130 gr TTSX

[GSoD]

Great results. I've been having a heck of a time getting a good load for a 180grain ###'s out of my .308 for my moose hunt this fall.

I was thinking of going to the 168's. Which should be nicer for my 1:12 twist. This now helps alay my concerns it would be too light for moose.

 

[todbartell]

What is missing is what the downrange velocities are to calculate kinetic energy downrange

The 130 TTSX lands with about 250 ftlbs less energy than a 180 gr TSX @ 400y. Impact energy may be a moot point

Great results. I've been having a heck of a time getting a good load for a 180grain ###'s out of my .308 for my moose hunt this fall.

I was thinking of going to the 168's. Which should be nicer for my 1:12 twist. This now helps alay my concerns it would be too light for moose.

Personally I would go straight to the 150 grain TTSX or TSX or new Nosler E-Tip in the 308 Win

 

[Republic of Alberta]

Or shoot a 165 partiton and be done with it.

 

[Camp Cook]

Interesting I haven't heard of the Nosler E-Tips until now...

Here is the link to Nosler's E-Tip page tp://www.nosler.com/index.php?p=11&b=5&s=140 add an ht to the front of the address.

The price isn't all that bad either...

I have never been able to get long range accuracy with any of the Barnes X or TSX bullets I have tried maybe these are the answer?

My latest trials were with my 270 Weatherby using 140gr TSX BT's was getting awesome cloverleaf groups at 100 yards but it started to spread out to over a foot @ 300 yards.

In other words the 130gr TTSX looks/sounds good up close but can you get it to group out to the longer distances that you guys are quoting figures for.

I'm curious does anyone else have this problem with Barnes bullets?

 

[Noel]

Thanks for posting the test Gatehouse. I'm actually impressed how well the old Hornady Interlock held up considering the test.

Going with the 130gr would appear to make more sense. Only thing left would be which weight grouped better in the specific rifle.

FWIW in the 338-06 and 338 Win Mag we did tests with the 160 X and 210 X and they did scream. Both were out of RKS barrels with a 1-10" twist.
More often than not the first two would make an oblong hole at 100 paces and the third was almost always a flyer 1 1/4" high and to the right or left with no rythym to speak of.

Was at the range two weekends ago and found a couple TSX's in the dirt behind the 100yd pile. First one was opened up just like Gate's pics but the second was bent over like an FMJ, not expanded at all. I was quite suprised as I thought that kind of performance was left with the old X bullet design.

 

[MTM]

TSXs

Interesting I haven't heard of the Nosler E-Tips until now...

Here is the link to Nosler's E-Tip page tp://www.nosler.com/index.php?p=11&b=5&s=140 add an ht to the front of the address.

The price isn't all that bad either...

I have never been able to get long range accuracy with any of the Barnes X or TSX bullets I have tried maybe these are the answer?

My latest trials were with my 270 Weatherby using 140gr TSX BT's was getting awesome cloverleaf groups at 100 yards but it started to spread out to over a foot @ 300 yards.

In other words the 130gr TTSX looks/sounds good up close but can you get it to group out to the longer distances that you guys are quoting figures for.

I'm curious does anyone else have this problem with Barnes bullets?

I've had extremely good luck with the 160/7mm TSX and the 210/338 TSX at long range. The 7mm has shot several groups at 300 yds under 2" out of my STW. The 210 would go about 3" at 300 out of my 338/378.

 

[Omega]

I've had only mediocre accuracy with Barnes bullets. But I do have a bunch of MRX, TST and TTX along with Nosler E-Tip on the way to test. The E-Tip shot well at the range in Vegas but that wasn't much of a test.

 

[Gatehouse]

Iv'e had nothing but good luck with TSX bullets at 300 yards, the longest I'v shot groups at, using 300 WSM, 7RM and 223. I shot a deer last year at 383 yards, hit the brisket and went end to end. Not sure of the group size at that range, but it was good enough to kill a deer, and I suppose that is what counts.

 

[Gatehouse]

]

Thanks for posting the test Gatehouse. I'm actually impressed how well the old Hornady Interlock held up considering the test.

Teh Hornady is going at 30-06 velocities. Ramp that up to 3500 FPS and it would be interesting! I don't have any 130gr Hornadys, but I do have some 150's, when I get some more paper I'll send those out at 3300 fps..Wish I had thought of it at the time...

Was at the range two weekends ago and found a couple TSX's in the dirt behind the 100yd pile. First one was opened up just like Gate's pics but the second was bent over like an FMJ, not expanded at all. I was quite suprised as I thought that kind of performance was left with the old X bullet design.

Probably hit a rock with the side of the tip? And with no water (or blood) to flow into the hollow point to initiate expansion, it banana'd...But it's just a guess.

 

[mpwolf]

hmmm, I just took delivery of 3 boxes of 168 tsx's. I was planning on shooting them out of my .300 SAUM. I'm curious how fast I can push them- I damn sure can't make them fly as fast as the 130's!

 

[Omega]

]
Probably hit a rock with the side of the tip? And with no water (or blood) to flow into the hollow point to initiate expansion, it banana'd...But it's just a guess.

So how did it expand in your dry phone book test?
There are just not great amounts of blood laying around in the body. In fact the liver and spleen are the only organs where there is a lot of blood present, enough to actually affect a bullet and perhaps enough to carry a shock wave. The blood in the rest of the body is controlled by the vascular system and most veins and arteries are much smaller than the bullet. On top of that the bullet doesn't just meander through the body waiting for blood to flow into it to cause expansion, that trip through the meat is complete in micro seconds, long before blood even has time flow.

 

[Boomer]

It sure tosses SD out the window in this case don't it?

SD is meaningless as soon as a bullet expands. The advantage of going to a heavy for caliber bullet in more traditional bullet designs is to attain a larger expanded frontal area which increases the wound volume. Wound volume is proportional to the expanded frontal area of the bullet.

In the case of the X Bullet, this doesn't happen because the potential for expansion is determined by the depth of of the nose cavity which is the same within caliber. Barnes increases the shank length to gain weight without lengthening the hollow nose cavity proportionately, hence there can be no increase in performance with increased bullet weight. Should Barnes change their design so that the nose cavity of the heavy bullet is proportional to it's length, it's terminal performance would improve 3 fold. As it stands, Gate's 130 gr TSX shows text book performance, where the heavy bullets show excessive shank length. The problem here is that if there is not enough expansion, a long for caliber bullet can become unstable as it penetrates because the center of gravity does not move far enough forward. This is the reason that the best solids for thick skinned game are those that have parallel sides and are short for caliber.

Based on Gate's findings, I need to rethink my selection of X bullets, which at this time are 180 gr .30's and 300 gr .375's. Clearly a better choice will be a 130-150 gr in .308 and 250-270 gr in .375. Perhaps, given my distrust of high velocity bullet performance, the correct answer is to abandon the X's altogether and concentrate on solid shank bonded bullets. A couple of examples are Woodleigh's .308/240 gr that performs well from a 1:10 barrel at 2400 fps, as does the .375/380 gr Rhino.

 

[Omega]

SD is meaningless as soon as a bullet expands.

I surprised at your response, no coffee yet this morning? A higher SD figure means a heavier bullet with in the caliber. That higher weight still counts, many believe the greater momentum helps over come the slowing effects of expansion and causing deeper penetration. You are saying no?

 

[Boomer]

I surprised at your response, no coffee yet this morning? A higher SD figure means a heavier bullet with in the caliber. That higher weight still counts, many believe the greater momentum helps over come the slowing effects of expansion and causing deeper penetration. You are saying no?

A heavier bullet does not have more momentum than a lighter bullet unless they are fired at the same velocity. The higher velocity of the lighter bullet makes it's momentum the equal of the heavier bullet when both are fired at similar pressure from the same rifle.

 

[Gatehouse]

So how did it expand in your dry phone book test?

I didn't say they "needed" moisture to expand, just that in Noels case the tip of the bullet may have hit something hard, pinching it closed and with nothing getting into the hollowpoint to initiate expansion- it didn't.

It was a guess based on some reports of TSX bullets expanding perfectly in game or wet medium, yet not expanding in some dry medium. I've never had that problem, no matter what I've shot them into.

 

[Gatehouse]

A higher SD figure means a heavier bullet with in the caliber. That higher weight still counts, many believe the greater momentum helps over come the slowing effects of expansion and causing deeper penetration.

How come the 180 bullets didn't penetrate any better than the 130gr bullet then?

 

[Camp Cook]

Theories and more theories...

Amazing how a little bit of experience disproves so many theories...

Guys the ignore feature doesn't work when you quote the ignored one...

So much for enjoying my morning coffee...

 

[1899]

The higher velocity of the lighter bullet makes it's momentum the equal of the heavier bullet when both are fired at similar pressure from the same rifle.

Momentum is calculated by multiplying mass and velocity:
p=mv

Any change in mass or velocity will equal a proportional change in momentum.

A 130gr bullet is .01857 lbs

p(1) = .01857 x 3525 fps
p(1) = 65.5 lb-ft/sec

180gr = .02571
p(2) = .02571 x 2970
p(2) = 76.4 lb-ft/sec

You would have to drive the 130gr bullet at 4112 fps in order to have the same momentum as the 180gr bullet. You could not do this out of the .300wsm.

How come the 180 bullets didn't penetrate any better than the 130gr bullet then?

The 180gr TSX did. It was only 1/4" more, but none of us knows what that really means in a hunting situation. Your opening to the thread warned everyone of that caveat. Does it matter? Probably not. It's all just academic anyways. People did, and still do hunt successfully with plain old boring bulllets (speer, sierra, hornady etc) fired out of plain old boring cartridges (.270, .30-06, .375 H&H).

But it is fun to talk and think about topics like these. It makes for good excuses to load up more ammo, go to the range and experiment/practice, which is a great thing. So thanks GH.

 

[Gatehouse]

The 180gr TSX did. It was only 1/4" more, but none of us knows what that really means in a hunting situation. .

But the NP and the Hornady did not.


Momentum, energy, Sectional density all take a back seat to bullet contstruction.

 

[1899]

But the NP and the Hornady did not.


Momentum, energy, Sectional density all take a back seat to bullet contstruction.

What was the weight of the NP and Hornady at the following stages of penetration:

1", 3", 7" etc etc.

The weights were obviously decreasing. This means the calculation of momentum is not (if you use the initial bullet weight) accurate, nor is the effect of sectional density. Additionally, we don't know the diameters of the various bullets at various stages of penetration.





Bullet construction is only one factor in the multitude of factors that affect performance. If you want to compare the effects of sd and momentum on penetration in dry paper, you need to look at two bullets that are equal in construction - ie NP vs NP, TSX vs TSX etc.

But GH already knows this.


EDIT:
It would be interesting to keep lowering the muzzle velocity of the 130gr TTSX until the penetration decreased to the equivalent of the lead core bullets, and then to examine how much it mushroomed. For example, could you get similar penetration out of a .308 Win with a 130gr TTSX as you could with a .300WSM and a 180gr NP?