130 gr TTSX

Gatehouse

Gatehouse

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
145   0   0
Location
Pemberton BC
I did a head to head test of a few bullets today, fired from my 300WSM into dry paper at 30 yards.

Before we get people lining up to tell me the test wasn't scientific, doesn't properly simulate animal flesh, isn't done at various distances etc etc.....

...I'll tell you it isn't scientific. I only shot one bullet of each type. And it doesn't simulate animal flesh, nor is it designed to. And I dont' care what it will do at different distances, since I know it will open as far as I can shoot. So, if you want to use wet paper, bullet tubes, gelatin-whatever- and you want to spend days loading to different velocities, trying numerous combinations to get some hard scientific data, please do. (And if you are willing to pay me to do it, I'l do it for you.;)) So save the "what you need to do is this" speech,as I was just having a bit of fun this afternoon...:p:D

What I want to do is compare one bullet of known value to an unknown. I already know what a 180gr TSX, a 180gr Nosler Partition and a 180gr Hornady does when fired at game, so I wanted to see how a bullet much smaller holds up. (I also had some 180gr Failsafe factory ammo from several years ago and tried that too, but I don't think I ever shot an animal with a 180gr FS)


Dry paper really stresses a bullet, it's harder than wet paper and will tear weaker bullets apart. Specifically, I wanted to see what the 130gr TTSX does when it's stressed to the max!!:)

We had:
130gr Tipped Tripe Shock X bullet @ 3525 fps

180gr TSX @ 2970 fps

180 gr Partition @ 2950 fps

180 gr Hornady @ 2825 FPS

180 gr Fail Safe @ 2987FPS


Here is about an inch in.

n526315515_1368538_3627.jpg


CLockwise form top right at 130 TTSX, 180 NP, 180 TSX, 180 HI, 180 FS.

All the bullets have started to open up a bit but are far from full expansion. The Fail Safe leaves the smallest wound channel.

Here we are about half way through the bullets journey. They are all expanded, and the 130gr TTSX is actually making the biggest wound channel, and the FS the smallest, although it 's a bit hard to see from the photo.


n526315515_1368397_9852.jpg






This is just before the end. All bullets have expanded as much as they are ever going to, the NP has lost it's front half, and the Hornady is mangled wreckage. The Hornady penetrates this newspaper and goes no further, stopping at the next layer.


n526315515_1368537_6560.jpg
 
Last edited:
Still playing mad scientist (ballistic tech), eh Gate ;) You've got me thinking about trying a 185gr TSX load in the .338/06 that Rocky Mtn Rifles (Corlane's) is building for me as I type :dancingbanana:
 
n526315515_1368540_8380.jpg




From left to right we have:

180gr TSX
16" penetration
179.7gr retained

180gr FS
16.25" penetration
173.2gr retained (Although a petal broke off and was with the bullet, but I lost it before I weighed it)

130gr TTSX
15.75" penetration
129.6gr retained

180gr NP
15.5" penetration
121.6gr retained

180gr Hornady Interlock
14.25" penetration
124.9 gr retained


n526315515_1368539_4782.jpg


So, we see the FS penetrated the most, with less expansion.

The Hornady proved that heavy bullets at moderate weight will still penetrate well, although the Hornady was mangled in the end, and may not have stood up at higher speeds.

The NP did what they often do when stressed- shed the front and leave the rear to penetrate deeply.

The 2 TSX bullets penetrated about the same, although the 130gr expanded larger due to higher velocity.

I'd still use the 180gr TSX if I was going to use my 300WSM on a grizzly hunt, but I think the 130gr TTSX should do very well as a general purpose load. Going at 3500 FPS, you won't even have to think abotu elevation correction to about 400 yards, I bet. (Although i haven't crunched numbers yet):)
 
This actually tells a lot.

That 130-grain bullet at 3,500 held together at that impact velocity through that brutal test medium, and it penetrated basically the same as the 180. If ever there was proof that you can get away with lighter bullets in the TSX, this is it.

Thanks, Clarke. And if your bear experience proves anything, then this load is a serious killer, too.
 
Numbers:

The Barnes 130 gr TTSX @ 3500 fps has a +/- 3" point blank range of 330 yards (282 yard zero). Drop at 400 yards is 10 inches, at 500 yards it is -25 inches.

In comparison, the Barnes 180 gr TSX @ 2970 fps has a +/- 3" point blank range of 292 yards (250 yard zero), drop at 400 yards is 16" & drop at 500 yards would be -35"
 
Awesome experiment Gates..i used to do those as a kid shooting into trees hahah took me ages to cut them out with an axe...this is the way to do it those barnes bullets are sweet.
 
And, from the look of all those bullets you'd be butchering a critter, most any critter, after you drove any of those bullets through the shoulders.
 
Gatehouse said:
[

The NP did what they often do when stressed- shed the front and leave the rear to penetrate deeply.
Click to expand...

The shedding or fragging of the front portion of the NP isn't an undesirable trait. Nosler studies show that the shedding greatly increases both the width and length of the permanent wound cavity and accelerates blood loss.
 
Interesting stuff Gate. This supports the contention that the 130 grs TSX when used at normal hunting ranges may very well match the performance of the 165's and 180's TSX's as the higher impact velocity of the light bullet makes up for the greater mass of the heavier bullet. The length to expanded diameter ratio of the recovered 130 actually appears to be better balanced than the long shanked heavier bullets. Being of the heavy bullet-moderate velocity club this is a bitter pill to swallow, but I take comfort in the fact that I believe it applies only to expanding mono-metal bullets. Anybody want to swap a couple of boxes of 180 gr TSX for 130's?::eek:
 
I'm starting to think that the 180gr's TSX and larger should only be used in 300 RUM's 30-378 WBY etc. The 180gr expanded well, penetrated well, but the 130 expanded more and penetrated almost as deep.

What's the point of all that extra shank if it doesn't do much?:p
 
Clarke,

That was quite an interesting test. I have found some 130TSX's that I want to try in my 300WM and I am confident (now) that they will hold together and get the job done.

You posted the drop at 400 and 500 yards, but I am curious, what would the wind drift be on the 130gr vs 165gr or 180gr? Does your software calculate wind drift? Just curious. It would be nice to get an idea of what kind of a drift to expect on some of the high elevation plateaus that might have a 20 or 30 mph wind.

James
 
What on the thoughts of this majorly higher velocity lighter bullet and the hydrolicing of the meat that is going to occur from the high velocity?

I do see this would be a great sheep/goat bullet cause you wouldn't have to pack much edible meat out after the shot because there wouldn't be much left that you could eat.

I love empty spaces... :p
 
Boomer said:
Interesting stuff Gate. This supports the contention that the 130 grs TSX when used at normal hunting ranges may very well match the performance of the 165's and 180's TSX's as the higher impact velocity of the light bullet makes up for the greater mass of the heavier bullet. The length to expanded diameter ratio of the recovered 130 actually appears to be better balanced than the long shanked heavier bullets. Being of the heavy bullet-moderate velocity club this is a bitter pill to swallow, but I take comfort in the fact that I believe it applies only to expanding mono-metal bullets. Anybody want to swap a couple of boxes of 180 gr TSX for 130's?::eek:
Click to expand...

It sure tosses SD out the window in this case don't it?
 
One factor that may or may not be important is the downrange energy difference between the 130 and 180 grain bullets.
180 grain @ 2970 FPS = 3525 ft/lbs energy at the muzzle
130 grain @ 3525 FPS = 3586 ft/lbs energy at the muzzle.
What is missing is what the downrange velocities are to calculate kinetic energy downrange.
Extreme velocity may be a replacement for mass sectional density and frontal area ??
 
I like the results Gatehouse. The bullets did what one would expect them to, in terms of penetration, expansion, and weight retention. Now when am I going to get the 270 WSM and the 110gr TTSX's Bartell?:wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom