Call Me "The Waffler"

[enysse]

I love the Swift A just below the TTSX. I actually prefer the Accubond over the Nosler Partition.

 

[rnovi]

FWIW,

I used 180 gr. TSX's at 2,950 fps from my 300 H&H in 2012.
My buddy Kevin used the 180 TSX at 2,650 from his 30-06 during the same hunt.

We shot everything up to Kudu x2 (.300 H&H) and Zebra (30-06) Black Wildebeest (.30-06).

On my Kudu with my .300 H&H, I shot the first at 280 yards, the second just shy of 290 yards.

On the first kudu I hit it three times before it went down. Two of the TSX's must have hit big bone: they did not exit and one bullet lost all four petals. The other lost two petals. The third round exited - from the angles I do not think I hit bone with that one.

On the second kudu I had a perfect tight behind the shoulder broadside from a prone position. The kudu took about 20 steps and collapsed. The bullet exited.

For my buddy and his .30-06, the TSX exited every critter except the Zebra - the bullet was found "As Advertised" perfect mushroom under the skin on the far shoulder.

This is my opinion: TSX's kill, just not particularly spectacularly. On bigger game If you can hit nearside bone and shatter a shoulder you will drop your prey quickly. Otherwise they seem to lack the hydrostatic shock of a lead bullet (Partition, A-Frame, etc.). TSXs kill but almost every critter I shot through the heart lungs run a distance - 100 yards or so. My first kudu ran nearly 700 yards before my third shot anchored him (*we'd closed the gap to around 70 yards at the shot).

I guess all I'm trying to say is that "Bang Flop" isn't likely on lunch shots. They will die, but they will likely run quite a distance. Heck, even the Impala I shot ran 200 yards with it's off-side shoulder completely destroyed and both lungs taken out.

 

[rnovi]

PS: forgot to add: I'd use the TSX's again. There's a reason why you have Trackers in Africa. Do your job and then let the Trackers do theirs.

In fact, I'm going to use the Nosler E-Tip in two weeks...mainly because I got a bunch and they are incredibly accurate in my rifle.

 

[tarbe]

Heck, even the Impala I shot ran 200 yards with it's off-side shoulder completely destroyed and both lungs taken out.

Sounds like the bullet did all you could ask for. You never know when you are going to run into Conan the Impala.

Thanks for sharing your observations.


Tim

 

[billc]

Why just one bullet for all.Everything you loaded for me was shooting good and would hunt with any of them without changing scope setting at all.I think you should try a few 200 aframes when I send my next box out to you.

With the list you told me about I would not use the 220 and settle on the 180 for the hunt.I would want that flatter shooting bullet for some of the smaller stuff and longer ranges.Just think you will have all the info on the bullets when i get back to really mess you up.lol

 

[billc]

Here is why I like the 200 rain aframe you loaded out of my gun.

 

[tarbe]

Here is why I like the 200 rain aframe you loaded out of my gun.

Nice! You cannot beat that! Why would you want to shoot anything else?

 

[billc]

Because you loaded me all those nice 180 ttsx also.They shoot almost as good and some of the animals i will be after maybe out in that 300 yd range and then the ttsx maybe just alittle better.I just ordered another box of aframes so you can try some after you load me up another 20 or 30.Maybe just the bullet for you as it will give you that middle ground between your 220 nolser and 180 barnes.

 

[tarbe]

I guess all I'm trying to say is that "Bang Flop" isn't likely on lunch shots. They will die, but they will likely run quite a distance.

Got to thinking about your post...you said you used TSX? Not TTSX?

Reports are that the TTSX open more reliably and more quickly than TSX, due to the design - the polymer tip guarantees quick initiation of expansion.

 

[tarbe]

Just think you will have all the info on the bullets when i get back to really mess you up.lol

I will probably waffle again on bullets. Maybe not. Well, maybe. I don't know. I'm probably pretty sure I don't know.

Heck, I may get crazy and decide I have to take the 375. Then I can have two waffle sessions going on simultaneously!

 

[rnovi]

Got to thinking about your post...you said you used TSX? Not TTSX?

Reports are that the TTSX open more reliably and more quickly than TSX, due to the design - the polymer tip guarantees quick initiation of expansion.

Purely because I couldn't get TTSX's at the time.

I'd have used the TTSX if I could have - I'm a fan of tipped bullets in general.

 

[tarbe]

Purely because I couldn't get TTSX's at the time.

I'd have used the TTSX if I could have - I'm a fan of tipped bullets in general.

Thanks for the confirmation. I know how easy it is to leave off a T in TTSX!

 

[Velo Dog]

I think the TSX was a real improvement over the X, and the TTSX is a real improvement over the TSX.

I had trouble getting the old X bullets to shoot well and fouling was bad in my rifles. I gave up on them.

I had good luck with the TSX and actually took some critters with them

I have only killed one deer with a TTSX, but all reports indicate they are very reliable and have a wider usefull application range than even the TSX (impact velocity, angle of entrance, etc).

Hi Tarbe,

"ALL reports"?
If you get a spare minute or two, send an email to:
big5game@worldonline.co.za
Ask "Hannes" (pronounced hawn-ess) what he thinks of X-type bullets, including TSX, TTSX and such likes for shooting African critters.
He's the white dude under the baseball ball cap, nearest the caboose of the buffalo in my avatar here.
It's hunting season and he will be in the bush much of the time but, eventually he will get back to you.

One person here submitted that, some PHs don't know the difference between various models of Barnes bullets... older, newer and latest versions.
However, most of the PHs I have met, are rifle/bullet enthusiasts.
There is one PH I have met, "Coos", pronounced coo-iss (he works for Hannes) that really swears by the TSX or TTSX (my memory is not clear on which one anymore) in his 7x64 Brenneke, including for eland.
But Coos is the only PH I have met who does not prefer Hornady RNSP, Nosler Partition and generally RNSP/heavy for caliber "cup & core" bullets for PG, in normal bush conditions and Swift A-Frame or Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, North Fork, etc., for the first shot on buffalo.
After that, even Coos prefers flat nose-meplat solids or RN solids for the follow-up, especially monolithic ones for follow up on buff and all shots on elephant.

Likewise, in all fairness to Barnes, Kevin "Doctari" Robertson, recommended their monolithic expanding bullets in his incredible book, "The Perfect Shot".
I do however feel it's important to ad that in the same book he recommended Winchester "Failsafe" bullets and they were dropped by Winchester soon after their introduction, possibly from too many complaints of "Failure To Expand" in big game animals.

I'm gonna go do a couple lines of Geritol and I will catch up with you down the trail,
Velo Dog.

 

[tarbe]

Hi Tarbe,

"ALL reports"?

Likewise, in all fairness to Barnes, Kevin "Doctari" Robertson, recommended their monolithic expanding bullets in his incredible book, "The Perfect Shot".
I do however feel it's important to ad that in the same book he recommended Winchester "Failsafe" bullets and they were dropped by Winchester soon after their introduction, possibly from too many complaints of "Failure To Expand" in big game animals.

Dog;

I understand monometals have their detractors!

Yes, all reports....I have yet to read about a documented failure of a TTSX. Truly, someone just saying they don't like monometals over cup and core is not a documented failure, wouldn't you agree?

We all know human nature...if a person had a failure with an X bullet, the chance of them trying TTSX are probably slim. The TTSX is a failure in their mind due to association if nothing else. I would probably be inclined to do the same thing myself!

If there is a body of evidence documenting TTSX failures I would love to see it. This is not about love, it is more like science! Data is king! Bring on the data!

Regarding Failsafes, they suffered from the same deficiency as the original X bullet, and to a lesser extent the TSX. The could fail to open, especially when the angle of impact was severe, sometimes at longer range when velocity had fallen off.

I would not be "shocked" (no pun intended!) to see Barnes eventually drop the TSX and go TTSX exclusively. I personally don't see the point of the TSX any longer, and would not use them over a Partition, just due to the possible reliability issue.

Appreciate your thoughts!

Tim

 

[Norwegianwoods]

One person here submitted that, some PHs don't know the difference between various models of Barnes bullets... older, newer and latest versions.

Velo Dog.

I was the one claiming that.

I have not seen any PHs on this forum not knowing the difference, but I have seen it on another big forum.
In fact some PHs on this forum recommend the Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets, also for buffs.
And they seem very experienced and knowledgeable to me in all their posts.
Maybe Hannes have much more experience than them when it comes to the TTSX bullets..

There are made TTSX bullets for much fewer calibers than the it is done with the TSX.
In my experience have most people that have tried Barnes bullets, either used the old X or the TSX while much fewer have used the TTSX.
The TTSX have after all not been that long on the market.
For DG there are in reality 3 TTSX options. 250 grains for .366(9.3), 250 grains for .375 and 350 grains for .416.
Many think those weights are to low in those calibers and choose a heavier TSX version instead.
This can quickly result in to low impact speeds with some cartridges and ranges.


The TSX and TTSX are tested to always expand at 2000 fps in ballistic gel. Some versions are even made to expand at 1800 fps in ballistic gel.
The LRX is constructed to expand at 1600 fps in ballistic gel.
The TSX needs hydrostatic pressure to start expanding.
The TTSX and LRX don't because of the plastic tip.

Normally is animals harder than ballistic gel and you need less speeds than that to get the expansion needed.

You need to load your cartridge very moderately not to achieve the impact speed needed for the TTSX bullets to expand at short and medium hunting distances.
If you look at any of the normal .375 cartridges, you need to have a reduced load not to get 2000 fps at 200 yards with the 250 grains TTSX bullet.
And you will be way above that at normal DG distances.
But if you load it with the 350 grains TSX, you can very well risk to end up with an impact speed lower than 2000 fps.

The plastic tip of the TTSX ensures that the bullet will not be closed at impact.
The plastic tip of the TTSX ensures that the bullet tip will not be filled with mud or whatever at impact.
The plastic tip ensures an initial expansion without the need for hydrostatic pressure like the TSX does.

CEB also offers plastic tips for their Raptor bullets to achieve higher BC and more rapid expansion without the need of hydrostatic pressure to start it.
Just like Barnes with their TTSX.

Some even think and claims that the TTSX expands to rapidly and much because of the plastic tip, and because of this doesn't get enough penetration according to them, so they prefer to use the TSX instead, in case they will take angling and raking shots.

Personally I will always choose to use the TTSX instead of the TSX.
The TTSX is a better bullet in all aspects in my opinion.

 

[Velo Dog]

I was the one claiming that.

I have not seen any PHs on this forum not knowing the difference, but I have seen it on another big forum.
In fact some PHs on this forum recommend the Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets, also for buffs.
And they seem very experienced and knowledgeable to me in all their posts.
Maybe Hannes have much more experience than them when it comes to the TTSX bullets..

There are made TTSX bullets for much fewer calibers than the it is done with the TSX.
In my experience have most people that have tried Barnes bullets, either used the old X or the TSX while much fewer have used the TTSX.
The TTSX have after all not been that long on the market.
For DG there are in reality 3 TTSX options. 250 grains for .366(9.3), 250 grains for .375 and 350 grains for .416.
Many think those weights are to low in those calibers and choose a heavier TSX version instead.
This can quickly result in to low impact speeds with some cartridges and ranges.


The TSX and TTSX are tested to always expand at 2000 fps in ballistic gel. Some versions are even made to expand at 1800 fps in ballistic gel.
The LRX is constructed to expand at 1600 fps in ballistic gel.
The TSX needs hydrostatic pressure to start expanding.
The TTSX and LRX don't because of the plastic tip.

Normally is animals harder than ballistic gel and you need less speeds than that to get the expansion needed.

You need to load your cartridge very moderately not to achieve the impact speed needed for the TTSX bullets to expand at short and medium hunting distances.
If you look at any of the normal .375 cartridges, you need to have a reduced load not to get 2000 fps at 200 yards with the 250 grains TTSX bullet.
And you will be way above that at normal DG distances.
But if you load it with the 350 grains TSX, you can very well risk to end up with an impact speed lower than 2000 fps.

The plastic tip of the TTSX ensures that the bullet will not be closed at impact.
The plastic tip of the TTSX ensures that the bullet tip will not be filled with mud or whatever at impact.
The plastic tip ensures an initial expansion without the need for hydrostatic pressure like the TSX does.

CEB also offers plastic tips for their Raptor bullets to achieve higher BC and more rapid expansion without the need of hydrostatic pressure to start it.
Just like Barnes with their TTSX.

Some even think and claims that the TTSX expands to rapidly and much because of the plastic tip, and because of this doesn't get enough penetration according to them, so they prefer to use the TSX instead, in case they will take angling and raking shots.

Personally I will always choose to use the TTSX instead of the TSX.
The TTSX is a better bullet in all aspects in my opinion.

Hi again Norwegianwoods,

You make an excellent point, actually several excellent points, (as usual).
Furthermore, you have quite a bit of experience in the taking of animals with center-fire rifles.
I totally respect your opinion.

You have used the TTSX bullet quite a lot with great success and I cannot argue against success (nobody can).
The only reason I speak of an opposing opinion on them is because I would be remiss if I had heard they were not preferred by some PHs that I have met and I did not say anything about it.
Such silence on the subject might result in someone believing such bullets were flawless/foolproof, then losing the chance of a lifetime because their bullet did not expand and the animal was not recovered.

I think it is important that it becomes public knowledge that some PHs ask clients to avoid them because they are a bit hard (copper alloy is of course much harder than lead), thereby resulting in failures to expand from time to time.
Just the same as; that people should know old fashioned "cup & core" bullets tend to shatter against bone if driven too fast, instead of holding together and smashing through, into the vitals.

It seems to me that your recommendation for people to select the lighter for caliber TTSX so they can drive them faster is very good advice.

It is a shame that we do not live in close enough geographic proximity to get together and trade hunting/fishing stories now and then or, for visits to the rifle range or perhaps a deer/moose/wolf/grouse/whatever hunt now and then.

Kind Regards,
Velo Dog.

 

[enysse]

I actually have no problems with lead bullets. I love them and have a HUGE stockpile. But the TTSX and TSX do work best by driving them as fast as possible.
My two cents if you take the double lung shot, lead bullets work absolutely wonderful. If you hit a big bone on a "iffy" shot, sometimes they work, most of the time they do not. Learned my lesson the hard way on that one!
Heck I might use those old Barnes X bullets on the small antelope yet.

 

[Velo Dog]

I actually have no problems with lead bullets. I love them and have a HUGE stockpile. But the TTSX and TSX do work best by driving them as fast as possible.
My two cents if you take the double lung shot, lead bullets work absolutely wonderful. If you hit a big bone on a "iffy" shot, sometimes they work, most of the time they do not. Learned my lesson the hard way on that one!
Heck I might use those old Barnes X bullets on the small antelope yet.

Hi enyesse,

I presume you are referring to jacketed bullets with lead or lead alloy cores when you say "lead bullets".

Also, I'm not sure what an "iffy" shot against a big bone is, unless perhaps you are referring to my personal favorite rifle foolishness topic.....using a small bore rifle to shoot a large/heavily built animal.
If the above is so, then I must agree with you that when deciding to shoot a large animal with a small caliber for some reason or, choosing an otherwise adequate caliber but, for some reason wanting to use a light bullet/super high velocity in it for a large beast, then the TTSX is probably your best bet to pull that off.

Grumpy old Velo simply prefers to use enough gun on large and/or dangerous animals.
That not only includes a large bore for large game but also a rather high sectional density usually blunt shaped bullet for same.
The above recipe has worked awfully well for over a hundred years.

For long shots at things like N. AM pronghorn or African game like springbok, of course, I would go for at least a semi-spitzer if not a full-on spitzer shaped projectile and smaller calibers are tailor made for such animals at longer ranges and I like them for same.

Most of my hunting these days generally does not include super long shots any more - I finally have gotten my stalking abilities together after all these years (better late than never).
Therefore, old fashioned RNSP bullets have been so effective for me that I cannot get excited about trying anything else lately (perhaps I've outgrown the experimentation phase in my life).
Again, I must emphasize that I use plenty of gun though.
One example is that for eland or grizzly, I personally would not use less than a .33 bore/250 gr bullet/2400 fps.
And I'd prefer a .375 H&H/300 grain RNSP for either animal.
Just for me, not anything that I would demand other folks use for such as those.

I'm rambling.
Good Night,
Velo Dog

 

[Norwegianwoods]

Hi again Norwegianwoods,

It is a shame that we do not live in close enough geographic proximity to get together and trade hunting/fishing stories now and then or, for visits to the rifle range or perhaps a deer/moose/wolf/grouse/whatever hunt now and then.

Kind Regards,
Velo Dog.

I totally agree Velo Dog.
I very much appreciate your posts and views and I am sure we would enjoy each others company trading stories and being at the range or out in the nature with a gun and a fishing rod in our hands.

 

[enysse]

I have some bad experiences with slightly quartering to shots where the boat tail lead alloy bullet skipped along the rib cage or hit the shoulder and did not penetrate. One waterbuck was hardly injured and this is using a 190 grain bullet out of a 300 Win Mag.

Unless desperate I would avoid that shot altogether, with any bullet. But I think the lead alloy bullets are not made for that shot at all. A 375 H&H might just because of shear power.