World's most popular community & resource for hunting in Africa since 2007
300 Winchester Magnum bullets for plains game
- Thread starter John18
- Start date
-
- Tags
- barnes swift a-frame woodleigh
Ryan
AH elite
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,604
- Reaction score
- 2,984
- Location
- Anchorage, Alaska
- Media
- 151
- Articles
- 2
- Member of
- Black Sheep Bowmen Archery Club.
- Hunted
- Namibia and South Africa
If you aren't reloading go with the factory 180s and you'll do great. I dropped an eland dead as disco with 180 grain PMP factory ammo (probably cup and core) out of a 300 Win Mag and several animals including two kudu and a zebra with 168 grain Barnes TTSX bullets out of a 30-06. So it's safe to say the 180 A-Frame or TTSX out of a 300 WM will do the job well. If you use it on giraffe I'd go for a neck shot, which I did on mine per my PHs suggestion. It's a big target and it will drop right there.
mikecatt13
AH fanatic
Just bought a 300 win mag for my wife, that I'll likely use sometimes too 
Just like my .375, 470, and future 416 barrel for her R8, they will all be using aframes for softs (with the exception of my leopard, which will but accubonds out of the 375, and potentially barnes for giraffe). I havent been to Africa yet so take my advice for what it is, but based on my research I see no reason to use anything else unless the aframes prove otherwise in the field.
I've had a huge, stressful issue with bullet failure on game with Winchester so I research my bullet selections quite seriously.
Just like my .375, 470, and future 416 barrel for her R8, they will all be using aframes for softs (with the exception of my leopard, which will but accubonds out of the 375, and potentially barnes for giraffe). I havent been to Africa yet so take my advice for what it is, but based on my research I see no reason to use anything else unless the aframes prove otherwise in the field.
I've had a huge, stressful issue with bullet failure on game with Winchester so I research my bullet selections quite seriously.
John 18,
Back in the 1990s Rem marketed a cartridge called the Safari ??? in several calibers. Swift also makes a 200 gr for reloaders. I used the Rem. Ammo on several hunts as it grouped tighter then anything I was able to load.
Back in the 1990s Rem marketed a cartridge called the Safari ??? in several calibers. Swift also makes a 200 gr for reloaders. I used the Rem. Ammo on several hunts as it grouped tighter then anything I was able to load.
Brent in Az
AH ambassador
I have used the, Barnes 180gr partition, and Nosler TSX, on Elk with good results. Elk are bigger than most African plains game, with the exception of Eland and Giraffe.
Just bring one bullet for one gun. Once sighted in and one has the ballistic dope for the scope it doesn't matter whether one bullet shoots a tad flatter than the other.
Keeping it simple avoids mistakes. In this case if giraffe or eland is on the menu I'd stick with the 200 grainer for everything.
Major Khan
AH legend
I have a decided soft spot for the 200 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw soft point bullet m
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2012
- Messages
- 969
- Reaction score
- 1,136
- Media
- 165
- Member of
- Life Member SCI, Benefactor NRA, NMLRA.
- Hunted
- RSA, Namibia
I used the same 200gr. load in my .300 Win with excellent results back when it was in production. You run across old stock of the Remington Premier Safari occasionally on some of the various online auction sites. Up until recently Double Tap loaded the .300 Win Mag with a 180 grain Swift A-Frame but not sure if they still do. Swift loads the 180gr. A-Frame these days but haven't seen any of the 200 grain A-Frames in loaded ammo from any major manufacturer of late.
Tradition vs. technology...
Fact #1 - What truly made the .30 cal - first in .30-06 form, then in .300 mag form - a legendary "light caliber" in a traditional 3 rifles battery (the other two being traditionally a .375 H&H and a double .470 NE or equivalent .450 / .458) was the 200 gr cup & core soft nose bullet.
Fact #2 - Even at .30-06 velocity - never mind .300 mag velocity - the 200 gr cup & core bullets generally broke to pieces sometime during penetration. In 1948, the Nosler Partition, the first genuine premium bullet, literally started to revolutionize the hunting fields with its dual core concept. Its proper operating mode is that, by design, the front core expands violently and is consumed during the initial stage of penetration, and the rear core stays together and penetrate deeply. To this day, the Nosler Partition (NP) continues to perform very well.
For example, these two 250 gr .338 NP launched from a .340 Wby killed a very large Eland bull. The left one (shot #1) broke the massive shoulder bones, and the right one (shot #2) only hit soft tissues (follow up shot on the fleeing Eland, quite literally up its rear end).
The first bullet lost 40% of its weight (bones hit) and the second bullet lost 30% of its weight (flesh hit). In effect, after the first few inches of penetration, the bullets penetrated deeply with 152 gr and 172 gr.
Fact #3 - More modern bullets such as the Swift A Frame (1984) or the Barnes X (1986) then TSX then TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - that provide BOTH great expansion (typically twice the caliber) AND great weight retention (typically in the 95% range) essentially penetrate with almost all of their initial weight. To continue with the same .33 cal example, factually, a TTSX 185 gr .338 bullet that retains 95% weight, penetrates deeply with 175 gr, which is the same as a 250 gr NP after it sheds its front core.
Logical conclusion - Swift A Frame (SAF) or the Barnes TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - DO NOT NEED to weigh the same weight as traditional cup & core bullets to accomplish the same expansion and penetration on game. From this logical conclusion, there seems to be potential paths forward:
Pros & cons - A few factors are worth considering:
What do I choose?
I have used in Africa with great effect on over 40 plains game a .33 mag, a .30 mag and a .25 mag. In my case: .340 Wby, .300 Wby and .257 Wby. But yours can be .338 Win, .300 Win and .25-06; or .33, .30 and .26 Nosler; or .338, .300 RUM and .25 WSM; etc. I like the increased maximum point blank range (MPBR) that the Weatherby/RUM/Nosler/etc. cartridges give over the short Win mag family, but one can live perfectly without it.
Predictably, the .340 Wby 250 gr NP flattened everything I shot it at. But it is needlessly powerful, noisy and hard recoiling for most plains game. What was less predictable was that the .257 Wby gave me 17 one-shot, dead right there (DRT) kills for 17 cartridges fired, shooting 100 gr TTSX bullets at anything from Impala to Roan. And I did not recover any bullet. Complete pass-through penetration on everything, including Warthog, Roan, etc. Impressive!
My plains game rifle is now a full bespoke custom rifle built on an "upgrade #3" double square bridge "Mauser" action (CZ 550) with 26" barrel in .300 Wby. It shoots two loads:
Just my $0.02. I hope that the post was interesting and thought provoking
Fact #1 - What truly made the .30 cal - first in .30-06 form, then in .300 mag form - a legendary "light caliber" in a traditional 3 rifles battery (the other two being traditionally a .375 H&H and a double .470 NE or equivalent .450 / .458) was the 200 gr cup & core soft nose bullet.
Fact #2 - Even at .30-06 velocity - never mind .300 mag velocity - the 200 gr cup & core bullets generally broke to pieces sometime during penetration. In 1948, the Nosler Partition, the first genuine premium bullet, literally started to revolutionize the hunting fields with its dual core concept. Its proper operating mode is that, by design, the front core expands violently and is consumed during the initial stage of penetration, and the rear core stays together and penetrate deeply. To this day, the Nosler Partition (NP) continues to perform very well.
For example, these two 250 gr .338 NP launched from a .340 Wby killed a very large Eland bull. The left one (shot #1) broke the massive shoulder bones, and the right one (shot #2) only hit soft tissues (follow up shot on the fleeing Eland, quite literally up its rear end).
The first bullet lost 40% of its weight (bones hit) and the second bullet lost 30% of its weight (flesh hit). In effect, after the first few inches of penetration, the bullets penetrated deeply with 152 gr and 172 gr.
Fact #3 - More modern bullets such as the Swift A Frame (1984) or the Barnes X (1986) then TSX then TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - that provide BOTH great expansion (typically twice the caliber) AND great weight retention (typically in the 95% range) essentially penetrate with almost all of their initial weight. To continue with the same .33 cal example, factually, a TTSX 185 gr .338 bullet that retains 95% weight, penetrates deeply with 175 gr, which is the same as a 250 gr NP after it sheds its front core.
Logical conclusion - Swift A Frame (SAF) or the Barnes TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - DO NOT NEED to weigh the same weight as traditional cup & core bullets to accomplish the same expansion and penetration on game. From this logical conclusion, there seems to be potential paths forward:
1- Continue to shoot SAF or TTSX of the same traditional weight (e.g. .300 mag 180 gr or 200 gr), and in effect the .300 mag is "up-gunned" to traditional .338 mag effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no such thing as too dead.
2- Shoot SAF or TTSX of a weight that matches the weight of the rear core of the NP, say 70% of the initial weight (e.g. 70% of .300 mag 200 gr = 140 gr and 70% of .300 mag 180 gr = 126 gr), and in effect the .300 mag retains its traditional effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no need to expand considerable bullet energy on the landscape after pass-through penetration.
2- Shoot SAF or TTSX of a weight that matches the weight of the rear core of the NP, say 70% of the initial weight (e.g. 70% of .300 mag 200 gr = 140 gr and 70% of .300 mag 180 gr = 126 gr), and in effect the .300 mag retains its traditional effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no need to expand considerable bullet energy on the landscape after pass-through penetration.
Pros & cons - A few factors are worth considering:
1- Sectional density and ballistic coefficient: longer and heavier bullets typically have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient. Does it matter? Yes. How much? This is hard to quantify, because lighter bullets fly faster and this has a tremendous effect too on both trajectory and penetration. In effect higher velocity mitigates significantly lower sectional density and lower ballistic coefficient.
2- Recoil: everything else remaining equal, a 10% reduction in ejecta weight (bullet & gases) produces a 20% reduction in recoil. This is mitigated somewhat by the fact that a 10% increase in velocity produces a 20% increase in recoil, but when everything is combined, a .300 mag shooting a 200 gr bullet recoils 70% more than the same rifle shooting a 130 gr bullet. This is VERY significant, because a critical factor in accurate shooting is the ability to control recoil, especially from uncertain field shooting positions.
2- Recoil: everything else remaining equal, a 10% reduction in ejecta weight (bullet & gases) produces a 20% reduction in recoil. This is mitigated somewhat by the fact that a 10% increase in velocity produces a 20% increase in recoil, but when everything is combined, a .300 mag shooting a 200 gr bullet recoils 70% more than the same rifle shooting a 130 gr bullet. This is VERY significant, because a critical factor in accurate shooting is the ability to control recoil, especially from uncertain field shooting positions.
What do I choose?
I have used in Africa with great effect on over 40 plains game a .33 mag, a .30 mag and a .25 mag. In my case: .340 Wby, .300 Wby and .257 Wby. But yours can be .338 Win, .300 Win and .25-06; or .33, .30 and .26 Nosler; or .338, .300 RUM and .25 WSM; etc. I like the increased maximum point blank range (MPBR) that the Weatherby/RUM/Nosler/etc. cartridges give over the short Win mag family, but one can live perfectly without it.
Predictably, the .340 Wby 250 gr NP flattened everything I shot it at. But it is needlessly powerful, noisy and hard recoiling for most plains game. What was less predictable was that the .257 Wby gave me 17 one-shot, dead right there (DRT) kills for 17 cartridges fired, shooting 100 gr TTSX bullets at anything from Impala to Roan. And I did not recover any bullet. Complete pass-through penetration on everything, including Warthog, Roan, etc. Impressive!
My plains game rifle is now a full bespoke custom rifle built on an "upgrade #3" double square bridge "Mauser" action (CZ 550) with 26" barrel in .300 Wby. It shoots two loads:
- 130 gr TTSX at 3,650 fps for everything up to 600 lbs.
- 165 gr TTSX at 3,330 fps for everything over 600 lbs.
Just my $0.02. I hope that the post was interesting and thought provoking
Last edited:
BeeMaa
AH ambassador
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2017
- Messages
- 6,528
- Reaction score
- 16,893
- Location
- Alexandria, VA USA
- Media
- 144
- Articles
- 1
- Member of
- NRA Life Member, SCI Member
- Hunted
- Eastern US & RSA
If that post was your $0.02, I'd hate to have to read a full opinion.Tradition vs. technology...
Fact #1 - What truly made the .30 cal - first in .30-06 form, then in .300 mag form - a legendary "light caliber" in a traditional 3 rifles battery (the other two being traditionally a .375 H&H and a double .470 NE or equivalent .450 / .458) was the 200 gr cup & core soft nose bullet.
Fact #2 - Even at .30-06 velocity - never mind .300 mag velocity - the 200 gr cup & core bullets generally broke to pieces sometime during penetration. In 1948, the Nosler Partition, the first genuine premium bullet, literally started to revolutionize the hunting fields with its dual core concept. Its proper operating mode is that, by design, the front core expands violently and is consumed during the initial stage of penetration, and the rear core stays together and penetrate deeply. To this day, the Nosler Partition (NP) continues to perform very well.
For example, these two 250 gr .338 NP launched from a .340 Wby killed a very large Eland bull. The left one (shot #1) broke the massive shoulder bones, and the right one (shot #2) only hit soft tissues (follow up shot on the fleeing Eland, quite literally up its rear end).
View attachment 334293
The first bullet lost 40% of its weight (bones hit) and the second bullet lost 30% of its weight (flesh hit). In effect, after the first few inches of penetration, the bullets penetrated deeply with 152 gr and 172 gr.
Fact #3 - More modern bullets such as the Swift A Frame (1984) or the Barnes X (1986) then TSX then TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - that provide BOTH great expansion (typically twice the caliber) AND great weight retention (typically in the 95% range) essentially penetrate with almost all of their initial weight. To continue with the same .33 cal example, factually, a TTSX 185 gr .338 bullet that retains 95% weight, penetrates deeply with 175 gr, which is the same as a 250 gr NP after it sheds its front core.
Logical conclusion - Swift A Frame (SAF) or the Barnes TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - DO NOT NEED to weigh the same weight as traditional cup & core bullets to accomplish the same expansion and penetration on game. From this logical conclusion, there seems to be potential paths forward:
1- Continue to shoot SAF or TTSX of the same traditional weight (e.g. .300 mag 180 gr or 200 gr), and in effect the .300 mag is "up-gunned" to traditional .338 mag effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no such thing as too dead.
2- Shoot SAF or TTSX of a weight that matches the weight of the rear core of the NP, say 70% of the initial weight (e.g. 70% of .300 mag 200 gr = 140 gr and 70% of .300 mag 180 gr = 126 gr), and in effect the .300 mag retains its traditional effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no need to expand considerable bullet energy on the landscape after pass-through penetration.
Pros & cons - A few factors are worth considering:
1- Sectional density and ballistic coefficient: longer and heavier bullets typically have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient. Does it matter? Yes. How much? This is hard to quantify, because lighter bullets fly faster and this has a tremendous effect too on both trajectory and penetration. In effect higher velocity mitigates significantly lower sectional density and lower ballistic coefficient.
2- Recoil: everything else remaining equal, a 10% reduction in ejecta weight (bullet & gases) produces a 20% reduction in recoil. This is mitigated somewhat by the fact that a 10% increase in velocity produces a 20% increase in recoil, but when everything is combined, a .300 mag shooting a 200 gr bullet recoils 70% more than the same rifle shooting a 130 gr bullet. This is VERY significant, because a critical factor in accurate shooting is the ability to control recoil, especially from uncertain field shooting positions.
What do I choose?
I have used in Africa with great effect on over 40 plains game a .33 mag, a .30 mag and a .25 mag. In my case: .340 Wby, .300 Wby and .257 Wby. But yours can be .338 Win, .300 Win and .25-06; or .33, .30 and .26 Nosler; or .338, .300 RUM and .25 WSM; etc. I like the increased maximum point blank range (MPBR) that the Weatherby/RUM/Nosler/etc. cartridges give over the short Win mag family, but one can live perfectly without it.
Predictably, the .340 Wby 250 gr NP flattened everything I shot it at. But it is needlessly powerful, noisy and hard recoiling for most plains game. What was less predictable was that the .257 Wby gave me 17 one-shot, dead right there (DRT) kills for 17 cartridges fired, shooting 100 gr TTSX bullets at anything from Impala to Roan. And I did not recover any bullet. Complete pass-through penetration on everything, including Warthog, Roan, etc. Impressive!
My plains game rifle is now a full bespoke custom rifle built on an "upgrade #3" double square bridge "Mauser" action (CZ 550) with 26" barrel in .300 Wby. It shoots two loads:
Truth be told, I will be purposefully testing the 130 gr TTSX on tough quartering angles on large plains game (Wildebeest, Hartebeest, Zebra, etc.) this coming September in Africa, and I fully expect that after this test I will only carry the 130 gr TTSX load with it. After all, the math say that they are the equivalent to the 180 gr NP (70% weight retention of 180 gr = 126 gr), and there was never anything wrong with the 180 NP in a .300 mag...
- 130 gr TTSX at 3,650 fps for everything up to 600 lbs.
- 165 gr TTSX at 3,330 fps for everything over 600 lbs.
Just my $0.02. I hope that the post was interesting and thought provoking
But seriously, lots of good information.
My vote is the SAF or TTSX/TSX...whichever shoots best in your rifle.
Any of the factory loaded bullet weights from 150-220 grains will get the job done.
I prefer 180 grains for a .30 caliber, but some barrels like 165, 195 or even up to 220.
IMO to avoid mixing stuff up, stick with one load and one range card.
KISS...you know what that acronym stands for right?
Buy a few of boxes and do some range testing.
We would all be interested in seeing your results.
375Fox
AH legend
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
- Messages
- 3,188
- Reaction score
- 10,272
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Media
- 157
- Hunted
- Zambia, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Cameroon
Thanks for the information. I’ve moved towards lighter 150 and 250 grain TTSX bullets in my 300 and 375, mainly for less recoil and flatter shooting and my Sako rifles shoot much better with them, but I always thought I was giving something up, your write up made me think.Tradition vs. technology...
Fact #1 - What truly made the .30 cal - first in .30-06 form, then in .300 mag form - a legendary "light caliber" in a traditional 3 rifles battery (the other two being traditionally a .375 H&H and a double .470 NE or equivalent .450 / .458) was the 200 gr cup & core soft nose bullet.
Fact #2 - Even at .30-06 velocity - never mind .300 mag velocity - the 200 gr cup & core bullets generally broke to pieces sometime during penetration. In 1948, the Nosler Partition, the first genuine premium bullet, literally started to revolutionize the hunting fields with its dual core concept. Its proper operating mode is that, by design, the front core expands violently and is consumed during the initial stage of penetration, and the rear core stays together and penetrate deeply. To this day, the Nosler Partition (NP) continues to perform very well.
For example, these two 250 gr .338 NP launched from a .340 Wby killed a very large Eland bull. The left one (shot #1) broke the massive shoulder bones, and the right one (shot #2) only hit soft tissues (follow up shot on the fleeing Eland, quite literally up its rear end).
View attachment 334293
The first bullet lost 40% of its weight (bones hit) and the second bullet lost 30% of its weight (flesh hit). In effect, after the first few inches of penetration, the bullets penetrated deeply with 152 gr and 172 gr.
Fact #3 - More modern bullets such as the Swift A Frame (1984) or the Barnes X (1986) then TSX then TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - that provide BOTH great expansion (typically twice the caliber) AND great weight retention (typically in the 95% range) essentially penetrate with almost all of their initial weight. To continue with the same .33 cal example, factually, a TTSX 185 gr .338 bullet that retains 95% weight, penetrates deeply with 175 gr, which is the same as a 250 gr NP after it sheds its front core.
Logical conclusion - Swift A Frame (SAF) or the Barnes TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - DO NOT NEED to weigh the same weight as traditional cup & core bullets to accomplish the same expansion and penetration on game. From this logical conclusion, there seems to be potential paths forward:
1- Continue to shoot SAF or TTSX of the same traditional weight (e.g. .300 mag 180 gr or 200 gr), and in effect the .300 mag is "up-gunned" to traditional .338 mag effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no such thing as too dead.
2- Shoot SAF or TTSX of a weight that matches the weight of the rear core of the NP, say 70% of the initial weight (e.g. 70% of .300 mag 200 gr = 140 gr and 70% of .300 mag 180 gr = 126 gr), and in effect the .300 mag retains its traditional effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no need to expand considerable bullet energy on the landscape after pass-through penetration.
Pros & cons - A few factors are worth considering:
1- Sectional density and ballistic coefficient: longer and heavier bullets typically have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient. Does it matter? Yes. How much? This is hard to quantify, because lighter bullets fly faster and this has a tremendous effect too on both trajectory and penetration. In effect higher velocity mitigates significantly lower sectional density and lower ballistic coefficient.
2- Recoil: everything else remaining equal, a 10% reduction in ejecta weight (bullet & gases) produces a 20% reduction in recoil. This is mitigated somewhat by the fact that a 10% increase in velocity produces a 20% increase in recoil, but when everything is combined, a .300 mag shooting a 200 gr bullet recoils 70% more than the same rifle shooting a 130 gr bullet. This is VERY significant, because a critical factor in accurate shooting is the ability to control recoil, especially from uncertain field shooting positions.
What do I choose?
I have used in Africa with great effect on over 40 plains game a .33 mag, a .30 mag and a .25 mag. In my case: .340 Wby, .300 Wby and .257 Wby. But yours can be .338 Win, .300 Win and .25-06; or .33, .30 and .26 Nosler; or .338, .300 RUM and .25 WSM; etc. I like the increased maximum point blank range (MPBR) that the Weatherby/RUM/Nosler/etc. cartridges give over the short Win mag family, but one can live perfectly without it.
Predictably, the .340 Wby 250 gr NP flattened everything I shot it at. But it is needlessly powerful, noisy and hard recoiling for most plains game. What was less predictable was that the .257 Wby gave me 17 one-shot, dead right there (DRT) kills for 17 cartridges fired, shooting 100 gr TTSX bullets at anything from Impala to Roan. And I did not recover any bullet. Complete pass-through penetration on everything, including Warthog, Roan, etc. Impressive!
My plains game rifle is now a full bespoke custom rifle built on an "upgrade #3" double square bridge "Mauser" action (CZ 550) with 26" barrel in .300 Wby. It shoots two loads:
Truth be told, I will be purposefully testing the 130 gr TTSX on tough quartering angles on large plains game (Wildebeest, Hartebeest, Zebra, etc.) this coming September in Africa, and I fully expect that after this test I will only carry the 130 gr TTSX load with it. After all, the math say that they are the equivalent to the 180 gr NP (70% weight retention of 180 gr = 126 gr), and there was never anything wrong with the 180 NP in a .300 mag...
- 130 gr TTSX at 3,650 fps for everything up to 600 lbs.
- 165 gr TTSX at 3,330 fps for everything over 600 lbs.
Just my $0.02. I hope that the post was interesting and thought provoking
IvW
AH ambassador
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2016
- Messages
- 6,456
- Reaction score
- 15,581
- Location
- South Africa
- Media
- 68
- Articles
- 3
- Member of
- BASA, CHASA
- Hunted
- South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Botswana, Namibia,Zambia
Tradition vs. technology...
Fact #1 - What truly made the .30 cal - first in .30-06 form, then in .300 mag form - a legendary "light caliber" in a traditional 3 rifles battery (the other two being traditionally a .375 H&H and a double .470 NE or equivalent .450 / .458) was the 200 gr cup & core soft nose bullet.
Fact #2 - Even at .30-06 velocity - never mind .300 mag velocity - the 200 gr cup & core bullets generally broke to pieces sometime during penetration. In 1948, the Nosler Partition, the first genuine premium bullet, literally started to revolutionize the hunting fields with its dual core concept. Its proper operating mode is that, by design, the front core expands violently and is consumed during the initial stage of penetration, and the rear core stays together and penetrate deeply. To this day, the Nosler Partition (NP) continues to perform very well.
For example, these two 250 gr .338 NP launched from a .340 Wby killed a very large Eland bull. The left one (shot #1) broke the massive shoulder bones, and the right one (shot #2) only hit soft tissues (follow up shot on the fleeing Eland, quite literally up its rear end).
View attachment 334293
The first bullet lost 40% of its weight (bones hit) and the second bullet lost 30% of its weight (flesh hit). In effect, after the first few inches of penetration, the bullets penetrated deeply with 152 gr and 172 gr.
Fact #3 - More modern bullets such as the Swift A Frame (1984) or the Barnes X (1986) then TSX then TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - that provide BOTH great expansion (typically twice the caliber) AND great weight retention (typically in the 95% range) essentially penetrate with almost all of their initial weight. To continue with the same .33 cal example, factually, a TTSX 185 gr .338 bullet that retains 95% weight, penetrates deeply with 175 gr, which is the same as a 250 gr NP after it sheds its front core.
Logical conclusion - Swift A Frame (SAF) or the Barnes TTSX - and any equivalent bonded or mono metal design - DO NOT NEED to weigh the same weight as traditional cup & core bullets to accomplish the same expansion and penetration on game. From this logical conclusion, there seems to be potential paths forward:
1- Continue to shoot SAF or TTSX of the same traditional weight (e.g. .300 mag 180 gr or 200 gr), and in effect the .300 mag is "up-gunned" to traditional .338 mag effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no such thing as too dead.
2- Shoot SAF or TTSX of a weight that matches the weight of the rear core of the NP, say 70% of the initial weight (e.g. 70% of .300 mag 200 gr = 140 gr and 70% of .300 mag 180 gr = 126 gr), and in effect the .300 mag retains its traditional effect on game. There is nothing wrong with that; there is no need to expand considerable bullet energy on the landscape after pass-through penetration.
Pros & cons - A few factors are worth considering:
1- Sectional density and ballistic coefficient: longer and heavier bullets typically have higher sectional density and ballistic coefficient. Does it matter? Yes. How much? This is hard to quantify, because lighter bullets fly faster and this has a tremendous effect too on both trajectory and penetration. In effect higher velocity mitigates significantly lower sectional density and lower ballistic coefficient.
2- Recoil: everything else remaining equal, a 10% reduction in ejecta weight (bullet & gases) produces a 20% reduction in recoil. This is mitigated somewhat by the fact that a 10% increase in velocity produces a 20% increase in recoil, but when everything is combined, a .300 mag shooting a 200 gr bullet recoils 70% more than the same rifle shooting a 130 gr bullet. This is VERY significant, because a critical factor in accurate shooting is the ability to control recoil, especially from uncertain field shooting positions.
What do I choose?
I have used in Africa with great effect on over 40 plains game a .33 mag, a .30 mag and a .25 mag. In my case: .340 Wby, .300 Wby and .257 Wby. But yours can be .338 Win, .300 Win and .25-06; or .33, .30 and .26 Nosler; or .338, .300 RUM and .25 WSM; etc. I like the increased maximum point blank range (MPBR) that the Weatherby/RUM/Nosler/etc. cartridges give over the short Win mag family, but one can live perfectly without it.
Predictably, the .340 Wby 250 gr NP flattened everything I shot it at. But it is needlessly powerful, noisy and hard recoiling for most plains game. What was less predictable was that the .257 Wby gave me 17 one-shot, dead right there (DRT) kills for 17 cartridges fired, shooting 100 gr TTSX bullets at anything from Impala to Roan. And I did not recover any bullet. Complete pass-through penetration on everything, including Warthog, Roan, etc. Impressive!
My plains game rifle is now a full bespoke custom rifle built on an "upgrade #3" double square bridge "Mauser" action (CZ 550) with 26" barrel in .300 Wby. It shoots two loads:
Truth be told, I will be purposefully testing the 130 gr TTSX on tough quartering angles on large plains game (Wildebeest, Hartebeest, Zebra, etc.) this coming September in Africa, and I fully expect that after this test I will only carry the 130 gr TTSX load with it. After all, the math say that they are the equivalent to the 180 gr NP (70% weight retention of 180 gr = 126 gr), and there was never anything wrong with the 180 NP in a .300 mag...
- 130 gr TTSX at 3,650 fps for everything up to 600 lbs.
- 165 gr TTSX at 3,330 fps for everything over 600 lbs.
Just my $0.02. I hope that the post was interesting and thought provoking
Very large Eland bull...
Last edited:
CBH Australia
AH legend
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
- Messages
- 3,519
- Reaction score
- 7,376
- Location
- NSW Australia
- Media
- 18
- Member of
- Sporting Shooters Association Australia, Africa Hunting website!!!
- Hunted
- Australia and now South Africa
@One Day... Good write up written clearly. I’ve been told similar but this puts it into context and is coming from an experienced Hunter not someone using a sales spiel.
There is a company in Australia called Outer Edge that make mono metal and promote the same principle but you have give s some excellent information in examples that we can relate too.
The salesman at the shop said Outer Edge recommend a bullet weight to a twist rate etc but that’s all relevant anyway if we get into heavy bullets.
I researched some low recoil options for my brother in a lightweight .308 as he had some neck issues one trip. We never resolved if it was the shooting or other.
I decided on was Barnes TTSX as they are known for expansion and weight retention and from what I found they still perform a ton lower velocity within reason.
Thanks for some clearly written explanation and examples.
There is a company in Australia called Outer Edge that make mono metal and promote the same principle but you have give s some excellent information in examples that we can relate too.
The salesman at the shop said Outer Edge recommend a bullet weight to a twist rate etc but that’s all relevant anyway if we get into heavy bullets.
I researched some low recoil options for my brother in a lightweight .308 as he had some neck issues one trip. We never resolved if it was the shooting or other.
I decided on was Barnes TTSX as they are known for expansion and weight retention and from what I found they still perform a ton lower velocity within reason.
Thanks for some clearly written explanation and examples.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 7,211
- Reaction score
- 15,341
- Location
- Texas
- Website
- www.dorper.net
- Media
- 128
- Articles
- 15
- Member of
- NRA, Life SCI, Life DSC, Life EWA
- Hunted
- RSA, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Cameroon, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Austria, Australia, TX, NM
I like your way of thinking!
Members online
- 62flint
- festuscat
- Fabnosh
- grand veneur
- revturbo9967
- luger6
- FlyGuy
- krish
- Brandon.Gleason
- BeeMaa
- Christian Davis
- Ngonyama
- Altitude sickness
- AfricaHunting.com
- zephyr
- fanies7772
- Beretta391
- Dr Ray
- Axle2010
- Wade J VanGinkel
- Denvir Tire
- Tubby’s Canteen
- DishaK
- TONYC
- Mark R
- Foxi
- Hyde Hunter
- mneilh
- DavidGregory
- Colorado cowman
- Jonathan Kashouty
- eatmore-pbj
- Rule404
- Nevada Mike
- Mo-hntr
- KJE81
- Nkawu
- Softballdad
- nols
- saswart
- Hunter-Habib
- matt85
- Clodo Ferreira
- marksman
- Pheroze
- Fryeguy
- WAM
- cash_tx
- TNDave
- Hank2211
Forum statistics
Latest profile posts
Nick BOWKER HUNTING SOUTH AFRICA wrote on EGS-HQ's profile.
Hi EGS
I read your thread with interest. Would you mind sending me that PDF? May I put it on my website?
Rob
I read your thread with interest. Would you mind sending me that PDF? May I put it on my website?
Rob
