Can plains game A Frames or TSX bullets be 30% lighter?

[Doug Hamilton]

Thankfully, I have never had the experience of copper fouling to that degree. I have shot quite a few copper and gilding metal monolithic bullets in range sessions and have not had that happen. Actually, I have had no worse copper fouling from old Barnes X-bullets than Swift A-Frames in a couple of rifles that I shot both in.

I pretty much exclusively use the expanding monolithics, be they copper, gilding metal from .224 through.458 calibers. Some may foul worse than others, but I have never felt the need to stop a range session and clean the barrel due to copper fouling when starting with a relatively clean barrel.

I fully agree on that type of politicians, in any country, will attempt to make it as difficult as possible on hunters / shooters / firearms owners. Their bullshit has no boundaries of borders. It is universal.

Well it only.happened yo mms that one time, but sometimes one.bad experience is enough.
As far as the politicians making things harder on hunters/shooters, in the US thing s are far worse in the liberal run ststes. "Make America a cess pool again! Vote Democrat!"

 

[Rule 303]

This is something that I have wondered about myself. Having grown up in California, where the use of lead free bullets is now required, I bought a box of Barnes and loaded them for my .30-06. After about three shots I could no longer hold a group. I polled the bolt a looked down the bore. It looked like a tiny shotgun barrel. Completely smooth and shiny. The lands had sheared so much copper which completely filled the grooves that the bullets would no longer stabilize. It took a lot of copper solvent and elbow grease to restore the rifle to its former tight shooting self.
That was quite a few years ago, and I know that the technology has advanced, but my old friends that still live in California tell me that hey have a lot of trouble with copper fouling. A few of them have stopped hunting in California because of it. We tend to believe that making it tough for hunters was the real reason for the lead ban.
I'm going to stay with premium lead core bullets.
Besides that, have you ever seen a western movie where they threatened anyone with copper poisinin'?

I think I put the Barnes kids through University with the amount of their bullets I tried. Best group was 4" none were anywhere near the POI that others were. This in a 270, 35Whelen, 375H&H and 308. So I gave up on them and never used them again. Though the banded ones might work, I will not try them as they have enough of my money, and I have found other monos that work well and shoot well.

A mono of the same weight as a cup and core is longer. As they are longer they will need a quicker twist rate in the rifling when using the heavier pills, well before a conventional bullet will.

In mono's I prefer the bore riders over the Barnes style of cutting groves into the shank. I find less fouling, not that most foul badly in my rifles, slightly better velocity. Not sure why as it would appear there is less pressure.

 

[Dukeisok]

No plains game experience yet, but I've killed a mess of deer with a 110 ttsx in a 270. Loaded up that thing is moving 3550 fps at the muzzle and is deadly on the small deer we have here. Plus recoil is less and trajectory is laser like. Within reason I think the same would apply to most calibers. From a physics perspective, near complete weight retention with lower expanded diameter than a cup and core means higher retained sectional density and better penetration. One could argue that the shed weight is imparting energy into the animal but I've never been a proponent of the theory that energy kills. Damaging vital organs kills. That said, I did one time shoot a 100 pound deer at approximately 25 feet at last light. My high heart aim ended up as a spine shot at short distance and there was a phenominal amount of bloodshot backstrap and an exploded vertebrae with bone fragments 6 inches away, so the energy did something.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I think I put the Barnes kids through University with the amount of their bullets I tried. Best group was 4" none were anywhere near the POI that others were. This in a 270, 35Whelen, 375H&H and 308. So I gave up on them and never used them again. Though the banded ones might work, I will not try them as they have enough of my money, and I have found other monos that work well and shoot well.

A mono of the same weight as a cup and core is longer. As they are longer they will need a quicker twist rate in the rifling when using the heavier pills, well before a conventional bullet will.

In mono's I prefer the bore riders over the Barnes style of cutting groves into the shank. I find less fouling, not that most foul badly in my rifles, slightly better velocity. Not sure why as it would appear there is less pressure.

@Rule 303
The 100gn TTSX groups itty bitty groups in my 25 and shoots flat as a shit carters hat. Sighted a bit over 2" high at 100, spot on at 300 and 8" low at 400 when started at 3,660fps. Zero copper fouling.
You need to try the Australian made Atomic 29s mate, very very accurate in the whelen and stuff all fouling. The 220gn at close to 2,900fps should work well.
Bob

 

[Rule 303]

Bob, I have some Outer Edge 110 grain to try. I have tried some Atomics in 358 and after I run out of ACP's in 358 they are what I will go to for the 220 grain weight. If I get to go back to Africa I will see if Cameron can knock up some Atomics' in a 240 to 250 weight for the 358RUM. I have a ton and a half of Speer, Sierra and Woodleigh in 250 for the Whelen. Might sell some of those off and replace with the Atomics'

The mono 270, 110 grainers are way to long to get into the 6.8 SPC unless I get the magazine lengthened, not a big job and seriously long throat it. That is long throat it to shame Roy Weatherby's long throats..

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Bob, I have some Outer Edge 110 grain to try. I have tried some Atomics in 358 and after I run out of ACP's in 358 they are what I will go to for the 220 grain weight. If I get to go back to Africa I will see if Cameron can knock up some Atomics' in a 240 to 250 weight for the 358RUM. I have a ton and a half of Speer, Sierra and Woodleigh in 250 for the Whelen. Might sell some of those off and replace with the Atomics'

The mono 270, 110 grainers are way to long to get into the 6.8 SPC unless I get the magazine lengthened, not a big job and seriously long throat it. That is long throat it to shame Roy Weatherby's long throats..

@Rule 303
Mate those Outer Edge work a treat.
My son used the 140 grainer in his 308 in Namibia on zebra.
At 120 yards the first one hit smack on the 3rd chevron but the fool thing ran off not knowing it was dead. The second shot at 190 yards was 2 inches from the first shot and it toppled over. Neither projectile was recovered and the internals were a mess. At the skinning shed the skinners and and another hunter thought he had used the camp 300WM as there was no difference in the damage between the 1 he shot and the sons.
Bob

 

[colorado]

No plains game experience yet, but I've killed a mess of deer with a 110 ttsx in a 270. Loaded up that thing is moving 3550 fps at the muzzle and is deadly on the small deer we have here. Plus recoil is less and trajectory is laser like. Within reason I think the same would apply to most calibers. From a physics perspective, near complete weight retention with lower expanded diameter than a cup and core means higher retained sectional density and better penetration. One could argue that the shed weight is imparting energy into the animal but I've never been a proponent of the theory that energy kills. Damaging vital organs kills. That said, I did one time shoot a 100 pound deer at approximately 25 feet at last light. My high heart aim ended up as a spine shot at short distance and there was a phenominal amount of bloodshot backstrap and an exploded vertebrae with bone fragments 6 inches away, so the energy did something.

I should try those in my 270 Weatherby, maybe it would be a bit too fast?

 

[Dukeisok]

I don't think you can push a barnes too fast really. You will shed petals but the animal still dies. The tsx doesn't open as violently but I'm not sure if they make a 110 .277 tsx

 

[Mountaineer]

Has anyone used the 250 grain Aframe in a 375 H&H to hunt Cape buffalo?

 

[Sabattiboy]

This seems to be a two part question.
1) bullet as loaded out the bbl in the distance to animal performance
2) After animal impact performance
maybe a 3rd based on whether bone is hit or just flesh.
Cutting Edge bullets and others these days have the petals that expand doing mega damage. It seems some break off and some don't. That would make a weight difference per your question of retained bullet weight.
The partition that does most of its penetration after shedding the front end of the bullet is similar to the petals coming off but not necessarily equal in damage from the initial expansion part.
A friend uses CE bullets in his 500 NE that are about 100gr lighter than the standard 570gr bullet. He gets higher fps with them and devastating results. Recoil is equal.

In my thinking, if the bullet is giving advertised performance in the animals used on the weight, within a range, is not a critical factor. Can't trade a 150gr copper/lead bullet for a 50gr copper turned bullet.
If recoil is reduced and performance is not lessoned that can only be a plus.

Elmer Keith wrote about his trials of Western Copper and tool bullets in his day. Maybe other brands as well. He wrote he supplied client ammo in order see how they performed. He wrote some over expanded or blew up not penetrating and some failed to expand punching through like a solid. Some probably worked as they were supposed to. I don't recall his giving any percentages.

He also mentioned on one African hunt he shot a plans game animal with a chest shot like he would an American deer or elk and stopped shooting waiting for it to pile up. He wrote it never did and ran out of sight unrecovered. Decision from that; African animals take more killing and don't stop shooting until they are down. Many African hunter and PH probably found this to be true.

 

[colorado]

My 270 Bee shoot 150 A-Frames or TSX's at 3250 fps That's probably fast enough

 

[Nevada Mike]

I can answer only from my own recent experience. I used a 7mm Remington Magnum with 160 grain Swift A Frames on my recent hunt. We had one shot, immediate kills on impala, zebra, roan, and reed buck. All of these were "Bang Flop" - no followup. I did have to use two shots on one zebra (first shot broke a front leg at the shoulder and he ran, requiring a long follow-up). Also two shots on a Hartebeest, but he traveled only 75 yards or so.

So, yes, but proper shot placement is still absolutely necessary.

 

[Alaska]

Love the A frame for accuracy and game performance this .338 225gr passed thru a entire moose lengthwise and was just under the skin on far hip. Shot was 300 yards with 338 RUM. Recovered weight was 99.3% excellent performance. No follow up or tracking needed. The only A frame I have ever recovered from game.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying but have you run a ballistic chart on two bullets, one heavy and one light, with the same muzzle velocity? At the same distance downrange, the lighter one will be faster than the heavier one.

If you have a heavier bullet and a lighter bullet with the same muzzle velocity (speed) the lighter bullet will loose velocity faster than the heavier bullet. This is why the long range shooters have gone to heavy for caliber bullets. Lighter bullets can be pushed to a higher.muzzle velocity because the initial resistance, and therefore pressure, is less. Over time and distance he lighter bullet sheds velocity and energy faster than the heavier.bullet. if both.bullets leave the.barrel st the same speed the heavier bullet will.fly flatter and deliver more energy at the target.

 

[Scott CWO]

Love the A frame for accuracy and game performance this .338 225gr passed thru an hat the perfect bullet and weight fentire moose lengthwise and was just under the skin on far hip. Shot was 300 yards with 338 RUM. Recovered weight was 99.3% excellent performance. No follow up or tracking needed. The only A frame I have ever recovered from game.
View attachment 497295

That’s the perfect bullet and weight for the .338.

 

[WyoBull]

I think I put the Barnes kids through University with the amount of their bullets I tried. Best group was 4" none were anywhere near the POI that others were. This in a 270, 35Whelen, 375H&H and 308. So I gave up on them and never used them again. Though the banded ones might work, I will not try them as they have enough of my money, and I have found other monos that work well and shoot well.

A mono of the same weight as a cup and core is longer. As they are longer they will need a quicker twist rate in the rifling when using the heavier pills, well before a conventional bullet will.

In mono's I prefer the bore riders over the Barnes style of cutting groves into the shank. I find less fouling, not that most foul badly in my rifles, slightly better velocity. Not sure why as it would appear there is less pressure.

Barnes 300 gr TSX in my 375 H&H and it clover leafs 3 rounds at 100 yards.

Several Barnes bullets from 110 gr TTSX to 160 gr TSX in my 7mm RUM and they are all 1/2 inch MOA. My go to for this rifle is the Barnes 145 gr LRX and it is less than 1/2 MOA.

Barnes 80 gr TTSX in my .243 Win and it is 1/2 inch MOA or better.

For me, Barnes have performed extremely well not only in accuracy but in terminal performance on game as well.

 

[ldmay375]

The ballistic coefficient of lighter versus heavier must be taken into account regarding retained velocity, even in same weight bullets.

The Barnes .338, .375, and .416 TSX have been accurate in several of my rifles. So far absolutely no complaints on terminal performance.