120 ttsx in 7mm08..big game

Lefty #### said:
It’ll ruin an elk or moose’s life if you put one of those TTSX’s through their lungs, betchya if ya mess up and catch a bit of shoulder on the way in, it still will give them misery for the rest of their lives.

It’s a monolithic bullet that will retain at least 90% or better of its original bullet weight. 90% of 120 grains, equals 108 grains.

While the much flaunted Nosler Partition bullets is designed to maintain about 65% of its original bullet weight. So if you take 65% of 160 grains you get 104 grains!?!?!

Now with the 120’s having a muzzle velocity of 3000 FPS, you get a resultant 200 yard energy of almost 1700 ft lbs. and won’t go below the minimum expansion velocity for decent expansion till around 425 yds.
With a zero set 2” high at 100 yds you’ll have the bullet drop just shy of 6” at 300 yds.

With the 160 Partition leaving at say 2600 FPS, you’ll get a whopping 100 more foot pounds at 200 yds. And by 300 yds you’ve pretty much dropped below the designed minimum expansion velocity for this bullet.
Setting up for the same 2” high at 100 yds your drop at 300 yds would be 10” low.


Run them with confidence.
Click to expand...


When you compare percentages, that really puts it into perspective. Thanks. Ideally a 300 yard zero would take a lot of guess work out and still okay for closer shots.
 
OP, I've had the same question in principle as you have. My concerns about not enough speed to expand is what made me develop something different. What I consider bullet "lack" of performance from regular cup and cores when first started reloading to bonded in 7-08 for my son and myself. Bonded bullets are doing the trick on deer quite well when we do our part.

To satisfy my need to try mono's I have Federal trophy bonded loaded and ready just for myself. From my interpretation, it the closest thing to a mix of more copper jacket and base to bonded lead but somehow different than a Bear Claw. I haven't sectioned one, preferring let field results speak for themselves. They are 140 grain in .284 and 160 grain.

Can't dispute what RJ or Kelly are indicating from their camps. :d



remington jim said:
Swift Scirocco 11 's are Bonded ! Very TUFF bullet but i never get them to shoot as well as Nosler Accubonds ! RJ
Click to expand...

Kelly Timoffee said:
They are fussy, they like a jump, but when they do shoot they shoot.
Click to expand...
 






These are the kinds of examples as to why I don't use the Barnes bullets, don't get me wrong , they are shooters and I load them for others I just don't like the failures I know about from others.
 
No problem shooting anything with those but the distance is critical.... They need the speed to open, if they don't open it's like a FMJ !!!

I wouldn't go past 200y to be safe !

They copper foul the barrel very quick too !
 
120gr TTSX @ 2910 fps, 300y. One and done

sMKFqyB.jpg
 
Kelly Timoffee said:






These are the kinds of examples as to why I don't use the Barnes bullets, don't get me wrong , they are shooters and I load them for others I just don't like the failures I know about from others.
Click to expand...

Looking at these bullets they appear to be heavy for caliber bullets. That there is your nemesis.
Loose a minimum of 25% in bullet weight, and watch things die with Barnes bullets. Old dyed in the wool traditionalists haven’t learned to except the lighter may be better principle of a bullet that retains nearly all its bullet weight.

Barnes even talks to this in its information about their bullets, but let’s face it nobody reads the instructions before operating anything.

Barnes recommends a minimum impact velocity of around 2000 FPS. Compared to most lead and jacket bullets having minimum impact velocities of around 1600-1800 FPS.

How do you maintain such high impact velocities? By running lighter bullets! I’ve discussed the math side in my earlier post about retained weight so I won’t re-hash that here.

I can say that in my way back machine I put 100 grain 0.277” Barnes X (originals) head to head against 130 gr, Nosler Partitions of the same diameter. I loaded them to achieve nearly the same impact energies at the test distance. The test media was as near to identical arrays of phone books and mail order catalogues, soaked in the bath tub over night, with a couple inserts of OSB about 1” from the entrance side.
Wouldn’t you know it the 100gr X bullets penetrated just a smidge better, retained more weight, and expanded slightly larger in diameter than the 130gr Paritions!
Whodathunkit!
 
Last edited:
Kelly Timoffee said:






These are the kinds of examples as to why I don't use the Barnes bullets, don't get me wrong , they are shooters and I load them for others I just don't like the failures I know about from others.
Click to expand...

Not sure where those pics are from or the story behind them, but that second picture with the three bullets is not a pic of TSX/TTSX bullets. The bottom pic looks like the type of performance I get. I've shot a wild boar, a whitetail, a moose and a bear and have been very impressed with the performance. I'm shooting 130 TSX out of a 270 win at 3050. I also have 120 TTSX loaded to 3100 in my wifes 7mm-08 which have been untested to this point.
 
I think the monometals are good choices when velocities are kept up a bit [read: lighter bullets at higher MVs]
Someone mentioned the Swift Scirocco IIs. These are great bullets on game, but can be a bit fussier to get to
shoot well.
They usually need a bit of a jump. I have one custom 308 Norma with a McGowen barrel that loves the 180
Scirocco II. Groups are sub-moa out to 500 meters. I shot a moose with one 3 years ago, and I was impressed
with the performance. Retained a lot of it's original weight. [152 grains = almost 85%] Picture below. Dave.
l8w0Pe1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom