Probably just deer,,,,I also have a 300 WSM for anything large that I haven't started reloading for yet, but I have developed a good load for my .308 that gives me about 3000 FPS (130 gr. TTSX) so it is also an option for larger game (moose and elk).
120 gr. TTSX velocity concern
- Thread starter sure as shootin
- Start date
Probably just deer,,,,I also have a 300 WSM for anything large that I haven't started reloading for yet, but I have developed a good load for my .308 that gives me about 3000 FPS (130 gr. TTSX) so it is also an option for larger game (moose and elk).
I TOTALLY trust it out to the distances I normally shoot my deer at ( a hundred yards or less) and even further,,,,,I'm just wondering if my shooting gets to the point where I need to make a shot over 300 yards, which I never even come close at attempting at wild game, if the bullet is capable under the current velocity I'm getting with my load. I have been practicing those distances recently and I guess I'm just looking for confirmation. The main reason for the switch to copper projectiles is I REALLY like the idea that my meat will not be contaminated by lead, not to mention getting minimal damage to the meat.
Don't get me wrong, I've shot dozens and dozens of deer with lead core bullets over the last few decades and I'm living proof that I'm still alive but I also know that the heavy metal count in my body for lead is quite high and I don't work anywhere near the stuff. I was tested for heavy metals in my body a few years back and thought I should do something about it. When I saw some video footage on a documentary about a year and a half ago where they used special equipment to show how the meat was contaminated by lead and how far it could get from the actual bullet entry/exit ,,,,much further than I would have thought, so that confirmed my choice to switch to monos.
I'm definitely not pushing it on to others,,,,hunters can make their own choice whether to use copper pills in their ammo or not.
Then the next question is what evidence do you have that the heavy metal count you fear in your own tissues is the result of the lead in the bullets you used. There are many sources of lead that many people do not take into account (lead solder in plumbing for example). I do not know of anyone who has scientifically linked lead in human tissue to lead in bullets used on wild game.
However, IF (notice the big "if") I was concerned about lead in my meat, at the same time as I opted for mono-metal bullets, I would opt for a cartridge that drove them fast enough that I had no qualms about using them at any distance I would shoot even when I allowed for the odd circumstances of having to shoot beyond what I though was "normal" for me. My problem with mono-metal bullets is just what concerns you about their performance. I demand a bullet for my hunting that has my complete confidence that it will always expand, maintain a large percentage of its mass, and do that at ALL ranges I will ever shoot. I have always tried to avoid meat damage by simply not shooting the meat parts. So I do not understand making much effort to figure out how to use a hunting bullet that I thought had the issues this thread discusses.
I'm not concerned about you "pushing" it on others; I'm just wondering why you bother when there is no proof the lead in your system is caused by lead bullets, and your bullet choice obviously creates doubts in your own mind about terminal performance.
However, IF (notice the big "if") I was concerned about lead in my meat, at the same time as I opted for mono-metal bullets, I would opt for a cartridge that drove them fast enough that I had no qualms about using them at any distance I would shoot even when I allowed for the odd circumstances of having to shoot beyond what I though was "normal" for me. My problem with mono-metal bullets is just what concerns you about their performance. I demand a bullet for my hunting that has my complete confidence that it will always expand, maintain a large percentage of its mass, and do that at ALL ranges I will ever shoot. I have always tried to avoid meat damage by simply not shooting the meat parts. So I do not understand making much effort to figure out how to use a hunting bullet that I thought had the issues this thread discusses.
I'm not concerned about you "pushing" it on others; I'm just wondering why you bother when there is no proof the lead in your system is caused by lead bullets, and your bullet choice obviously creates doubts in your own mind about terminal performance.
Although I have no way of knowing exactly what may have contributed to having lead in my system I figure it might be a good idea to elimanate it where I can. I guess time will tell if not eating lead contaminated meat has made a difference, especially if it is the only factor that I can realistically change because I don't plan on moving or changing jobs. I can be re-tested in a couple of years and if there is a decrease that could have been the cause. As I said before, I fully believe for the distance I regularly shoot my big game at I won't have any issues. I think if there is any doubt for the 300+ yard shot, it's would my accuracy be good enough to pull it off.
Although Varget is a great powder I don't think it is the best choice for this bullet. I have never found it to produce good velocity like some other offerings. I would think that H414 would be a far better choice. It's my go to powder for my 7-08 if I'm looking for speed. I would also agree (flame suit on) that pushing them over max would not be a terrible idea in your gun. I'm actually going to sit down and assemble some 120 ttsx rounds in the next couple days. I'll let you know how it turns out. My 7mm-08 is one of the few guns I own that actually perform up to the published data. I would be reluctant to load mine over max for that reason. I can see my velocity gains drop off and my muzzle blest increase significantly when I approach max loads.
120gr TTSX
Varget min 42 @2877fps Max 44 @3025
H414 min 47 @2935fps Max 50.5@3132
120gr TTSX
Varget min 42 @2877fps Max 44 @3025
H414 min 47 @2935fps Max 50.5@3132
Yoiu should be able to get up into the 3100 fps range with that bullet. Did you get pressure signs with RL15 and stop? H4350 should work fine, as well as a bunch of others. Did you get pressure signs with the Varget before you stopped?
The RL 15 wasn't giving me the same accuracy as the Varget. I opted for accuracy. I also went a little higher (up to 44 gr. of Varget) during my testing but once again accuracy dropped off at the max. end. It appeared that the OCW for my 7-08 is 43.5 with that bullet/Varget combination. I'm going to go with it for this hunting season. Next year I may experiment with some RL 17 which I also have. It will also give a higher velocity than the Varget. I may also try a 110 TTSX which according to the Barnes and Quickload data easily gets you over 3000 fps.
It looks like accuracy trumps velocity this year. Who knows,,,,,next season may be the same. LOL
So; run mono bullets out of calibers that won't hurt conventional bullets at half speed to gain accuracy for the purpose of hunting at ranges so short that accuracy doesn't matter much? Then wonder if they are going to open?
hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
If you are shooting less then 300 yards Load em as hot as you can. a 4" group at 200 yards but at 3200fps is better then a .5" group at 200 at 2800fps. For mono velocity trumps accuracy always. As long as you hit a pie plate at the max range you want it is accurate enough.
hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
With monos you need a min of 2200. I had emailed barnes about the ttsx and the reply I got said they will work at 2200 but 2400fps + is best.
I think the min impact velocity can be debated. There are some trials out there with impact on various media at different velocities. Obviously, the higher the impact velocity, the better. Have a look at this...
http://huntingwithnonlead.org/PDFs_Main/WI DNR Copper Bullet Study.pdf
About 3500 is better yet.
I emailed barnes about the ttsx and what speeds are needed for expansion. They replied with a min of 2200fps but 2400 and up was better the actually get it to expand. From what I have seen is they seem to call a deformed tip expansion.
This is still expanded according to them. I would disagree
That's about the twice in diameter, I call it a perfectly mushroomed.
May be some may vary on opinion but I don't see any problem with that.
Ltbull, that's a good read. Thanks for posting that. I've got a plastic chemical barrel that would work like the one in the article.
Certainly something to consider regarding expansion of mono type bullets.
Regards
Ron
I emailed barnes about the ttsx and what speeds are needed for expansion. They replied with a min of 2200fps but 2400 and up was better the actually get it to expand. From what I have seen is they seem to call a deformed tip expansion.
This is still expanded according to them. I would disagree
Great pic. Was that retrieved from an animal or media?
