300 win mag ammo

Easy, and the law is there for a purpose. To see that adequate guns and loads are used for animals. Penetration again,
"More weight in the same caliber with the same bullet construction equals more penetration. When animals get very large, bullet weight is required to small bullets(or large ones) to the right spot. The answer to what a heavier bullet of the same caliber will do at reasonable range is that the heavier bullet with similar construction will penetrate better."
 
Well that is the third attempt and you still could not come up with a single example of where a 168gr tsx or 180gr tsx would not perform adequately at normal ranges in a hunting situation,where a heavier .308" bullet would perform adequately.Yes the 168gr would not be legal for bison in the yukon but that is a legal issue,not a performance issue,so you did not answer the question.However,I am not surprised,as I doubt that anyone on these forums will answer the question as asked,the reason being that most people here understand that bullet construction is far more important than bullet weight as far as penetration is concerned.Most people here are also aware of the reputation that the barnes bullets have for outpenetrating much heavier bullets of different construction..
 
Dude, every one of your arguments could apply equally to any number of premium bonded bullets. Just what exactly is your point here? There's no 'magic' involved
 
Okay, hunting big moose at reasonable distances. The heavier bullet is a better penetrator than the light one. I doubt anyone going hunting for large moose walks into a store and buys .300 anything with a light bullet. If they do they don't know what they are doing. The same is true of bears and bison. Grizzly hunters with .300s do not look for 168 grainers and with good reason.
Why would you choose the lighter bullet if you know the ranges are going to be reasonable? The heavy bullet will surely do everything the heavy one will and more.
Don't say bullet construction because I have added to every one of these the bit about bullets of similar construction. I 200 grain Barnes super whatever will outpenetrate a 168 grain Barnes super whatever from the same gun. This is known. Why use the little one? They really aren't that much heavier to carry. Recoil is not a factor, you are shooting a .300 mag afterall.
Weight in relation to diameter determines penetration with the same construction.
Have you ever done any penetration testing at all?
 
Dude, every one of your arguments could apply equally to any number of premium bonded bullets. Just what exactly is your point here? There's no 'magic' involved
Click to expand...

I merely chose the tsx as an example,but yes you are absolutely correct.The point being that bullet construction is a far greater factor in penetration and performance on game than the weight of the bullet.As a result,if you use a bullet of tougher construction,there is absolutely no need or for that matter any advantage to use the heaviest bullets for caliber.If you can't kill a moose or a grizzly with a 168gr or 180gr tsx or mrx or another bullet of the same construction,you aren't going to kill it with any .308" bullet.Apparently.some people just refuse to accept that fact.
 
Last edited:
if I want deeper penetration, for stuff like moose and elk, bear etc, I chose a bullet that is constructed in a more robust design, to aid in higher retained weight on impact, rather than pick a heavier bullet. A TBBC may retain 90-95% of its weight, but it probably wont penetrate as deep as a Swift A-Frame or a Barnes X bullet, due to the larger expanded frontal area. and then there is regular soft points like Hornady Interlocks ro Sierra etc that may shed 3/4 of their weight througout the animal and slow to a stop

old school of thought is to pick a heavy bullet so you can have more hitting power. "hitting power" is just deep penetration, more destruction along its deeper, longer path through the animal. IMO at least

Barnes Triple Shock X - the best hunting bullet in the world
 
I should change it to :

fastest
heaviest
biggest caliber
most recoil
biggest scope, with illuminated recoil

oh yeah

semi auto with extra clips at the ready


:dancingbanana:
 
Are you then telling me that a 168 grain TSX or MRX will penetrate as deeply as the same bullet of a heavier weight in the same caliber? If so, I fail to see why they would make any heavier.
I agree that bullet construction has come a long way. But there are no magic bullets. More bullet is a better thing. A Barnes may well out penetrate a heavier Hornady or whatever but a Barnes will not out penetrate a heavier Barnes.
I completely agree that to get more hitting power you should go to a heavier caliber entirely. But it just is not logical that a lighter bullet will penetrate more that a heavier one of the same contruction.
I accept facts when they are proven to me. I test bullets constantly and on game. I do not accept what you've said is a fact. I disagree completely with the logic. The Triple shock is one hell of a good bullet, but one 40 grains heavier is a better one!
I just looked at the sight. If the 165 or 168 TSX does it all, why do they make a 200 grain TSX? Barnes won't accept the facts either I guess.
 
Last edited:
but if a guy could drive a 180 grain TSX from one end of a moose to another and exit, why would a 200 grain bullet be any better

it just boils down to shoot whatever you want
 
Yeah, but what if your 180 stopped 3" short of perfection? The 200 might make it. Perfect shots are desired but "you can't always get what you want".
Why does Barnes make a 200 grain TSX? I agree with good bullets just not light ones.
 
Are you then telling me that a 168 grain TSX or MRX will penetrate as deeply as the same bullet of a heavier weight in the same caliber? If so, I fail to see why they would make any heavier.
Click to expand...

I never said that.I said that a 168gr tsx or 180gr tsx(you keep forgetting the 180gr tsx) will provide more than enough penetration for any game that a .308" bullet of any weight is suitable for.The tsx is made in weights from 130 gr to 200 gr but no heavier in .308".The mrx is only made in 180gr,so no,it is not made any heavier.However they do state that they are developing 165gr and 150gr versions of the mrx in .308".One of the reasons for making a variety of bullet weights however,is that some rifles shoot more accurately with different bullet weights.I shoot the 180gr tsx myself,because it shoots more accurately in my rifles than the 168gr tsx.However even barnes themselves state that their bullets perform just as well in lighter weights than other bullets due to their design and construction.

From the barnes site.

When I use X-Bullets, should I choose a lighter bullet than I'd normally use?
Because both X-Bullets and Triple-Shock X-Bullets retain nearly 100 percent of their original weight and penetrate so deeply, many shooters select a lighter-weight X-Bullet or TSX in place of a heavier conventional bullet. The lighter X-Bullet delivers higher velocities and a flatter trajectory, and outperforms heavier bullets of conventional design. It also produces less recoil.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but what if your 180 stopped 3" short of perfection? The 200 might make it. Perfect shots are desired but "you can't always get what you want".
Click to expand...

I tell you what.I am inviting anyone here that has used a .308" 180gr tsx and is unhappy with the penetration to post their story here.Tell us what cartridge you were using,the range,shot placement,the animal you shot,and how the bullet did not penetrate enough.

Do you think that we will see many takers?Or even a single one?



Why does Barnes make a 200 grain TSX?
Click to expand...

Two main reasons.

one-some guns shoot heavier bullets more accurately,and

two-because of people like you that aren't convinced that a lighter bullet will do the job.They would rather have you shoot a heavier than necessary bullet that lose sales.
 
As some added information on bullet performance,the june 1996 issue of handloader magazine did an extensive test of the common 180gr .308" bullets of the time.Predictably the barnes x and the failsafe outpenetrated the other bullets in the test.However there was a second part to the test where they took speer grand slams (which were a common premium bullet at the time) in 150gr,165gr,180gr and 200 gr weights and tested them against each other.As expected the 150gr bullets penetrated the least.However the average penetration for the 165gr,180gr and 200gr bullets were virtually the same.These were identical bullets except for the weight.It appears that with some of the controlled expansion bullets, increasing the bullet weight makes very little if any difference in penetration.
 
I'd just ike to throw somehting in here...

Just like Yukon, BC has bulet restrictins for Bison hunitng.

IN BC, You must use a bulet that is 175 gr or larger, and that retains 2000 ft/bs at 100 metres.

Basically, they want you to use a minimum of a 30-06 with 180gr bulets or a 7Rm with 175gr bullets.

But.........The law is SEVERELY flawed.

For instance, it woud be completey legal to use a 7mm Rem magnum with a 175 gr Ballistic TIp bullet, yet illegal to use a 160 gr TSX in the same cartridge, even though the TSX woudl penetrate and kill far, far better than the BT.

We live in 2006, gentlemen. Bulet cnstruction is far, far different than it was in Elmer Keiths age. We don'tg need to rely n bullet diameter or weigth anymore.

Frankly, I think that the 30-06 with a TSX bullet will kill just as well, if not better, than the 338WM wiht cup and core bullets of yesteryear.
 
Id take that a bit further, and suggest that a 270 Winchester with a 150 grain Barnes TSX would be a better choice for hunting elk and mooose, even bison, than a 338 win mag with a cup and core bullet under 225 grains
 
Come on a .270 better for big animals than a .338. It must be armchair theory season because nobody here is speaking of personal experiences.
The law here actually rules out bullets below .30 for bison too which is sensible and limits hunters to basically a .30/06 with 180s changed from a .30/06 with 200s.
Minimalism is a bad practice for hunting big game. You guys are assuming perfect shots and conditions which may work here or in your chair but it is plain foolishness in the field.
Tell me just how many big moose(alaska/yukon) and bison and even elk you've shot with these or other rounds. There is no hint of experience in the things you say and please don't quote from magazines and other's hunts. Your experiences!
I used to hunt quite a lot with a .300 Wby and all sort of bullets were tried. It worked like a hot damn until I moved to the north 12 years ago. Then I encountered really big animals. Two years into it, I gave up on the .300 Wby. It just doesn't do what I want, I don't like to chase big wounded animals for all sort of reasons. I went to bigger diameter bullets and never looked back. As I recall what I ended up using in that .300 for some years were Barnes, Nosler and GS bullets all in 200 grain weight.
There are lots of stories of small bullets used on big game usually with a guide to later stop the animal or horror stories of magazines full to stop them. It is done cleanly too I have no doubt, by guys with experience and that know what they are doing. They are no way to go for the average hunter though. On deer and sheep sure, elk are getting big and most guys that know what they are doing start looking for a bigger gun.
I do want to hear of your kills with these bullets though or at least how you've gone out and tested them well before hunting. Otherwise you don't know what you're talking about. Magazines are paid to sell you Barnes TSX bullets.
 
Tell me just how many big moose(alaska/yukon) and bison and even elk you've shot with these or other rounds.
Click to expand...

I haven't hunted the Yukon or alaska,but I have hunted just across the border in Northern B.C. and in Northern Alberta.I have taken 15 elk,6 moose,and a grizzly.I have also witnessed first hand another dozen moose and over a dozen elk killed.I seriously doubt that those moose cared which side of border that they were on,or that they would suddenly grow in size or toughness if they walked a few miles into Alaska or the Yukon.I have killed moose with cartridges ranging from the 7mm-08 with 140gr bullets to the 300ultramag with 180gr bullets,to the 8mmremmag using a 200gr bullet.My elk were killed with cartridges ranging from a 257wby using 100gr bullets,to the 7mmstw using 140gr bullets,to the 300ultramag using 180gr bullets,to the 8mmremmag using 200gr bullets.Guess what,I haven't lost an elk or a moose,and haven't had to track one after shooting it with the cartridges and bullets that I use.
 
Alaska/Yukon are a subspecies of moose actually, and they are the largest moose. There are some in northern B.C. from my understanding. My meaning is large heavy moose not which side of the border they stand on.
And my point is the heavier bullets for caliber penetrate more than the lighter ones. If Barnes has figured out how to defeat the laws of physics, they should let the rest of us know. I didn't see it listed in the lastest engineering monthlys. It is my opinion that the heavier bullet of same construction is going to go in farther. This is helpful on larger animals for obvious reasons.
That is an impressive field record. I would have think by now you know hunting and shooting. A good field shot and hunter can do great stuff. The average guy does not stay as calm or usually get as close. You have enough experience to use whatever you like, but I disagree with recommending lighter bullets to hunters, especially saying there is no advantage to heavier bullets, there obviously is. Barnes wouldn't make them if they couldn't sell them.
I am hunting this weekend with a guy using a Mark V .300Wby. It will be interesting to see what he's using for bullets. I will be carrying a .416 Taylor.
How many shots did you put in these animals with the small bullets? Have you recovered any TSX bullets from big stuff? If so, any pictures?
I fully beleive in modern bullet quality. I used a XLC on my bison. However, I also think that bullets should be as heavy as your rifle will accurately use. Physics simply tells us that the heavier bullet is going to be harder to stop. Same bullet, same construction and caliber, the heavier bullet WILL penetrare deeper. Sometime that little bit is what it needed. And also, why not use the heavier bullets? The advantage seems very obvious.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom