I have to call BS on Barnes Video

[BRICKBURN]

I was hoping to take a factory tour but alas under the new owners policies I am no longer allowed to take the free tour. Not a US Citizen. Oh well.

Apparently REMINGTON just bought out BARNES this year. The desire to expand into ammunition manufacture and not just do bullets and the finance required seemed to do well with the timing for retirement.

Anyway, as a parting gift I was provided a promo video. Performance vs Deformance.

Given the line I was just told in this video we can apparently shoot at animals that are standing side by side and you won't kill the second animal.

"Barnes bullets pass through game causing maximum shock and tissue damage"

The apparent Myth they are claiming to dispel that there is energy being expended in the hill behind the deer. (critter)

The test demonstrated a pass through on a Ballistic Gel block 24 inches deep

180 grain TTSX 300 remington Ultra Mag
2997 FPS striking velocity
Entered the block with 3590 Foot Pounds of energy
EXIT ONLY 23 FOOT POUNDS

ie. 99.35 % of the energy was expended in the block.


Unknown assumptions: Not that a lot of deer are 24 inches deep in the chest nor are they likely the same density as the Ballistic Gel block, but I have a very hard time accepting the line.

I wonder if Barnes is willing to pay the extra trophy fees?

Anyone smarter than me want to explain this one.

 

[sierraone]

Hi Brickburn. I cannot explain the ballistic question, but I will throw in another wrench to the part that you couldn't tour a factory because you are not a U.S. citizen! I am in Kosovo working a contract for about 7 weeks now. Several, but not all of the web sites that I have used many times for buying large caliber ammo, scopes ect in the past were not available to me on my internet here. A window will pop up and tell the site is for U.S. citizens only. A friend who is a high end IT guy was able to get around this by logging into my computer from the states and changed my IP address to make anyone or a computer in the U.S. think that I am in the U.S. It took him all of about two minutes! I only activate this feature when I am going to one of the "banned sites" for a foreigner. The rest of the time my IP address is Kosovo. So this makes me wonder if you were not allowed the factory tour since by U.S. law you couldn't buy from them directly since you are Canadian. Let me know your opinion on this. I could be completely wrong!

 

[JimP]

The problem with scopes and optics as I understand it is from Homeland Security and has nothing to do if you are not a US Citizen. If you are here in the states you can purchase any scope that you want to take home with you and then deal with your countries customs about the purchase.

For Brickburn it is interesting that their tours are only open to US Citizens. I might have to check that out when I am over there in a a couple of weeks. And Barnes Bullets has been owned by Remington Outdoor Company since 2009

As for their claim that the majority of the bullets energy is expended inside the animal I will also call BS. On my safari in May none of the bullets were recovered on shots ranging from 70 yards out to 400 yards. The furthest shots were on black wildebeest, gemsbok, and kudu and if you believe what they are saying then I should of recovered at least 1 bullet out of the 3 animals. I have also taken rocky mountain elk with the same loading and with a shot of 700 yards I had complete penetration on two shots into him with no bullets found.

 

[enysse]

I wouldn't count on it. If you stacked impala or blesbok up side by side it could be a slaughter.

 

[BRICKBURN]

.......... So this makes me wonder if you were not allowed the factory tour since by U.S. law you couldn't buy from them directly since you are Canadian. Let me know your opinion on this. I could be completely wrong!

I can buy the place out of Ammunition or bullets any time I want. Just can't take a tour and see how they get it done anymore.
Oh well.

 

[BRICKBURN]

The problem with scopes and optics as I understand it is from Homeland Security and has nothing to do if you are not a US Citizen. If you are here in the states you can purchase any scope that you want to take home with you and then deal with your countries customs about the purchase.

For Brickburn it is interesting that their tours are only open to US Citizens. I might have to check that out when I am over there in a a couple of weeks. And Barnes Bullets has been owned by Remington Outdoor Company since 2009

As for their claim that the majority of the bullets energy is expended inside the animal I will also call BS. On my safari in May none of the bullets were recovered on shots ranging from 70 yards out to 400 yards. The furthest shots were on black wildebeest, gemsbok, and kudu and if you believe what they are saying then I should of recovered at least 1 bullet out of the 3 animals. I have also taken rocky mountain elk with the same loading and with a shot of 700 yards I had complete penetration on two shots into him with no bullets found.

They said they were just bought out. Who knows.

You have to see this video.
The bullet goes through they are just claiming that it only had 23 Ft ends on the off side.
Interesting idea to me.

 

[BRICKBURN]

I wouldn't count on it. If you stacked impala or blesbok up side by side it could be a slaughter.

180 grain TTSx in 300 Winmag


I guess if the two Blesbok counted up to 24 inches of gel then I guess the third one is safe.

 

[enysse]

Well as long as Barnes is paying the trophy fees, I okay with it.

 

[JimP]

Do you have the link to the video? I went to their site and didn't see it.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Similar but not the exact one.

 

[JimP]

I was thinking of the difference between ballistic gel and a animals body. There are open voids inside the animal, the gel is solid granted the animal has bones and skin but in my mind all the gelatin shows is the amount of hydro static shock that there would be inside a solid object and really can't be compared to a animal as far as penetration is concerned.

It is also my belief that any bullet be it Barnes, Nosler, Speer, or whoever makes it. If it exits the animals body it has a chance of killing or injuring another animal on the off side of whatever you are shooting.

 

[Desert Dog]

I do not make the typical heart/lung shot on thin-skinned game when using the TTSX bullets. I go right through the shoulder. Damage is extensive and first-shot kill ratio and lack of tracking is the best I have ever experienced with any bullet.

Really, it doesn't matter what Barnes claims or what stupid gel tests they perform, the performance of the TTSX on animals speaks for itself. Just about every guide I hunt with is drinking the TSX cool-aid now. A product like that really doesn't need marketing gimmicks like the handgun ammunition manufacturers do. They have awesome penetration AND they open reliably every time, no need to make a ridiculous claim that the bullet has no energy left on exit. Shame on Barnes.

 

[farrokhrt]

The problem with scopes and optics as I understand it is from Homeland Security and has nothing to do if you are not a US Citizen. If you are here in the states you can purchase any scope that you want to take home with you and then deal with your countries customs about the purchase.

For Brickburn it is interesting that their tours are only open to US Citizens. I might have to check that out when I am over there in a a couple of weeks. And Barnes Bullets has been owned by Remington Outdoor Company since 2009

As for their claim that the majority of the bullets energy is expended inside the animal I will also call BS. On my safari in May none of the bullets were recovered on shots ranging from 70 yards out to 400 yards. The furthest shots were on black wildebeest, gemsbok, and kudu and if you believe what they are saying then I should of recovered at least 1 bullet out of the 3 animals. I have also taken rocky mountain elk with the same loading and with a shot of 700 yards I had complete penetration on two shots into him with no bullets found.

I agree, 30 caliber 168gr TTSX flying at 3060 (muzzle) I used to kill my sable and blue wildebeest from about 50 yards went through the animals and no bullets recovered. I wouldn't shoot anything with these great bullets if something else was behind it that I didn't want to kill.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Don't get me wrong. TTSX are in every rifle I shoot now.

I have recovered some (few) bullets, I have had them enter the animal sideways.

There is not one hope I would ever shoot these bullets at any critter with anything behind it I did not want to kill as well.

If I can ever figure out how to copy this video with this claim I would share the clip.

 

[Bert the Turtle]

Ballistic gel is consistent. One can make it arbitrarily thick and have any given bullet more or less reliably come out the other side with only a modest amount of energy. Given the vagaries of shot presentation, animal size, distance, and exact tissue path, such a demonstration in no way shows that one can reliably consider it safe to shoot at an animal that has another animal standing behind it.

I can think of one reason why one may wish to show that the bullet has little energy left when it exits the gel. There is a school of thought that considers full penetration to be wasting energy. They espouse the concept that a bullet which exits the animal is expending energy in the dirt and said energy would be better expended in the animal. The people that subscribe to this idea (and I am emphatically not one of them) will consider a Barnes bullet to be inferior to other bullets because the Barnes is such a good penetrator. Perhaps Barnes is trying to market to those people and rather than arguing the rather more complex topic of terminal ballistics or trying to convince those people that they are wrong, Barnes is choosing not to engage in a discussion regarding the core belief but rather to point out that even if there is a waste of energy the actual amount wasted is trivial. This would allow people to maintain their point of view and still choose a penetrating bullet such as the Barnes.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Bert, that is what the video seemed to be on about.
"how much wasted energy went into the hill on the offside of the animal"
Very little was the message of this video.

If it all has to be in the animal we should start using exploding rounds. NOT!

It is obviously a marketing ploy, but it pisses me off.

 

[Desert Dog]

There is a school of thought that considers full penetration to be wasting energy. They espouse the concept that a bullet which exits the animal is expending energy in the dirt and said energy would be better expended in the animal. The people that subscribe to this idea (and I am emphatically not one of them) will consider a Barnes bullet to be inferior to other bullets because the Barnes is such a good penetrator. Perhaps Barnes is trying to market to those people and rather than arguing the rather more complex topic of terminal ballistics or trying to convince those people that they are wrong, Barnes is choosing not to engage in a discussion regarding the core belief but rather to point out that even if there is a waste of energy the actual amount wasted is trivial.

This is exactly correct. They are trying to play the same game that defensive handgun ammunition manufacturers use, where a complete pass-through with energy to spare is considered very bad. Every self defense and CCW forum you visit is full of threads 100s of pages long with people arguing about how their bullets perform in gel, trying to get that magical 12" of penetration that the FBI says is needed, but scoffing anything that penetrates beyond 18".

The purpose of handgun ammunition is to STOP a threat with no collateral damage to other people, mainly stemming from law enforcement development to mitigate liability issues.. The purpose of hunting ammunition is to KILL tough animals as efficiently as possible over a wide range of distances, while preserving meat and leaving something to track if your aim was not true. Other than testing bullet expansion/fragmentation, gel tests are pretty much useless for hunting rifle ammunition. The vast majority of people shot with handguns live, so why would we want to emulate those ballistic results on an elk?

Barnes is marketing to the lowest common denominator.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

So Remington bought Barnes. This might explain why I can't find any Remington Premier Swift A-Frame ammo anywhere. Remington must have dropped the deal with Swift and now focusing on Barnes.

 

[lcq]

So Remington bought Barnes. This might explain why I can't find any Remington Premier Swift A-Frame ammo anywhere. Remington must have dropped the deal with Swift and now focusing on Barnes.

Remington was bought by the Freedom Group who own a pile of companies like DPMS Barnes is no longer a family operation