Barnes TTSX

I would drop down a weight from where I am in each of my rifles if I was starting over and could find the TTSX bullets. I'd go 130 in my .300 win mag rather than 150 and I'd even consider trying the 110 and try to hit 3,800 fps just to see how it would work. I'd definitely drop to the 80 gr in my .25-06 having seen how it works for JimKirk. The 80 gr TTSX should penetrate like a 100 gr bonded which is a nice weight for deer in .257 cal. I'm starting with 120 gr in my .280ai because that's what I could find. 120/0.8 = 150 grains in a bonded bullet which is more than necessary for deer I bet. The 110 grain should penetrate about like a 140 grain bonded which in 7mm should be plenty.

They're not as pretty as CNC machined bullets, but they are more than accurate enough for hunting, and probably as accurate as any hunting bullet out there.

The fit of the plastic ballistic tip does not have to have a smooth transition to the copper body. At supersonic speeds, drag does not work like the flow of air over a Cadillac fender.



I've used 100, 115, 120, and 127 grain TTSX in .264" and they all make sub-MOA groups. On Mule deer, they're very effective. As one could expect from a monolithic hollowpoint, they will fully penetrate. They will expand. They will produce a small exit wound. If the bullet traverses the thoracic cavity at high-velocity, it will result in severe wounding of heart, lungs, and other vital organs. It will not always be a DRT result. I've never seen a mule deer go more than 40 yards after one went through them, even with suboptimal shot placement.

I'd like to try Lehigh 110 grain Controlled Chaos in .264" (they also make a 130, but I think that would be best-suited to 1:8" or more twist and large cases like 6.5 PRC or bigger). These are a CNC-machined bullet that will be very pretty before it hits anything. Lehigh claims a G1 about the same as Barnes TTSX or LRX of similar weight and you'll be happy there is no ill-fitting plastic tips. I'm hoping the Controlled Chaos will give me more DRT shots even with behind-the-shoulder placement, but I'm skeptical until I see something work for myself. I can tell you I'm not skeptical of Barnes TTSX/LRX any more. I've seen them work with respect to accuracy and their effect on game.

Varminterror said:

I’m not terribly a fan of monometal bullets, largely due to the high required impact velocity,

Click to expand...

That was me too, until I tried their TAC TX bullet. It’s a winner @ 2000fps. It impressed me enough I emailed them wanting a 7mm version and they replied, “The 139 LRX has a low impact velocity of 1400 fps the same as the 30 cal 110 gr TAC-TX.”

I use the Barnes XPB monometal that opens well at 1100 fps. I'm pretty sure there are 45 ACP and 300 BLK monos that open at subsonic velocities like this Lehigh at 1000 fps:

When I inquired with Barnes about impact velocity of their 6.5 TTSX, they advised 1600 fps for 100 grain, 1700 fps for the 120 grain, and 1800 fps for the 115 grain. Those velocities will give 1.7X expansion, and about 100 fps more will give 2X expansion. Independent tests suggest yet another 100 fps, but demonstrate the 100 grain, for example, absolutely performs wonderfully at 1800 fps.

Grendel is a fairly low-velocity 6.5 cartridge/rifle combo, especially with shorter barreled AR's. Is there a 6.5 case out there with a smaller capacity? I don't know, but with a 24 inch barrel, mine can hit deer at 300 yards still with 2000 fps with any of the above bullets. The 100 grain doesn't just open at the lowest velocities, but it also has the highest velocity. No one with experience using a .243 Win. thinks 100 grains is too little for big deer. The monometal bullet keeps 100% of that 100 grains all the way through the deer, unlike cup and core bullets that might need another 30 grains to shed into the meat on the way through.

The bullet needs to be matched to the velocities the cartridge and rifle will produce. It's fair to say that if we take a mono designed for the 300 Win Mag and put it in a 300 BLK, it's going to need more velocity to perform well than we can obtain. But there are monos suitable for many of the lower velocity cartridge/rifle combinations like 450 Bushmaster, 350 Legend, etc.

hdtramp said:

I thought I would give Barnes TTSX a try. I heard the accuracy wasn't the best but you might get better penetration. After looking at the bullets I was surprised at how sloppy they were made. The tips didn't match up with the copper bullet at all and could understand why the accuracy suffers. The tips on Hornady SST which I have been using matched flawlessly. Since I only bought one box, I was wondering if I got a bad lot or is this normal for Barnes. Thought Barnes was a good name, but I see they have a Quality Control issue there. Was wondering your thoughts.

Click to expand...

Maybe just bad luck, I’ve never had a problem with any Barnes, this is a couple loads I worked up for a couple of my 270’s

wombat13 said:

That is not normal in my experience. Surprised to hear that TTSX have. Rep for poor accuracy. I’ve had the exact opposite experience. Most accurate and easiest load development I’ve ever done. 165 TSX and 150 TTSX are the most accurate bullets in my Hawkeye .300 win mag. Each produced 1” groups at 100 with the first and only powder I tried. It’s a hunting rifle and I’d rather be scouting than trying to reduce group size under 1”.

Click to expand...

@wombat13 My experience mirrors yours.

So my brother has been harping on Barnes TTSX for a couple years now. He doesn't reload but buys Barnes factory ammo for his 338 WM and loves em. I had no desire to try them, I just didn't think they could deliver the shock of lead core bullets.

I typically whitetail hunt with calibers like 257 and 300WBY, 264WM, 7 Rem Mag etc. and the vast majority of my shots come within the 50yd -75yd range. On top of that (with the exception of the 257) ii like slightly lighter bullets for velocity/shock, but I've also read horror stories about bullet failure at closer ranges. Though it's never happened to me.

So when I bought my 270 WSM a year or 2 ago I started looking at bonded bullets to try. Nosler Accubond and Speer Grandslam is what I decided on first. Bought some 130gr TTSXs also. First trip to the range and I was able to find 1" or better groups with 2 of the 3 bullets, (4 different powder charges for each) but what jumped out to me is that all 4 powder charges I had loaded with the TTSXs shot 1" or better. So... I figured I'd try them on deer and see how they worked. All the ballistic gel tests I've watched on then shows they deliver a good amount of energy/shock after all.

***I did notice the offset polymer tips on quite a few though, and wondered how these bullets gained a following with such crappy quality...Didn't seem to affect accuracy at all though, so oh well.***

I've since killed deer with it and with 120gr TTSXs in the 264 and they've made a believer out of me. Performance on game is excellent, out of 6 deer, none has went farther than 20yds after the shot with most dropping in their tracks. Exit holes are typically about golf ball size if I hit bone. About the size of a nickel if I don't.

I now load TTSXs in 270WSM, 264 Win Mag, 7 Rem Mag, 300 Wby, and 28 Nos for hunting. Will prob start loading 30-06 with em also. Load development for all was pretty pain free when using Barnes recommended COAL. Kinda took the fun out of tinkering around with hunting loads, bit oh well, I can tinker with other calibers.

Why did you choose the 120 grain for deer? Not arguing, but I need to make the choice myself. The 100, 115, and 120 all seem viable for 6.5/264. I don't see a 100 failing to exit on a deer, moose or elk maybe. My boys have been successful with the 115 and 127 in other cartridges. My 264WM is 1:9 so I'm reluctant to use the 127 in that.

westernrover said:

Why did you choose the 120 grain for deer? Not arguing, but I need to make the choice myself. The 100, 115, and 120 all seem viable for 6.5/264. I don't see a 100 failing to exit on a deer, moose or elk maybe. My boys have been successful with the 115 and 127 in other cartridges. My 264WM is 1:9 so I'm reluctant to use the 127 in that.

Click to expand...

Nothing scientific behind me choosing the 120gr. My daddy has used 140gr z Remington Core Lokts as far back as I can remember with devastating results. I found an accurate load with 130gr Sierra Gamekings HPBT that I figured would be an instant "show stopper" on whatever it hit. Didn't get to try any on game before I became a believer in the TTSXs.

Without having to worry about bullet failure at closer ranges I decided to drop down to 120gr for a little more velocity. My load is 3248fps with RL22 but I can gain another 100fps or so if I get up towards max, and I prob will try at some point.

My Winchester Model 70 Featherweight is 1:9" twist also. Shoots the 120gr TTSXs lights out.