Bullet failures - What your experience has been.

What bullet construction has failed you the most, on big game.

  • Mono Metal

    Votes: 25 20.3%
  • Partition or A Frame Style

    Votes: 2 1.6%
  • Bonded

    Votes: 6 4.9%
  • Cup and core

    Votes: 42 34.1%
  • Ballistic tip style

    Votes: 39 31.7%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 7.3%

  • Total voters
    123
Barnes bullets have excellent initial expansion with the help of the plastic tips. This has helped reliability too.

The Barnes TTSX is the most accurate, expanding, deepest penetrating hunting bullet made. Fact. Thanks for helping me realize this.
 
Since we are describing bullet failure, I think it's also necessary to describe bullet success.

In Golf, equipment manufacturers make a great deal of.money marketing the latest and greatest driver.....launch angle, trampoline effect, centre of gravity.....yada yad yada. In truth most shots are 100 yards.and in. The same applies to game. Most shots are short range.....despite what long range hunting shows.would have you believe.

My ideas.of success

Bullet killed the animal quickly and humanely ....one bullet, not counting coupe de gras
Performed as designed and marketed
Transferred energy to animal....wound channel, bone/organ destruction

Feel free to add


I remember as a kid, Model 99 308, short range Moose, often finding cup n core factory ammo bullets. Perfectly mushroomed in the offside hide. Perfect performance for a short range 308/303 velocity. Would this work for 600 yards, dont know, probably not. Would it kill a typical Mule deer buck, almost certainly.....say 150 on meat hooks....compared to 600-50 for interior Moose.

I dont really know how to express it, but you need to match the bullet to end use. A African solid is.not going to expand at any range; while a quasi target bullet, highly frangible, designed to expand at sub 1800 ft/sec might blow up and have horrible performance at 30 yards. Take a 150 gr .308 bullet traveling 3400+ ft/sec from a 300 rum, compare that to a 147gr eldx doing 2600 from a 6.5 creedmore....basically the extremes. Both are expected to kill, both would.....results would be drastically different depending on game size/resistance, range, and bullet stoutness/frangibility. Now add other methods, an arrow simply slices, imparting little or no "shock" or energy, a large/slow bullet (thinking hard cast 45/70) has a large frontal area....penetrates, minimal expansion, imparts some energy>>>>so close to how a arrow kills, but no hydrostatic shockwave/blood bubbles or enormous wound channel.

Then there's another dimension....speed of kill/ease of tracking vs excess meat damage. One finds little meat loss from arrows, people talk about eating right to the hole with 45/70. However, it's wise to let a arrowed deer bed down and bleed out......and a 45/70 is not necessarily a bear stopper, killer yes, but not a energy transfer/stopper. The other extreme is the hyper speed shoulder shot, turning most of a quarter into Rottweiler food. Match the hatch....right bullet, caliber, for range and species.

I'm rambling, but to summarize. Define failure and success? Dead or got away? A quarter of bloodshot Jello? Bullet recovered or large exit wound? Bang flop or three hours of tracking?

I seem to be moving away from 3000 +ft/sec Magnums.....one.day I will dig out my tonnage of original Barnes X bullets. Looks like buckmaster is the guy to buy them. Getting back to the original poll, I havent had any failures.with partitions.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, I just looked that up: Franklin Weston Mann, The Bullet's Flightpublished in 1909. It still appears to be available new.

In your professional observations, did you find yaw occured with every bullet?

You are asking about lab work I did over 50 years ago.

My recollection was that bullets wig-wagged for the first 100 yards or so. That is why we tested expansion at 100, so the yaw on impact would not distort the results.
 
I think what needs to be under stood is that no bullet is good at everything, bullets should be matched to the task and what your personal preference is.
Barnes X Bullets are deep penetrating, high weight retaining bullets, but they have low BC’s and struggle to open at low velocity ( less then 1800fps approx). If your not a long range hunter and your impact velocity’s will be above 1800fps depending on caliber and cartridge it’s a great round.

Accubond, Accubond LR, Scirocco, have much higher BC’s and will open at reduced velocities, however they will not out penetrate or retain more weight than a Barnes.
Depending on what game your hunting and what caliber your shooting do you really need the toughest, deepest penetrating bullet?
If you’re hunting antelope or deer with a 7mm rem do you want to shoot Barnes? You definitely can but you could also shoot a higher BC bullet that doesn’t slow down as fast, has a flatter trajectory and less wind drift.
I think that most hunters would agree if you are hunting elk or moose, deep penetration is more important than if you are just hunting deer and antelope, of course shot placement is the most important thing that you can do. But if you can shoot a bullet that’s tough enough to bust through shoulder bone and give you the option of taking quartering shot is the why not?
I definitely don’t think that a Barnes bullet that has lost a few petals after hitting heavy bone at high velocity is a failure, that’s asking a lot.
However not having a bullet open or expand in the velocity range that it is supposed to open at is a failure.
 
You are asking about lab work I did over 50 years ago.

My recollection was that bullets wig-wagged for the first 100 yards or so. That is why we tested expansion at 100, so the yaw on impact would not distort the results.

Sorry, I knew you are an experienced man... just didn't think it was fifty years ago experienced. Thank you anyway: the subject interests me.
 
. The second was this year on a cow moose with a 127lrx from a 6.5 prc at 140 yards. 3100'/sec muzzle velocity. I got the moose, which is the prime objective, but the bullet pencil holed through both sides.Next to no blood but as I said it did succumb to that 1 shot. So it worked I guess but don't think it opened at all, unproven of course.


I always find reports like this interesting. Can you give us a few more details?

What was the shot presentation ? (broadside/quartering etc)

Where did the bullet impact?

Where did the bullet exit?

What was the reaction of the moose?

Did you gut the moose? What organs were hit and what was the damage?

Thanks. I'm getting a 6.5 PRC made for me right now and the 127 LRX is on my list of bullets to try.
 
I always find reports like this interesting. Can you give us a few more details?

What was the shot presentation ? (broadside/quartering etc)

Where did the bullet impact?

Where did the bullet exit?

What was the reaction of the moose?

Did you gut the moose? What organs were hit and what was the damage?

Thanks. I'm getting a 6.5 PRC made for me right now and the 127 LRX is on my list of bullets to try.

Completely broadside behind the shoulder taking out the lungs. It exited far side but never hit bone (ribs)on either side.
it went about 100-125 yards before expiring. Like I said, The moose died but was surprised at the very small exit hole. It appeared to us that it didn't open at all.
 
Bringing this back from the dead because I think it has valuable and interesting information

Edit to add. I’ve seen a factory loaded Hornady ftx bullet completely separated after being shot from a 92 16” 44mag. The bullet broke a rib on entrance, 2 on exit. Wound channel was massive. Bullet re-entered leg, broke bone, and was recovered on far side of hide. Not sure I’d call that a failure.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have first-hand field experience on game with (a) the Federal Trophy Bonded Tip bullets (with the plastic tips) or (b) the older Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullets (hollow point)? I have both and would like to give them a try.
 
Does anyone have first-hand field experience on game with (a) the Federal Trophy Bonded Tip bullets (with the plastic tips) or (b) the older Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullets (hollow point)? I have both and would like to give them a try.

the old bear claws acted much like the swift a-frames. shot couple moose with them 100-150 yards with 7 rm - ya get a little hole on the way in and a bit bigger one on the way out.

got 140gr tbt for the 280 but haven't shot anything yet, id expect them to be between a swift s2 and barnes lrx.
 
I will post some pictures of recovered bullets and make comments.
This first group are C&C bullets recovered from game at distances from 30 yards to 350 yards.
All these were shot from standard chambering save one, a Norma 180 grain dual core from my
308 Norma Magnum. [range about 200 yards]
On the right are 6 bullet jackets that, while game was recovered, I consider them "failures"
20201224_172706 (1).jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20201224_172706 (1).jpg
    20201224_172706 (1).jpg
    113.6 KB · Views: 86
Last edited:
This next group are premium bullets, mostly Partitions with a few AB and Sciroccos
Plus one TTSX
This group represents about 20% of all game I have taken with Partitions, the remaining
80% made exit and were not recovered. I believe I have shot enough game with
Partitions to have a valid opinion. I fully trust the NP to do the job if I do mine.
20201224_172248.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20201224_172248.jpg
    20201224_172248.jpg
    83.8 KB · Views: 85
Last edited:
Here are a couple of other pictures. One shows two Barnes monometals that required second [or third]
follow up shots. I consider both these to show lousy performance. The TTSX has lost only the plastic tip
and was found sideways in the animal. The 338 was a bit far back [not my shot, BTW], but did not do
the damage that it should have.
20141210_184341.jpg

The last picture is a loaded round, a fresh component bullet, and the same bullet type exactly, recovered
from a bull moose. Chambering: 308 Norma Magnum, bullet: 180 Scirocco II, MV: 3125 FPS, range 85 yards.
Bullet was recovered under hide of far side of the chest. Moose went 10 feet and pitched on his nose.
This is ideal, IMHO. Dave.
20141028_183637.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20141028_183637.jpg
    20141028_183637.jpg
    45.7 KB · Views: 84
  • 20141210_184341.jpg
    20141210_184341.jpg
    18.7 KB · Views: 71
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom