Quantcast

strike 4 with a barnes tsx

Discussion in 'Hunting' started by Lloyd Smale, Sep 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. stsimons

    stsimons Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    174
    No flame from me. No hunt is the same and sometimes ***** just happens that you can't control. I have made a couple of clean misses in my time that I could have sworn were going to be in the kill zone. On one of those I know for a fact that my scope took a dump on me. The others are anyone's guess.

    Either way I suggest if you take a trip to Vegas check your pockets and make sure you don't have a stray Barnes bullet anywhere. They are bad luck for you!
     
  2. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    46,380
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    "...my crosshairs were right behind the shoulder at the shot."

    Doesn't sound like a shoulder shot to me. Sounds like heart/lung, depending on height above the belly-line.

    I've made that shot with my .243 with the Sierra 85-grain BTHP. The insides are a double-handful of mush. "Ruint", and Bucky never moved out of his tracks.

    But, I once had a hit from a .270 in that same spot have Bambi go to his knees, get up and boogie, and two hours of tracking effort by me and my father were frustratingly unsuccessful. Fortunately, only once.
     
  3. Freedom_fighter_in_IL

    Freedom_fighter_in_IL Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,097
    Lloyd, you said you both heard the "report" of impact. Was it a high tone or a low one? If it was a high tone then you hit bone. If not then you hit probably where you thought you did which is right in the "arm pit" which will damn near sound like a bass drum on the report. The TSX is designed to penetrate deeply into bone so if you hit "the pit", as I said earlier, it will not open very well and you will have 2 .25cal holes with little to no blood. Thats where you need to break out the tracking goggles and start hoof trailing or do like I did and get yourself a really good tracking dog. I've bow hunted for 40+ years and in all that time and with many kills I have had my share of liver shots and of course the bad experiences with mechanical blades not opening properly so there in itself is a tracking job.

    Now I reload myself and do find that to be a very enjoyable part of hunting and shooting, but what on earth made you think you needed a monolithic style bullet for white-tail? Part of our jobs as stewards of the land is to make reasonable decisions for clean, quick, ethical kill shots. The TSX bullets are great for what they are designed for but they need to hit a good solid bone to open up and create hydrostatic shock and a decent wound cavity. They just aren't needed, and as you have discovered, not that great on thin skinned game like deer.
     
  4. Davek1977

    Davek1977 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,569
    I'll echo the responses so far, in that the bullet choice was poor, and the amount of searching after the supposed "hit" wasn't long enough. Age is NO EXCUSE for leaving aan animal to SUFFER and die a slow death. If you aren't able to honor your game in such a way, then you, at the very least, need a hunting partner that IS willing to. If you can't be bothered, yes, i DO believe you need to stay out of the woods. When you can no longer put in the time and effort required to recover wounded or downed game, then its time to either enlist help, or give it up, whereas you seem to believe your age entitles you to the occasionmal wounded animal, and that two hours is sufficent searching because you're too old.. You sound like a "shooter" not a hunter. You brag about how many deer you've killed, but then act as though a two hour search for one that got away is sufficient because of your age. If you have time and the ability to shoot 50 deer a year, you have the time and the ability....not to mention the RESPONSIBILITY....to recover your wounded game, or to at least make every humanly possible effort to do so. Furthermore, did it really take 4 incidents of failure to clue you in that maybe your bullet choice wasn't the best one for the job?
     
  5. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Lloyd, for a guy who has claimed as many kills as you, I'm awful surprised by the bullet choice. I've got nowhere near your experience or claimed success but I'd never consider using that bullet in that situation, especially with the reported past failures.

    You used a small diameter caliber with a bullet designed for maximum penetration at the expense of expansion. Nothing wrong with a 25/06 on deer - with the right bullet.

    I gather from the tone in your writing, that you're sort of experimenting with different calibers/bullets, but then you go on to fully blame the bullet manufacturer when; A. you made a poor choice and you know it; B. there are clearly many other variables involved that you are completely ignoring; C. you have the equipment and know-how to do things right.

    Your experience and past success doesn't entitle you to experiment or make poor choices on the game animals we all share and neither does it make your complaints justified or even true. You keep touting your experience, in my opinion that level of experience is even more reason to feel some shame at the outcome and be accountable for the failure.

    Now you've got two choices; man-up and accept responsibility for your poor choice or cause a distraction and claim I don't know what I'm talking about because I was in diapers when you started hunting in the late 60's.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
  6. MtnCreek

    MtnCreek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2010
    Messages:
    4,038
    Location:
    Georgia, Dixie
    Kachok,
    Thanks for the additional info on the Barnes bullet.


    Some Others,
    Were your soap boxes issued to you when you signed up or did you have to bring your own?
     
  7. Canazes9

    Canazes9 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    118
    Lloyd,

    Sorry to read of your failures w/ the TSX (was this the TTSX?) I would have thought this an ideal application for that bullet and caliber (according to the data from Barnes). Barnes also indicates that this bullet should expand very easily, a behind the shoulder shot should have been ideal (video of a light for caliber 30 cal):

    http://www.barnesbullets.com/videos/308 130 TTSX 2906fps 3Gel_WMV9_640x480.wmv

    I'm struggling to understand the issues you've had with these bullets and am a bit aprehensive as I've loaded a bunch of the 160grn TTSX's in my 338 Federal for Deer/Hog this year. I'm actually heading to my lease in a few hours, may have the opportunity to try TTSX's on a hog. I hope mine work closer to advertised for me than yours did for you.

    As for the ridiculous dog piling of the net nancy's telling you what an idiot your are for using this bullet and not looking for your deer for 24 hours - are you freaking kidding me? Most of the ones telling you should look for the deer for the rest of your life are the same ones telling you that bullet wasn't designed for that application - automatically disqualified as idiots, don't let it get you down.

    They can't spend 5 minutes with google researching the bullet and it's intended application before they tell you what an irresponsible loser you are for not looking for a deer with no sign past 2 hours - unbelievable.

    I will post my experiences on the TTSX's when I have some.

    Regards


    David
     
  8. Lloyd Smale

    Lloyd Smale Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,991
    Location:
    Munising MI
    I plead guilty to the poor bullet choise. I knew they were not needed but have heard so many good things about them on the internet (I KNOW THE INTERNET) that i wanted to see if all the hoopla was really true. Ive shot deer with about every 25 cal bullet out there and with all the glowing reports I figured they were worth the try. As to my marksmanship i dont know how well im known here but freinds on other fourms will tell you that theres very few guys in the whole country that spend as much time at the range as id do. My round count through rifles each year is in the thousands and my handgun round count is well into the 10000s. I will put my shooting skills up against anyone. If you doubt this ask John taffin or John linebaugh or any one of the shootists what they think of my ability with a rifle or handgun. My only hobby is shooting and hunting and i have more into my loading room then some do there homes. A week doesnt go by in a year winter or summer that i dont at least spend 3 days at the range and in the summer its about daily. I am also an NRA certified firearms trainer and range officer. As to how long i tracked this deer. Ill say two things. I did what i could and no less and in the thick swamps and tall grass that surround these fields tracking is near impossible without snow. We spend 2 hours doing circles as far back as 500 yards without finding any blood. Ill make no appologys it is what it is. Ill include a couple pics of my loading room just to show you that theres no bs in what i say. Im a shooter and 99 times out of a 100 if i say i hit it its hit. Like I said eariler i wish I could convince myself i missed but i didnt. One last thing ill say is like the previous poster said. **** happens. If you shoot enough animals your going to loose one eventually. If your nieve enough to think that you dont cause animals pain each and ever time you kill one your living in a fairytale. If that truely tears you up you shouldnt be hunting period. cant find a way to post them here but look about half way down on this post and youll see it http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=6458729#post6458729 post #1379. Back to the bullet choise many hear obviously dont reload or arent avid reloaders because if you were youd know that barnes totes this bullet as the ideal whitetail bullet. It is not a cup and core 80 grain varmit bullet its a big game bullet. If you allready didnt know this its probably you that needs to spend some more time at the range because ive met exactly zero non handloader that i would consider even a fair shot with a rifle. All i wanted to do here i to help keep someone else from making the same mistake. Not start a pissing match about hunting ethics. Believe me ill not loose a minute of sleep because you think i didnt track a deer long enough. Just like the poster who said hes shot over a 100 deer without loosing one the guy who says hes spending 24 hours looking for a deer is more likely to me a keyboard commando then someone giving an honest opinion. Ive tracked a good many deer shot by other hunters in my life and for the most part after two hours the chances are very slim your ever going to recover that deer and after 6 hours ive yet to see one recovered unless there was snow on the ground or found the next day because ravens were in the air above it. thats the problem here. On the internet youll get guys that have shot a half a dozen deer and think there some kind of an expert on it or someone that just sits back and waits to flame someone for about anything. Me im brutely honest. What happened happend and if one guy gets the message and it prevents it from happening again it was worth it. Now ill leave this thread and let the children flame on! One last thing caneze9 the bullet was a ttsx as were all 4 of the bullets that i consider failures this year. Your post one one of a few from guys not living in a fairytale.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
  9. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Among other rifles, I own a 243 and a 270. Which would be the wiser choice for soft tissue; a solid 243 or a jacketed 270? Regardless of what Barnes claims, we all know there is a trade-off between penetration and expansion. Rightfully so, people use solids for their penetration.

    If you can tell me why it makes sense to use a small caliber bullet that almost certainly won't expand as fast as a conventional, jacketed lead bullet - on soft tissue, then I'll take back everything I said.

    However, just like with vehicles, people fall in love with brands and tend to want to stick by them - and defend them - in the face of contrary reasoning. It's the "I love what I own" syndrome.

    Anyone with any experience ought to know that there is a reasonable possibility that a small caliber solid could leave only a pencil sized hole.

    Regarding intended applications, what's a "for profit" company supposed to say? "we are not going to offer .22 - .25 caliber solids for taking deer because we know there are better choices" They offer them and make suggestions because someone will buy them.
     
  10. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Lloyd, I never questiosn your skills, knowledge or experience. I never suggested you setup a base camp and continue to look for the deer. In essence, I said you should know better regarding the bullet choice.

    Rather than fight it to the bitter end, I'm glad you're telling it like it is.

    Last I checked I cannot walk on water either.
     
  11. Canazes9

    Canazes9 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    118
    You keep calling it a solid - that's not what it is. A solid is, by design a bullet that is designed not to expand, whether it's a monometal or the older solids that have a lead core. The TTSX is a bullet designed for expansion, it is supposed to be one of the easiest opening bullets on the market place. Just because it is a monometal bullet doesn't make it a solid. Barnes does make solids - the TTSX's/TSX's aren't solids.

    Google is your friend - all this information is just a few clicks away and would have taken less time to find that your post did to write.

    David
     
  12. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Perhaps I'm not conforming to your definitions, but that doesn't nullify my position.

    I'm using the term "solid" loosely to define a bullet without a lead core. I think you know that.

    I'm sorry, because Barnes says it's so, doesn't make me believe. There's way too much deception around. I guess I've learned to trust my common sense and reasoning.

    I do think there's time and a place for that bullet. It's not a poor bullet.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
  13. Canazes9

    Canazes9 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    118
    I have no idea what you mean when you choose to make up your own definitions.

    The bullet was designed for the application that Lloyd used it in, it has been used successfully by many for similar applications.

    David
     
  14. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I think you knew exactly what I meant. You're simply causing distraction. If you want to debate whether the bullet was the right one for the job, that's okay. If you didn't know what I meant, you wouldn't be calling me on it.

    Again, because Barnes says it's so, doesn't make it so.

    FYI, I work in IT and probably use Google more in a month than you ever will. Further, I think Barnes is a fine bullet and have spent a lot of time at their site investigating their offerings and have to say, their solids, IMO,make fine bullets for tougher game.
     
  15. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Further, I think in a way Lloyd was "testing" or experimenting with that bullet. To me, that suggests he wan't very sure of the outcome. Nothing wrong with experimenting, however, if I were experimenting and it didn't work out as planned, I wouldn't make it public and blame the bullet. I'd quietly chalk it up as a lesson.

    And for the record, I think a two hour search is worthy of trying pretty hard to recover the deer.

    Quite honestly, Canazes9, you seem like because you've used the TSX/TTSX in your Fed 338 successfully that it means they're infallible and appropriate for every application. The title of this thread is "Strike 4 with Barnes".
     
  16. MtnCreek

    MtnCreek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2010
    Messages:
    4,038
    Location:
    Georgia, Dixie
    I’m not the hunter that many of the people here are; I wouldn’t try to claim otherwise. Many years ago when I was an avid deer hunter, I chose a bullet that gave very poor results. I loaded 160gr Nosler BT’s for a 7mm RM. I had every reason to believe that bullet in that caliber would be a great deer load and I was wrong. I was hunting in very dense mountains with the typical shot less than 50 yards. Twice I shot deer within 20 yards that I was unable to retrieve. There was very little, spotted blood that eventually stopped. I can’t prove it, but it is my opinion the bullet passed through these deer without expanding. The same season, I shot a large doe at about 125 to 150 yards with the same load; at that range there was brutal damage to the deer. The neck, both shoulders and better than half of both backstraps were completely lost. After that, I bought a cheap box of Rem 175gr Core-Locs and had no more issues with lost deer at very close range and a lot less meat damage at greater distances. The following season I hunted with a 30-06 and found it to be much better suited to me and my location. Lesson learned, but I had to learn it on my own; all the local guru’s had told me the 7 Mag was the way to go! The Ballistic Tip was the best bullet out there! My point is, I followed the ‘conventional wisdom’ of my peers and wound up with a combination that was not affective. Deer suffered and deer were lost. If I continued to use this load, then I would be due a ton of criticism, but like the Op, I realized there was a problem and addressed it.

    MtnCreek
     
  17. sirgilligan

    sirgilligan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    887
    I appreciate the report. Information is always good. Thanks for telling.

    For me, I have learned there is a difference in shooting all your life and hunting all your life. I have shot ground hogs, feral dogs, starlings, etc., all nuisances around the farm. Mostly with my trusty Browning 22 Semi Auto.

    My brother is a hunter. Rifle, bow, and pistol.

    I went hunting this year. Antelope. We all filled our tags that went hunting. A couple just road around in the trucks and looked at the scenery (which is fine too). I went to the store and grabbed some 150 grain Hornady Superformance ammo, for my BAR Safari .30-06. The antelope I killed was bigger than I thought, almost the size of some White Tail deer I have seen.

    With eight people standing behind you saying, "Don't miss. Don't shoot a buck, you have a doe tag. Can you see if it doesn't have a black spot on its jaw? Does can have prongs too." Pretty soon you couldn't hit a bull in the butt!

    I missed the first shot. It didn't move, so must have been high. Second shot it just dropped like a light was turned off. Only 135 yards. Next time I don't want an audience talking so much!

    My brother shot two at 325+ yard (checked with range finder, and the year before at 500). He uses a .300 Win Mag. I was standing right by him when he shot. Bang.....thwop. One down. Bang....thwop. The "report" was loud even at 325 yards, a loud low smacking sound. I never heard anything on my second shot.

    When sighting in, I couldn't hit a thing. I was getting real frustrated. Never shot a scope before. Finally it dawned on me, turn the power down. I set it on 4x and suddenly I was shooting like a champ! I am sure I was still moving around but since I couldn't see it I wasn't trying to compensate for it. 16X is just crazy! My brother grabbed the gun, put two of his hand loads in and one of my Hornady, laid the gun across an upside down feed trough, shot all three at 135 yards into paper, all three shots touching, two different ammo's, 150 grain and 110 grain. I have a lot of practice to do.

    If there had been another antelope behind the one I shot I would have had trouble. Shot clean through the beast.

    Hit it in the spine. See photos attached.

    I am going to set up a .243 with a variable power scope up to maybe 6x, or maybe even drop a simple red dot on the thing and call it good. Anything with 200 yards should be easy enough, unless I have eight coaches standing behind me again.

    Again, thanks for the info. I don't have a .25-06 but I would have thought that the bullet you choose would have done the job. Am I wrong to think this was a White Tail Deer?

    By the way, the 150 grain .30-06 Superformance has a bit of a kick, I need a kick pad, or I need to fatten up a bit.
     

    Attached Files:

    • a1.jpg
      a1.jpg
      File size:
      126.7 KB
      Views:
      241
    • a2.jpg
      a2.jpg
      File size:
      148.6 KB
      Views:
      240
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
  18. Lloyd Smale

    Lloyd Smale Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,991
    Location:
    Munising MI
    art ill step in this one last time. Like you said because barnes said its so doesnt mean its so and thats the truth. Bottom line is they care about selling bullets period. that was my whole reason for this post. If you look at there website and read all the bs on the internet about these bullets youd think they were made by God himself. I found it isnt so and wanted to pass this knowlege on to others. Ive killed truck loads of deer with standard cup and core bullets and never found them lacking. I was allways one that preached that the only reason these companys come out with premium bullets and try to convince you there needed is because sales of there other bullets have became stagnant. I guess its one of those things that i down deep knew but had to find out for myself. Its sad though that one of those 4 deer wasnt recovered. Ive learned from this experience and if it makes just one guy looking at bullets on the shelf at there local dealer pass on them and buy something else then this was all worth it. Was i at fault? you bet. I recovered 3 deer with that in all 3 cases i wasnt impressed with them but had to go one more time to be sure. that was stupid.
     
  19. castingdonkey

    castingdonkey Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    194
    Here is a thought. If the bullet was placed properly why did it need to expand(I understand hydrostatic shock)? The vitals were either hit or they weren't. I wish I had some real solids to hunt with this year but I don't think I need to prove the point that a well placed bullet is a well place bullet and we all make bad shots from time to time. Barnes has worked for me a few times Like lloyd said I have shot half a dozen big game animals with them. I have only retieved one round and it looked awesome. But the game I chase is bigger. The point being if the lungs or heart were hit LLoyd would have his deer. 2 lost deer out of 150 or so that's a dang good record and I sure wish I could hunt and spend as much time at range as you do LLoyd. I really like Barnes bullets so far and have had zero issues with them not doing brutal damage to game. I sure wish you would shoot another deer with a ttsx just one more and give a report. You never know you could have been a little dizzy from the medicine if you just had surgery. I have had a couple and riding in a pickup on a rough road seems like good reason to eat an extra one.
     
  20. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I happen to completly agree. I considered posting something similar to your post, but figured I'd stirred the pot enough.

    Because no one knows where Lloyd's deer was hit, no one can really say how well or not it performed. However, I still believe a conventional bullet will work better and kill quicker than a solid .257, at least on deer. I wouldn't hesitate to use a solid of .277 or better on a boar.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
  21. Freedom_fighter_in_IL

    Freedom_fighter_in_IL Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,097
    Fact: Monolithic bullets are designed to be tough and deeper penetrating. For that to be the case they do give up on expansion on thinner skin or boneless hits. No way around that as it is basic physics.

    Fact: Everyone so far that has been towing the Barnes party line for the TSX has, so far, has advertised the use of them in .30cal or larger. The bullet in question is an 80gr TIPPED TSX out of a .25/06 (have to assume it's the tipped one since they do not seem to sell 80gr TSX in .257) so how can you guys be saying this is the "end all be all" bullet when you yourself have not tried it. It may very well BE the second coming of bullets when used in the proper weight for the proper target but I am getting the feeling here that Lloyd has MORE than sufficiently proven that an 80gr TTSX out of a .25/06 is NOT a sufficient combination to anchor white-tail deer no matter what Barnes wishes to claim.

    Now granted, if he had hit dead on shoulder, that combination may very well have turned the chest cavity into a fine jello but a PROPER white-tail bullet should be able to do that without HAVING to impact heavy bone. My personal favorite shot choice is high shoulder so that I hit good lung and HOPEFULLY smack the spine for a DRT no tracking kill because , like Lloyd, I am no spring chicken and tracking all bent over for hours on end is rough to say the least.

    Lloyd, I am not "dissing" you in any way here. I know how hard tracking is in your area as I have hunted many areas such as yours (bow hunted primarily) and I DO know how hard bloodless tracking can be there which is why I suggested that for future tracking get yourself a really good track dog. My personal favorite is the Jack Russel. Great house dogs, lots of fun because they are funny as hell, and absolutely will NOT give up till they find your deer. Just a suggestion from one old fart to another :)

    As too the couple of guys that suggested he leave the woods, I would suggest you leave your keyboards!! I personally do not feel that 2 hours was enough to give up, but I am also NOT there to see the land and how swampy, overgrown, or whatever it is. I've spent countless hours on my hands and knees trailing deer that were not passed through in archery and do know from EXPERIENCE how difficult a job it can be in areas as he described so I'll get off his butt about that. But you guys saying he should leave the woods need to get a clue!
     
  22. Canazes9

    Canazes9 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    118
    Calm down Art. If you go back and re-read my post you will see that I have NOT successfully used the TTSX on game out of my 338Fed. I have worked up a load and I'm going to try it for myself. The bullet is very accurate in my rifle, I've read good reports, I'm going to try it.

    2 Final points of clarification and I'm done.

    1) You and many others have insisted that Lloyd picked an inappropriate bullet for the job - interestingly some become the weight is too light and therefore it must be a varmint bullet and others (like you) who somehow believe because it's an all copper bullet it is incapable of expansion and will penetrate like a dangerous game solid.

    My point is that Lloyd picked a bullet for an application recommended by the bullets manufacturer - it is neither a varmint bullet, nor a dangerous game solid, but a controlled expansion premium hunting bullet designed for medium sized game such as the whitetail deer at which Lloyd shot at. Lots of products don't live up to their advertising or hype, Barnes is not the only bullet that has been accused of that - if you google bullet failure with just about any bullet on the market you will find enough reading to keep you busy for a month.

    Whether or not the bullet worked well for him or not, it certainly was NOT unreasonable for him to have a reasonable expectation of success - the bullet was designed for the application he was using it, there are countless reports of success for the same bullet and the same application. He did not make a poor choice to try - a poor choice would have been varmint bullet or even one of Barnes solid designs :D.

    2) Point 2 - Lloyds success or failure with bullet proves nothing to anyone but Lloyd. It is not even remotely close to being statistically significant. I have no problem with Lloyd or what he wrote regarding their performance - he has lost confidence with them and won't be using them again, regardless of anyone else's opinion (I feel much the same way about the 243 for deer based on my statistically insignificant experiences with it).

    I won't speculate what went wrong for Lloyd, I won't insist that he gut shot the deer or missed it - mechanical things fail. Happens all the time. The vast majority of people that use these bullets in similar applications are very pleased with their performance.

    I will try them out for myself and post my findings if fortune smiles on me and I'm able to kill a deer or hog with them.

    David
     
  23. ArtP

    ArtP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Lloyd himself stated he was skeptical of the hype. BTW, I am critical of the weight too but didn't feel the need to mention it to make my point. In .257, 80 grains is lowest weight offered (chosen over a 100 grain offering) and has a SD considerably less than .2. Now I'd be willing to bet a box of Sierra Pro Hunter or a box of Nosler Accubonds that Lloyd picked that caliber and weight because it could achieve the the highest muzzle velocity's his equipment was capable providing and still be reasonable for deer. I think, but could be wrong, that he wanted so see how the Barnes would behave being launched at exceptionally high speed.

    Now that's either dumb luck - and I don't think Lloyd is dumb - or it was a test that failed. While it's possible Lloyd's deer was not hit in the vitals, it is true that this is "strike 4".

    My criticism was simply based on the fact that he, as a very experienced hunter, went to an extreme -- that is, ultra-low weight and ultra-high velocity -- didn't get good results then went on to bad mouth Barnes, all the while neglecting that he himself clearly picked a marginal bullet. And yeah, David, it is marginal. Run a poll on THR if you don't believe me.

    Lloyd has since come clean and I have nothing but respect for him at this point.

    I wish you the best with your Barnes 338 on tough boars, which I think IS a fantastic idea and I am interested in the results. I've got a 338-06 and have considered using Barnes TTSX for tough game with possible long shots.
     
  24. Lloyd Smale

    Lloyd Smale Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,991
    Location:
    Munising MI
    freedom fighter i wish we could use dogs to track them but its illegal in mich to use dogs to track wounded game. I hate that bad feelings were brought out over this post. It sure wasnt my intention. I do respect others opinions and knew i would get them in spades when i posted this. dont worry guys i have big sholders. art and canazes are both right. I picked this load to test them and wanted to test them at high velocitys as thats what there really all about. thats why i choose a 2506 a 257wby and a 300 wby to test them in. Is it right to use living targets to test on. I dont know. I do know that what i did sure wasnt using a combo that was way off base for the purpose i used it for. It was a load that was within the design perameters of what the bullet manufacture claimed. Is it going to happen to everyone. No doubt not. But like was said it sure as hell isnt going to happen to me again. Im glad this post toned down to a civil level that someone might learn something from instead of a high school parking lot scrap. Funny thing is and this is sure not info wrote in stone but i two deer this year with noslers etip 140 in a 7mag one at 200 and one a bit more then 300 and both were dead in there tracks and after gutting and skining them id say they worked as well as a cup and core bullet. Lots of damage to vitals and a good exit wound. Does that make them better. Well 2 or even 4 deer to test on isnt going to give any concrete results but you will see me using the nos monolithic again.
     
  25. Freedom_fighter_in_IL

    Freedom_fighter_in_IL Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,097
    Hey Lloyd, GOOD NEWS for you. They have legalized tracking dogs in MI. They have to be leashed and you can not possess a firearm or bow while tracking but most all states are like that anyway. This came from a company that actually does this for a living Deer Search INC.

    Michigan

    Michigan has also announced legalization of leashed tracking dogs. A special license is not required. The dog must be kept on a leash and no one in attendance can possess a firearm or bow and arrow. If the tracking is done at night, a light of the type ordinarily carried in the hand may be used (e.g. flashlight, lantern). A dog that barks while tracking the deer cannot be used on public lands

    Link to them is here http://deersearch.org/joining-deer-search/tracking-regulations/
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice