130 TTSX for moose from a .30-06?

stubblejumper said:
For some reason, some people just can't seem to comprehend that concept. Either that, or the math confuses them.:)
Click to expand...

There is something called "knockdown Power". Lets say you are out in the bush and have two rifles on your tailgate of your truck. One is a 243 Win, 70 grain bullet, energy at 50 yards is 2267 ft-lbs according to the Federal Factory load online data. The other is a 45-70 300 grain bullet and it's energy is about 1900 ft-lbs at 50 yards.

All of a sudden a grizzly busts out of the bush coming right at you, you only have a few seconds, which rifle do you grab? The math is always right but the conclusions are sometimes wrong.
 
Kingofalderwood said:
Take a Nosler Partition as an example. Its weight retention at or after impact is roughly 60-70%. That translates into a bullet of about 180g becoming one of 115g. Now look at a Barnes TSX or Hornady GMX. Weight retention is about 95%. This means an bullet of 125G would lose 6g and become 119g or a 165g bullet would be 157g at or after impact. Couple that with less recoil because you're using a lighter bullet and as mentioned you become a better, more confident shooter.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that animals weigh the bullet to find out dead they are? Or that higher weight retention of the spent bullet automatically equates to a larger wound channel?

A Partition never became the fast killing bullet that everything has been compared to since the 40s despite losing some weight and basically staying mostly together for penetration.

It became the success it has because it sheds some weight while practically guaranteeing that much of it will stay together for penetration.
 
R
Dogleg said:
Are you suggesting that animals weigh the bullet to find out dead they are? Or that higher weight retention of the spent bullet automatically equates to a larger wound channel?

A Partition never became the fast killing bullet that everything has been compared to since the 40s despite losing some weight and basically staying mostly together for penetration.

It became the success it has because it sheds some weight while practically guaranteeing that much of it will stay together for penetration.
Click to expand...
Suggesting...? That's my wife's department. I postulate, ruminate and muse. Anyhow, my statement was more a reflection on the improvements regarding bullets. Personally, I love the science and math behind hand loading or reloading myself. I'm finding that bigger isn't always better. However in the case of a grizzly as was suggested I digress and say you are right. Bigger has its place. I do carry a couple of 220g cartridges just in case...
 
Kingofalderwood said:
R
Suggesting...? That's my wife's department. I postulate, ruminate and muse. Anyhow, my statement was more a reflection on the improvements regarding bullets. Personally, I love the science and math behind hand loading or reloading myself. I'm finding that bigger isn't always better. However in the case of a grizzly as was suggested I digress and say you are right. Bigger has its place. I do carry a couple of 220g cartridges just in case...
Click to expand...

Except for very specialized purposes, I don't think mono bullets are an improvement, musing and cud-chewing aside. I haven't seen the "science" proving that high retained weight kills better, but I've seen multiple hundreds of dead things proving that whatever rips the biggest, deep enough hole does. I've also seen very few instances that the deepest possible was an advantage. Most of those were situations that most people would swear they'd never do.

I like your signature line, and yes, I already have.

Now if my partner in crime would only get here so we could go shooting..........................
 
Let's remember 150 gr 30-30 bullets kill a lot of moose year after year.
I enough overthinking from time to time, but the last moose I saw on the ground was knocked over by a .243 with the cheapest (bell) box of ammunition available.
 
Varmit said:
There is something called "knockdown Power". Lets say you are out in the bush and have two rifles on your tailgate of your truck. One is a 243 Win, 70 grain bullet, energy at 50 yards is 2267 ft-lbs according to the Federal Factory load online data. The other is a 45-70 300 grain bullet and it's energy is about 1900 ft-lbs at 50 yards.

All of a sudden a grizzly busts out of the bush coming right at you, you only have a few seconds, which rifle do you grab? The math is always right but the conclusions are sometimes wrong.
Click to expand...

And if my 300Rum shooting the 180gr TSX was also on the tailgate, I would choose that rifle over either of the other two. Even though the 180gr bullet only weighs a bit more than half of the 300gr bullet, it will penetrate and smash bone and expand to leave a large wound channel. And for the record, I have actually killed a grizzly using a bullet with a solid copper shank, so I speak from actual experience.
 
Varmit said:
There is something called "knockdown Power". Lets say you are out in the bush and have two rifles on your tailgate of your truck. One is a 243 Win, 70 grain bullet, energy at 50 yards is 2267 ft-lbs according to the Federal Factory load online data. The other is a 45-70 300 grain bullet and it's energy is about 1900 ft-lbs at 50 yards.

All of a sudden a grizzly busts out of the bush coming right at you, you only have a few seconds, which rifle do you grab? The math is always right but the conclusions are sometimes wrong.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you would be a grizzly snack......

There is more to "knockdown power" than energy..... Energy does don take into account momentum and sectional density......

For a good comparison go to the hornady site and punch your numbers into the H.I.T.S. Calculator.........
 
Superbrad said:
It sounds like you would be a grizzly snack......

There is more to "knockdown power" than energy..... Energy does don take into account momentum and sectional density......

For a good comparison go to the hornady site and punch your numbers into the H.I.T.S. Calculator.........
Click to expand...

If anyone thinks that they are going to knock down a grizzly with the momentum of the bullet, they are badly mistaken. To kill an animal quickly, a bullet must either strike the central nervous system, or it must first reach the vitals, and then tear a large wound channel through the vitals. If the bullet doesn't penetrate enough to reach the vitals, there is no quick kill, if it passes through the vitals without expanding, you won't likely achieve the quickest kill. As to whether you use a lighter bullet that expands and yet holds together well enough to completely penetrate the vitals, or a heavier bullet that loses more mass, but still retains enough to completely penetrate the vitals, really doesn't matter, if they create a similar wound channel. As to sectional density, it is the sectional density of the bullet as it passes through the animal that matters, not the sectional density of the unfired bullet.
 
stubblejumper said:
If anyone thinks that they are going to knock down a grizzly with the momentum of the bullet, they are badly mistaken. To kill an animal quickly, a bullet must either strike the central nervous system, or it must first reach the vitals, and then tear a large wound channel through the vitals. If the bullet doesn't penetrate enough to reach the vitals, there is no quick kill, if it passes through the vitals without expanding, you won't likely achieve the quickest kill. As to whether you use a lighter bullet that expands and yet holds together well enough to completely penetrate the vitals, or a heavier bullet that loses more mass, but still retains enough to completely penetrate the vitals, really doesn't matter, if they create a similar wound channel. As to sectional density, it is the sectional density of the bullet as it passes through the animal that matters, not the sectional density of the unfired bullet.
Click to expand...

Agreed...... Just didn't want to turn this into yet another bear defense thread.....
 
9.3 Hunter said:
comedy ..... use the 165 TTSX for moose; higher BC does wonders. 30-06 was made for 165/168gr and performs at its all around best in that weight and fps.
Click to expand...

If I find the same deal I did for the 130's I'll be sure to try either the 150's or 165's. Unfortunately I suspect I won't be getting 150 of those for a half dozen beer and a box of 130 grain .277 TSX's. Its great when folks don't read labels.

Kryogen said:
question, why not just use a regular hunting bullet in 180 grains?
Click to expand...

I don't have any 180 grain bullets on hand, but for future reference what is this "regular hunting bullet" you recommend? I'm likely not going to be drawn in my home province and definitely won't be travelling for moose this year so I probably have time yet to decide. I may pick up a few 165 & 180 grain more conventional bullets, any recommendations?
 
I personally would use a 180 grain hunting bullet, whatever brand you prefer.... they all will work.

hdy interlock, interbond, partition, whatever...

seriously if you hit a moose with a 180 grain bullet out of a 30-06 its dead no matter what brand you prefer.
 
Kryogen said:
I personally would use a 180 grain hunting bullet, whatever brand you prefer.... they all will work.

hdy interlock, interbond, partition, whatever...

seriously if you hit a moose with a 180 grain bullet out of a 30-06 its dead no matter what brand you prefer.
Click to expand...

With my handloads I get better accuracy with 180 grain bullets in all my 30-06s
 
Jim870 said:
If I find the same deal I did for the 130's I'll be sure to try either the 150's or 165's. Unfortunately I suspect I won't be getting 150 of those for a half dozen beer and a box of 130 grain .277 TSX's. Its great when folks don't read labels.



I don't have any 180 grain bullets on hand, but for future reference what is this "regular hunting bullet" you recommend? I'm likely not going to be drawn in my home province and definitely won't be travelling for moose this year so I probably have time yet to decide. I may pick up a few 165 & 180 grain more conventional bullets, any recommendations?
Click to expand...

You should kill a few deer with the 130's before you write them off. :)

I've put a 130gr TTSX end to end through a 6+foot bear, among other critters.
 
Kryogen said:
I personally would use a 180 grain hunting bullet, whatever brand you prefer.... they all will work.

hdy interlock, interbond, partition, whatever...

seriously if you hit a moose with a 180 grain bullet out of a 30-06 its dead no matter what brand you prefer.
Click to expand...

And a lighter monometal bullet will kill moose just as dead.
 
Gatehouse said:
You should kill a few deer with the 130's before you write them off. :)

I've put a 130gr TTSX end to end through a 6+foot bear, among other critters.
Click to expand...

Far from writing off the TTSX 130's they shoot great, with noticeably less recoil. I'm just going to play with a few more conventional bullets. I hope I will get the chance to try the 130's on a deer and/or a black bear or two this fall. And at the very least I have more confidence that should I receive the opportunity to use the 130 TTSX's on Bullwinkle it will do the job, provided I do mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom