premium bullet rant (read at your own risk)

[gordon-kruger]

One thing is perhaps the most important here, do not matter of what bullet but if you shoot a moose high on the shoulder it will go down - a buffalo will not do that - therefore a a-frame or even a Hornady RN or NF is impact to high in top of the lungs it will be a long day of tracking !!! Aim low exactly 30 % up on the shoulder and it will go down even with a 30-06 good quality soft nose - premium or not - !!

 

[Red Leg]

Gordon you are absolutely correct! after some thought, the use of the word "premium" was in poor taste.

my gripe is people claiming that using anything shy of the absolute most expensive bullet will somehow be detrimental to your hunt. when ever you mention the cost of a bullet peoples knee jerk reaction is to tell you that "bullet cost is nothing compared to trophy fees".

while bullet cost is hardly the biggest expense on your hunting trip, it is decent sized additional expense. the old saying "death by a thousand needles" comes to mind. one of the most costly parts of an African safari is the hundreds of small expenses that are often hidden or not considered. a hundred dollars here, three hundred dollars there, and before you know it you've added $3000 to the cost of your hunt.

-matt

Matt, I think I understood you perfectly. I just have a different opinion. And I suspect that we are simply talking past each other just a little bit. I use the best equipment I can find (and afford) when I hunt. That does not necessarily mean the most expensive. For instance in .375 on up, I believe that the TSX and its newer ilk are the best premium bullets on the market. They are not the most expensive - but if they were, I would pay more and use them. I think Northfork SPs and Bearclaws are right behind the TSX and I think they are both superior to the TSX in sub .375 cals. I pay a premium to use those bullets over some others because I believe they enhance my ability to ensure that first shot is as lethal as I can make it. Likewise, with waterfowl, I refuse to shoot steel - can't abide all the wounded birds. The various matrix loads are 3 and 4x steel. I suppose they too qualify as premium but I use those loads because they are far more effective - and frankly - ethical. But whatever I am paying for those bullets and shells really is the least part of the expenses associated with almost any hunt. Not sure why that, in particular, seems to bother you so much - but it is true.

And heck Matt, everything about this ridiculous pastime of ours falls into these sorts of choices. I use "ethical/lethal" first shot as my guide post. For instance, I am taking a Blaser S2 to Mozambique next week. It is the right balance of affordability and lethality for me and the way I want to hunt a double rifle. A far more expensive option would be a Holland & Holland Royal. And yet a Remington 700 would get the job done because two barrels, of course, really aren't a requirement. I don't envy the guy with the Royal (at least not too much ) nor look down my nose at the man with the Remington. That Blaser carries a Zeiss Victory. Compared to bullets that is a fairly meaningful investment, but what a difference such a glass makes - yet other less expensive scopes will get the job done. But one way all of us can afford to move up the lethality scale relatively inexpensively is to use the best bullet for the job. Because whether I am carrying that H&H, Blaser or Remington, if I am following a PH and tracker in Africa or guide in Canada, that best bullet really and truly is the least of my expense worries.

 

[gordon-kruger]

What experience you have Redleg from the TSX bullet in .375 (how many buffalo's did you successfully take with them) ?

 

[K-man]

If you want my experience with 1 buffalo, 1 bullet (a300grn 375 tsx) you can see pics on my profile page.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Been pondering this thread today and thought I'd add my perspective on the "premium" bullets. This isn't directed at anybody and not intended to upset anyone. We're talking shooting here gents, it's supposed to be fun! Some 60 years ago.....oh nevermind, read it yourself. This is from the Nosler website:

In the fall of 1946, a stubborn, mud-caked Canadian moose failed to go down, despite a well placed shot from John Nosler’s 300 H&H. On the way home from that trip, John started thinking about a way to make a bullet that would perform well every time, no matter what the size of the game or the shot angle.

Over the next year, he experimented with bullet design, finally settling on a unique, dual core bullet that was really the first Partition®. The following fall, John and his friend, Clarence Purdie, both killed moose with one shot using John’s new bullet. In 1948 the Nosler Partition Bullet Company was formed.

I don't claim to be an expert on bullet history, far from it. I was born nearly 20 years after John Nosler put out his Partition bullet and didn't start hunting until 1986. It doesn't seem to me that John Nosler was trying to put a wing ding brand new super duper premium bullet out, he was just trying to make a better bullet. And without a doubt in my mind, he accomplished that. I don't know for sure, but I would guess that folks had to pay at least a somewhat premium price for his bullets however.

I wonder if the internet had been around at that time, if the hunters of the day would have jumped on forums like these and scoffed at his new bullet. Would we have seen comments about how the bullets available prior to the Partition were just fine and there was just no need or even ability to improve on those bullets? That it was all about proper placement or not loading too hot or......?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is saying that whatever bullet someone may like and has had success with but isn't one of the so called "premium" bullets won't get the job done in most circumstances. The way I view it, the folks at Barnes, CEB, North Fork, Swift, Woodleigh, GSC and whoever else I may missed are just trying to come up with even better bullets.

Now my personal favorites are the North Forks (no surprise I'm sure to many here) and the A-Frames. Why? Because they're essentially improvements on the Partition. I like the baseline technology of a lead fronted bullet because it's so proven to expand. But the A-Frames and North Fork Bonded Cores expand on that technology by adding weight retention and in the case of North Forks, pressure reduction. If John Nosler were still around, I'd bet he would agree (perhaps only in private) that these offerings are an improvement on his design.

I'm not as big a fan of the mono-metals as I've seen some cases where the bullets have failed to expand. But they're known to kill effectively when they work as they're supposed to and I'm sure the rate of failure to expand is pretty small. Furthermore I believe this issue to relegated to the non-tipped TSX and in the small to medium bores. Whatever the case if you like it and have confidence in it, then use it.

The CEB's, a total departure from conventional bullet technology. I've not used it, but I know those that have and they appear devastating. They will see use in my .458 B&M because the effect is so dramatic that experienced PH's from what I've read are extremely impressed with their performance on DG, particularly buffalo.

Again why would I spend the money on these bullets? Because I think they reduce the likelihood of an animal getting away on marginal shot placement and lead to faster, thus safer and more humane kills on shots properly placed. It doesn't mean that if I were using less expensive bullets that I would definitely lose an animal or get charged by a properly wounded buffalo, but only that the likelihood is somewhat reduced.

Is that worth the time, effort and cost it takes in load development? For me it is, for others it isn't. To each his own.

 

[gordon-kruger]

Red leg did not answer regarding "how many buffalo's he successfully" put in salt with the Barnes TSX bullet. This is a couple .416 that I have used on buffalo. The old 400 gr Hornady RN is keeping the best rest weight and is perfect mushrooming ! The Partition have lost all lead on the front part and lost 40 % of its weight, the Speer have also lost around 40 % but is a bit soft, and the Barnes bullets have lost the wings and give a very small wound channel.

Left to right.
Hornady 400 gr RN
Nosler Partition 400 gr
Speer Mag Tip 350 gr
Barnes X 350 gr
Barnes X 350 gr
Barnes X 350 gr

Cheers, Gordon

 

[Red Leg]

What experience you have Redleg from the TSX bullet in .375 (how many buffalo's did you successfully take with them) ?

Sorry about not replying sooner Gordon. I was gone all weekend, and just now saw your question. I am hardly a buffalo expert - I have killed exactly two. I would note I have been shooting stuff for most of my 62 years both hunting and in the military. So though I am not a PH, I have pretty extensive experience in the terminal ballistics of a lot of different projectiles. My response to the "rant" was directed toward the implication that "premium bullets" weren't that important so long as one hit where it mattered. My opinion remains that what one hits a game animal with is also important, that it is a part of our ethical responsibility as a hunter, and that the right bullet represents a small relative investment in that hunt.

To your specific point, I find the TSX bullet (not the old X bullet) worked perfectly on those animals and has given similar service to a number of friends and colleagues. Some of those people are in your specific line of work. However, I do not insist it is the only "best" bullet for that or any other particular animal. My rifle likes them and I have confidence with them. This summer, my son, of whom I am a tad protective, will be shooting North Forks - another outstanding premium soft. My .318 WR loves the old Kynoch 250 gr soft, my .404 does best with Bear Claws, and I again use the TSX in the 500-450 barrels of my S2. This summer, I'll shoot TSX'x in the .375 barrels and North Forks in the 30-06. But to be clear, if a rifle likes them the TSX is my first choice .375 and above.

I am really surprised by the petals breaking off the TSX bullet - I assume these were 350's from a .416? This was a common problem with the old X bullet - they almost always shed one or more petals. I have probably recovered a dozen TSXs in different calibers over the last several years and as I say, have a large circle of friends who have looked at many more, and none have done this. Not all were shot at cape buff, but a lot were (and eland, water buffalo, and the like). Are you certain these are TSX and not X bullets? I am holding one in my hand which drilled through both shoulders of buffalo (lodged under far hide). Like all recovered TSX bullets the grooves are very pronounced. (Will try to post a picture shortly). Expansion like every TSX I have seen was perfect. I do not see those pronounced grooves in your bullets. Had you simply posted them, I would have identified them as the old X bullet doing exactly what it always did when hitting bone.

 

[gordon-kruger]

Thank you redleg for your answer, and yes the photo I posted are X bullets, I wrote that if you see under - Left to Right - anyhow my trust for the Barnes X is gone for more than 10 years ago, and its difficult to build up this trust again... my point is that the X bullet is the same as TSX with same material but with two cutting grooves and a polymer tip to state a better BC, anyhow its probably good that everyone do not prefer the same bullet, it would be hard to find them

I'm impressed every time I find a classic mushroomed 400 gr Hornady RN and its like a old friend that always are there for you.... not the best BC but up to 100 meter is doing the job time after time after time, and I say also like you r-l its perhaps not the best bullet in the world but shooting well in my rifle with superb effect !!

I do not know if its a "premium" bullet or not...

Gordon

 

[CAustin]

Gordon
Looks like the all did the job they were intended to do! Also looks like the Hornady mushroomed the best. Not being an expert of any sort can you tell me what the RN after the Hornady stands for? Thank you.

 

[Johnny7604]

"RN" stands for round nose.

If you look at the "abbreviation" section of the following web page you will see a list of common abbreviations for bullet configurations. Kind of mind boggling how many different names we have for little pieces of metal we shoot out of a steel pipe.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet


John

 

[Red Leg]

Sorry about not replying sooner Gordon. I was gone all weekend, and just now saw your question. I am hardly a buffalo expert - I have killed exactly two. I would note I have been shooting stuff for most of my 62 years both hunting and in the military. So though I am not a PH, I have pretty extensive experience in the terminal ballistics of a lot of different projectiles. My response to the "rant" was directed toward the implication that "premium bullets" weren't that important so long as one hit where it mattered. My opinion remains that what one hits a game animal with is also important, that it is a part of our ethical responsibility as a hunter, and that the right bullet represents a small relative investment in that hunt.

To your specific point, I find the TSX bullet (not the old X bullet) worked perfectly on those animals and has given similar service to a number of friends and colleagues. Some of those people are in your specific line of work. However, I do not insist it is the only "best" bullet for that or any other particular animal. My rifle likes them and I have confidence with them. This summer, my son, of whom I am a tad protective, will be shooting North Forks - another outstanding premium soft. My .318 WR loves the old Kynoch 250 gr soft, my .404 does best with Bear Claws, and I again use the TSX in the 500-450 barrels of my S2. This summer, I'll shoot TSX'x in the .375 barrels and North Forks in the 30-06. But to be clear, if a rifle likes them the TSX is my first choice .375 and above.

I am really surprised by the petals breaking off the TSX bullet - I assume these were 350's from a .416? This was a common problem with the old X bullet - they almost always shed one or more petals. I have probably recovered a dozen TSXs in different calibers over the last several years and as I say, have a large circle of friends who have looked at many more, and none have done this. Not all were shot at cape buff, but a lot were (and eland, water buffalo, and the like). Are you certain these are TSX and not X bullets? I am holding one in my hand which drilled through both shoulders of buffalo (lodged under far hide). Like all recovered TSX bullets the grooves are very pronounced. (Will try to post a picture shortly). Expansion like every TSX I have seen was perfect. I do not see those pronounced grooves in your bullets. Had you simply posted them, I would have identified them as the old X bullet doing exactly what it always did when hitting bone.

Thank you redleg for your answer, and yes the photo I posted are X bullets, I wrote that if you see under - Left to Right - anyhow my trust for the Barnes X is gone for more than 10 years ago, and its difficult to build up this trust again... my point is that the X bullet is the same as TSX with same material but with two cutting grooves and a polymer tip to state a better BC, anyhow its probably good that everyone do not prefer the same bullet, it would be hard to find them

I'm impressed every time I find a classic mushroomed 400 gr Hornady RN and its like a old friend that always are there for you.... not the best BC but up to 100 meter is doing the job time after time after time, and I say also like you r-l its perhaps not the best bullet in the world but shooting well in my rifle with superb effect !!

I do not know if its a "premium" bullet or not...

Gordon

The Hornady RN is indeed a great bullet - no argument at all - and I think most would not place it in the same class as say a Remington core lokt. Missed your ID behind the recovered Barnes. Assumed since I was talking about TSXs you were as well. I am told Randy Brooks and team also changed the metallurgy on the TSX in some way. I can't independently confirm that, but I can confirm that, unlike the X bullet, the new bullets do not shed petals, drive very deeply, and create a significant wound channel. Your experience with the X bullet is exactly mine and a lot of other people. Whatever Ju Ju was used, the TSX is a different thing entirely.

 

[CAustin]

Thanks for the answer Johnny and the attached chart. Thought round nose was a possibility.

 

[Red Leg]

This is a photo of a .375 300 gr TSX after penetrating both shoulders of a buffalo and stopping under the hide on the off side. Typical performance of this bullet. It puts the bullet into a whole different performance class than its predecessor, the X bullet.

 

[enysse]

Red Leg is correct the Barnes X and the TSX are made of a different metal composite.

I guess premium bullets is sensitive subject to everyone. In North America I use Power Points, Interbonds, SST, Core Lokt, Swift A Frame and Accubond. I have used the Barnes X with a lot of success and the Fail Safes.

I use the TSX and TTSX a little just because of cost... To me they are twice as expensive to use and costs add up. Shot placement is everything. If you don't take out the lungs or heart you are playing with luck then counting on taking out the central nervous system or a major artery...it can work but I won't hedge my bets on it.

So far in Africa I have used super cheap bullets, but after the last trip...no more. I was using Remington's Premier Boattail bullets. 190 grain bullets in 300 Win Mag but they won't penetrate a front shoulder so no more.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Red Leg is correct the Barnes X and the TSX are made of a different metal composite.

I guess premium bullets is sensitive subject to everyone. In North America I use Power Points, Interbonds, SST, Core Lokt, Swift A Frame and Accubond. I have used the Barnes X with a lot of success and the Fail Safes.

I use the TSX and TTSX a little just because of cost... To me they are twice as expensive to use and costs add up. Shot placement is everything. If you don't take out the lungs or heart you are playing with luck then counting on taking out the central nervous system or a major artery...it can work but I won't hedge my bets on it.

So far in Africa I have used super cheap bullets, but after the last trip...no more. I was using Remington's Premier Boattail bullets. 190 grain bullets in 300 Win Mag but they won't penetrate a front shoulder so no more.

If those bullets are actually Sierra Boattails I'm not surprised at those results. About a hundred years ago in Idaho, I shot a mulie with my 7mm Magnum using those Sierra's. The bullet put two holes in the deer on the same side!

After getting the deer home and hung and cleaned, it appeared the bullet broke into two pieces when it hit a rib. The larger piece, defying all belief, made a hard right turn skipping along the inside of the rib care cutting the membrane as it traveled. It finally gained traction and broke through at the belly.

The smaller piece veered slightly left and created a leak at the top of the heart. That hole was maybe the size of what I'd expect from a .22 and likely not even that. But it was a fatal leak and the deer went down within 50 yards of where it was hit.

Long point, that deer was hit exactly where it was supposed to be, pretty much good luck that I was able to recover it.

 

[enysse]

Well to quantify my experience with a soft boattail bullet. There was a blue wildebeest in Namibia that took a bullet at 200 yards to the shoulder it hit and messed his shoulder up very bad and bruised and wrecked his heart and lungs...slower death. Then the famous waterbuck, that made me mad. Shot at a waterbuck like 150 yards away, slight quartering to shot. Hit the shoulder, bullet bounced off the ribcage with just a leg wound. If a 300 Win can't do the job, then the bullet is the problem. A Barnes X would have flattened that waterbuck!!!

A Boattail is super deadly, if placed right. In the wrong place a nightmare, maybe round nose soft bullets work better?

I have killed a ton of deer with 100 grain power points in a .243 Win.

 

[graybird]

When I think of "premium" bullets, cost has never figured into the equation. My thoughts go more towards bullet construction. This being compared to the tradition cup and core bullets.

 

[tarbe]

I drive a smallish diesel car that gets 45+ miles per gallon.

The money I save on fuel, I spend on bullets!

 

[gordon-kruger]

ha..ha that a god one tarbe.... ..............

 

[enysse]

I'm think now, have two supplies of bullets : practice bullets and hunting bullets.