Understanding The Barnes TSX Controversy

[grand veneur]

Ultimately it's all a question of impact velocity, although there should hardly be any problems with current small and medium caliber rifles. When it comes to big bore rifles and especially when it comes to the choice of suitable ammunition for double rifles, things can look completely different. If the involved double rifle moreover is an old and used rifle, the problem can become even more difficult.

Despite the fact that I also appreciate the Barnes bullets for many reasons, I remain of the opinion that for many big bore rifles and especially double rifles, you should primarily use classic SP bullets. Such statement leave some people outraged, but unfortunately that is so. These types of bullets are more suitable when the impact velocities are lower and due to the different jacket thickness, some are also suitable for older used double rifles. Nowadays we have enough premium SP bullets available for the big bore caliber classes. It is certain that Barnes TSX or Swift A-Frame bullets are superior to SP bullets, but they have to work as desired and not behave after impact like a frangible bullet or like a FMJ bullet.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

I like Barnes bullets and have a few rifles that love them. I shoot a handloaded 100gr TTSX’s out of my 257Wby at astonishingly high velocities well over their factory loaded specs.

I’d suggest maybe looking into the metallurgical side of things. I have suspected something changed at some point in this, as I’ve seen differences in expansion, hit reaction, and wound channels from animals shot with the same gun and loading at very similar distances.

 

[Philip Glass]

I suppose anything can happen. I’ve used Barnes in 6 calibers including the 500g in the .470. I’ve always had good expansion.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Hard to draw any firm conclusions from a sample of one bullet. I am sure that every bullet design will have experienced a failure to expand or perform adequately at some time or other but unless the bullet is recovered it is hard to say if it has failed. Saying that it is entirely possible for one batch to be more or less likely to expand at a given velocity due to material variations, alterations in annealing etc. Was the batch of ammunition chronographed as giving 2150fps or is that data off the box? I assume the range for both shots was similar - sub 80m? If the data was off the box then could the velocity have been much lower?
I have a moderate amount of experience with Barnes bullets having shot three to four hundred deer with them as well as some African game, buff, warthog, kudu etc with the 300 grain .375 TSX at 2550fps. I agree that velocity helps these bullets do incredible things. Providing there is sufficient velocity I find they show signs of very rapid expansion indeed.
I should add that I tend to use the 130gr TTSX at 3000fps (.308W) and the 120g TTSX (7mm Rem Mag at 3450fps)

I take it you're shooting those guns with cans attached?

 

[Ontario Hunter]

My experience with Barnes bullets and big bore calibers is limited to the shooting of two buffaloes with the cartridge 460 Weatherby Magnum and the 450gr TSX bullet. It was a maximum load with a muzzle velocity of approximately 2600 fps. The shooting distances were in both cases between 50 and 100 yards. In both cases the bullets were maximally expanded.

As far as the rifling is concerned, that certainly plays a role by the use of modern bullets and there are differences between modern barrels for bolt action rifles caliber 375, 416 or 458 and barrels for double rifles caliber 470 and above.

You must be a big fella to hang onto that gun with those bullets at that velocity. Wow!

 

[JG26Irish_2]

My experience with Barnes TSX is quite limited. This past July on a Safari to Africa, I took one animal with my 375HH FN Browning using the 300g TSX ammo. This was a rather large Blue Wildebeest bull that weighed in at just over 600lbs. The first shot at 160y was a frontal shot slightly quartering right that hit the right lung, clipped the top of the heart and just clipped the left lung before penetrating about 36" lodging in the paunch. The bull jumped, bucked and ran about 60y before falling. We approached to 60y where my PH suggested a 2nd shot to anchor the bull. That shot was to the neck and was a thru and thru shot but did not finish the animal. When we got to 10y more or less I fired a third shot to the chest that finished the beast. That bullet was found under the hide on the opposite side. MV was about 2500fps and impact vel for shot one was about 2250fps. That shot opened up to 0.72" or about 1.9x. Shot 3 at very close range opened up to 0.80" or 2.1x.

In comparison my 308 loaded with 180g bonded bullets managed to drop five animals at ranges from 20y to 202y all with one shot kills and none ran further than 60y (Gemsbok shot at 202y). I was a bit underwhelmed by the Barnes performance. While the first shot killed the Wildebeest it still took two more to finish it. The hunt was a dress rehearsal for a DG hunt in 2025. I am still pondering which ammo to use for Cape Buffalo on that hunt. My rifle shots the Barnes very well and at closer ranges I should not worry about it expanding. From what I have seen, it does seem to expand more slowly than traditional soft point ammo. My other option is Swift A-Frames also in 300g.

I am tuning up a Husqvarna 30-06 for PG hunting next year as we will be in Free State for part of that time and I want to hunt some critters that will possibly take longer shots. I have tested 180g Barnes TTSX and Swift Sciroccos, as well as Fusion bonded (What I used with the 308). The rifle shot them all well but liked the Swift and Barnes pills the best. I will probably not use the Barnes for that rifle.

Below is a pic of the two recovered TSX bullets from my Wildebeest as well as a pic of the animal which measure about 1/8" short of a Rowland Ward record book trophy (Prelim numbers).

 

[skydiver386]

Well the issue is when TSX bullets seemingly fail to expand at normal factory loads, and at middling if not short distance. Not an issue of too long a range, or a weak load.

Barnes may say 1500, but my eyebrows are raised when there are reports of broadside, 100 yards 30 caliber shots from factory loads which should be at 2500 penciling through.

Similarly, I find the thoughts on twist interesting: Would the Barnes TSX reliably expand at 2400 out of my 1:10, but fail for someone with a 1:12?

The answer is YES!

This is a direct quote from Cutting Edge Bullets.

"If your rifle has the listed twist rate or faster, you will be able to shoot that bullet. If it is slower, you WILL NOT be able to shoot that bullet. These listed twist rates are a REQUIREMENT to shoot said bullet, not a suggestion."

This requirement for faster twist rates is not just for accuracy through the air, it's also important at the point of impact with the animal.

Telling someone to "Just drive e'm fast and you'll be ok" is horrible advice. It leaves out half of the formula that makes most mono bullets perform properly on game.

Twist Rate X Velocity = Rotational Speed

When a bullets forward speed slows down, it's ROTATIONAL SPEED also slows down. Once the bullets ROTATIONAL SPEED (read that as centrifical force) goes below a certain level, that bullet will fail even if it's forward speed is above the recommended minimum!

This is exactly why a .458 500 grain bullet out of a rifle with a 1-10 twist performs wonderfully, but a .458 500 grain out of an older rifle with a 1-16 twist will often fail.

Adding velocity only partially solves the problem because it is only half of the equation.