Discussion in 'Hunting' started by KansasTrapper77, Nov 1, 2022.
It showed up fine wombat.
I would always choose the TTSX over the TSX if I had the option. Barnes released the TTSX to address reported issues with expansion of the TSX. If all I could get is the TSX, that's what I would buy (in fact, I have some in the cabinet).
I should clarify I intend on reload it them myself. But I have heard good things about Federal Trophy Copper.
If I am going to pay more than a dollar a bullet, I'll use what has worked for me for the last 52 years until they outlaw lead in Florida, Ga., and Ala.
I'm sure you are correct. I shoot the Barnes Expander MZ in my .50 cal inline muzzleloader. The hollowpoint in that bullet is big enough to use as a shot glass!
This post is like complaining about the 1970's Citicar or Comuta-Car (lead acid battery electric cars with single-digit hp motors) and using that as a reason not to buy a Tesla. The X bullet was Barnes first foray into monolithic copper bullets. That bullet had pressure issues, copper fouling issues, and they had expansion issues. All of those issues have been over come with later generations of Barnes and other brands of monolithic bullet from other makers.
I also like my old stick-shift truck with roll-up windows better than my new truck that has computers doing everything even if I don't want to do it. Newer isn't always better. (Yes, I'm a Fudd.)
True, newer is not always better but with your self-admitted "Fudd" attitude you wouldn't know either way.
You're allowed to mix the old and new bullets or otherwise... This year alone I have hunted and killed stuff with monolithic Barnes TSX, Maker REX, traditional cup and core Rem Core-Lokt and Hornady XTP and good old plain lead hollow points.
The hammer bullets shed the petals at impact and they normally 3 spread out very quickly, and the base is held together to penitent. They seem like the best mono out there well at least the idea. They dump a lot of energy when the bullet expands and sheds and those give more chance to hit something to make the animal die quicker. And the base still will keep going. Most guys I talked with said the hammers almost always leave a exit, that's a big deal to me.
Loaded in 7mm RemMag, they put the zip in your doo daa..
Shot a deer @378 yards. DRT. Hit on left shoulder ball joint, exited on right should. Both shoulders obliterated.
Got some in 6.5mm, have shot anything, yet.
ETA: I was looking through my bullets. I have a box of Barnes .224 60 gr HP. Looked through my log and they are very accurate in my 700. No notation or memory of use on game. I may have to revisit these soon. I find none loaded.
I already have 7mm TTSX in 120 gr and 140 gr and have the dies for .280AI. Now I just need to get the rifle.
I point out that I prefer the "standard" weight (62gr in 223, 120gr in 7-08, 150gr in 308 Win, and 165gr in 30-06) since most people seem to prefer dropping to a slightly lower weight bullet for faster impact speeds but I have never found that to be necessary and the "standard" weight mono's seem to hit above their weight class when it come to using them on game animals.
@zdc1775 I concur with the standard weight analysis. Extremely impressed with 168gr TTSX in 30-06 and 120gr TTSX in 7-08. No need to drop weight just because they are monos
7-08 120gr TTSX, 46.8gr CFE223 (haven’t chronoed it), 190yards:
Exit side pictured:
I think the mentality of dropping the weight is twofold. Like you ever mentioned they seem to punch above their weight class so if you’re used to a lead 165 a mono 150 will probably have similar results. And since its a mono and not as dense dropping the weight gives some room back in the case for a hotter powder charge. Or at least thats my understanding for the thought process of dropping the weight with Monos.
That is the mentality. But my mentality for elk is that I want 180gr-200gr magnum performance out of my 30-06 with a 168gr. And I get it. Standard weight still going plenty fast and there’s enough weight for an exit in more scenarios. I want to maximize penetration, I want an exit and to break every bone in the way. I don’t catch many TTSX and that’s what I want. I catch more 180gr Nosler Accubonds from shots inside 200 yards from my 300wsm than I do any TTSX from that 30-06
But those are my preferences, there are other dynamics others value more than me (like speed and energy)
You are correct about the reasons people drop weight, but even with the slightly longer length I have never ran into any capacity issues with my mono loads. Now if I were more restrained on overall cartridge length, or it I had rifles with slower twist rates, I might consider dropping the bullet weight as well but so far that has not been an issue for me and gaining the little extra speed has not been worth the decrease in on game performance to me.
I like the way you think
That is one of the reasons that I drop weight. My main hunting rifle is a Ruger Hawkeye which has a rather short magazine box (at least in .300WM) and .300WM itself has a short neck on the case.
It’s even more pronounced than that. Accubonds and other premium bonded bullets typically retain about 80% of their initial weight whereas monos typically retain close to 100%. That means a 150 gr mono will penetrate like a 188 gr bonded. A 165 mono is like a 206 bonded and a 180 is like a 225!
Separate names with a comma.