Between the two

riverratt · August 6, 2021, 03:44 AM

Let me start by saying I know there are much better options but this is what I have available. I'll also say that both bullets are equally accurate out of my firearm so we'll assume proper shot placement.

Back in the spring I picked up a savage 111 (I believe is the model, could be a 110) in 7mm-08 as I was impressed with the gun I bought for my kids to use. I was hoping that the load I have for their rifle would be sufficient but that is just not the case. In this shortage I've struggled to find bullets to reload and I have already loaded all of my 139gr interlocks for their rifle. I was able to come across some Barnes 140gr TTSX and worked up a load that shoots roughly 1/2" at 100 yards and is chronographed at 2600ish fps and can't cram any more H-4350 in the case. I found some 162gr sst a couple weeks ago and have a nice load worked up shooting nearly identical groups and are chronographed just under 2700fps.

I have experience with the 120gr TTSX out of my kids 7mm-08 and was pretty happy with it BUT I know these bullets are very dependent on velocity for terminal ballistics and that round was traveling 3100 fps. That said I'm concerned about what the 140 will do being launched 500 fps slower, especially at the 200 yard mark.

My limited experience with the sst was with a 165gr .308 dia out of my 06 at a full 3000fps. I wasn't happy with the explosiveness of that bullet. However, I am aware that the 7mm will have more SD and be launched at a more modest velocity so it should hold together better. At least ai would think.

The does I'll be shooting will average about 90lbs field dressed and a big buck will go around 200lbs. Average shots will be less then 100 yards but may have opportunities out 200 or possibly, but unlikely, 300 yards.

Now that y'all have the technical data what's your experience with these bullets as far as terminal performance? Personally I'm leaning towards the SST because I think (key word here) they will expand rapidly enough for good energy transfer on the smaller does, have enough SD and mass to drive deep on a larger buck and remain well above their expansion threshold for good energy transfer at my farther ranges.

jmr40 · August 6, 2021, 05:14 AM

I think either will work for what you want to do and at the ranges you plan to shoot. Neither would be my 1st choice for deer, but I understand that in this case you're using what you can find.

I ran the numbers through a calculator and the TTSX 140 is still at 1999 fps at 300 yards if you're getting 2600 at the muzzle. Most of what I read says 2000 fps at impact is needed for expansion. Load data says you should be able to get 2800-2900 fps with 140's though.

https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-con...mingtonV10.pdf

But if accuracy is equal I'd choose the 162 gr bullet. They expand more than most, but 162 gr is heavy for 7mm caliber and I think it'll be fine. If hunting much larger game where you need lots of penetration and possibly have to take shots at less than ideal angles then the better penetration of the TTSX might be the better choice.

riverratt · August 6, 2021, 05:25 AM

I've got 46.8gr of H4350 in the case, compressed load to the top of the 2nd band. Accuracy gets real bad if I load it any closer to the lands

eastbank · August 6, 2021, 05:31 AM

i shoot 120 gr nosler BT bullets useing varget and have killed a pile pf deer and a few prong horns with it, a shot thru their lungs kill them with pass thru,s. i shot two prong horns in wyoming, one at 280 yrds and the other at 310 yrds thru the lungs with complete pass thru,s that didn,t go 20 yrds.

riverratt · August 6, 2021, 06:45 AM

That little 120gr nosler did impress me quite a bit, that's what I started my kids out with several years ago. I loaded a reduced load around 2600fps and it hammered everything they shot with it. Accuracy wasn't quite there at those velocities but it was good enough inside of 100 yards. As they got older I worked the load up until I found an accuracy node using Varget right around 3000fps if I recall correctly. I had 3 of those loads left over and I was able to shoot 1 ragged hole at 100 yards with em in my rifle so when/ if availability returns they are definitely a viable option. Only thing I didn't like about them was I used them to take a 180ish lb buck at 40 yards. He was quartering away so I hit about mid body going up into the off shoulder. He dropped right there and the inside was mangled but the bullet completely came apart. All I could find was a small portion of the lead resting against the inside of the ribcage. A lot to ask from a cup and core bullet of that weight and velocity I know. If they ever made an accubond version it would be perfect for my needs but I'm sure the market would be quite small.

reynolds357 · August 7, 2021, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riverratt

Let me start by saying I know there are much better options but this is what I have available. I'll also say that both bullets are equally accurate out of my firearm so we'll assume proper shot placement.

Back in the spring I picked up a savage 111 (I believe is the model, could be a 110) in 7mm-08 as I was impressed with the gun I bought for my kids to use. I was hoping that the load I have for their rifle would be sufficient but that is just not the case. In this shortage I've struggled to find bullets to reload and I have already loaded all of my 139gr interlocks for their rifle. I was able to come across some Barnes 140gr TTSX and worked up a load that shoots roughly 1/2" at 100 yards and is chronographed at 2600ish fps and can't cram any more H-4350 in the case. I found some 162gr sst a couple weeks ago and have a nice load worked up shooting nearly identical groups and are chronographed just under 2700fps.

I have experience with the 120gr TTSX out of my kids 7mm-08 and was pretty happy with it BUT I know these bullets are very dependent on velocity for terminal ballistics and that round was traveling 3100 fps. That said I'm concerned about what the 140 will do being launched 500 fps slower, especially at the 200 yard mark.

My limited experience with the sst was with a 165gr .308 dia out of my 06 at a full 3000fps. I wasn't happy with the explosiveness of that bullet. However, I am aware that the 7mm will have more SD and be launched at a more modest velocity so it should hold together better. At least ai would think.

The does I'll be shooting will average about 90lbs field dressed and a big buck will go around 200lbs. Average shots will be less then 100 yards but may have opportunities out 200 or possibly, but unlikely, 300 yards.

Now that y'all have the technical data what's your experience with these bullets as far as terminal performance? Personally I'm leaning towards the SST because I think (key word here) they will expand rapidly enough for good energy transfer on the smaller does, have enough SD and mass to drive deep on a larger buck and remain well above their expansion threshold for good energy transfer at my farther ranges.

For kids, the 120 Pro Hunter is my choice. Of what you listed, the SST.

GeauxTide · August 7, 2021, 10:08 PM

Coming off a procedure, I wanted a lower recoil version of my 7# Rem 788 in 308. I ran 165 Grand Slams at 2500. At 127 measured yards, the high lung shot cut a 1/2" hole in and out and the 120# doe was rolled completely over, quivering once. That 139 will be great at 2500-2600.

bamaranger · August 9, 2021, 07:40 PM

As noted by others, either slug will likely do just fine, given good shooting. Were it me, my choice would depend on the number of slugs/loaded ammo I could produce. I'd hunt the bullets I had the most of, to allow for misses, zero check, lost cartridges while afield, etc.

stillquietvoice · August 10, 2021, 06:31 AM

I've gotten great results with ramshot hunter under 139 interlock spbt, shot a 7/8 3 shot group at 300 yds from my rem 700 7mm08.

I did a load work up with ramshot big game with 139 sst's but haven't brn yo the range to test yet, right those 2 powders becausey supply of I and j 4350 is running low and can't seem to find it.

I know from experience that the 139 sst at 2900 is explosive especially up close, not sure about the 162, but heavier, flower should keep it together. You could try shooting through eater jugs or wet news paper and check expansion of each bullet before you hunt with them. It won't give an exact duplication of performance on game but will let you know if it blows up or not. May instill some more confidence in your load, or keep looking for a better option.

std7mag · August 12, 2021, 08:02 AM

The Savage 110/111 are long actions. So magazine length shouldn't be any issue.
Heck, even the 10/11 short actions have generous magazine length.

The issue i'm seeing is the 162gr SST and the amount of freebore in the 7mm-08.
Unless you throat ream your barrel, there is a lot of bullet being pushed down into the case.
Your probably running 110% or more of case fill.
That crunching sound your hearing when seating a bullet is the powder kernels breaking.
Which can change the burn rate of the powder.
That and the pressure of the powder pushing against the bottom of the bullet will affect your cartridge length after some time. (Ask me how i know!

)

While i don't care for Barnes bullets, your better choice in this circumstance would be them.

reynolds357 · August 14, 2021, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by std7mag

The Savage 110/111 are long actions. So magazine length shouldn't be any issue.
Heck, even the 10/11 short actions have generous magazine length.

The issue i'm seeing is the 162gr SST and the amount of freebore in the 7mm-08.
Unless you throat ream your barrel, there is a lot of bullet being pushed down into the case.
Your probably running 110% or more of case fill.
That crunching sound your hearing when seating a bullet is the powder kernels breaking.
Which can change the burn rate of the powder.
That and the pressure of the powder pushing against the bottom of the bullet will affect your cartridge length after some time. (Ask me how i know!

)

While i don't care for Barnes bullets, your better choice in this circumstance would be them.

IMO, the 7-08 is far from the ideal cartridge to shoot heavy bullets in. The small 7 for shooting heavies out of is the 7x57.

std7mag · August 14, 2021, 04:36 PM

7mm-08 will give decent performance with up to about the 162gr class of bullets.
But like i've said.
They really need to be throat reamed to seat the bullet out of the powder column.

riverratt · August 30, 2021, 03:25 AM

Update for inquiring minds. I settled on a load of 44gr of H4350 under the 162gr sst seated 30 thou off the lands. My test in wet pack showed significant penetration of about 20" with an impressive wound channel, about the size of my fist, that lasted about 14" before tapering down and streamlining at about the 16-17" mark. There were fairly consistent results at 30 and 100 yards. The recovered bullet from the 30 yard shot weighed 93gr but shed most of it's expansion and measured .47 at its widest and .38 at its narrowest points. The 100 yard recovered bullet weighed 103gr, its widest expanded point was .52 and .48 at its narrowest.

The 140gr Barnes bullet was only tested at 100 yards and it did as Barnes bullets do complete passthrough of my 24ish inches of wet pack. The wound channel showed slight quicker expansion with a longer, less impressive damage path of about 2", maybe 3" for a short duration. It didn't loose any petals so I'd suspect 100% weight retention. Measurable wound cavity extended to about 20" before streamlining so I don't think there was much energy left but I didn't recover the bullet.

Thanks to all who replied as I took everyone's opinion into consideration when making my decision and I feel much more confident with this load going into the woods this November.

August 6, 2021, 03:44 AM	#1
riverratt Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2014 Posts: 314	Between the two Let me start by saying I know there are much better options but this is what I have available. I'll also say that both bullets are equally accurate out of my firearm so we'll assume proper shot placement. Back in the spring I picked up a savage 111 (I believe is the model, could be a 110) in 7mm-08 as I was impressed with the gun I bought for my kids to use. I was hoping that the load I have for their rifle would be sufficient but that is just not the case. In this shortage I've struggled to find bullets to reload and I have already loaded all of my 139gr interlocks for their rifle. I was able to come across some Barnes 140gr TTSX and worked up a load that shoots roughly 1/2" at 100 yards and is chronographed at 2600ish fps and can't cram any more H-4350 in the case. I found some 162gr sst a couple weeks ago and have a nice load worked up shooting nearly identical groups and are chronographed just under 2700fps. I have experience with the 120gr TTSX out of my kids 7mm-08 and was pretty happy with it BUT I know these bullets are very dependent on velocity for terminal ballistics and that round was traveling 3100 fps. That said I'm concerned about what the 140 will do being launched 500 fps slower, especially at the 200 yard mark. My limited experience with the sst was with a 165gr .308 dia out of my 06 at a full 3000fps. I wasn't happy with the explosiveness of that bullet. However, I am aware that the 7mm will have more SD and be launched at a more modest velocity so it should hold together better. At least ai would think. The does I'll be shooting will average about 90lbs field dressed and a big buck will go around 200lbs. Average shots will be less then 100 yards but may have opportunities out 200 or possibly, but unlikely, 300 yards. Now that y'all have the technical data what's your experience with these bullets as far as terminal performance? Personally I'm leaning towards the SST because I think (key word here) they will expand rapidly enough for good energy transfer on the smaller does, have enough SD and mass to drive deep on a larger buck and remain well above their expansion threshold for good energy transfer at my farther ranges. Last edited by riverratt; August 6, 2021 at 03:59 AM.

August 6, 2021, 05:14 AM	#2
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	I think either will work for what you want to do and at the ranges you plan to shoot. Neither would be my 1st choice for deer, but I understand that in this case you're using what you can find. I ran the numbers through a calculator and the TTSX 140 is still at 1999 fps at 300 yards if you're getting 2600 at the muzzle. Most of what I read says 2000 fps at impact is needed for expansion. Load data says you should be able to get 2800-2900 fps with 140's though. https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-con...mingtonV10.pdf But if accuracy is equal I'd choose the 162 gr bullet. They expand more than most, but 162 gr is heavy for 7mm caliber and I think it'll be fine. If hunting much larger game where you need lots of penetration and possibly have to take shots at less than ideal angles then the better penetration of the TTSX might be the better choice. __________________ "If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong" Winston Churchill

August 7, 2021, 10:08 PM	#7
GeauxTide Senior Member Join Date: April 20, 2009 Location: Helena, AL Posts: 4,423	Coming off a procedure, I wanted a lower recoil version of my 7# Rem 788 in 308. I ran 165 Grand Slams at 2500. At 127 measured yards, the high lung shot cut a 1/2" hole in and out and the 120# doe was rolled completely over, quivering once. That 139 will be great at 2500-2600. __________________ Reloading For: 223R, 243W, 6.5 GR, 6.5 CM, 260R, 6.5-06, 280R, 7mmRM, 300HAM'R, 308W, 30-06, 338-06, 9mm, 357M, 41M, 44SPL, 44M, 45 ACP, 45 Colt, 450BM.

August 9, 2021, 07:40 PM	#8
bamaranger Senior Member Join Date: October 9, 2009 Location: North Alabama Posts: 8,300	choice As noted by others, either slug will likely do just fine, given good shooting. Were it me, my choice would depend on the number of slugs/loaded ammo I could produce. I'd hunt the bullets I had the most of, to allow for misses, zero check, lost cartridges while afield, etc.

August 10, 2021, 06:31 AM	#9
stillquietvoice Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2015 Location: UPSTATE NY Posts: 179	I've gotten great results with ramshot hunter under 139 interlock spbt, shot a 7/8 3 shot group at 300 yds from my rem 700 7mm08. I did a load work up with ramshot big game with 139 sst's but haven't brn yo the range to test yet, right those 2 powders becausey supply of I and j 4350 is running low and can't seem to find it. I know from experience that the 139 sst at 2900 is explosive especially up close, not sure about the 162, but heavier, flower should keep it together. You could try shooting through eater jugs or wet news paper and check expansion of each bullet before you hunt with them. It won't give an exact duplication of performance on game but will let you know if it blows up or not. May instill some more confidence in your load, or keep looking for a better option. __________________ actions speak louder than words flatter tragectories quicker results.

August 6, 2021, 05:25 AM	#3
riverratt Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2014 Posts: 314	I've got 46.8gr of H4350 in the case, compressed load to the top of the 2nd band. Accuracy gets real bad if I load it any closer to the lands

August 6, 2021, 05:31 AM	#4
eastbank Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 2008 Location: pa. Posts: 2,450	i shoot 120 gr nosler BT bullets useing varget and have killed a pile pf deer and a few prong horns with it, a shot thru their lungs kill them with pass thru,s. i shot two prong horns in wyoming, one at 280 yrds and the other at 310 yrds thru the lungs with complete pass thru,s that didn,t go 20 yrds.

August 6, 2021, 06:45 AM	#5
riverratt Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2014 Posts: 314	That little 120gr nosler did impress me quite a bit, that's what I started my kids out with several years ago. I loaded a reduced load around 2600fps and it hammered everything they shot with it. Accuracy wasn't quite there at those velocities but it was good enough inside of 100 yards. As they got older I worked the load up until I found an accuracy node using Varget right around 3000fps if I recall correctly. I had 3 of those loads left over and I was able to shoot 1 ragged hole at 100 yards with em in my rifle so when/ if availability returns they are definitely a viable option. Only thing I didn't like about them was I used them to take a 180ish lb buck at 40 yards. He was quartering away so I hit about mid body going up into the off shoulder. He dropped right there and the inside was mangled but the bullet completely came apart. All I could find was a small portion of the lead resting against the inside of the ribcage. A lot to ask from a cup and core bullet of that weight and velocity I know. If they ever made an accubond version it would be perfect for my needs but I'm sure the market would be quite small.

August 12, 2021, 08:02 AM	#10
std7mag Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2013 Location: Central Taxylvania.. Posts: 3,609	The Savage 110/111 are long actions. So magazine length shouldn't be any issue. Heck, even the 10/11 short actions have generous magazine length. The issue i'm seeing is the 162gr SST and the amount of freebore in the 7mm-08. Unless you throat ream your barrel, there is a lot of bullet being pushed down into the case. Your probably running 110% or more of case fill. That crunching sound your hearing when seating a bullet is the powder kernels breaking. Which can change the burn rate of the powder. That and the pressure of the powder pushing against the bottom of the bullet will affect your cartridge length after some time. (Ask me how i know! ) While i don't care for Barnes bullets, your better choice in this circumstance would be them. __________________ When our own government declares itself as "tyrannical", where does that leave us??!! "Januarary 6th insurrection". Funny, I didn't see a single piece of rope...

August 14, 2021, 04:36 PM	#12
std7mag Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2013 Location: Central Taxylvania.. Posts: 3,609	7mm-08 will give decent performance with up to about the 162gr class of bullets. But like i've said. They really need to be throat reamed to seat the bullet out of the powder column. __________________ When our own government declares itself as "tyrannical", where does that leave us??!! "Januarary 6th insurrection". Funny, I didn't see a single piece of rope...

August 30, 2021, 03:25 AM	#13
riverratt Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2014 Posts: 314	Update for inquiring minds. I settled on a load of 44gr of H4350 under the 162gr sst seated 30 thou off the lands. My test in wet pack showed significant penetration of about 20" with an impressive wound channel, about the size of my fist, that lasted about 14" before tapering down and streamlining at about the 16-17" mark. There were fairly consistent results at 30 and 100 yards. The recovered bullet from the 30 yard shot weighed 93gr but shed most of it's expansion and measured .47 at its widest and .38 at its narrowest points. The 100 yard recovered bullet weighed 103gr, its widest expanded point was .52 and .48 at its narrowest. The 140gr Barnes bullet was only tested at 100 yards and it did as Barnes bullets do complete passthrough of my 24ish inches of wet pack. The wound channel showed slight quicker expansion with a longer, less impressive damage path of about 2", maybe 3" for a short duration. It didn't loose any petals so I'd suspect 100% weight retention. Measurable wound cavity extended to about 20" before streamlining so I don't think there was much energy left but I didn't recover the bullet. Thanks to all who replied as I took everyone's opinion into consideration when making my decision and I feel much more confident with this load going into the woods this November.