Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
That is exactly consistent with my experiences as well, and is one of the reasons why I am also transitioning from TSX to TTSX's, along with the increased reliability that the TTSX offers...
Barnes and the .270 win
- Thread starter Reflex_84
- Start date
That is exactly consistent with my experiences as well, and is one of the reasons why I am also transitioning from TSX to TTSX's, along with the increased reliability that the TTSX offers...
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
I've mentioned it in other threads, the decision to chang over to Barnes in five calibers and I've settled on these weights in the five calibers.
- 270 Win........................130gr TTSX
- 7x61 S&H......................140gr TTSX (possibly
120gr TTSX) - 30-06...........................150gr TTSX (possibly 130gr TTSX)
- 308 Norma Magnum.........180gr TTSX (possibly 168gr TTSX)
- 358 Norma Magnum.........225gr TSX
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Good deal. My guess is that those will all work to your satisfaction.
I'm currently using the 100gr TTSX in .25-06, 140gr TTSX in .280 and 7RM, and the 130gr TTSX and 150gr TSX in .308. I've yet to come across a Barnes bullet that didn't work, and I've run 'em all from X to TSX to TTSX.
I'm currently using the 100gr TTSX in .25-06, 140gr TTSX in .280 and 7RM, and the 130gr TTSX and 150gr TSX in .308. I've yet to come across a Barnes bullet that didn't work, and I've run 'em all from X to TSX to TTSX.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
The first Barnes I purchased were their 25 cal, 115gr TSX FB. I had recently acquired a Savage 112BVSS in 25-06 and they were part of a selection I picked up initially to 'feed it'. I never did get to trying them, yet, because of the exceptional accuracy I got with the Sierra 117gr SBT. Oh well, one day...
The change over decision in the previous calibers I've mentioned was at the suggestion of my son in law and daughter. On a Mule Deer draw hunt with them in Alberta my daughter and I were both successful in filling our draws and as things turned out, we both hit our Deer in almost the exact same spot. I was using my 308 NM with 200gr Sierra SBT's and she was shooting a 300 WSM with 180gr Barnes. The meat loss from the lead fragmentation on my Deer was CONSIDERABLY greater than on the one she got and the shot circumstances were very close to identical. Being basically a 'deep freeze' hunter, go fo Barnes.
In addition to Barnes TSX and TTSX, I also have some along the lines of some of the more traditional hunting bullet construction. 220gr and 250gr Barnes Originals for the 348 WCF. Recently I've also picked up some Barnes 250gr Spitzer SP to 'play' with in my 358 NM.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The Barnes original is one that I've never played with, but I used to think that if I was ever faced with a big grizz or brown holding my 7Mag, I'd like to have it stuffed with a 195gr Barnes Original. Now after all these years of shooting the X-style bullets, and being face-to-face with numerous grizzly bears (but never had to shoot one!), I'd not be too worried if I had a 120gr TTSX or heavier loaded up, as long as I could put it where it needed to go.
The originals are great for calibers that just don't have many bullet options available.
The originals are great for calibers that just don't have many bullet options available.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
Exactly, and that's why I think the 220gr and 250gr Originals are probably some of the best bullet choices available for my model 71. Some of todays technology in bullets like Barnes, definately seems to be the way to go. To a degree, that technology has cut down on 'yesterdays' benefits of weight.
On the topic of weight, recently I purchased a Husqvarna in 358 NM from Why not? and one of the goodies I ended up also getting from Ted is a box of Hornady 35 cal 275gr RN. Something different to try and actually, I wouldn't mind getting hold of a couple more boxes but it's a product is no longer produced. Also, on an old Hornady bullet display board that makes up some of the decore of my reloading room, there's a 275gr RN that used to be available for the 338 WM. Times are a changin'.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Yeah, I remember that bullet
These days there's no good reason for Horn to make a bullet like that for the .338WM with all the recent advancements that have been made. I think .338 is a caliber that is not suffering for bullet choices like some others
These days there's no good reason for Horn to make a bullet like that for the .338WM with all the recent advancements that have been made. I think .338 is a caliber that is not suffering for bullet choices like some others
Quoted from Barnes #4 manual page 2 on the TSX "The all copper Triple-Shock X Bullet".
Then on page 3 on the TTSX "Like Barnes' Triple Shock X Bullet, the Tipped TSX features a 100-percent copper body......The tip and re-engineered nose cavity provide even faster expansion."
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
A bullet's minimum expansion velocity does not necessarily determine wound channel characteristics. Testing on water is not a consistent way to get results from the two bullets. The hp on the TSX will allow hydraulic compression to work in favour of expansion, while the TTSX has a very pointy tip which would sooner cut through the water than be forced rearward into the hp cavity.Just to show the hp cavity characteristics between the two bullets. The two on the left are TTSX, the one on the right is a TSX...
A more direct way to compare the TSX vs. TTSX would be to ask Barnes which bullet opens easier and wider.
A friend lent me an interesting book to read, Death In The Long Grass by Peter Hathaway Capstick. I was thinking of your comments on expansion and picture showing the difference between the cavity opening of the Barnes TSX compared to the TTSX. It fell inline with his comment and tactic for ammunition he prefered for use on Leopard wanting rapid expansion. He was using a 375 H&H with 300gr factory loaded Silvertips. His method was to pry out the alloy tip to expose the soft lead beneath. Great book and I'm really enjoying it, even though I have no asirations or funds to go there. I'll have to try and obtain a copy.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
A .375 shooting 300gr HP's should do the trick on most anything with 4 legs
Capstick is the last person I'd put any credence in. He writes a good story though. Come to think of it he'd fit in well here.
I've read most of Capsticks books and he sure is a good writer and story teller. Not sure I'd be trying to emulate any of his hunting methods, especially ones that pertain to removing tips on bullets to create faster expansion.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
Capstick is the last person I'd put any credence in. He writes a good story though. Come to think of it he'd fit in well here.
Could well be, and as you've indicated,
I've found the book overall to be an interesting read. And, his rationale behind the alteration of the 300gr. SilverTips, out of a 375 H&H on basically a thin skinned somewhat dangerous animal like in this case a Leopard, seemed to make sence to impart the maximum amount of energy/stopping power.shortaction
CGN Regular
- Location
- Manitoulin Island, Ontario
A bullet's minimum expansion velocity does not necessarily determine wound channel characteristics. Testing on water is not a consistent way to get results from the two bullets. The hp on the TSX will allow hydraulic compression to work in favour of expansion, while the TTSX has a very pointy tip which would sooner cut through the water than be forced rearward into the hp cavity.
Just to show the hp cavity characteristics between the two bullets. The two on the left are TTSX, the one on the right is a TSX...
A more direct way to compare the TSX vs. TTSX would be to ask Barnes which bullet opens easier and wider.
I have never had a problem with a wound channel with a TSX, have you?
I would think testing on water would give very consistent results, the median in always the same? Animals are full of liquid, so the hp on the TSX will allow hydraulic compression to work in favour of expansion.
I don't know which one opens wider, guess that would depend which has the deeper nose cavity, but it would seem that the one that opens at the lower velocity would be would also be the one that opens easier!
I have never had any trouble(accuracy, expansion or penetration) with either the TSX or TTSX, so why not use the one with the high B.C.?
