Light bullets at insane velocities for White Tails.

[reynolds357]

What are your thoughts on .25 cal TSX at 3850 fps?
.27 cal 85 gr. TSX at 3925?

I will have to say they amazed me. I have always been a fan of heavy bullets. 7WSM 160 gr. has been my old stand by for last 15 or so years. Before that, 35 Whelen and 7 Rem mag. They put deer down. Usually blood trail for 25 or so yards and find deer.

Last 2 year's I have been shooting the light Barnes at high velocities. They are like a death Ray or something. Have yet to have a whitetail or hog take a step. I shot a buck last week at 220 yds. The heart was disintegrated. One lung was disintegrated. Most of what used to be the lung, blew out his mouth and left a stream of blood that looked like you threw a gallon bucket of blood out in a straight line. He piled up in his tracks.

[bamaranger]

Light and fast for caliber bullets will kill whitetails like lightning when all goes right, and that slug blasts into the chest cavity and acts as you describe. AS long as one can pick and choose their shots, and place them accurately, all is well. Set ups with multiple opportunities and shooting from a support like a shooting house or blind/tripod on food plots and ag fields , as well as the mental discipline to wait for a shot and pass marginal ones, are good situations for the light fast theory.

When taking quartering shots or raking shots requiring a bit more penetration, or shoulders, forelegs and ribs enter the picture, either by choice, or the angles are deceptive, is when a fast expanding slug can provide undesirable results. So too if you have limited chances, and are inclined to shoot at the first opportunity. So too, deer can vary in size, and something like a 135 lb buck here, will likely not take as much penetration as a 250 lb buck up in Alberta.

I have some rifles set up for lighter than traditional bullets for deer (.270/110 and .243/85) and use them as set piece guns for special situations as noted earlier. Both of these rigs drive their bullets about 3100 fps. But I think the traditional weights (.270/130, .30/150 as example) are better general purpose, all around deer combo's. All that said, I think most of us are overgunned for deer. As of late, much of my deer/rifle kills have been with short, light carbines in .44 mag or 7.62x39, at ranges of about 50 yds.

[Mobuck]

BAD IDEA!!!!!!!!!!
Sooner or later, you're going to have a dismal failure so I consider the screaming fast varmint(ish) bullets unethical.
I've killed several deer with "varmint" bullets and/or calibers BUT the conditions were very controlled and shots were more like execution than hunting.

[reynolds357]

According to Barnes, these are not varmint bullets. They are non dangerous game bullets.

[MarkCO]

I like the TSX/TTSX within certain parameters. Impact velocity needs to be above about 2100 fps or so or they don't open up and can pencil through. More so with the smaller diameters than the larger ones. I have shot game with .22 up to .33 caliber with them (Coyotes, Pigs, Deer, Pronghorn and Elk). Last Elk I shot was at 405 yards, with an impact velocity of 2000 fps. It went about 100 yards and laid down, but not dead. While the shot would have been fatal eventually, I was not happy with the performance. Went right through the lungs about 2 inches above the heart and went through the off shoulder with about a .35 caliber hole. Previous year, 250 yards, really good performance. I won't ever use them for Elk again, but I will use them for Deer and Pronghorn. The faster they are going the better. I have them in .22 (62 grain) and .24 calibers (80 grain) and load them at about the fastest I can get, but starting velocity over 3000 for sure. I'll probably try them in the Valkyrie next year.

[Rachen]

BAD IDEA!!!!!!!!!!
Sooner or later, you're going to have a dismal failure so I consider the screaming fast varmint(ish) bullets unethical.
I've killed several deer with "varmint" bullets and/or calibers BUT the conditions were very controlled and shots were more like execution than hunting.

In "Unintended Consequences", by John Ross, there was a long range sniper duel, I recall the good guys were described as using custom built high velocity 6mms' with "J-4" bullets and at one of the shots, "the bullet blew up". So naturally, I had to look up that kind of phenomenon and indeed, there were actual instances when shooters of high velocity small-caliber rifle rounds would have bullets fragment in flight. Super-fast twist rifling was often another factor that contributed to this phenomenon and the bullets would be described as "spinning apart at the axis of rotation", before fragmenting completely.

There was a thread on here long ago that talked about what was the maximum velocity a bullet can hypothetically travel, and someone mentioned that jacketed rounds can only be propelled at a certain speed before friction with air acts as a solid barrier and destroy the bullet in flight. If that happens right before the impact of the slug with the animal, I can see many ways it can go wrong. If only the core manages to penetrate and inflict a less-than-effective wound channel, that will be unethical.

If you can load the perfect kind of bullet for your intended velocity, ie, a solid homogenous projectile like copper or brass only, anything above 3,000 fps is a guaranteed clean kill. Hydrostatic shock is a real thing and that is why varmint bullet manufacturers advertise "grenade-like performance" and "explosive expansion".

When hunting, I would prefer to have game drop instantly and without further struggle. But the world is not perfect all the time and I have had deer and hogs that ran up to 50 yards before expiring, usually happens when I am using arrows with broadheads. That is still acceptable, but instant drops like the OP described would be ideal. Not only is it unethical to have a wounded animal, but the longer it suffers, the more stress hormones are released into the meat. Eating that meat will cause a lot of problems for your health later on. In China I have slaughtered numerous domesticated animals using "free-range harvesting" where an arrow would be shot through the back of the animal's skull at close range. Think captive bolt gun but with the bolt unrestrained and allowed to penetrate the brainstem and brain completely. Unlike a firearm or steel bolt though, the arrow does not deliver hydrostatic shock or concussion of any kind so there is no possibility of brain matter contaminating the parts that are to be eaten (prions, Mad-Cow disease and Creutzfeldt-Jakob's disease are real dangers). And the result of using this procedure is almost always an instant kill, and when the bow that is used to fire the arrow is at least 40lbs draw weight, clean kills are always the norm. (I have usually used 70lb traditional recurves or takedown survival bows for this particular reason) In a part of the world where there are over 800,000 different kinds of dishes, the quality of food is not toyed around with. Chinese physicians have linked the presence of stress hormones in meat with different kinds of human cancers. That is why I prefer to hunt or free-range harvest and will try not to consume factory farmed meat whenever possible.

[Jim Watson]

I am not a hunter but I have experience with bullets failing in flight.
I thought to turn a .223 into a Long Range rifle with 6.5" twist and 90 grain bullets.
If I overloaded a Sierra 90 gr MK to stay supersonic at 1000 yards, I lost bullets in flight. I eventually caught one on paper at 100 yards, making a perfect C shaped hole in the target, the bullet apparently bent, not broken.
I tried hot loaded 75 gr Hornady A-Max. My spotter could see about 10% of those disappearing in a sparkle of fragments.
I ended up with JBM and Berger VLDs which held up. Although very accurate to 600 yards, I could not get .308 results at 1000.

[reynolds357]

Well, the Barnes do not spin apart at these velocities.

[jmr40]

Solid copper bullets don't play by the same rules as conventional bullets. Within certain parameters more velocity and less weight is a good thing.

Those bullets usually retain 100%, or very near 100% of their weight at impact regardless of impact speed. As long as you are using a bullet with enough mass to reach the vitals of the animal you are shooting then they are good to go.

And it takes much less weight than you think. For years we have used heavier bullets than really needed because we knew that a lot of weight would be lost at impact and the extra weight was needed to ensure penetration. Conventional bullets will lose at least 20% and as much as 80% of their weight at impact with around 50% being the norm. A 180 gr 30 caliber bullet will actually weigh somewhere between 90 to 140 gr after impact. A solid copper bullet that starts at 90-140 gr will still weigh 90-140 gr after impact and give comparable penetration.

But like everything else there are downsides. These bullets need to impact at speeds of 2000-2200 fps or they don't expand at all. While an 85 gr bullet at 3800 fps looks good up close it will also drop below the 2200 fps impact velocity at closer ranges than a heavier bullet that starts slower. It will also be pushed around by the wind a lot more.

Plus a conventional bullet will still expand with impact speeds in the 1600-1800 fps range. Considering that they retain speeds better, and they need less speed to work, conventional bullets are still the better option once you start getting to moderate to long ranges. Where the solid copper bullets shine is that they allow small caliber rifles to be very close in performance to larger calibers at closer ranges.

[Brian Pfleuger]

You’ve discovered why I do exactly that....TTSX, light and fast. Drops almost everything in its tracks. I always use the lightest version they make for the caliber.

[Colorado Redneck]

Jmr40 hit on an important point. A 130 gr. 270 Ballistic Tip will shed sugnificant weight soon after impact. An 85 gr. Barnes 243 TSX will likely have nearly the same retained weight throughout as the 130 gr. BT 270. My very limited experience with Barnes has been bang flop drt.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I'm not quite sure why someone would use the TSX rather than the TTSX though.

The difference in weights is minimal and the TTSX is usually available lighter, which I consider a good thing, even though 5-10 gr is mostly irrelevant.

Plus, the difference in BC is often in favor of the tipped version or if not the differences are so small as to be irrelevant, like a few hundredths.

The inferiority in trajectory and wind versus traditional bullets at long range is mostly false... speed does wonders for such things. Look at a typical .30-06 load, say 180gr round nose at 2,750fps, versus a Barnes TTSX 110gr at 3,550... in a 10mph crosswind at 300 yards, the TTSX has 8.5" drift... the 180 has 12.5". Both zeroed with 10" target @ MPBR, the 180 is 4" *low* while the TTSX is still 2" *high* at 300.

Even if you make that .30-06 bullet a Hornady SST, the TTSX still wins in drop by over 3" and has only about 1.5" more drift.... and it's still carrying 2,500+ fps (only 200fps below the SSTs *muzzle velocity*), while the SST has dropped to 2,100.

The TTSX has better trajectory out to beyond 500 yards (and is still over 1,800fps)... a distance well beyond the concerns of the vast majority of hunters.

And that's the lightest, worst BC option available.

[reynolds357]

I'm not quite sure why someone would use the TSX rather than the TTSX though.

I have always gotten better accuracy from the TSX. It could be due to the fact I spent extensive time working up TSX loads before there was a TTSX, but who knows? I could be wrong, but I am guessing the tips are melting off at 3800, 3900, 3950 fps anyway. (I have not researched that, correct if wrong)

[Brian Pfleuger]

Hm. I’ve never considered that but I suppose it’s possible. I’ll have to poke around and see if there’s any data on it.
I do remember asking them a looong time ago about maximum speeds... I don’t remember why... they mentioned that the petals might shed above certain impact velocities, which I assume would apply to both but possibly somewhat lower speeds for the TTSX, since the expansion is probably more aggressive. I’ll shoot them an email if I can’t find anything. They’ve always been helpful in the past.

[Double Naught Spy]

Last 2 year's I have been shooting the light Barnes at high velocities. They are like a death Ray or something. Have yet to have a whitetail or hog take a step. I shot a buck last week at 220 yds. The heart was disintegrated. One lung was disintegrated. Most of what used to be the lung, blew out his mouth and left a stream of blood that looked like you threw a gallon bucket of blood out in a straight line. He piled up in his tracks.

Pics?

[MarkCO]

At the higher speeds, I have found the TSX to be more accurate as well. Also, some of it is just timing. I used Barnes solids when it was the X-bullet. I worked up loads and found some of the nuances and loaded up a bunch. It was about 8 years after the TSX came out that I ran out of the X-bullets. I bought a few and tried them and it took me a while to switch over on the 3 rifles I used then in. I got my first TTSX about 3 years ago and I have directly tested them only in the .33 caliber at the range and on game.

[Wyosmith]

Just my 2 cents here.
I also have found that impact velocities over about 2800 FPS are a lead core bullets enemy. But not so with expanding solids like the Barnes and the Hornady GMX bullets. It seems impossible to drive the solid expanding bullets too fast. Like MarkCO I also have found the TSX seems to love speed both for accuracy and for killing effects on game.
I personally do not use them much just because my 2 fastest rifles (one is a 270 set up for 130 grain bullets and the other is a 300 H&H set up for 200 grain bullets) have been using Nosler Partitions for many years and I see no advantage in changing now. But I have used the expanding solids from time to time in various rifles and so far I have no complaints.

As a guide, I would far rather see someone come to hunt with a round that expands only 1/2 as much as they would like then show up with one that blows apart.
Why?
Because if I have an exit I find the game and it seldom goes very far. The bullets that shatter inside the game sometimes do kill like lightning.............sometimes. If hit in the chest from a good angle, I'd say most times they kill fast.
But I have had far too many long tracking jobs then I like because of a bullet breaking up and not penetrating well, or breaking up in a way that the path of the bullet turns off radically inside the animal. I have 1/2 a century of hunting and guiding other hunters, and I see a LOT of shots made every year so I have seen patterns that are what I base my advice on. As an example, this is a "slow year" for me, and so far I have killed and seen killed 14 head this year, and I am hoping to add 5 more before we are all done for 2018.

Remember that a straight hole of good diameter with an exit is the goal. I don't care (and I don't think it matters much) how that hole gets through, be it a 45-70, a 54 caliber muzzleloader, a 243 or an arrow. It's the hole that kills the game, not the gun and not really the bullet. The bullet is the means to make the hole.

So those fast expanding solids kill very well and if you have enough bullet weight they usually exit. Liquids do not compress, which is one reason a fast bullet often doesn't penetrate as deep;y as one that's a bit slower. The faster the bullet, the larger the shock-wave in the liquid. The larger that wave is the bigger the "drag chute" is. But it's that shock that gives those dramatic kills in many cases.

I for one will usually choose the heavier weights and shoot them a bit slower, but if a light faster bullet is giving me exits in a fairly straight line, I'd have no complaints at all.

[T. O'Heir]

3850 fps is a Big Game powder(Ramshot) Max load out of a .270 with an 85 grain TSX FB/TAC-X FB. But it's not about velocity. It's about bullet construction. Like jmr40(And I've been saying for years) solid copper bullets ain't the same as a lead cored bullet. They need their own data. An 85 grain SP isn't a TSX. A solid is going to hold together when a regular varmint bullet will disintegrate.

[MarkCO]

I enjoy your posts Wyosmith. Happy Thanksgiving all.

[Capt Rick Hiott]

I like my 22/250
It has never let me down!

[Brian Pfleuger]

I see the only mention of a melting tip I've ever found in this video by Hornady. https://vimeo.com/163427845

I don't deny that there could be something to it... but I also recognize marketing when I see it.

I have sent an email to Barnes to inquire... but then I submit a few of points to ponder in the meantime....

One, Barnes publishes load data for their 45gr TTSX in .22-250 at over 4,000fps... which leads me to believe that they don't anticipate an issue.

Two, Hornady strongly implies that they only knew there was an issue because they use doppler radar.... which makes me wonder if this is an issue that will rise above the noise for a normal shooter.

Three, on the other hand... the only truly disappointing load I've ever developed was in a .22-250 that otherwise routinely shoots well under 3/4 MOA at 100... that was with 35gr Noslers being pushed over 4,500fps and they exhibited a strange tendency to shoot reasonably well at 100 but then rather poorly at 200... melting tip? Hm.

[Double Naught Spy]

Strange how Hornady documented the problem, but still sell bullets with melting tips. Why is that, or is it just a bunch of hooey? If the tip was the only problem, why did they redesign the whole bullet? Why not just change the tips?

Hornady discovered the melting tips by radar? Hornady has a lot of capability to recover fired bullets. You would think they would have some recovered examples that show this alleged melting.

[reynolds357]

I see the only mention of a melting tip I've ever found in this video by Hornady.

I don't deny that there could be something to it... but I also recognize marketing when I see it.

I have sent an email to Barnes to inquire... but then I submit a few of points to ponder in the meantime....

One, Barnes publishes load data for their 45gr TTSX in .22-250 at over 4,000fps... which leads me to believe that they don't anticipate an issue.

Two, Hornady strongly implies that they only knew there was an issue because they use doppler radar.... which makes me wonder if this is an issue that will rise above the noise for a normal shooter.

Three, on the other hand... the only truly disappointing load I've ever developed was in a .22-250 that otherwise routinely shoots well under 3/4 MOA at 100... that was with 35gr Noslers being pushed over 4,500fps and they exhibited a strange tendency to shoot reasonably well at 100 but then rather poorly at 200... melting tip? Hm.

Hornaday was also publishing data that cooked their tips. If what Hornaday says is accurate, so is Nosler. Is cooking the tip off a problem? It just makes it basically a hollow point and thus essentially a TSX. I have always seen the tip as a gimmick anyway. When the first tipped ammo came out, a rep told me it was "ballistic" because it kept the meplat from being deformed in the magazine.

[MarkCO]

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

Strange how Hornady documented the problem, but still sell bullets with melting tips. Why is that, or is it just a bunch of hooey? If the tip was the only problem, why did they redesign the whole bullet? Why not just change the tips?

Hornady discovered the melting tips by radar? Hornady has a lot of capability to recover fired bullets. You would think they would have some recovered examples that show this alleged melting.

They have changed the polymer in their bullets that are more precision based. It did affect accuracy some, but typically at the longer distances where there was sufficient time to melt the tips. In their 100ish yard test ranges, the tips don't melt, not enough time. Not hooey, but at the same time, irrelevant for most bullets, most shooters, 400 and in.

[Brian Pfleuger]

There’s no question with any brand or caliber bullets I’ve ever seen that the tipped bullets are far more consistent, in terms of lacking deformity. It seems to me that even if it melted off, that melting would be more consistent than aan I melted but deformed metal tip. This is especially true with exposed lead bullets but even all the hollow points I’ve used are commonly slightly misshaped.

The tipped bullets typically have much larger cavity than a normal hollow-point so a tipped bullet missing it’s tip is not just another hollow point... however, I would be highly suspicious of the claim that the ENTIRE tip melted off.

I had the same thoughts about time at close range... for instance, it seems a plausible explanation for that .22-250 load but the bullet covers the 100 yards from 100 to 200 in 0.074 seconds... is there even time for whatever melting is happening (which has no discernible effect at 100) to produce noticeable deflection? Seems debatable.