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

[PHOENIX PHIL]

my experience with accubonds 165gr out of a 300wsm are accurate as hell, great BC but they come apart fast at high velocity. I'd say at long range they are fantastic, up close and personal not so much

What @stug said.

 

[Milehighshooter]

Something to consider, does the lighter bullet expand to the same diameter as the heavier bullet ? A heavier bullet will be longer than lighter bullet(calibre and design remaining constant).
?

That is the misconception many have of monometal bullets. They are in fact VERY long. A 130gr TTSX .308 is near the same length as a 180gr cup and core. They're not short stubby bullets like a comparable traditional bullet or bonded would be. Barnes themselves even recommends "stepping down a size" of bullet. I.E. if you use 180's try Barnes 165's. On traditional weights, a monometal may be so long that standard twist rates may not even stabilize the projectile. An example being the 115gr .257 bullet, Barnes recommends 1:9 or faster, almost all factory 25's of any flavor carry a 1:10 twist

 

[bruce moulds]

from personal use, i have some thoughts.
in my 9.3x64, i am known for not being a great promoter of the 286 nosler partition.
the equivalent swift aframe on the other hand lets this gun realize far more potential on a broad spectrum of agme.
i personally do not rate the nosler as reliable on donkeys to give a guide to my thoughts.
30% of 286 is about 86, so reducing wt by this much brings the bullet to 200 gns.
cannot say what a monometal in this weight can do as have never tried one, and do not know of one.
if it is as good as the partition, in my mind it is still not much of a bullet, and only suited to light game.
this topic has however got me thinking about the 250 barnes for certain applications.
a good calibre to test this in would be 338 of various chamberings, due to a plethora of available different lighter weight monometals.
problem is you need to shoot a lot of animals of different sizes, at different ranges, and different angles, to achieve a valid statistical analysis.
bruce.

 

[Milehighshooter]

from personal use, i have some thoughts.
in my 9.3x64, i am known for not being a great promoter of the 286 nosler partition.
the equivalent swift aframe on the other hand lets this gun realize far more potential on a broad spectrum of agme.
i personally do not rate the nosler as reliable on donkeys to give a guide to my thoughts.
30% of 286 is about 86, so reducing wt by this much brings the bullet to 200 gns.
cannot say what a monometal in this weight can do as have never tried one, and do not know of one.
if it is as good as the partition, in my mind it is still not much of a bullet, and only suited to light game.
this topic has however got me thinking about the 250 barnes for certain applications.
a good calibre to test this in would be 338 of various chamberings, due to a plethora of available different lighter weight monometals.
problem is you need to shoot a lot of animals of different sizes, at different ranges, and different angles, to achieve a valid statistical analysis.
bruce.

Bruce,

The Barnes "recommended step down" would indeed be using the 250 vs the 286 in your example

 

[Newboomer]

Very interesting thread. My 2 cents worth of experience: I swear by Barnes TSX in all my rifles. I took several species of plains game with 160 g TSxs in my 7mag, all one shot kills--zebra, waterbuck, black and blue wildebeast, gemsbok, impala, springbok. We recovered only one slug and it weighed 160.3 g with 4 perfect petals. The .3 g was tissue it picked up. All the others were through and through, mostly through a front leg into the boiler room and on out. My buffalo went down with one 375HH 350 g TSX head on shot. The skinners went through the innards and never did find the slug. His old heart was pretty well destroyed, though. Sable and hartebeest took one 375HH 235g TSX and dropped, again no slug was found.

160 g 7mag and 235g 375HH may be heavy for PG but I like a heavy bullet. They work and give a good wound channel.

I've heard of and seen some unpleasant happenings with various bullets of the lead core type and I am not a fan of tracking wounded game. I'll take a Barnes TSX or TTSX every time.

 

[One Day...]

Wow !!! Real-world difference between .300 Weatherby 180 gr and 150 gr Nosler Partition...

Hello guys. I have not posted on this thread for a little while, but since I am the one who opened it with that provocative question: "Can plains game A Frames or TSX bullets be 30% lighter?" I have read everything. Thank you All again for sharing.

Per previous post, I personally feel that 30% (i.e. what a Partition typically looses in the first inch or so of penetration) might be a bit too much in weight reduction when moving to mono-metal, but I have personally down-sized the .340 Wby 10% from 250 gr Partition to 225 gr TTSX,; the .300 Wby 8% from 180 gr Partition to 165 gr TTSX; and the .257 Wby 15% from 120 gr Partition to 100 gr TTSX. I do not have hunting outcomes to report yet, but I can already confirm that all three guns (2 Mk V and 1 Win 70) continue to shoot ~1 MOA with the TTSX, as they did with the Partition.

What I want to share though, is different and absolutely blew me away. As recently stated in some posts, I am gifting my .300 Wby Win 70 Stainless Classic to my oldest son, with a few boxes of Federal Premium Nosler Partition 150 gr and 180 gr, and we went to get him a bit of field-positions shooting practice at 200 yd on a 12" steel plate. I KNOW that the below has not real scientific bearing in terms of effect on game, but I was flabbergasted to see that the 180 gr NP punched clear through a 1/2" thick 12" steel plate at 200 yd !?!?!?!?

The 4 holes are .300 Wby 180 gr NP, and the four shinning recent dings (two centered, and two on the left) are .300 Wby 150 gr NP (the rest are .223 Mk 11, .308 SSG 69, and .300 Win Mag Mk 13 long range loads between 600 and 1,000 yd). This plate also received numerous .470 NE Hornady DGS at 25 to 50 yd, without the slightest ill effect.

1) I find absolutely amazing that the .300 Wby 180 gr punches clear through 1/2" of steel at 200 yd...............

2) As to the difference of "punch" (for lack of a better word - and I have no idea how it would translate into live game penetration), I find also amazing the difference between 180 gr and 150 gr NP................. (no wonder I never recovered one of these from any deer, black bear or wild boar!?!?)

 

[One Day...]

Ooops, meant .223 Mk 12 (the Mk 11 is a .308)

 

[bruce moulds]

one day,
your exoerience reminded me of one from my misbegotten youth.
shooting a steel plate with various rifles at 25 yds revealed some surprises.
the best penetrater was a 17/222mag ackley 25 gn hornady at 4200, followed by a 25/06 87 gn ad 3500.
270 win, 308, and 30/06 just bulged the steel.
450 nitro put the biggest bulge in the steel, but would not penetrate.
rumour has it that german military ammo would not penetrate british tanks in ww1, until they discovered that seating the bullets back to front in the case did the job.
bruce.
edid to say that shooting steel with rifles at close range is dangerous.
the 450 nitro sent a piece of jacket back into my forearm, fortunately not my eye, that had to be removed by a doctor.
do not do this.

 

[sgt_zim]

At shorter distances (under say 200-250), the lighter, longer bullets probably work at least as well as the heavier bullets.

But...
using .308 cal bullet as an example
it depends on case capacity. a 165 gr tsx will be almost the same length as a 180 partition, and certainly longer than a 165 gr partition. speed advantage to the 165 gr partition over 165 gr tsx, and speed advantage to the tsx 165 over the partition 180.

Partition and Scirocco II 180 gr both have higher BC and SD than 165 tsx. So MV is somewhat higher in tsx, but the lower BC means it decelerates at a greater rate than either of those 180s. There is a point along the energy curve where the path of the 180 crosses (and thus exceed) the 165. At impact beyond that intersection (and for some distance to the left of the intersection), the 180 has probably a fair momentum advantage.

As far as MPBR advantages for the lighter monometals...there just isn't an appreciable difference. In general, non-magnum cartridges will have an MPBR of 250-300 yards, and medium and small magnums will have an MPBR of about 300-350 yards (deer-sized game). Obviously, the bigger the target, the further out MPBR goes, but this is more of an effect of target size and less so about bullet weight.

Last, all bullets do not expand equally at given velocities. Nosler asserts that partitions will expand reliably down to 1800 fps. I expect at the lower end of their performance envelope, the issue of frontal separation is less of a thing than at the higher end. AFAIK, Barnes makes no assertions about minimum impact velocity, but between this and a couple other boards I frequent, it seems to be a widely-held view that 2k fps is the bottom end for Barnes. For me, the take-away of that is that a Nosler 180 is at least marginally better than a tsx 165 as MPBR is approached. And it may even be the case on non-magnum cartridges that MPBR exceeds the distance at which a tsx is thought to reliably expand.

math experiment.
30-06 shooting ttsx 165 gr at 2800 fps.
calculated mpbr for a deer sized animal is a little over 300 yards.
ttsx decelerates to 2000 fps at around 225 yards.

same 30-06 with NP 180 gr at 2750
roughly the same mpbr
NP is north of 1800 fps at 500 yards, and is still north of 2k fps out to 400 yards

30-06 shooting 180 gr Scirocco II at 2700
same mpbr
still north of 2k fps at 400 yards

It's for certain TSX is a slayer inside its performance window. But it unquestionably has a smaller performance window than either NP or Swift Scirocco. If you're certain to never take a long shot, TSX 165 may be preferable to a separating NP 180. But if you have the skill to shoot 300+, and the opportunity arises for a long shot, you'll probably be wishing you'd gone with one of the 180s.

 

[One Day...]

At shorter distances (under say 200-250), the lighter, longer bullets probably work at least as well as the heavier bullets.

But...
using .308 cal bullet as an example
it depends on case capacity. a 165 gr tsx will be almost the same length as a 180 partition, and certainly longer than a 165 gr partition. speed advantage to the 165 gr partition over 165 gr tsx, and speed advantage to the tsx 165 over the partition 180.

Partition and Scirocco II 180 gr both have higher BC and SD than 165 tsx. So MV is somewhat higher in tsx, but the lower BC means it decelerates at a greater rate than either of those 180s. There is a point along the energy curve where the path of the 180 crosses (and thus exceed) the 165. At impact beyond that intersection (and for some distance to the left of the intersection), the 180 has probably a fair momentum advantage.

As far as MPBR advantages for the lighter monometals...there just isn't an appreciable difference. In general, non-magnum cartridges will have an MPBR of 250-300 yards, and medium and small magnums will have an MPBR of about 300-350 yards (deer-sized game). Obviously, the bigger the target, the further out MPBR goes, but this is more of an effect of target size and less so about bullet weight.

Last, all bullets do not expand equally at given velocities. Nosler asserts that partitions will expand reliably down to 1800 fps. I expect at the lower end of their performance envelope, the issue of frontal separation is less of a thing than at the higher end. AFAIK, Barnes makes no assertions about minimum impact velocity, but between this and a couple other boards I frequent, it seems to be a widely-held view that 2k fps is the bottom end for Barnes. For me, the take-away of that is that a Nosler 180 is at least marginally better than a tsx 165 as MPBR is approached. And it may even be the case on non-magnum cartridges that MPBR exceeds the distance at which a tsx is thought to reliably expand.

math experiment.
30-06 shooting ttsx 165 gr at 2800 fps.
calculated mpbr for a deer sized animal is a little over 300 yards.
ttsx decelerates to 2000 fps at around 225 yards.

same 30-06 with NP 180 gr at 2750
roughly the same mpbr
NP is north of 1800 fps at 500 yards, and is still north of 2k fps out to 400 yards

30-06 shooting 180 gr Scirocco II at 2700
same mpbr
still north of 2k fps at 400 yards

It's for certain TSX is a slayer inside its performance window. But it unquestionably has a smaller performance window than either NP or Swift Scirocco. If you're certain to never take a long shot, TSX 165 may be preferable to a separating NP 180. But if you have the skill to shoot 300+, and the opportunity arises for a long shot, you'll probably be wishing you'd gone with one of the 180s.

Very interesting post @sgt_zim, Thank You. 100% agreed on the 2,000 fps threshold for the TSX based on various reads, but I really would love to see the results of a controlled experimentation about this. Is this a legend carrying through from past issues, or is this still real? The only thing I can say for sure, is that, actually, the failure to reliably expand was the reason why I quickly abandoned the original X back in the days. Some I tried would not even expand in wet telephone books (when such things existed LOL), but I did not own a chronograph in those days, the Shooter app did not exist, and published figures were pies in the sky, so I have no idea what speed they were flying.

I checked into this issue very specifically before shifting loads for my matched pair (.257 Wby & .340 Wby) of plains game rifles (https://www.africahunting.com/media...-game-matched-pair-battery-257-340-wby.70737/). The .257 Wby 100 gr TTSX is still flying at 2,500 fps at 400 yd (2,300 fps at 500 yd); and the .340 Wby 225 gr TTSX is still flying at 2,100 fps at 400 yd (down to 1,900 fps at 500 yd). The folks at Barnes say it's OK with a TTSX... I do not intend to engage at such distances, 300 yd is my self imposed maximum range for a first shot, but I do not exclude the possibility of follow up shots to 400 yd...

That concern is the reason why, after a lengthy discussion with Barnes, I chose to use the TTSX rather than the TSX. They DO say that in addition to given it a higher BC, the plastic tip make it open more reliably at down range speed (it replaces the liquid needed to fill the nose of the TSX to initiate expansion). By the way, they also say the TSX solved a long time ago the original X's issues, which I am willing to readily believe based on the community's experience and generally positive reviews. For those who shoot even further on game animals (not my cup of tea!), this is apparently why Barnes designed the LRX. If I understand our discussion right, it opens even easier than the TTSX.

This is my own interpretation, and I am not speaking on behalf of Barnes, but I get the perception that TSX is designed for up close (50 to 100 yd?) at hyper impact-velocity; TTSX for typical hunting ranges (200 to 300 yd?) at high impact-velocity, and LRX for "game snipping" (400 to 600 yd?), as seems to be fashionable these days, at low impact-velocity.

As to other calibers, I looked also into the .300 Wby 165 gr TTSX. It is still flying at 2,400 fps at 400 yd (2,200 fps at 500 yd), so no issue there, but this is a very valid consideration with slower cartridges.

Do you have any insight as to the general wisdom of a 2,000 fps threshold applying to the TTSX (as opposed to the TSX)?

 

[Luvthunt]

ONE DAY,
Why do all that speculation ??? Nosler Partitions in the weights you discuss will give you the killing criteria you seek at velocities that are acceptable. You may gain with les recoil but lose in momentum with the lighter for caliber bullet. Why temp faith as to expansion when Partitions always give you expansion?

 

[One Day...]

Because I live in Arizona and the writing is on the wall regarding outlawing lead containing bullets. They are already illegal in a large area (including some of the world's best Mule Deer end Elk hunting blocks near the Grand Canyon Condor Reintroduction Area), and I am speculating that sooner or later this prohibition will be expanded, as it already is in parts of California, or for migratory birds.

Additionally, I have had opportunities to see X Ray of game animals shot with lead containing bullets, and this is not pretty. As stated in previous posts, we old guys are far too gone to care much about ingesting lead LOL, but I would rather not feed too much of it to the grand kids

 

[Luvthunt]

When that day comes, bismuth or ?? Will replace lead in the blink and do just as well as lead in a Partition. May be better and no concerns as to expansion or momentum loss.

 

[One Day...]

Agreed. But right now bismuth Partition are not available, but lead containing bullets ARE prohibited in Arizona Game Management Units 9, 10, 12A/B, and 13A/B where I hunt Mule Deer and Elk.

 

[sgt_zim]

Do you have any insight as to the general wisdom of a 2,000 fps threshold applying to the TTSX (as opposed to the TSX)?

No I don't. It has just always been my impression that TSX (and perhaps TTSX) were better suited to magnum velocities or in thick environments where there is no such thing as even a 200 yard shot. A 300 gr TSX out of a 375 at under 100 yards is great medicine for cape buffalo, but if I were using that rifle for PG and shots may start reaching, I think I'd choose something different for that application.

A 180 TSX would do fine out of my .308 on our family land in Louisiana, where 75 yards is a very long shot. But I also hunt more open country in central Texas from time to time, and a TSX would not feed the bulldog at .308 Win velocities at those potential distances.

One of the reasons I like Nosler is because it is a jack-of-all-trades - it will perform acceptably well in just about any circumstance you can think of. The other premiums like Barnes may be a better choice than Nosler for a couple of different applications, but would then be a poor choice for other applications.

Part of the reason I chose 30-06 for my example above - the jack-of-all-trades rifle plus the jack-of-all-trades bullet. I'd be comfortable using that combo for any animal on earth provided it doesn't have fangs and 4" claws; or look at me like I owe him some money.

For my money, Partition and Accubond and Scirocco are the best bullets for the rifles I shoot (I don't own any magnums). If I had a magnum, I'd certainly look at TSX, A-Frame, and Oryx.

If I were out west, I'd probably own a couple hot shooters. The way politics are starting to look in Texas, the missus has decided she's interested in Wyoming. So, out west may be closer than I had imagined.

 

[Luvthunt]

One DAY,
Seens to me you may be overlooking a buisness opportunity, or at least a DIY project.
Back. When I lived in Idaho there was a fellow that made bonded bullet by hand, they were labeled “Bitteroot Bonded Bullets” his moniker was Bitteroot Billy.he made his bonded lead core bullets by hand ie one at a time. He ws located in Lewiston, I’d.
He was always sold out even tho they were priced HIGH. The bullets were in demand by the local elk and deer hunters.
Based on reading many of your posts I am sure you gather where I am going and you are in one o the Az. Hunting hotspots.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Thought I'd follow up on this post of mine. I've not hunted with the AB's but I know those that have and swear by them. In case it wasn't clear, my comment about it being a poor choice was in reference only to the bullet weight and not the bullet design itself. That's just going a bit too light and I see no advantage in the speed for typical African shooting distances.

@PHOENIX PHIL.
The bullet was are adequate for the animals shot it was the velocity that fell outside the bullets velocity parameters.
My son used 150 grain accubonds and 140grain outer edge monos for his plains game in Namibia. He experienced pass thrus on all game including Burchells zebra and Oryx with massive internal damage but the were loaded in a 308 Winchester. If he had gone a heavier projectile it would then be in the velocity parameters. Push a big bullet fast enough and it w I'll fail.
Bob

 

[Frederik]

Speed kills and so it does Kill bullets too there are no perfect bullets out there otherwise there would have been only one brand.
I think most manufacturers must change their packaging and also have the impact velocities recommend on them like Woodleigh bullets. With that we will have less stories about bullet failures.

 

[ldmay375]

Even though information in an above reply is over 2 years old. There was either a typo or mistake.
The Barnes .308, 165 grain TTSX has a B.C. of .442.
So launched at 2800 FPS, this bullet will still be slightly over 2000 FPS at 400 yards.
At 200 yds it is still doing 2387 FPS.
At 500 yds the 165 TTSX is doing 1843 FPS.

At shorter distances (under say 200-250), the lighter, longer bullets probably work at least as well as the heavier bullets.

But...
using .308 cal bullet as an example
it depends on case capacity. a 165 gr tsx will be almost the same length as a 180 partition, and certainly longer than a 165 gr partition. speed advantage to the 165 gr partition over 165 gr tsx, and speed advantage to the tsx 165 over the partition 180.

Partition and Scirocco II 180 gr both have higher BC and SD than 165 tsx. So MV is somewhat higher in tsx, but the lower BC means it decelerates at a greater rate than either of those 180s. There is a point along the energy curve where the path of the 180 crosses (and thus exceed) the 165. At impact beyond that intersection (and for some distance to the left of the intersection), the 180 has probably a fair momentum advantage.

As far as MPBR advantages for the lighter monometals...there just isn't an appreciable difference. In general, non-magnum cartridges will have an MPBR of 250-300 yards, and medium and small magnums will have an MPBR of about 300-350 yards (deer-sized game). Obviously, the bigger the target, the further out MPBR goes, but this is more of an effect of target size and less so about bullet weight.

Last, all bullets do not expand equally at given velocities. Nosler asserts that partitions will expand reliably down to 1800 fps. I expect at the lower end of their performance envelope, the issue of frontal separation is less of a thing than at the higher end. AFAIK, Barnes makes no assertions about minimum impact velocity, but between this and a couple other boards I frequent, it seems to be a widely-held view that 2k fps is the bottom end for Barnes. For me, the take-away of that is that a Nosler 180 is at least marginally better than a tsx 165 as MPBR is approached. And it may even be the case on non-magnum cartridges that MPBR exceeds the distance at which a tsx is thought to reliably expand.

math experiment.
30-06 shooting ttsx 165 gr at 2800 fps.
calculated mpbr for a deer sized animal is a little over 300 yards.
ttsx decelerates to 2000 fps at around 225 yards.

same 30-06 with NP 180 gr at 2750
roughly the same mpbr
NP is north of 1800 fps at 500 yards, and is still north of 2k fps out to 400 yards

30-06 shooting 180 gr Scirocco II at 2700
same mpbr
still north of 2k fps at 400 yards

It's for certain TSX is a slayer inside its performance window. But it unquestionably has a smaller performance window than either NP or Swift Scirocco. If you're certain to never take a long shot, TSX 165 may be preferable to a separating NP 180. But if you have the skill to shoot 300+, and the opportunity arises for a long shot, you'll probably be wishing you'd gone with one of the 180s.

 

[ldmay375]

My non-expert opinion, and Zero experience of African game :

I am comfortable using 10-15% weight reduction with monolithic types (TSX/ TTSX, GMX, and Others) and solid-shank bullets types (Trophy Bonded, North Fork, etc).

I am definitely a Barnes fan. They were the first monolithic types that I used and have had very performance and normally excellent accuracy. But based on others’ experiences, I group all the monolithic as nearly identical as to performance.
The Trophy Bonded and NorthFork types, I feel the same, that solid shank is not going to vaporize. In “my” theory that may be the best of the “premiums” if they shoot well in your rifles. I like the Partition / A-Frame types but favor the solid shank for a 2-material type bullet.

It took me awhile to “convert” to any weight reduction. The 10-15% weight reduction is what I am totally comfortable with.
I could probably get behind the 30% reduction Whitetail deer sized game. Larger game the 10-15% is my present comfort level.