It was factory barnes ammunition. It was a 150 grain bullet out of a 30-06
Barnes TTSX BT 168gr
- Thread starter Bowhunter60
- Start date
It was factory barnes ammunition. It was a 150 grain bullet out of a 30-06
Bowhunter60
New member
That would seem to indicate there was little expansion. But, since you've not recovered one, that's only speculation.
Bowhunter60
New member
It does concern me that there, at least from the animal, there was little expansion. Cavitation could have been significant, but would have been better with some degree of mushrooming. On the other hand, the defining answer is in how the animal responded. Was it a solid hit and quick dead animal? If it was, that opens up many other possibilities.
It was double lunged and went about 300 yards. Iv never had a deer go more than 20 yards with nosler accubonds and standard soft points and both leave a soft ball sized hole when they exit
Last edited:
Run a 130 grain TTSX as fast as you safely can in your rifle. I bet you'd be surprised at how well it does.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Other than the perceived cool factor why do you want a softball-sized exit?
Maybe just the Archer in me but I don't care if I have to track 300 yards so long as I have a good clean kill and minimum bloodshot
With that said
It's good to have choices and accubonds are good bullets. I've never experienced oa mono fail so I have confidence in them. If you can't feel confident with a mono shoot something else.
sra61
Member
I shoot a 150 gr. TSX BT in my .300 SAUM. I have killed elk, bear and deer with it, and had excellent results with it. I'm shooting Varget at the max in the Barnes book and getting 3050 fps avg. on the chrono. I don't know if that helps.
A bigger hole most of the time means a better blood trail if a deer does happen to run off and it also means that the bullet opened up and did its job inside the animal. Where i hunt its almost all thickets of just briars and thorns and i dont like going in those thickets to track deer so i want them dead right where they stand
Bowhunter60
New member
SRA, I just loaded up another batch, this time using 150gr TTSX, backed by 45gr of BL-C2. That should give me about 2800fps. I have some Varget which, if max'd out will be 46.3gr and 2910fps. I've used Varget and like how it burns. But I've been using BL-C2 because it feeds so well in my powder measure. But hey, I'm willing to go with the recipe that will most effectively bring down game quickly and humanely.
Bowhunter60
New member
The speeds with 130gr out of a .308 are impressive. I'll pick up a box of these and give them a try with the max load recipe. At 3285fps, the lopes are in for a huge surprise. Provided the recipe fires accurately out of my 22" barrel with a 1:12 twist.
WapitiBob
Well-known member
Light for caliber when using solids is where I'd be. I use 140 TSX out of my 7STW.
Having them "dead right where they stand" is more about where you hit them than what you hit them with. CNS hits will give you that. The amount of tracking I have to do has went down considerably once I made it a point to line up some bone in getting to the vitals.
Can't wait to hear how they shoot.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Should be good.
I know that the .30cal 168gr are borderline in a 1-12
You probably already know this but I just had to say make sure and start with a low powder charge and work up to that recipe.
Good luck
I know its more about where you hit them but i also want a bullet that turns there vitals into mush and the barnes triple shock didnt do that it didnt even get close just punched a tiny hole through both lungs and most of the time with that shot they dont take more than a couple of steps with nosler accubonds and standard soft points
Last edited:
Bowhunter60
New member
Absolutely
Could not agree more ElkMagnet. I started with the lightest recommended powder charge for both the 150g and 168g. I was not impressed with the accuracy on either. So, I stepped it up .5g, and saw much improvement, particularly in the 150g. I'm going to try that again with a slightly higher charge and see how it prints.
, 
My only concern is the solid construction of the TTSX and it's ability to expand, creating greater cavitation. Any thoughts from you ballistics gurus would be appreciated.
Could not agree more ElkMagnet. I started with the lightest recommended powder charge for both the 150g and 168g. I was not impressed with the accuracy on either. So, I stepped it up .5g, and saw much improvement, particularly in the 150g. I'm going to try that again with a slightly higher charge and see how it prints.
, My only concern is the solid construction of the TTSX and it's ability to expand, creating greater cavitation. Any thoughts from you ballistics gurus would be appreciated.
Bowhunter60
New member
130 TTSX Results coming
N2, I'll post the results of the 130gr firing as soon as I get the ones I ordered. The speeds at which these are reported to fly are exciting. Could make for a great Antelope round. Provided the provide enough expansion to make a clean one-shot kill.
N2, I'll post the results of the 130gr firing as soon as I get the ones I ordered. The speeds at which these are reported to fly are exciting. Could make for a great Antelope round. Provided the provide enough expansion to make a clean one-shot kill.
I shoot the BT TSX 150 grains and 168 gr (factory vor-tx) out of my 30.06 with great results! So far I have killed mule deer, white tail, antelope, elk, bighorn and mountain goat. Nothing even takes a step. Exit wounds on even small animals (like antelope) have been terrific. Shots have been between 80 and 250 yards. I'm going to buy some 130's and see how they shoot.
Don't be afraid to play with seating depth too. I've found I can affect grouping a lot with variances in or out, you'll have to play around with it.
I don't understand what sort of concerns you have with cavitation? Put the bullet in the vitals and the animal will die. I've shot a lot of shit with Barnes TSX bullets, and my recovery distances are usually measured in feet, not yards. If you feel you need an explosive bullet, don't use these. That's not what they are and they won't meet that expectation.
Of the ones I have recovered, which has been relatively few, every one looks just like the advertisements. Put the bullet in the ">" right in the shoulder pocket and watch the fall within a matter of steps.
I don't understand what sort of concerns you have with cavitation? Put the bullet in the vitals and the animal will die. I've shot a lot of shit with Barnes TSX bullets, and my recovery distances are usually measured in feet, not yards. If you feel you need an explosive bullet, don't use these. That's not what they are and they won't meet that expectation.
Of the ones I have recovered, which has been relatively few, every one looks just like the advertisements. Put the bullet in the ">" right in the shoulder pocket and watch the fall within a matter of steps.
Bowhunter60
New member
John, I could not agree more. Our primary responsibility is to place the bullet where its supposed to be for the quickest, cleanest kill. Cavitation is the effect of energy transfer into tissue that causes a ballooning of the tissue along the bullets path through the animals body. For instance, a 150g FMJ will transfer less energy and cavitate less than a 150g a mushroomed bullet at the same caliber and velocity. Consider this analogy, a knife traveling at X speed will kill, but not do it as effectively as a sledgehammer traveling at X speed. So, my point is simply this, I want to insure the TTSX is going to transfer the maximum energy to effectively harvest.
I do like your idea of adjusting seating depth in or out as another means of improving accuracy. Right now, I'm using Barnes recommended C.O.A.L. Of 2.735". However, Nosler recommends a C.O.A.L. Of 2.770" for the Partition and 2.800" for the Accubond. I typically stay pretty close to true recommendations as I'm not that experienced a reloader. But it's worth a try as those photos I previously submitted are not satisfactory for me.
I appreciate the recommendations.
