, and at higher impact velocities even disintegrate.

There are differences in the jacket thickness and lead alloy in the rear core, both to keep the rear end intact even when hitting heavy bone, and sometimes for better accuracy.

Unlike Bob, I've recovered several 7mm 140 and 160-grain Partitions from various animals, mostly deer and elk, but not all were shot from 7mm magnums. The cartridges ranged from the 7x57 to the 7mm Weatherby Magnum, and one of the 160's was recovered from a "raking shot" on a 6x6 bull elk with a 7mm Wby. I aimed at the far shoulder and that's where the bullet ended up, retaining 64% of its weight.

Another 160 retained 90% of its weight, but it was shot into a big Alberta mule deer at just under 300 yards from a 7x57, so impact velocity wasn't all that high. That's the second-highest weight retention I've seen from ANY Partition, the only one beating it a 400-grain .416 from a .416 Rigby that retained 95%. But the partition in the .416's (and several other of the larger Partitions) is moved considerably forward.

The 140's were all recovered from deer, including one from the ham of an eating-sized mule deer buck that was shot at 30 yards in lodgepole timber at the base of the neck. It retained 56% of its original weight.

Have consistently seen more penetration from the 200-grain .30 Partition than the 180. In fact have never recovered a 200, though one did end up somewhere in the chest of a raghorn bull shot in the tailbone at around 375 yards with a .300 Weatherby. Just couldn't find the bullet. (It had already been hit fatally already, but wasn't falling. Otherwise I wouldn't have taken the "raking" shot.) Once put a 200 into the big shoulder joint of a 6x6 bull that was quartering toward me at 75 yards, using a .300 Winchester Magnum. It exited the rear of the ribcage on the other side. Have recovered several 180's over the years from elk-sized African animals, but not from elk since for some reason I've never used them on elk.

Have killed more elk with the 200-grain 200 Partition using various .30 caliber cartridges from the .30-06 up, going back to the old "semi-spitzer" in the .30-06 which I went to when hunting elk in the thick thimber of western Montana over by the Idaho Panhandle in the 1970's. Have found it to penetrate plenty, as much as any .338 Partition I've used.

I think the 'Gold Star goes to the Nosler Partition, .30 caliber 200 grain bullet. At speeds generated by an 06, is top-shelf.
My 30-06 shoots this bullet very well. Makes for a nice hunting rifle.
I know lesser rounds will kill too. A man needs to make himself happy.

I hope you all had a nice Christmas.

Does anyone have a pic of a sectioned Nosler Partition in the 30-200 weight?

180 Nosler Partition from 300 Win Mag at about 450 yards into a herd bull. Quartering on, point of shoulder, broke the knuckle.

Recovered against the back ribs opposite side. I was impressed at how fast he dropped.

Just so there's no confusion I DO think the 200 gr Partition is a deeper penetrating bullet than the 180; but the 180 does a pretty fair job.

Im still looking for those 7mm's....must be just dumb luck.




165 NPT from a 30/06. 5x5 bull. Down through the trees at about 175,sort of broadside. Found against off ribs.

Good post JB. As well as the 200gr. partition worked on both deer and elk this year, I'd love to try the 210 partition in my 338 WM next year. I know you've said that bullet works very well in the 338. I also know a few guys that swear by them around here. One guy claims to get a little over 3,000 fps with the 210 partition out of his model 70 338wm. He also says he's seen a 210 knock over 2 bulls with one very well placed shot. I don't hunt with those guys, just something I was told.

Arguably one of the most informative threads on this entire website. I've learned a lot.

I agree.

I was just thinking about opening up that stash of 200gr. NP's for that spring interior brownie hunt in AK.. Would look good in a 300WM case I'd say with some H4831SC behind it.

Any leads yet on the Aagaard penetration test article?

The 210 Nosler in .338 was another of Hagel's favorites.. I did get about 3,000 fps, from my .338 with that bullet and Re 19.. I have shot a couple elk with it from my .340.. Dandy bullet.. The last batch of .340's I loaded was with 225's.. Both Accbond and Partition.. Killed some game with both.. Including one of my biggest whitetails.. Haven't used it in probably 8 years.. Great caliber and bullets..

Would the 150 grain North Fork in the 270 Win expand reliably on deer out to say 400 yds?

Bill, I'll let you borrow my .338-06 with 210 PT's and you can try it out for yourself.

I have taken two decent bulls in "timber" (if aspen and mixed-conifer thickets count). Both were shot at less than 25 yards and both were taken with 250-grain Swift A-Frames--the first from a .338 Win Mag and the second from a .338-06. The bullet from the .338 Win Mag exited, but I recovered the bullet from the .338-06 just under the hide on far side. Both bulls ran about 40 or so yards and died within ear-shot. FWIW, they didn't die any quicker than a number of bulls that I have shot at various ranges with other cartridges ranging from a 7mm Rem Mag up to a .375 H&H.

I didn't specifically choose either rifle/cartridge/bullet combination for hunting in the trees, they just happened to be what I was carrying on that particular day. The 250 A-Frames were simply the most accurate bullet that I tried in each of the rifles (a custom .338 mag built on a 1903 Springfield action and a Ruger No. 1 rebrarreled to .338-06).

Here you go Joe:

In Finn's test the 30-06 180 NP out-penetrated the 270 150 and 160 NP, though not by any tremendous amount. Seems fair to assume the 200 NP will at least equal, and likely better the 338 WM 250 NP.

Were I going to AK tomorrow on a Brown Bear hunt I'd likely just take a 30-06 loaded with 200 NP's or a 308 with 180 NP's.

No deer but 6 elk in 270, 7mm, and 30 cals.

The Northforks kept their front ends more intact resulting in a mushroom that didn't seem to "wipe off" as readily as Partitions. Consequently they didn't penetrate as far. Remember, larger the mushroom and the longer it remains intact the less penetration the bullet will have. One bullet that exited appeared to have lost the front end and had a small exit hole. Recovered bullets had a thicker front jacket that I could tell.

Based on my limited observation on elk, the Northfork is a tough bullet and I was impressed. Thing is the Northforks are verily expensive compared to Partitions and are trading one performance factor for another.

There are always trade offs.

They'ed probably work very well for deer, but my thinkinng is they are more bullet, and more expensive, than needed.

Casey

My current ideal of a 'timber' rifle pushes a .338 210 Partition at 2600. This rifle weighs only 5lb 13oz, which is great for carrying, but I don't think I want anymore smack from it. Turns out that when hunting at 10,000+ it retains its velocity pretty well too, enough that I don't feel in any way limited. But when I find elk, they seem to be in really thick stuff up close. I haven't shot enough elk to make any recommendations, but I was a little surprised when both the 160 and 185 TTSX did more internal damage than a 180BT. More holes too! I may just stick with the 185 TTSX at 2800fps, or not. I'll change my mind at least 50 times between now and next season. Might even go with a 140gn 6.5 at 2700ish.

Folks often talk about bullets with larger frontal areas not penetrating as deeply as (say) Partitions and other bullets that set up smaller frontal areas, and as a general rule this is probably true.

But sometimes I think the difference is not all that great,and I think people interpret this stuff to mean that the bullets with larger frontal areas do not penetrate "enough",which IME is not true at all.

I have recovered a pretty fair number of Partition bullets and Bitterroots from game and under conditions where both have been stopped the depth of penetration has been pretty similar. The Partitions will exit more often, in general ,but I have never seen situation where the Bitterroot penetration could be considered the least bit inadequate.

Here's a 160 BBC fired from a 7RM into a bull's neck from above and behind. It raveled maybe 3/4 of the neck ,pulping muscle and bone all the way,and was recovered under the chin. Based on a lot of use a Partition might have made the trip as well but doubt it would have done any better. It's expanded to a bit over .70 caliber and weighs 159 gr.

The BBC is in general a tougher bullet than the Partition,and I bet the same is true of things like the NF and Aframe.

You want penetration (then again how much is enough?). Here's a comparison between a 168gr TSX and a 200gr Nosler from a 300 Weatherby. Penetration was exactly the same. Note the weight retention....

jorg: I don't doubt it. My buddy RinB on here watched the 200 gr NPT from a 300 WM used in Africa along with a 7mm 145 Barnes LRX and said you couldn't tell them apart.They shot quite a few plains game.

You can ask him.

Think it was custom smith Joe Smithson doing the shooting with the 300 WM.

Bob: I just wanted to point out of the reasons as to why some folks prefer monometals. You can go down in bullet weight without losing penetration. Also, if you look at the bullets themselves, it appears that TSX would tend to cause more damage. Personally, I have not done enough hands on research, but this much I know: I use whatever bullet works best in the particular rifle I plant to hunt with and of course, I match velocity to construction. That elk I shot with my 300 Weatherby with a 180 TTSX showed complete and utter internal destruction and the heart had a fifty cent sized hole throught the center of it. Cheers, J

You said "utter".

Nice.



Elk shoulders will stop bullets, especially basic C&C bulets. I've dug quite a few out over the years, scarred and calloused over from seasons past. If you're a shoulder shooter, using a bullet that penetrates deeply is never a bad thing. I'm more of a tight behind the shoulder shooter, but have accidentally put them in the shoulders before, especially when in the tight timbered areas. Other times it is the only shot you get.

I do dearly love AMAXs for elk, but if I think I may be in the timber, I often pack something else. The old style speer grand slams are AWESOME bullets, if a guy can find some anymore. To answer the OP's question, I don't think there's much advantage to using a .338 of any flavor over the -06 and 200 grain partitions because it penetrates plenty...unless you like something about the gun itself.

I was gonna ask about your 338-06 build. I remember liking it. I may be in Saegertown in January.

NF 338, 225 grain after entering last rib on right side, found in neck. Love these North Forks...killed three bulls in three years with this bullet.

Jorge, IMO/ IME a TSX will certainly not do as much damage. For a couple reasons. One being that it does not shed the front end like a Nosler Partition is designed to do and secondly a Barnes typically has less frontal area due to the space between the petals.
IMO the TTSX only redeeming factor is the fact I don't have to worry about feeding my kids lead, which is my motivation for using them. That and they seem to be far less bitchy as far as getting them to shoot goes vs. the Nosler and Hornady monometals.

Godog how many grooves does your barrel have?

Godog, how did you get that bullet reloaded 3 times!! Joke!!

Ha! I probably could have worded my reply mo better.

Haven't counted the grooves. I'm shooting a late 60's Sako 338 with its original Bofors steel barrel. It'll shoot em into 0.4" groups at 100 yds. The Sako gurus will probably know.

My experiences are VASTLY different that yours.

PM replied to.

And vastly different than assorted tests of this subject as well as the design of said bullets.

Most of the tests I've seen don't show the TSX/TTSX doing less damage, but rather the shape of the damage column, or wound cavity, being more of a large cylinder compared to a cone shape as with more frangible bullets.

My experiences are similar to Jorge, and I've seen Phil Shoemaker, JJHACK, Rick Bin, and others report excellent results with TSX/TTSX/LRX bullets. I've also seen a bunch of credible posters, yourself included, report less than stellar results with various models of Barnes bullets, so I'm not quick to discount your observations, though they don't match my own. Brad and yourself have reported trouble with .308" 150/180 TSX/TTSX bullets, and MD has mentioned having a couple of instances of poor performance with the .257" 100gr TSX. I've killed with, and witnessed, all of these bullets in use a fair bit with no trouble, but that doesn't mean it can't happen to you guys.

In fact, on average over hundreds of kills, I've seen longer travel distances after the kill shot with frangible C&C bullets than I have with monos. That seems contrary to what a couple of other credible guys (like MD) have reported, but never-the-less it's what I've observed...

One should be able to discern the difference between credible, honest reporting and zealotry.

Fair bit of irony there.

Noshitsherlock, There's a lesson in there, somehow I doubt you grasped it.

It's three words, and Sherlock is a proper noun so it's capitalized.

You can be uncivil, but let's not make grammatical errors, eh?

Jorge, your a poser pure and simple. By your own admission you have very limited time to hunt. And when you do it involves someone holding your hand, a game farm or something else along those lines.

Paper, wet or dry, is not a replicant of tissue and what you see in it is not an indicator of what a bullet will do in flesh. Neither is water for that matter.







It is always interesting to me how hunters (and shooters) think that terminal ballistics is somehow "mystical", or what bullets do in tissue and how they do it is "up for argument".

Here's reality: before the late 80's no one really had a clue how/why bullets destroyed tissue (save Fackler, etc). All the same nonsense that's repeated here a thousand times about "energy", "momentum", etc was used then.
However, in the last 20 years, and especially in the last decade plus, millions of dollars have been spent with tens of thousands of test shots, tens of thousands of wounds examined, and reams of data collected by a few really switched on places to scientifically know why bullets do what.


A bunch of posters would learn a whole heck of a lot just by googleing- "Doc GKR terminal ballistics".

And nothing you've spewed above is relevant to the discussion, so as always you take this fork in the road, because. It's always fun to get grief from neophytes. I've never said or claimed to be anything I'm not, and an "elk hunter" is not one of my claims. That said, being called a "poser" from someone like you is so laughable it defies explanation.

Of course not, but when using THE SAME MEDIUM to test two or more projectiles to test ONE VARIANT IN THAT SAME MEDIUM, it is a valid measure of effectiveness. Neither newspaper or as you say water jugs are a valid MOE v animal tissue but for a penetration comparison using the same medium is sure is. I was merely trying to counter the purely empirical and anecdotal "absolute" posited by some that C&C bullets cause more internal damage (or penetrate as well) as monometals, specifically the Barnes TTSX, when there are clearly just as many empirical and anecdotal presentations such as here: TTSX performance Where TTSXs not only penetrate but cause massive internal trauma as well.

I've hunted most of my life with C&C bullets, with Hornadys being the most used, as well as Swift A Frames and Partitions including two African safaris with game ranging from Cape Buffalo, down to impala, and stateside, as well as many deer Including axis), LOTS of hogs, bear and one (1) elk and Scimitar Horned Oryx. About the only think I can say without reservation is this; the TTSXs left more exit holes (all larger than caliber indicating expansion) than any other bullet I've used AND have been consistently more accurate across all most calibers than any other hunting bullet I've used. Whether the hunts were Guided (aka hand-held) is really not relevant and in my experience the Barnes Do penetrate more than any other bullet I've ever used.

Which has nothing to do with the fact that Barnes TTSX are the best bullets ever made. They work on any game any way you hunt it.

Three observations:

1) If you're interested in seeing how far various bullets penetrate water-filled jugs, then by all means water-filled jugs are a valid test medium, and depth of penetration is the variable you're after.

2) If depth of penetration was the most important variable in determining effectiveness in killing big game then hunting bullets and their manufacture would be greatly simplified--they'd all be non-expandable.

3) They're not.

I don't recall ever mentioning water jugs, but ok. As two your second hypothesis, it does I think come with a couple of caveats: elephant, rino and hippo on land and in the case of the TTSX and the Partition, you get both..

One thing about it, the partition is a damn old bullet with old technology. But that doesn't mean it isn't still a bullet in which all others are judged. We've all heard the story, but damn the partition is still getting chit done since its introduction in 1947. Yeah, some guys will argue, bullet design has changed a lot since then. But for hunting, did it really need to??? Moral of the story is if you like keeping it simple, use a partition... Life will be much easier.. Hint..

Partitions I've caught in large game, though later on JB told me that 180 partitions are not the cats azz on penetration I should have been running 200 partitions... I was not aware of that at the time and in the meantime had found Barnes so problem was solved.

I've shot quite a few partitions over the years, they are better than standard cup and core for sure. But there came a new game to town thats better, IMHO, and i'm not scrimping on bullets when it comes to game, even if you can control your shots, you can't always control the angle of the bullet after impact and I simply want one that holds together the best, while expanding. Barnes does that.

Lehigh is a specialty company in the same realm dealing with subsonic stuff... its why I run them with a can subsonic ... they perform the best and most consistently.

Nilgai is what got me searching for something better than a partition, after I had 2 180 partitions penetrate enough but not much on whitetail... one whitetail stopped the bulllet in his neck against the spine. Evidently it sheared it but it was up against the spine on THIS side of it... on a DEER.... then some issues on nilgai and that was that.

Further down the road a couple of deer had caught 180 partitions from 300 wtby, not all that fast, 3100 IIRC ballpark. Lengthwise. And the bullet would not even exit small deer on the order of say 160 pounds live weight. While transistioning to X, I shot a couple of deer frontal shots with them, including a couple with an 85 tsx that were a bit over 200 yards, and from a 6/6.8 SPC round that was quite a bit slower than a 243... exits on all of them.... heck the lehigh sub sonic at the same distance as some of the partition shots, frontal, has been found in the hindquarters so far... same pentration as a partition from a mag....

By as always YMMV.

We don't still ride horses to work. But we do drive different vehicles as we all have different tastes.

The medium is beside the point. Substitute your medium of choice, be it wet newspapers, ballistic gel, etc. and the observation still holds true. It's why bullet companies test their bullets on actual animals, as well as media.

And I don't recall anyone mentioning dangerous game, or killing animals that will stomp a hole in you if you don't put them down with a CNS shot through a thick skull. Talk about a hail Mary.





Both? Good recovery. Above you were talking about testing a single variable (penetration) and now you've doubled that. You're moving in the right direction.

No they don't. In your post above you acknowledged that by saying you use a different bullet for subsonic speeds. And you don't need to go all the way to subsonic to get TTSXs to fail to open.

OF COURSE THE MEDIUM IS BESIDE THE POINT. The issue is penetration when all other data points are equal, including animal tissue where Barnes will usually outpenetrate partitions. Dangerous game is not the issue either, rather penetration, and your theory was obviously not absolute. You might want to read more on dangerous game (or even hunt some and they also include the cats where solids are eschewed) the reason for solids on the animals I mentioned,have little to do with skull penetration but rather the thickness of the hide and depth of the vitals. In fact, hippos have very thin skulls, that is why WHEN IN WATER, a frontal shot between the eyes with a soft point works wonders. On land, most hippos are heart/lung shot with solids. Same for rhinos as they are almost NEVER shot in the head and the overwhelming majority of elephants are heart/lung shot with SOLIDS. Getting a clue beforehand usually helps in discussions.

I was talking about elephants, dipschit.

Get a clue? The subject here is killing elk, remember?

For that matter, how many elephants, rhinos, and hippos have you killed?

We'll add reading fail to your attributes. You mentioned "dangerous game" and "skulls" to which I responded most elephants are heart/lung shot with solids. As to the elk issue, it's just another 600-800 pound animal and either bullet is more than adequate. I only took issue with the absolute theory that Partitions penetrate as much and so more internal damage than TTSXs. Might be true in some instances but to claim it as an absolute, like yours posts, is absolute bullshit...dipshit

Edit: none, but two buffalo but again irrelevant...

Not much of a hunter either, considering your hankering for shooting livestock in a pen. But you can at least brag to your SCI buddies how you conquered the wilds of a farm and killed a big bull..
You can sometimes fool the coaches, but not the players. Quit posibly you are the biggest poser on this site and that's saying something.

BS.

SCI? sorry, not a member. And YOU are a "player"? tsk, pardon me whilst I laugh my ass off... Nice hyperbole BTW..

So says the campfire Orifice (rectal) At Delphi....

Boy am I glad I mostly shot Partitions and BBC's.......once I figured out I hated C&C bullets except for varmints.

Maybe your one of those guys that like to track running game like Rost. Barnes probably are the best for guys like that.

Your reading comprehension is poor.
You are a poser through and through. That's a fact and by your own admission.

Trying to reason with millennial snowflakes like BWalker..

None. But you're an expert nonetheless. Just like with elk.

Only a true dipschit would introduce the topic of dangerous game in a discussion of elk bullets.

True story, I was in a Sportsman's Warehouse buying some deer bullets, 130 partitions for my .270, a classic big game killer if there ever was one.

TTSXs had just come out. The 20-something kid behind the counter told me the partitions were no good for deer, and I should get the super-duper new Barnes TTSX, because the plastic tip had vastly improved the BC and therefore the bullet.

I said "is that so?" Followed by "wait a minute" and went and got another box of partitions and put it on the counter. "Ring me up."

Arguing which bullet is "best" is really a waste of time, they all have their niche. A Barnes may be best for a high velocity cartridge and close-in shots. But not for longer distances in mild cartridges.

Agreed! I have not done a lot of chasing unless I screwed up and didn't hit where I shoulda....which happens to us all!

NEVER ever did I claim to be an expert on elk. I merely (and correctly, a concept you habitually fail to grasp) that an elk is no different than any other 800~ ruminant. As to the dangerous game "introduction", I was merely pointing out the STUPIDITY of your post referencing solids:


And there's plenty more of your "absolutisms" declaring C&C bullets cause more damage than TTSXs EVERY TIME, which are equally idiotic. This is all absurd really, I can ask guys like Hatari with elephant, hippo and buffalo to this credit to chime in and embarrass you further, but you're doing a great job on your own. Lastly, the noshitsherlock, clearly overtasked your pointy headedness. Try writing those three words verbatim and see what comes up.

Carry on smoking your pole...Say, you're not Ron Jeremy are you?

And that kid's statement is just as stupid as your claims TTSXs never cause as much internal damage as Partitions in every case... As to your statement (in bold), this might come as a surprise to you, but that is EXACTLY what I've said and have been saying all along and if I didn't agree with it, I would not have a wall full of animals killed with Partitions.

It appears that you're either hitting the sauce, need a new prescription, or you scored some "really good schit" and just smoked a bunch of it.

Because I haven't said any of that stuff, or anything close.




LOL, I get down to Florida a few times a year, any time you want to meet face to face, just let me know.

And we'll see who smokes what. Clown.

Jesus boys. Killin elk aint that hard.

Just a handful of examples. I realize not everyone lives in elk country, but they die like everything else..

180 gr MRX, 795 yards



175 NABLR, 415 yards


230gr OTM berger, 40 yards


sharp stick, 35 yards

Nice! Wonderful bulls!

Thanks Bob..I'd like to point out to sooth BWalkeer, that no one was holding my hand on the one killed at long range with the Barnes..Got lucky i guess?

Beautiful bulls, sir. You live in a beautiful state! J

Thanks Jorge, Dont let these guys fool ya..Half the guys that live with them right outside their door havent got a clue either.

These simply are the good old days in the west when it comes to elk hunting, it has never been better than it is right now.

Mule deer on the other hand have seen better days.

This is my friend's place in Montana, about 300 acres backing onto National Forest. When I was there in October of last year he had elk all over the place. He is strictly a recurve hunter and he gets one every year. Truly a paradise. J

I would get in on that if you could..Aint nothing like a interacting with your own calls at a hot bull at bow range. You'll love it. In the peak of the rut, sometimes they get so aggressive that it makes you nervous.

Even if you cant kill it, you'll come away shaking. Its a fun experience.

Rosco - you've killed some damn fine bulls!

Now back to the pissing match.

Beautiful bulls Rosco. Those are awesome animals.

I've taken elk with Partitions, Accubonds, Bitterroots and TSX's. While I didn't think the TSX's from my Whelen showed quite the effect of similar shots with a Partition it did take the elk cleanly without much wandering after the shot.

So far the most dramatic effects I've seen on elk have been with the 175 BBC from my MSM at 3050'ish FPS. This was the first time I saw an elk drop to to shot on a pure rib shot and a small bull run a short 40-50 yard death run and be stone dead.

Doesn't prove much but I'll take wide expanding Bullets that hold their weight. Seems to work for me. Maybe next year it'll be different.

Really nice bulls Rosco! That rack you photographed, sitting on the floor... Wow...

And ya, I wish the mule deer herds were doing better too. They're my favorite big game critters.

Regards, Guy

Jorge, why don't you find and post what you mistakenly claimed I said above?


Or just admit you were wrong.



And while you're at it, let's clarify this little gem:





The stupidity of my reference to solids?



Jorge, there is no reference to solids. "Non-expandable" does not mean solid.


Don't make me have to get Hatari to explain this to you.

Thanks Guy, me too..Big Mule deer get under my skin like nothing else

Ok, I was wrong.

As to the "gem", sure it does:
Non-Expanding Bullets

Non-expanding (FMJ) bullets typically retain their general shape as the bullet penetrates and passes through target. The penetration of this type of bullet is usually much greater than frangible or expanding bullets because the frontal area of a non-expanding bullet does not increase as it penetrates.

In round nose form they are favored by some African hunters for use on the largest and toughest game, principally on elephant and rhino, where very deep penetration against heavy hide and bone is required.

But there are two kinds of solids, monometals like Barnes solids and FMJs (with lead cores) like Woodleighs, etc.

berets - I'm with you on expanding bullets that hold their weight. Have nothing against Barnes except I had several bad experiences in a row when the TSX first came out, notably the 100 gr 25 cal. Hopefully the issue has been resolved. I'm considering trying the 168 TTSX in my 30-06 this year. They were always very accurate.

OMG. Here I have been doing it all wrong, killing them with Sierra 220 gr Round Nose for many years. Had to switch to Nosler Partitions,180 gr last year and a muzzle break on my .06 due to a bad shoulder Only because SPS had them for $13 a box of 50.

Some years,I even (shutter) used 180 gr Game Kings, 44mag 240 gr Semi jacketed flat points, 50 cal muzzle loader maxi-balls or Power Belts.I can see,I need to go out and buy some Barnes TTTTTTSSSSSXXX Supers if I want to do it correctly.
If only I had known!!!!!!

Big deal? Filling an elk tag aint that damn hard, no matter how much you'd like to claim it is.

They're big, leave a ton of sign and you can smell them a mile away.And if that aint enough,during half the time they are in season they'll tell you where they're at as loud as they can..crafty buggers

BIG elk, thats another story.

Oh, how I wish this were true for me in Oregon! I'd KYA for a rag horn every year.




P

FredIII killed like three this year, and he cant even spell "the"

Jorge, FMJ's are not "solids." And you think I'm the one who needs to get a clue, TFF.

Very jive bulls , Roscoe.
And for the record I don't have any.problem with guided hunting. Have done it myself and will again.
The problem. Is when some prick acts like he's an all pro hunter with pretty limited expiereance beyond guided hunts and high fence shoots. And this is by his own admission.

Never said it was hard to kill elk.Fact is,I find it real easy. Hasn't been many years when I didn't fill a tag.

As for big bulls the biggest bull I killed, an old 7x8 was put down, bang flop, with a 180 gr Sierra Game King at about 60 yards.Big bulls or rag horns.It don't make much difference.



I stopped hunting bulls exclusively about ten years ago although I have killed a few since them. Young cows are a lot better eating

I would be willing to bet that more elk are killed every year with "Core-lokt" & "Power Points" than than "premium" bullets. I for one still use factory Win/Rem in my 30/06. Never had a problem with 180 grain bullets.

Provided foe your consideration:



And an excerpt from the Woodleigh website and even a convenient link for you:

FULL METAL JACKET BULLETS
Full Metal Jacket BulletsThe most heavily constructed steel jacketed solids available. Made from extra deep drawing grade steel, clad with 90/10 gilding metal alloy. The jacket is heavy at the nose (0.084") to create extra impact resistance.

The base of the bullet is rolled back 90 degrees to provide a double strength heel to prevent core loss on impact.
Woodliegh Weldcore FMJ SOLIDS...

Edited. A new year is coming and I wish you and all here the very best/ Truly

How could this "prick" act like an all pro hunter and at the same time admit he's got limited experience?

As for myself, I have VERY limited experience (as I've attested to repeatedly) when it comes to hunting out west and ONE high fence hunting elk hunt. Be that as it may, most of my other hunts have been guided (and let me tell you I feel SO much better you approve of guided hunts!) but this was about bullets and their application and in that regard I consider myself fortunate to have hunted many years on many guided hunts and many more DIY or with friends. I do take umbrage though at "all-pro" neophytes making absolute statements about bullet performance on game when clearly many others think otherwise. Your mangina just got filled with sand because someone took you to task about your opinions about TTSXs.

That's the point. You have zero basis for your pompous, arrogant attitude.
I disagree with Jordan on somethings, but he's not an arrogant prick, so I have respect for him. He also approaches his argument from a rational standpoint vs. You parroting what you have heard over on AR or some other place.
And FWIW you might read JJ hacks posts lately on the TSX. He said basicly the same thing as I. Animals often do not react to the shot and often run off with a distance without CNS hits.

On elk of course, and show me where I have appointed myself and "expert"That said, an elk (as I've mentioned numerous times) is another 600-800 pound animal I've killed a few of those.

My ONLY point is that nothing is absolute and there are just as many experienced pros here whose vast experience says otherwise. As to Hack I'm proud to call him a friend and without question, his bullet of choice is the TSX/TTSX family. FURTHER, I've also commented on observation supporting your experiences with Partitions, etc (and truly I have no idea what your level of experience is).
My whole point in this unfortunate thread is nothing of what I or you or anybody says is absolute when it comes to bullet performance on game. I consider myself lucky to have taken probably over one hundred head of game (I really have no idea when I include deer and hogs down here), so I feel totally comfortable in proffering an opinion, and yes even on the ONE elk I've taken, where the TTSX worked perfectly in both penetration and internal damage. Same goes with my experiences with Noslers (Partitions only which I like very much) and LOTS with Swift AFrames.

I'm an open book, sir. Been here a long time, met and hunted with a lot of nice folks from this place and I think I'm a pretty straight shooter. Bullshitters don't last long here. Am I arrogant? absolutely, but not when it comes to hunting, and you'll find most Naval Aviators are. We can't help ourselves. Have a Happy New Year.

Jorge, FMJs include lots of bullets that aren't Woodleighs and aren't solids. Military ball ammo for example.

I agree. Not all FMJs are considered "solids" but solids with lead cores and steel jackets are FMJs and for what it's worth, the #1 killer of elephant in Africa is the 7.62X39 FMJ.

Jorge, since you seem to have drifted back to being civil I will as well.
I never spoke to anything as absolute. Bullet performance by its nature has a far amount of varibility. However physics being what they are mono metal type bullets give up some damage to internals in favour of increased penetration. This often leads to a substantial death run and lack of reaction to the shot as myself.
I will continue to use them as I mentioned before I have some concern in regards to exposing my kids to lead, but I am also cognizant of the trade offs involved with there use.