Post by: swift on December 26, 2014, 06:53:36 AM
I've had great performance with the MRX outta my weatherbys ! The only
Animal I've used a x bullet on I was not impressed and as I under stand the
LRX is just a TTSX streched out !
So now that they have been out a couple seasons does anybody have so
Good feedback ?
Post by: bearpaw on December 26, 2014, 07:04:42 AM
Post by: Stein on December 26, 2014, 02:51:01 PM
I don't tend to get all wrapped around BC numbers, with the new technology in scopes and software I'll just click 11 times instead of 10.
Post by: Bob33 on December 26, 2014, 04:54:05 PM
Post by: swift on December 28, 2014, 09:12:26 AM
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 28, 2014, 09:57:35 AM
The MRX bullet was a different composition than the TTSX bullet and had a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length.
Brilliant! :chuckle:
Post by: kbrowne14 on December 28, 2014, 07:14:16 PM
Post by: Fowlweather25 on December 28, 2014, 07:38:55 PM
i thought you loved Barnes bullets? LolThe MRX bullet was a different composition than the TTSX bullet and had a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length.
Brilliant! :chuckle:
Post by: coachcw on December 28, 2014, 07:43:09 PM
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 28, 2014, 08:01:43 PM
i thought you loved Barnes bullets? LolThe MRX bullet was a different composition than the TTSX bullet and had a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length.
Brilliant! :chuckle:
The only thing worse than Barnes bullets themselves. Is if it's being launched from a crap Tikka, frosted with a POS Vortex.
Some examples of the outstanding expansion performance of some Barnes bullets recovered from a Mulie buck shot with a .243 Winchester. Of course this was a friends doing, I shoot Accubond's and accasionaly have been know to kill things with Hornady's. I know better!
Bottom line, friends don't let friends shoot Barnes. Nor do they allow them to carry crap Tikka's frosted with a POS Vortex. That's the sugar coated forum friendly version of my opinion. :tup:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FIMG952012101495195149_zps61be86b1.jpg&hash=41986182e65165d6bf8790914767037b8e92ee51) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/IMG952012101495195149_zps61be86b1.jpg.html)
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on December 28, 2014, 08:10:17 PM
i thought you loved Barnes bullets? LolThe MRX bullet was a different composition than the TTSX bullet and had a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length.
Brilliant! :chuckle:
The only thing worse than Barnes bullets themselves. Is if it's being launched from a crap Tikka, frosted with a POS Vortex.
Some examples of the outstanding expansion performance of some Barnes bullets recovered from a Mulie buck shot with a .243 Winchester. Of course this was a friends doing, I shoot Accubond's and accasionaly have been know to kill things with Hornady's. I know better!
Bottom line, friends don't let friends shoot Barnes. Nor do they allow them to carry crap Tikka's frosted with a POS Vortex. That's the sugar coated forum friendly version of my opinion. :tup:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FIMG952012101495195149_zps61be86b1.jpg&hash=41986182e65165d6bf8790914767037b8e92ee51) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/IMG952012101495195149_zps61be86b1.jpg.html)
Boy that's a fact!!! I'd eat crushed glass fore I slummed a tikka/vortex combo...
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 28, 2014, 08:15:52 PM
Post by: predatorpro on December 28, 2014, 08:22:56 PM
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 28, 2014, 08:27:45 PM
I just shoot bergers so i dont have to worry about it...
There you go! It may start with a "B" and end with a "S" but there's a whole lot more going on when it comes to impact. :tup:
Post by: bearpaw on December 29, 2014, 04:16:57 AM
Post by: RadSav on December 29, 2014, 04:58:10 AM
Just dropped a cow elk yesterday in her footprints at about 610 yards with 160 gr TTSX. Bullet went through the animal as usual.
160? Did you get the Lapua or is that from a 340?
Post by: mountainman on December 29, 2014, 05:39:38 AM
Just dropped a cow elk yesterday in her footprints at about 610 yards with 160 gr TTSX. Bullet went through the animal as usual.shot a deer several years back. Average 3 point. 338-378 Weatherby with the same bullet. Quarter size hole in and out. Used a TTSX in a 308 in Africa on 9 animals, ranging from Impala to Zebra and Kudu. Only one Took a second shot, my first zebra running at 200 yards. All were perfect in and out bullet performance!
Post by: Jaques Bonet on December 29, 2014, 07:45:07 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 07:55:19 AM
Post by: mountainman on December 29, 2014, 08:15:30 AM
I love the stories of "failed bullets" that were recovered from dead animals.:chuckle:
Post by: kentrek on December 29, 2014, 08:47:52 AM
:stirthepot:
Back to reality I did find a berger once in a dirt backstop that failed to expand....it was a 700 yard target...all bullets can "fail" especially if a Tikka shoots them
:chuckle:
Post by: predatorpro on December 29, 2014, 09:19:37 AM
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 09:26:06 AM
Just dropped a cow elk yesterday in her footprints at about 610 yards with 160 gr TTSX. Bullet went through the animal as usual.
I've dropped does in their tracks with a HD2500 Chevy Silverado also. :tup:
Post by: Hornseeker on December 29, 2014, 09:28:38 AM
I guess I have seen a couple flip onto their back with their feet up... but dang, I still think their body was on their tracks or very close!
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 09:36:49 AM
Do animals ever not drop in their tracks/footprints?
I guess I have seen a couple flip onto their back with their feet up... but dang, I still think their body was on their tracks or very close!
The only time they don't "Drop in their tracks" is if you shoot them with anything other than a POS Tikka, Barnes, Vortex combo. Or if you don't read enough about how big game animals are supposed to die instantly with Barnes bullets.
"Dropped in their tracks" I consider humor, as I consider "Tack driver" as total complete humor.
The difference between guys that shoot Accubonds and most guys that shoot Barnes is?
People can slam the Accubond's and I could care less. A guy makes a remark that isn't positive towards a single Barnes bullet and the Barnes cult snivels like a bunch of snake bit Girl Scouts.
Post by: Wacenturion on December 29, 2014, 09:47:24 AM
http://www.soarraptors.org/Documents/CopperBulletStudy.pdf (http://www.soarraptors.org/Documents/CopperBulletStudy.pdf)
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 09:54:27 AM
Any bullet can fail. Every popular bullet make ever produced has failed. Sure, some have probably "failed" more often than others but it's usually the shooter to blame.
Too many hunters look at very small sample sizes to draw conclusions: "I shot a deer with brand x bullet and it was DRT"; "I shot an elk with brand y bullet and it ran off."
There are lots of bullets to choose from, with different performance characteristiscs. Choose the bullet you and your rifle like and go hunting.
Post by: mountainman on December 29, 2014, 10:04:55 AM
Shooters fail much more often than bullets do.Agreed Bob33. A hole in the right spot kills game. Period. An Accubond thru a deers nose is obviously less lethal than an FMJ through both lungs..
Any bullet can fail. Every popular bullet make ever produced has failed. Sure, some have probably "failed" more often than others but it's usually the shooter to blame.
Too many hunters look at very small sample sizes to draw conclusions: "I shot a deer with brand x bullet and it was DRT"; "I shot an elk with brand y bullet and it ran off."
There are lots of bullets to choose from, with different performance characteristiscs. Choose the bullet you and your rifle like and go hunting.
But this discussion is a yearly thing :) Nosler vs Barnes vs Hornady. Vs etc.......makes for fun reading on a winter's day! :chuckle:
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 10:19:00 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 10:27:48 AM
Google "accubond failure" and you get 477,000 hits. Google "TSX failure" and you get 478,000 hits.
There you go. Thanks Al.
Post by: predatorpro on December 29, 2014, 10:28:25 AM
Post by: The scout on December 29, 2014, 10:31:06 AM
Shooters fail much more often than bullets do.Agreed Bob33. A hole in the right spot kills game. Period. An Accubond thru a deers nose is obviously less lethal than an FMJ through both lungs..
Any bullet can fail. Every popular bullet make ever produced has failed. Sure, some have probably "failed" more often than others but it's usually the shooter to blame.
Too many hunters look at very small sample sizes to draw conclusions: "I shot a deer with brand x bullet and it was DRT"; "I shot an elk with brand y bullet and it ran off."
There are lots of bullets to choose from, with different performance characteristiscs. Choose the bullet you and your rifle like and go hunting.
But this discussion is a yearly thing :) Nosler vs Barnes vs Hornady. Vs etc.......makes for fun reading on a winter's day! :chuckle:
that's true unless said bullets are shot from a tikka with a piece of junk vortex :rolleyes:
Post by: magnanimous_j on December 29, 2014, 11:06:28 AM
Guy 1: “All-Clad are great pans”
Guy 2: “Yeah, if you’re on welfare or a migrant worker. You have to get Calphalon, .05% better heat retention, bro.”
Guy 3: “My brother-in-law went to college with a guy whose Calphalon exploded in his face. He looks like a sausage monster now. I would never let my kids near one.”
Guy 4: “Any pan in the world goes to crap when the cook frosts it with a cheap spatula!”
Guy 2: “ANY PAN CAN HAVE FAILURES! Google, “All-Clad turned my omelet into live snakes. 22k hits.”
Guy 5: “RON PAUL!”
Post by: Woodchuck on December 29, 2014, 11:09:33 AM
Post by: mountainman on December 29, 2014, 11:11:19 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 11:17:56 AM
Post by: VarmintVentilator on December 29, 2014, 11:32:48 AM
Quote
that's true unless said bullets are shot from a tikka with a piece of junk vortex
Hey I like Tikka's and junky Vortex. :chuckle:
Post by: predatorpro on December 29, 2014, 11:40:00 AM
:tup:Quotethat's true unless said bullets are shot from a tikka with a piece of junk vortex
Hey I like Tikka's and junky Vortex. :chuckle:
Post by: bearpaw on December 29, 2014, 03:32:19 PM
Just dropped a cow elk yesterday in her footprints at about 610 yards with 160 gr TTSX. Bullet went through the animal as usual.
160? Did you get the Lapua or is that from a 340?
It was a 340 and they are traveling at about 3450 fps. I am still experimenting with that idea I told you about, Barnes bullets performing better in lightweight bullets at high velocity for the caliber. I shot and the elk dropped without taking a step, same as the bear I told you about a year ago. The tough thing is that you rarely recover a Barnes bullet to look it over. Probably any bullet designed for big game would have killed the elk.
For the OP, I think there is a topic on this forum a year or so ago and the hunter was disappointed in the LRX, you will need to dig a little to find it. I have bought some and plan to use them eventually to see how they do.
Like many other hand loaders, I have most brands of bullets on my shelf, they will all kill when placed correctly. :tup:
Post by: RadSav on December 29, 2014, 06:00:31 PM
It was a 340 and they are traveling at about 3450 fps. I am still experimenting with that idea I told you about, Barnes bullets performing better in lightweight bullets at high velocity for the caliber. I shot and the elk dropped without taking a step, same as the bear I told you about a year ago. The tough thing is that you rarely recover a Barnes bullet to look it over. Probably any bullet designed for big game would have killed the elk.
Do you have an idea of what speed at target was? The ballisticians I have talked with all agree that Barnes is best above 2,600 fps. All agreed the TTSX gave more room for error but still drop rapidly in efficiency once you break the 2,400 mark.
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 06:17:28 PM
A .284" bullet that doubles in diameter would be a little over 1/2 inch. A bullet that doesn't expand at all would be .284". Punching a .284" hole in two lungs, along with the corresponding hydrostatic shock will kill most any big game animal.
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 06:24:21 PM
The rap against Barnes bullets is that they do not consistently expand.
A .284" bullet that doubles in diameter would be a little over 1/2 inch. A bullet that doesn't expand at all would be .284". Punching a .284" hole in two lungs, along with the corresponding hydrostatic shock will kill most any big game animal.
In that case just buy military surplus 7mm FMJ's in bulk and save yourself the fancy packing from Barnes. :tup:
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 29, 2014, 06:44:12 PM
The rap against Barnes bullets is that they do not consistently expand.
A .284" bullet that doubles in diameter would be a little over 1/2 inch. A bullet that doesn't expand at all would be .284". Punching a .284" hole in two lungs, along with the corresponding hydrostatic shock will kill most any big game animal.
In that case just buy military surplus 7mm FMJ's in bulk and save yourself the fancy packing from Barnes. :tup:
The pulled milsurp might be more accurate :dunno:
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 06:50:46 PM
If Barnes bullets never expanded that would make sense, but they do in the vast majority of instances.The rap against Barnes bullets is that they do not consistently expand.
A .284" bullet that doubles in diameter would be a little over 1/2 inch. A bullet that doesn't expand at all would be .284". Punching a .284" hole in two lungs, along with the corresponding hydrostatic shock will kill most any big game animal.
In that case just buy military surplus 7mm FMJ's in bulk and save yourself the fancy packing from Barnes. :tup:
Post by: kentrek on December 29, 2014, 07:00:54 PM
It was a 340 and they are traveling at about 3450 fps. I am still experimenting with that idea I told you about, Barnes bullets performing better in lightweight bullets at high velocity for the caliber. I shot and the elk dropped without taking a step, same as the bear I told you about a year ago. The tough thing is that you rarely recover a Barnes bullet to look it over. Probably any bullet designed for big game would have killed the elk.
Do you have an idea of what speed at target was? The ballisticians I have talked with all agree that Barnes is best above 2,600 fps. All agreed the TTSX gave more room for error but still drop rapidly in efficiency once you break the 2,400 mark.
I wonder if this is because the copper is more malleable an expands more rapidly creating more shock
It would be interesting to know how the temperature of each bullet affects performance
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 07:08:53 PM
It was a 340 and they are traveling at about 3450 fps. I am still experimenting with that idea I told you about, Barnes bullets performing better in lightweight bullets at high velocity for the caliber. I shot and the elk dropped without taking a step, same as the bear I told you about a year ago. The tough thing is that you rarely recover a Barnes bullet to look it over. Probably any bullet designed for big game would have killed the elk.
Do you have an idea of what speed at target was? The ballisticians I have talked with all agree that Barnes is best above 2,600 fps. All agreed the TTSX gave more room for error but still drop rapidly in efficiency once you break the 2,400 mark.
I wonder if this is because the copper is more malleable an expands more rapidly creating more shock
It would be interesting to know how the temperature of each bullet affects performance
I would think that temperature would have something to do with it.
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 29, 2014, 07:14:05 PM
Post by: RadSav on December 29, 2014, 07:47:03 PM
I don't see temperature of a Barnes at varying velocities making much of a difference in it's performance :dunno:
Also, a .284 diameter bullet that does not expand is producing VERY little hydrostatic shock below 2,600 fps. You have to transfer energy to create hydrostatic shock. Without bullet expansion that is extremely hard to accomplish. Hard to accomplish below 2,200 fps even if the bullet does expand rather rapidly.
Post by: kentrek on December 29, 2014, 08:04:56 PM
Dang...is it September yet :chuckle:
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 08:13:30 PM
I would think that the heat created from powder burning, friction of the barrel & friction of the air would be enough to make the copper soft which would speed up the expansion process of the barns, thus more shock...but who knows
Dang...is it September yet :chuckle:
Sounds like serious sales hype on a failed design and the readers buy into it. I could understand using a Barnes bullet for super fast light weight , smaller diameter bullets. Let's say a .257 Weatherby. The heavy bullet construction of the Barnes and the speed of the big magnum pushing it may make it perform.
Guys in the "Know", know when it comes to taking game. Speed makes up for mass to a certain point. Then it's like a "Big Block" no replacement for displacement.
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2014, 08:32:52 PM
"I've seen every premium bullet and a pile of different brands calibers and weights of standard cup and core bullets used in my career. After all this time and all this experience one thing stands out for me. You cannot expect a perfect mushroom at extended ranges and still have the same projectile remain in one piece at 50 meters. That's a very tall order!
With that said the premium bullets manage this at various levels better then cup and core bullets. So what do you choose? Well you must choose the bullet that matches the range and the game. Shooting a TSX at a small species of deer under 100 meters is not your best option. Shooting a Ballistic tip at the 3200plus FPS range at under 100 meters on larger big game also not the best choice.
Consider what your after and the conditions to match what you're launching. Otherwise all this banter about failure or perfection is a waste of time. Use the right tool for the job. Anytime you have a all purpose tool you sacrifice performance at one end of the scale or the other.
Having said this, with my business in Africa, I will say that you never know what is going to show up where, or how big it will be. So preperation for the worst case scenerio is prudent. After seeing dozens if not hundreds of different bullets, loads, cartriges, and in many calibers. There is one bullet that stands out as fail proof and as functional as possible at this point in time. That is the TSX bullet. It's not the best bullet for every situation, but it's the closest to a perfect comprimise as you will find. Even in the worst case situation if it fails to open, it reamins a solid that will out penetrate anything else made today for hunting. So if your aim is true, you will poke a hole clean through the intended target/organ of choice.
You will normally get two holes in the animal, and normally find it dead in short order. There are always exceptions to these things, only a fool would argue that. I've seen some screwy performance from all kinds of bullets, the TSX included. However the most consistant lethal performance remains the TSX.
Also remeber that I was likely the single biggest detractor of the original X bullet on the internet from a PH's standpoint for many years. I would not use one of the original X bullets if they were given to me for free. This TSX is a much different product.
As it stands right now, my loaner rifles are shooting TSX bullets in Africa. I can use any bullet I want, and load any way I see fit. With all the options available to me, the TSX is still the most consistantly lethal bullet I have seen in the last 1000 plus big game animals shot with it in my camps.
When somebody shoots or sees shot that many big to huge animals the resolution of performance begins to appear a bit more in focus. Seeing a dozen or two animals is a good start. But hundreds and maybe 1000's of 200-2000 lb animals killed really sharpens your opinion!
There are lots of opinions, and we need all the MFG's we have today producing ammo. I don't want to see a monopoly with one bullet maker in control. However as a professional in a position of experience with these matters, You can see my choice, and what I based it on. Your mileage may vary, choose wisely!
As far as my opinion for various sized game or cartridges......... I've written this before both in print and on this site. I'll go from memory here so if one of you clever guys find it in another post and it's not dead on the money it should be very close. From my expereince with various ammo, I have this opinion to share:
For guns 30 caliber to 8mm in standard cartridges under 3000fps MV I like the Hornady Interbond very much on non-DG under 400 pounds. When the game is getting bigger or can fight back requiring bone crunching impacts at close range, I strongly prefer the TSX.
When the same conditions are met but using rifles shooting over 3000fps the Swift Aframe is a very hard bullet to beat. I think I have seen more shuddering and stunning game stopping impacts with this combination then just about anything else. Same thoughts for DG though, I pick the TSX again
With calibers over 8mm on smaller species of game as above the Swift Aframe, and the Hornady Interbond, and many other bonded bullets, except the NF are very good. The NF is very hard and does not open like the others do when shot from a slower rifle, or on smaller game.
On bigger game the NF is a perfect fit as are the others along with the TSX. As game increases in size to the 1000 lb mark the TSX starts to pull away again. I can say without hesitation that the 270 grain Aframe in the 375HH has provided some of the most spectacular shuddering and stunning kills I have ever witnessed.
One thing to point out here for you folks. As a PH I have the opportunity to see game hit that the hunter does not. His vision is greatly disrupted through recoil, while I am watching through field glasses. I've learned far more about bullet performance and impact watching game shot then I could have ever hoped to learn as a shooter.
There is also a stunning difference between the 300 grain bullet at 2500 and the 270 grain at 2800. The 300fps trumps the 30 grains of weight 100% of the time on every single animal I have ever seen shot with both. The 270 grain at 2800 has consistantly penetrated further on both Eland and Buffalo then the 300 grain bullet does. There is a spectacular difference in results between the two. Dropping down a weight class to increase velocity with a bullet that retains 100% of its weight is a winning combination just about every time!
Sectional density may have played a roll in history, but it's not a functional measure today when comparing a 300 grain Cup and core bullet to a 270 grain monolithic copper bullet. That copper bullet may start out lower in SD but it's not changing at anywhere near the rate that the crumpling lead and jacket shedding cup and core bullet does! The recovered SD of the monolithic bullet will be greater then the recovered SD of the soft pointed jacketed bullet In every case I have ever seen.
All bonded bullets are not the same. The Interbond I think has been the softest and easiest to expand of all I have used. It's a tremendous killer of big game when sized properly and driven to a prudent speed. The North Fork is the opposite end of the scale it's very firm, actually hard with a thick jacket compared to the Interbond.
The Aframe, Woodleigh and Accubond seem to split the difference and maybe have it about right for the "all around" use crowd. I guess I don't see the need for a bonded design as hard as the NF. I would just use the TSX and get the higher percentage exits. If I want something for smaller game, I'll use the Aframe or Interbond which open better at a greater distance and still hold together great.
There is one other issue at hand that many people don't figure into the formula of their choice. There is so much debate and stress over what is best. We don't always get to decide this! Our rifle makes the final decision for us. Not every rifle will shoot all the bullets accurately or consistantly, or without excessive fouling. Each bullet has just enough difference in construction that they must be proofed at the bench to determine the final decision. I have had rifles that would not shoot the original X bullet without massive and un-usable fouling. I have had a barrel that would shoot 4-5 hole touching shots with the Interbond and then send one out into never never land. Yet both these rifles would shoot the Aframe and TSX all day as much as you please with stunning accuracy. In another rifle, of a friend would not shoot the Aframe at all. I worked on that for months and finally gave up. Yet it would shoot Failsafe, Woodleigh, and the original X bullets with perfection.
I'm at the point now that if I had a rifle that would not shoot the TSX bullets just right I would strongly consider getting a new barrel. It's no longer about the gun being the decision maker to me. It's about using what I know has the track record to give me confidence to go hunting.
After all, when it's all said and done, your going to unleash this little projectile at about 3000 fps and that is the only thing that ties your hopes and dreams of a successful hunt together. Not the 3000 dollar custom rifle and scope, the goretex camo gear, the 4X4, the ATV, the field glasses, nothing but that little chunk of metal traveling away at about 3000 fps towards your trophy. Feel lucky?
Let me put this into a story perspective here. I have a hunter( this has happened a lot of times) We see the game and he makes the shot. At the instant of the booming report of the gun the animals takes several big leaps and is out of sight. This happens in a fraction of a second. He then turns to me and says, I know I hit that thing good. We stand just a couple feet apart, so close I could feel the pressure of the muzzle blast on my cheeks. He is staring at me...... blank..... waiting for some evaluation of what went wrong or what do we do now. I have to say to him, How did the shot feel? what do you think?
We have to walk that 100-150 yards to the location the animal was last seen. We see tracks and follow the direction. With the other 20 animals there with him the spoor becomes complicated and messy. After going down several possible escape routes through the bush, we find a spot of blood, not much but at least we know it's a hit.
Up to that instant there was really no indication of a hit with the TSX bullet. That's a feature I could live without. However the only way to solve that in my mind is less penetration and being stopped under the skin.
In nearly every case the animal is just a short distance beyond the first few drops of blood, some follow ups are more entertaining then others, but they have........ at least up til now been successful. The few that have been lost are shooter errors. In the last two seasons less then 5 animals have been lost and all have proven to be shooter error, as stated by the hunter themself.
With a bonded core bullet, you choose the type. There is a reaction to the impact much of the time. It's audible as well. I have heard the bullets impact the game as often as I have seen them shudder and stagger the instant of impact. This is certainly not 100% of the time, but quite frequent. With the TSX being the exact opposite ratio of visual impact unless shoulders or CNS hits are made.
How many here have heard the impact of a bullet into an animal? Its unmistakeable. How many here have seen the streak of the bullet with the sun glaring off of it as it travels towards the animal? These are things you don't see every time, but it's awfully impressive when you do.
So what about that DG issue? It's much more to do with placement then bullet design. Either way your gonna break something if you hit the drive train. I feel strongly that the TSX will break bones and continue going straight ahead. I'm somewhat less confident that a bonded core bullet will travel true once badly deformed and mushroomed.
After all the TSX is really an expanding solid right? For the folks that seem to debate what to use on DG first a soft then the rest of the magazine solids? I say that is very old school. Stack the magazine with both at the same time, fill it with the TSX and be done with that debate!"
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 29, 2014, 08:35:53 PM
Post by: mountainman on December 29, 2014, 08:56:18 PM
Post by: RadSav on December 29, 2014, 10:32:21 PM
It was a 340 and they are traveling at about 3450 fps.
I punched some numbers into the calculator and it looks like you would have been about 1,850 fps at 610 yards. Did you hit bone or heavy meat areas? That is even slow for a bonded bullet on a behind the shoulder shot!
That would be 42 clicks on my scope...good shooting :tup:
Post by: Wacenturion on December 29, 2014, 11:01:03 PM
Post by: RadSav on December 30, 2014, 02:32:27 AM
Good read Bob33. And considering American game is the same size as African game, other then shouldered farther back on some African game, will hold true here in the states..
However, what was your average shooting distance in Africa? Many of the guys I know that have gone over there say the guides ABSOLUTELY will not allow a shot over 200 yards. Notice where the PH says, "We have to walk that 100-150 yards to the location the animal was last seen..." Barnes would be my choice the majority of the time if all my bear shots were under 150 yards. Add 50 yards and it would be a toss up between Barnes and Bonded Core bullets. Not sure that would be the case if 30% or even 25% of my shots were reaching out beyond 350 yards. And we all know how many western hunters can shoot sub MOA at 1,000 yards these days :chuckle: NOT!!
I agree with that PH about the original X bullet being completely different to the newer Barnes. IMO the TTSX is a completely different animal! I watched Barnes testers with the original shooting goats in CA. It was a horrible exhibition to put it mildly. Even at 100 yards it was hard to watch those small animals being hit five or six times and still running off a cliff to die in the fall. The few antelope (similar in size) that I have witnessed shot at distances close to 300 yards with the TTSX have been much better kills. Even spectacular when range has been close and muzzle velocity magnum fast!
Longrange Barnes seems an oxymoron to me. Bearpaw has a lot more faith than I do with Barnes at distance, apparently. Even with a muzzle velocity of 3450 and a high BC (which none of them really have) I'm not sure I'm brave enough to take a 400+ yard shot with the Barnes. 610 yards, I'd probably be too scared of failure to even hit what I was aiming at. Not even sure I'd take that shot with an Accubond!
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 30, 2014, 07:29:34 AM
I shot a Mulie buck facing me head on with a 260gr .375 diameter Accubond leaving the muzzle at 3050fps. Launched from a .375 Ultra Magnum at a range of 560 yards. Impact velocity was around 2000 FPS. From what was advertised that was within the claimed expansion threshold for the Accubond. The bullet penetrated from a center of the chest head on hit , it traveled the length of the deer and was found just on th under side of the hide on the belly just ahead of the pelvic bone. The bullet performed perfectly, rolled that buck off his feet and the hit sounded like you were slapping Rosannne Bar on the Azz with a canoe paddle!
The releasing of .375 260gr Accubond bullet was a welcome ordeal for me due to the fact the older 260gr Ballistic Tip was not designed for Ultra Magnum velocities and I had expirienced some messy hits on Mule Deer with them. So I shot the Hornady 300gr Spire Point until the arrival of the Accubond. The 300gr Hornadys worked amazingly well on elk and bear.
Here's a few pics I took of the bullet and its recovery since the bullets were new to the market back then. I can't say I would even remotely have the same confidence with a Barnes as I do with a Accubond at those distances or impact velocities.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FDSC01103_zps143c6514.jpg&hash=afeda756ed46a951d4c0be63d52fc2b460a749d5)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FDSC01094_zps097e7e89.jpg&hash=05f7d0e7c2b6521681b4668686f01c48bd7a0dc5) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/DSC01094_zps097e7e89.jpg.html)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FDSC01096_zpsf5d776fc.jpg&hash=ad0ea52c55b5c4b2a63a042980d1ec9a34e5f3e2) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/DSC01096_zpsf5d776fc.jpg.html)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FDSC01099_zps36344eed.jpg&hash=c486b4a69ffe7a1b785cf831e198056fabb63078) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/DSC01099_zps36344eed.jpg.html)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2FDSC01088_zps4779b612.jpg&hash=22091ac7992688323e228fba39b7168acbb190c9) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/DSC01088_zps4779b612.jpg.html)
Post by: mountainman on December 30, 2014, 08:23:20 AM
Good read Bob33. And considering American game is the same size as African game, other then shouldered farther back on some African game, will hold true here in the states..
However, what was your average shooting distance in Africa?
Shortest was 150 on a Kudu, longest was 475 on a blue wildebeest. At 308 velocities, bullets performed flawlessly! Yes, other bullets would have done the same, but in my XCR, the Barnes was a quarter minute round :) Yes, say" Barnes", and some bust a corpusle, and expound their vendetta for whatever reason, but real world experience don't lie... :). To the OP, you can have every faith in your bullet, as long as it shoots accuratley in your gun! :tup:
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 30, 2014, 09:50:42 AM
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 30, 2014, 09:58:26 AM
375 Ultra Mag for deer?
Yeah, figured it was better suited to Mulies and gave me more range than the .450 Ultra Magnum. :o . For the ease of a factory chambering and a true flat shooting across the board power house, the .338 Ultra mag is where it's at.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2Fphoto1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg&hash=5b212fcde4623a04acb6ac1c6c1d10d464138da6) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/photo1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg.html)
Post by: RadSav on December 30, 2014, 03:29:39 PM
Good read Bob33. And considering American game is the same size as African game, other then shouldered farther back on some African game, will hold true here in the states..
However, what was your average shooting distance in Africa?
Shortest was 150 on a Kudu, longest was 475 on a blue wildebeest. At 308 velocities, bullets performed flawlessly! Yes, other bullets would have done the same, but in my XCR, the Barnes was a quarter minute round :) Yes, say" Barnes", and some bust a corpusle, and expound their vendetta for whatever reason, but real world experience don't lie... :). To the OP, you can have every faith in your bullet, as long as it shoots accuratley in your gun! :tup:
Wow! Never before heard of shooting those distances in Africa. That is very interesting. What outfit did you book with?
308 Norma, maybe :chuckle:
Post by: predatorpro on December 30, 2014, 04:28:07 PM
Post by: Bob33 on December 30, 2014, 04:35:47 PM
Post by: RadSav on December 30, 2014, 05:00:46 PM
I think that is why the Nosler Partition has remain so popular for so many years. It may be a flying brick in comparison to long range bullets of today, but it has always been the bullet of maximum compromise to many.
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 30, 2014, 05:40:15 PM
Post by: predatorpro on December 30, 2014, 06:41:06 PM
An exit hole creates another opportunity for a blood trail. In open terrain that is meaningless but in brushy conditions it can aid in animal tracking.hmmm....valid point...but a bullet that does massive internal damage in an animal will probly not need tracked...i guess we can agree to disagree on bullets...lol
Post by: Bob33 on December 30, 2014, 07:03:01 PM
Ive lost animals in Western Washington that went 20 yards (found the next day). BTW I have nothing against Accubonds and have used them with good success.An exit hole creates another opportunity for a blood trail. In open terrain that is meaningless but in brushy conditions it can aid in animal tracking.hmmm....valid point...but a bullet that does massive internal damage in an animal will probly not need tracked...i guess we can agree to disagree on bullets...lol
Post by: Biggerhammer on December 30, 2014, 09:13:48 PM
Not for me , I like them but depending on what and where I hunt. I've been know to slum bullets effectivly that most Barnes shooters would turn their nose up to. I think the confusion comes when people try to chooose a bullet to do it all. That just isn't going to happen.
Accubonds do it all "Good" but aren't the "Best" at anything particular and that has worked for me. Besides I've been a die hard Nosler bullet guy forever and that's where my loyalties are. Just another great bullet from a great bullet maker. There was a long period of years there that no matter where I was, or what I was hunting. A Remington 700 BDL with a box mag full of 175gr Partitions covered it all. It was so much simpler then. I guess it's what we make it.
Post by: kentrek on December 30, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
It was so much simpler then. I guess it's what we make it.
Agreed :tup:
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on December 31, 2014, 02:52:07 PM
Post by: mountainman on December 31, 2014, 05:53:46 PM
Post by: thinkingman on January 01, 2015, 10:57:46 AM
375 Ultra Mag for deer?
Yeah, figured it was better suited to Mulies and gave me more range than the .450 Ultra Magnum. :o . For the ease of a factory chambering and a true flat shooting across the board power house, the .338 Ultra mag is where it's at.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2Fphoto1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg&hash=5b212fcde4623a04acb6ac1c6c1d10d464138da6) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/photo1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg.html)
30mm depleted uranium on cous deer.
88mm on elk, for sure.
Post by: mountainman on January 01, 2015, 01:02:11 PM
Post by: Biggerhammer on January 01, 2015, 01:09:11 PM
375 Ultra Mag for deer?
Yeah, figured it was better suited to Mulies and gave me more range than the .450 Ultra Magnum. :o . For the ease of a factory chambering and a true flat shooting across the board power house, the .338 Ultra mag is where it's at.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2Fphoto1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg&hash=5b212fcde4623a04acb6ac1c6c1d10d464138da6) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/photo1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg.html)
30mm depleted uranium on cous deer.
88mm on elk, for sure.
You wouldn't happen to have some depleted Uranium? :o If so, how much can you fit in a flat rate USPS "Small" box? :tup:
Post by: jackelope on January 01, 2015, 01:11:00 PM
Do animals ever not drop in their tracks/footprints?
Only with crappy bullets fired from non-tackdrivers.
Post by: Biggerhammer on January 01, 2015, 01:14:00 PM
Do animals ever not drop in their tracks/footprints?
Only with crappy bullets fired from non-tackdrivers.
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: jay.sharkbait on January 01, 2015, 07:09:12 PM
375 Ultra Mag for deer?
Yeah, figured it was better suited to Mulies and gave me more range than the .450 Ultra Magnum. :o . For the ease of a factory chambering and a true flat shooting across the board power house, the .338 Ultra mag is where it's at.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi90.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk269%2Flandonmoses%2Fphoto1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg&hash=5b212fcde4623a04acb6ac1c6c1d10d464138da6) (http://s90.photobucket.com/user/landonmoses/media/photo1-14_zpsc4ebf336.jpg.html)
30mm depleted uranium on cous deer.
88mm on elk, for sure.
You wouldn't happen to have some depleted Uranium? :o If so, how much can you fit in a flat rate USPS "Small" box? :tup:
Looking up feeds and speeds for depleted Uranium is one way to get peoples attention....... :chuckle: