Yes it does. A double lung shot as example, marginal shot on African game but a shot most US hunter think is good. A fast expanding soft point will create much more damage and quickly put that animal down. A solid, or quite possibly these Barnes TSX, will not. A quartering towards you shot slightly back, one lung and liver, poor shot. You'd have a long tracking job with a bullet that doesn't expand and break away.
I shall beg to differ on this. A double lung shot IS NOT a marginal shot on African game.
The "behind-the-shoulder, double-lung shot" is as deadly on African animals, as it is on American, European, or Asian animals.
Many species will go many miles with a completely destroyed shoulder and/or broken leg, but there is no living mammal that will go more than a few hundred yards, if that much, with two collapsed lungs. Even a perforated heart can keep an animal running for a while,
not a brain deprived from oxygen. This is a simple physiological reality. A TSX will collapse two lungs quite efficiently ... and it has many times in my experience.
As a matter of fact, I use the TTSX on PG for convenience reason because this is what Barnes and Weatherby load in the .257 and .300 Wby ammo, but my wife shot an entire safari with Federal Premium .270 Win 130 gr TSX because her usual Barnes 130 gr TTSX ammo was out of stock just after COVID, and we could not see any difference whatsoever in killing effectiveness.
Admittedly, she only hit the lung/heart area on all animals shot, so I cannot comment on potential differences of effectiveness between TSX and TTSX for gut shots. And quite honestly, I do not believe that any bullet would deliver satisfactory results in the guts. A diverging fragment from a NP front core, for example, may (?) by chance clip the liver if it goes by close enough, which a TSX may not do, but this is as much as I think can be hoped for a specific bullet to make up for a bad shot...
As to body-shots placement, there are indeed morphological differences between species, but all four-legged mammals, African animals included, are built on the same schematic, and there is nothing easier than locating the vital area, generally one third up behind the elbow of the front leg. There is also no bigger target, on any animal, that the lungs/heart vital area.
A few very specific shots (e.g. sitting leopard) require indeed more knowledge of their specific anatomy, but any herbivore, all the way up to and including Buffalo or Elephant will get to the salt shed promptly with an accurately placed behind-the-shoulder, double-lung shot.
Matter of fact, I have taken many dozen clients to Africa, where I generally spend the first day with them and their PH, and I always recommend this shot, which has been invariably deadly. There is enough "first safari excitement" going on in general to not complicate things more than needed, and the old African "break the shoulder" shot belongs to a long-gone era when a lot of military ammo was shot in a lot of Mauser, Lee–Enfield, Mannlicher, etc. A Kudu will succumb perfectly to the same behind-the-shoulder, double-lung shot that will take an Elk in the US or a Red Stag in Europe.
My own reaction to your opening post conclusion: "
Had to do these species again, and only using one bullet type, I would chose something that is quicker expanding" would be to suggest that another conclusion could be to deliver the shot in the vitals as opposed to breaking shoulder bones and muscle, none of which perform vital functions.
PS: this is quite a nice Sable you collected