30-06: 168gr vs 180gr TTSX for PG?

[dchum]

Honestly,
I don’t think you or the game will tell much of a difference. t. As stated before me ^. You will get better mushrooming and terminal performance out of a mono metal bullet when the velocities are kept higher. Remember these mono metals are nearly 100% weight retention. That 168 TTSX mushroom is now equal or heavier than most 180gr lead based bullets.
So the 168 really does suit the 30-06.
Keep the 180 ttsx for the 300 win mag. In my opinion.

 

[dchum]

168 is perfect. Its not how heavy it is when it comes out of the gun, its how heavy it is after it hits. That 168 will weigh 168 most of the time. The conventional wisdom about heavier bullets like 180 or higher is from a time when a 180 would way less than 168 after impact. A 168 will take a kudu, zebra, oryx or any other plains game you'd like. At least mine did.

Bingo

 

[Philip Glass]

Have my first Africa and first PG hunt this summer. Largest animals will be Sable & Kudu. I've only been about to find Vor-Tx 30-06 ammo with the 180gr TTSX in stock and have been practicing with that. Although I've seen multiple mentions of using the 168gr loaded ammo, I can't seem to find it anywhere. Well, I did find 1-2 places charging nearly 2x the price of the 180s. Am I going to be at much of a disadvantage on PG using the 30-06 with the heavier 180s? I'm expecting all shots will all be within 300 yards.

I shot a sable in August with a .300 Win with Barnes 180g and it took 5 solid shots and still needed a knife to the spine to finish. You guys on your fist safari need to know from the veterans how tough Africa can be. Use more gun!

 

[Bert the Turtle]

I shot a sable in August with a .300 Win with Barnes 180g and it took 5 solid shots and still needed a knife to the spine to finish. You guys on your fist safari need to know from the veterans how tough Africa can be. Use more gun!

I had a similar experience with a fallow deer. No idea why the damn thing wouldn't die. But an '06 is plenty of gun for Africa. Unless you get one of those vampire animals. Maybe a wooden stake through the heart LOL

 

[One Day...]

Old wisdoms die hard; opinions often last a lifetime...

This is a recurring question that has been answered many times, but it is always worth revisiting...

There are opinions, and there are facts. Some opinions have been expressed already, so I will focus on facts.

What made the reputation of the 180 gr (actually the 200 gr) .30-06 load in Africa were older technology cup & core bullets that typically fragmented upon impact and penetrated with various weights of fragments. Progressing to the first "premium" bullet, the Nosler Partition, things started to get a little more predictable. The front core typically expanded quite explosively during impact and shaved off during the first couple inches of penetration, and the deep penetration was accomplished by the rear core, which typically represent 60 to 70% of the Nosler Partition weight. In so many words, a 180 gr NP typically penetrates with 180 gr x 70% retained weight = 126 gr penetrator.

It follows that for a given caliber, .30 for example, a 130 gr TTSX that retains 95% of its weight will penetrate just as deep as a 180 gr Partition, and typically deeper that a 180 gr cup & core bullet (and will generally create a wider wound channel).

I have not tested the .30-06 per se, but I have tested extensively the .300 Wby magnum on large PG and my experience is that:

• the .30 165 gr TTSX invariably penetrates deeper and kills faster than the 180 Nosler Partition;
• the .30 180 gr TTSX does not provide any better results that the 165 gr TTSX; both punch through and exit on all large PG, never mind small PG;
• the .30 165 gr TTSX shoots meaningfully flatter than the 180 gr TTSX;
• the .30 165 gr TTSX recoils meaningfully less than the 180 gr TTSX;

and actually:

• the .30 130 gr TTSX punches through large PG just the same (including wildebeest, Kudu, etc.), and, if anything, it kills even faster than the 165 or 180 gr TTSX likely due to more consistent hydrodynamic shock;
• the .30 130 gr TTSX shoots a lot flatter than both the .30 165 gr and 180 gr TTSX;
• the .30 130 gr TTSX recoils significantly less than both the .30 165 gr and 180 gr TTSX.

If data is relevant to one's mind, this all makes sense as a .30 130 gr that retains 95% weight penetrates with essentially the same weight (124 gr) as a .30 180 gr that retains 70% weight (126 gr), not to mention that it flies a lot faster.

Old wisdoms die hard; opinions often last a lifetime; and hard facts are often not well known, so most folks continue to shoot 180 gr in their .30 or .300, but those who have shot the TTSX extensively will tell you that you can advantageously go 1 or even 2 bullet weights down the scale. I do...

This being said, opinions clearly carry more weight than facts in ammo sales, because I observe that Weatherby first stopped offering the 130 gr TTSX in factory .300 Wby loads, and then a few years later even stopped offering the 165 gr TTSX in factory .300 Wby loads, and now only offer the 180 gr TTSX. They will freely admit that this is due to sales volume, not performance. They load what folks buy. I regretted not having stocked up on the 130 gr TTSX load, and I bought 10 boxes of 165 gr TTSX load when I realized they were discontinuing it. That will last me 10 to 15 years as I only shoot the TTSX Weatherby loads on game and use the cheaper Interlock Weatherby loads for practice...

The 168 gr load carries a mystique because it was traditionally the "sniper" load in .30 caliber, but there is exactly zero field difference between 168 gr and 165 gr. Then of course, for those who do not reload, factories dictate the choices, I do not think that Barnes offers any other option than the 180 gr in Vor-Tx TTSX .30-06. But I you load your own, you can confidently explore what shoots best (accuracy, trajectory, recoil) for you among the .30 TTSX from 180 gr down to 130 gr, through 168, 165 and 150 gr. All will kill just the same any PG that walks the earth, and the heavier ones will up-gun the .30-06 into Eland territory with a careful shot, and will reach lengthwise the lungs from the rear in follow up shots on large PG; this last point being the valid argument for preferring 165 gr to 130 gr on large PG.

PS: as to how many shots it takes to kill, it all depends where the shots land... which is the main argument for limiting shooting distance, even from quad sticks...

 

[Philip Glass]

I had a similar experience with a fallow deer. No idea why the damn thing wouldn't die. But an '06 is plenty of gun for Africa. Unless you get one of those vampire animals. Maybe a wooden stake through the heart LOL

Yes sir it is in most cases. I had a client last year on safari with an ‘06 but he could dial and had 180g Barnes. He did well.

 

[Philip Glass]

Old wisdoms die hard; opinions often last a lifetime...

This is a recurring question that has been answered many times, but it is always worth revisiting...

There are opinions, and there are facts. Some opinions have been expressed already, so I will focus on facts.

What made the reputation of the 180 gr (actually the 200 gr) .30-06 load in Africa were older technology cup & core bullets that typically fragmented upon impact and penetrated with various weights of fragments. Progressing to the first "premium" bullet, the Nosler Partition, things started to get a little more predictable. The front core typically expanded quite explosively during impact and shaved off during the first couple inches of penetration, and the deep penetration was accomplished by the rear core, which typically represent 60 to 70% of the Nosler Partition weight. In so many words, a 180 gr NP typically penetrates with 180 gr x 70% retained weight = 126 gr penetrator.

It follows that for a given caliber, .30 for example, a 130 gr TTSX that retains 95% of its weight will penetrate just as deep as a 180 gr Partition, and typically deeper that a 180 gr cup & core bullet (and will generally create a wider wound channel).

I have not tested the .30-06 per se, but I have tested extensively the .300 Wby magnum on large PG and my experience is that:

• the .30 165 gr TTSX invariably penetrates deeper and kills faster than the 180 Nosler Partition;
• the 1.30 80 gr TTSX does not provide any better results that the 165 gr TTSX; both punch through and exit on all large PG, never mind small PG;
• the .30 165 gr TTSX shoots meaningfully flatter than the 180 gr TTSX;
• the .30 165 gr TTSX recoils meaningfully less than the 180 gr TTSX;

and actually:

• the .30 130 gr TTSX punches through large PG just the same (including wildebeest, Kudu, etc.), therefore it penetrates just as deep, and, if anything, it kills even faster than the 165 or 180 gr TTSX likely due to more consistent hydrodynamic shock;
• the .30 130 gr TTSX shoots a lot flatter than both the .30 165 gr and 180 gr TTSX;
• the .30 130 gr TTSX recoils significantly less than both the .30 165 gr and 180 gr TTSX.

If data is relevant to one's mind, this all makes sense as a .30 130 gr that retains 95% weight penetrates with essentially the same weight (124 gr) as a .30 180 gr that retains 70% weight (126 gr), not to mention that it flies a lot faster.

Old wisdoms die hard; opinions often last a lifetime; and hard facts are often not well known, so most folks continue to shoot 180 gr in their .30 or .300, but those who have shot the TTSX extensively will tell you that you can advantageously go 1 or even 2 bullet weights down the scale. I do...

This being said, opinions clearly carry more weight than facts in ammo sales, because I observe that Weatherby first stopped offering the 130 gr TTSX in factory .300 Wby loads, and then a few years later even stopped offering the 165 gr TTSX in factory .300 Wby loads, and now only offer the 180 gr TTSX. They will freely admit that this is due to sales volume, not performance. They load what folks buy. I regretted not having stocked up on the 130 gr TTSX load, and I bought 10 boxes of 165 gr TTSX load when I realized they were discontinuing it. That will last me 10 to 15 years as I only shoot the TTSX Weatherby loads on game and use the cheaper Interlock Weatherby loads for practice...

The 168 gr load carries a mystique because it was traditionally the "sniper" load in .30 caliber, but there is exactly zero field difference between 168 gr and 165 gr. Then of course, for those who do not reload, factories dictate the choices, I do not think that Barnes offers any other option than the 180 gr in TTSX .30-06. But I you load your own, you can confidently explore what shoots best (accuracy, trajectory, recoil) for you among the .30 TTSX from 180 gr down to 130 gr, through 168, 165 and 150 gr. All will kill just the same any PG that walks the earth, and the heavier ones will up-gun the .30-06 into Eland territory with a careful shot, and will lengthwise the lungs from the rear up in follow up shots on large PG; this last point being the valid argument for preferring 165 gr to 130 gr on large PG.

PS: as to how many shots it takes to kill, it all depends where the shots land... which is the main argument for limiting shooting distance, even from quad sticks...

I would not advise Nosler Partition for Africa. So if we take the out then what? Heavier bullets are certainly more accurate for one and if they retain their weight as they should then why are they not better? I am not married to any bullet weight and like you have gone down in some cases.
PG

 

[BWH]

I personally used the 168gr in Barnes TTSX. Worked perfectly, speed, weight & performance. From little guys to Eland & 20 PG in between.

 

[One Day...]

I would not advise Nosler Partition for Africa. So if we take the out then what? Heavier bullets are certainly more accurate for one and if they retain their weight as they should then why are they not better? I am not married to any bullet weight and like you have gone down in some cases.
PG

I too moved on from the Nosler Partition after 40 years of happy use. They still kill well enough, but one needs to start with heavier slugs to account for predictable weight loss. I only shoot TTSX (or TSX in DG calibers) these days...

I do not believe that there is any science or any fact about heavier bullets being more accurate. They retain more momentum and they have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient, hence they buck the wind better, but they are not more accurate.

Heavier bullets do not fly as flat and they recoil substantially more. Arching trajectories combined with lesser recoil control translate into less accurate shooting in hunting conditions.

This may explain why it takes 5 shots to kill a Sable, especially if shot at 600 yards, even from quad sticks, as evoked in another post...

If modern lighter bullets offer the same penetration as older heavier bullets, there is little advantage in sticking to "traditional" bullet weights for the same hunting. Up-gunning a given caliber for increased performance i.e. using the caliber on larger game (e.g. .300 on Eland) or more uncertain quartering or lengthwise shots is the only, but limited application, rationale for shooting the same weight in modern bullets (e.g. TTSX or AFrame) as in older cup & core "traditional" loads.

 

[dchum]

I would not advise Nosler Partition for Africa. So if we take the out then what? Heavier bullets are certainly more accurate for one and if they retain their weight as they should then why are they not better? I am not married to any bullet weight and like you have gone down in some cases.
PG

When did the nosler partion stop working?

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I believe the 168 Barnes was made for 30-06 velocities, and the 165 for magnum speeds. I don’t know how the 180s rate.
Nice to see you back @One Day...

 

[Philip Glass]

When did the nosler partion stop working?

It comes apart. Far inferior to Barnes, A frame, and Accobond et al.

 

[RandEMT]

Took 168 TTSX to Huntershill in the East Cape 2 weeks ago out of my 300 WSM. My gun loved this bullet. Using Choice Ammunition hand loads. I like the extra speed for this particular bullet. The 10 plains game animals I shot did not love this bullet. From Steenbuck to Eland. All dropped on the spot with the exception of the Eland that only gave me a frontal shot. Needed one more after he turned. Love the 168s out of my 300!

 

[Philip Glass]

I too moved on from the Nosler Partition after 40 years of happy use. They still kill well enough, but one needs to start with heavier slugs to account for predictable weight loss. I only shoot TTSX (or TSX in DG calibers) these days...

I do not believe that there is any science or any fact about heavier bullets being more accurate. They retain more momentum and they have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient, hence they buck the wind better, but they are not more accurate.

Heavier bullets do not fly as flat and they recoil substantially more. Arching trajectories combined with lesser recoil control translate into less accurate shooting in hunting conditions.

This may explain why it takes 5 shots to kill a Sable, especially if shot at 600 yards, even from quad sticks, as evoked in another post...

If modern lighter bullets offer the same penetration as older heavier bullets, there is little advantage in sticking to "traditional" bullet weights for the same hunting. Up-gunning a given caliber for increased performance i.e. using the caliber on larger game (e.g. .300 on Eland) or more uncertain quartering or lengthwise shots is the only, but limited application, rationale for shooting the same weight in modern bullets (e.g. TTSX or AFrame) as in older cup & core "traditional" loads.

A .375 solves the debate!

 

[One Day...]

It comes apart. Far inferior to Barnes, A frame, and Accobond et al.

Actually, the Partition was designed to have the front core expand violently, and the rear core penetrate deeply, which is exactly what it does. This was a tremendous step forward from the previous generation of bullets, and for 40 years the Partition was the bullet by which all others were judged. To this day, yes technology has evolved since 1948 and modern bullets retain more weight while expanding, but it is still probably one of the very best bullets there is for most PG applications and especially for Leopard or even Lion where violent expansion in rather shallow chests is highly preferable to endless penetration.

Things tend to get confused, and the "deep penetration" credo that resonate as a constant backdrop in safari hunting circles, only really applies to the heavy weight DG (Buffalo, Elephant, Hippo), to which, by experience, I would add Eland. Actually, in most cases the deep penetration of the TTSX and AFrame on PG is expanded against the landscape behind the animal where it does not do much good after the bullet punches through................

Truth be told, I appreciate the flatter trajectory and the lighter recoil of a lighter TTSX over a heavier Partition, but if it was not for the fact that I live in Arizona in a lead-free ammo zone (close to the Grand Canyon where Condors are being re-introduced), I would likely not have started on the TTSX path, so happy was I with the Partition. I actually finished some stocks of Federal Premium ammo loaded with Partition (the only "premium" ammo in the market, with Weatherby, also loaded with Partitions, for decades) during my first safaris and was quite happy with them.

A .375 solves the debate!

I am not so sure about that too, or how to interpret it. As good as the grand old .375 H&H is, its .300 gr slug in the wrong place does not beat a 165 gr .30 slug in the right place...

This being said, I absolutely believe that a .300 with a decently heavy slug (165 gr or 180 gr) will kill an Eland, I have seen it done enough to believe it, but I agree that for those who can shoot it well a larger caliber is better. The .33s work, and the .375s have been for a century the reference on Eland. Folks tend to not realize that an Eland is actually as big as a Buffalo. A great sable tops the scale at 500 lbs.; an Eland that does not watch its cholesterol goes 2,000 lbs...

 

[gizmo]

180 TTSX’s will do you well. I hand load them for all my PG hunting. If you do your job they will do theirs.

 

[Newboomer]

Have my first Africa and first PG hunt this summer. Largest animals will be Sable & Kudu. I've only been about to find Vor-Tx 30-06 ammo with the 180gr TTSX in stock and have been practicing with that. Although I've seen multiple mentions of using the 168gr loaded ammo, I can't seem to find it anywhere. Well, I did find 1-2 places charging nearly 2x the price of the 180s. Am I going to be at much of a disadvantage on PG using the 30-06 with the heavier 180s? I'm expecting all shots will all be within 300 yards.

180gr TTSX or TSX will be perfect for the game you'll be hunting at the ranges you mention or farther should the occasion arise.

 

[Newboomer]

Actually, the Partition was designed to have the front core expand violently, and the rear core penetrate deeply, which is exactly what it does. This was a tremendous step forward from the previous generation of bullets, and for 40 years the Partition was the bullet by which all others were judged. To this day, yes technology has evolved since 1948 and modern bullets retain more weight while expanding, but it is still probably one of the very best bullets there is for most PG applications and especially for Leopard or even Lion where violent expansion in rather shallow chests is highly preferable to endless penetration.

Things tend to get confused, and the "deep penetration" credo that resonate as a constant backdrop in safari hunting circles, only really applies to the heavy weight DG (Buffalo, Elephant, Hippo), to which, by experience, I would add Eland. Actually, in most cases the deep penetration of the TTSX and AFrame on PG is expanded against the landscape behind the animal where it does not do much good after the bullet punches through................

Truth be told, I appreciate the flatter trajectory and the lighter recoil of a lighter TTSX over a heavier Partition, but if it was not for the fact that I live in Arizona in a lead-free ammo zone (close to the Grand Canyon where Condors are being re-introduced), I would likely not have started on the TTSX path, so happy was I with the Partition. I actually finished some stocks of Federal Premium ammo loaded with Partition (the only "premium" ammo in the market, with Weatherby, also loaded with Partitions, for decades) during my first safaris and was quite happy with them.



I am not so sure about that too, or how to interpret it. As good as the grand old .375 H&H is, its .300 gr slug in the wrong place does not beat a 165 gr .30 slug in the right place...

This being said, I absolutely believe that a .300 with a decently heavy slug (165 gr or 180 gr) will kill an Eland, I have seen it done enough to believe it, but I agree that for those who can shoot it well a larger caliber is better. The .33s work, and the .375s have been for a century the reference on Eland. Folks tend to not realize that an Eland is actually as big as a Buffalo. A great sable tops the scale at 500 lbs.; an Eland that does not watch its cholesterol goes 2,000 lbs...

Eland is bigger than buf. They can weigh up to or over a ton. Mine came in at 1900 lb on the hoof. And they are one tough critter.

 

[One Day...]

A nice mature Buffalo bull will go 2,000 lbs.
Young bulls - too often confused with true trophy because they tend to have longer un-broomed horns - as well as truly old "dugga boys" on the decline will be a couple hundred pounds lighter, and some African variant such as Forest Buffalo or Savanna Buffalo also will be a couple hundred pounds lighter, but most bulls shot in South Africa should be healthy mature Cape Buffalo bulls.
Whether THIS Eland or THAT Cape Buffalo is heavier is always up for grab, but as a generalization mature bull Eland and Buffalo are in the same weight class.

 

[fourfive8]

I'm also in the group who loaded, shot, and hunted with Partitions since the time they changed from turned to the current swaged design- late '60s or so?. The original Barnes X was a POS... which delayed my conversion to the superior, current banded monometal designs like the TSX. Over the last few years I've sold off, traded away and completely moved away from Partitions and others in favor of the various IMO best designs such as Barnes TSX, GS Custom, North Fork, TBBC and A-Frame bullets for all large game both PG and DG. I've continued to load and shoot various "whatevers" for trigger time, shooting paper or varmints but not for hunting any large game.