Buck13
Member
I'm thinking of using Barnes TTSX or TSX in .270 Winchester. My choice of weight would be influenced by which will still be going fast enough to open up reliably at my limiting range (to be determined).
What is minimum velocity for TSX expansion?
- Thread starter Buck13
- Start date
- Status
Berger.Fan222
Member
I know they advertise lower numbers, but based on my years of experience and testing, 2000-2200 fps is the lower end of my comfort zone.
With the TTSX bullets, the heavier the bullet for a given caliber the lower the minimum expansion velocity. What bullet weight are you considering? The TTSX have a wider operating window in terms of velocity compared to the TSX bullets. You're probably looking at a minimum velocity of 1,800 fps with the 130gr TTSX. Ty over at Barnes does suggest a couple of hundred fps more than their suggested minimum as a factor of safety. This is consistent with Berger.Fan222's comments above.
The bullets in calibers larger than .308 work better at lower speeds. Around 2000 fps at impact is as slow as I'd be comfortable with in any 22-30 caliber. That doesn't mean you have to go with the lighter bullets. Just run the numbers and figure out at which range you drop below 2000 fps and consider that the max range for that load. The copper bullets generally do fine at normal ranges out to 300 yards or a bit farther. Not a good choice for the guys who want to shoot at 500 yards or farther.
I "borrowed' the photos from Nosler's website comparing the Accubond on top with their copper bullet. The Barnes copper bullets perform about the same. You get expansion at 1800 fps. But not enough to make me happy.
I "borrowed' the photos from Nosler's website comparing the Accubond on top with their copper bullet. The Barnes copper bullets perform about the same. You get expansion at 1800 fps. But not enough to make me happy.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,888
JMR40's pics are the EXACT ones I was about to go copy over, as they do accurately represent the expansion - or lack thereof - of the mono-metal tipped bullets on the market.
They'll kill game, but long range, low velocity impacts don't offer much expansion - they'll penetrate deep, but the game will run. Not great when you're shooting at ranges where you really need the game to be anchored quickly.
They'll kill game, but long range, low velocity impacts don't offer much expansion - they'll penetrate deep, but the game will run. Not great when you're shooting at ranges where you really need the game to be anchored quickly.
I worked up a 130gr TTSX load for a friend's Mountain Ascent chambered in .270 Win. With a MV of 3,050 fps the bullet is moving at 2,040 fps at 500 yards and 1,865 fps at 600 yards. I would have no concerns using that bullet on a mule deer at 500 yards. Any expansion results in petals that will cut tissue.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ain-ascent-270-win-6-1-2lb-elk-slayer.761028/
6-shot group with Barnes 130gr TTSX
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ain-ascent-270-win-6-1-2lb-elk-slayer.761028/
6-shot group with Barnes 130gr TTSX
OP
OP
Buck13
Member
Ok, that is very reassuring. Somehow, I had the idea that the Barnes 130 needed to be going about 2400 fps to expand well. Looks like even if I limited myself to >2100 or 2200, the range would be as long as I would be comfortable with shooting at an animal.
Riomouse911
Member
From what the writers have stated about the all copper X-bullets and their penetration/lack of weight loss in game animals, you should be able to go with 130's at normal .270 velocities and be good for elk on down.
OP
OP
Buck13
Member
That was my thinking exactly.
A friend was trying to convince me the .270 Win is marginal for mule deer, but I think he saw someone lose a muley at 400 yards and blamed the caliber rather than the shooter. I suspect the opposite was more likely the problem! I'd guess all the talk of 500+ yard hunting makes people forget that perfect shooting at half that distance is still not guaranteed, for the average rifle owner. But he outweighs me by about 70 pounds, so maybe he actually LIKES playing with his 7 mm STW! I'd prefer to suffer less, practice more, and know my range limitations.
My .300wm has stopped a few deer wounded by .270/.30-06 rifles, my .243 has stopped a few deer and antelope wounded by .280 up to 7mm Mag rifles, your .270's ONLY shortcomings will begin and end with YOU. I got a few friends that swear by the ol reliable .270 and having hunted with them quite a few years, plain old federal blue box to browning bxr to nosler partitions and ballistic tips, it doesn't matter what you throw at the deer as long as you put it where it counts. Though I would suggest not using the tipped Hollowpoints up close, they're meant to expand at distance and as such, they're QUITE messy up close.
Corn-Picker
Member
You could load up some of the 95 grain ttsx and launch them.at 3650+ fps 
These were produced to satisfy the 6.8 spc crowd, they wanted a copper bullet that would expand out to 300+ yards. Speed freaks have been using the 85 grain tsx and 95 grain ttsx in the 270 and 270 WSM.
These were produced to satisfy the 6.8 spc crowd, they wanted a copper bullet that would expand out to 300+ yards. Speed freaks have been using the 85 grain tsx and 95 grain ttsx in the 270 and 270 WSM.And some do that with magnum cartridges too. My go to hunting rifle for deer and elk is chambered in .375 H&H. I don't suffer while shooting it, in fact I enjoy shooting it, I practice a lot more than most and I know my range limitations (~ 600 yards). The .375 H&H is a good choice for me but my advice to anyone who asks me what they should use for hunting deer and elk is to shoot the biggest, fastest bullet of suitable construction that they can shoot well, and from a rifle/scope combination that they can "comfortably" carry for the duration and in the conditions in which they typically hunt. Bullet mass and speed buy margin and if you can shoot a magnum cartridge well then why on earth would you go smaller? The only thing you risk is the ire of numerous .270 Win shooters who are convinced that their choice is the best choice for everyone. The bullets from left to right are the Barnes 250gr TTSX, Federal 165gr Trophy Copper and Barnes 120gr TTSX all recovered from the 100 yard sand berm at my house. I've shot mule deer ranging from 203 yards to 460 yards using the Barnes 250gr and Federal 165gr.
Last edited:
Which 6.5 cartridge was used for that test? Just curious.And some do that with magnum cartridges too. My go to hunting rifle for deer and elk is chambered in .375 H&H. I don't suffer while shooting it, in fact I enjoy shooting it, I practice a lot more than most and I know my range limitations (~ 600 yards). The .375 H&H is a good choice for me but my advice to anyone who asks me what they should use for hunting deer and elk is to shoot the biggest, fastest bullet of suitable construction that they can shoot well, and from a rifle/scope combination that they can "comfortably" carry for the duration and in the conditions in which they typically hunt. Bullet mass and speed buy margin and if you can shoot a magnum cartridge well then why on earth would you go smaller? The only thing you risk is the ire of numerous .270 Win shooters who are convinced that their choice is the best choice for everyone. The bullets from left to right are the Barnes 250gr TTSX, Federal 165gr Trophy Copper and Barnes 120gr TTSX all recovered from the 100 yard sand berm at my house. I've shot mule deer ranging from 203 yards to 460 yards using the Barnes 250gr and Federal 165gr.
Jmr40 thanks for the chart. I have shot TTSX for years but there have been times when the density of a lead bullet would have been advantageous for me.The bullets in calibers larger than .308 work better at lower speeds. Around 2000 fps at impact is as slow as I'd be comfortable with in any 22-30 caliber. That doesn't mean you have to go with the lighter bullets. Just run the numbers and figure out at which range you drop below 2000 fps and consider that the max range for that load. The copper bullets generally do fine at normal ranges out to 300 yards or a bit farther. Not a good choice for the guys who want to shoot at 500 yards or farther.
I "borrowed' the photos from Nosler's website comparing the Accubond on top with their copper bullet. The Barnes copper bullets perform about the same. You get expansion at 1800 fps. But not enough to make me happy.
Those Nosler bullets look like they have some Zinc in them. Barnes states in their literature that the TTSX bullet has a "100-percent copper body" whereas Federal states that their Trophy Copper bullet is a "copper-alloy construction". I think that the Trophy Copper bullet is made by Nosler and it's basically the E-Tip which Nosler refers to as having a "solid copper-alloy construction". The bottom line is that the images on Nosler's website that have been posted here represent their "copper-alloy" bullets and may not be representative of Barnes' TTSX bullets. Look at the color difference in the image that I posted between the Barnes bullets and Tropy Copper bullets in the top two rows. You'll notice that the Trophy Copper bullets look more "brassy" in color whereas the Barnes bullets are more red in color. It's not much of a mystery that the alloy used will affect expansion of the bullet.
- Status
