.03-06 bullet selection - elk out to 500 yards

[eyeguy]

168 ttsx or 180 accubond would be top 2 on my list

 

[SDHNTR]

The bullet doesn’t matter in this case. Accuracy does. Shoot the one that’s most accurate. I’d be more concerned about having a good scope and mounting system for shooting at that range.

 

[apieceofwork]

The bullet doesn’t matter in this case. Accuracy does. Shoot the one that’s most accurate. I’d be more concerned about having a good scope and mounting system for shooting at that range.

Scope is zeiss conquest v6 3-18x50 mounted with m-brace American rifle company rings.

 

[sndmn11]

Thank you, everyone. A lot of great info here. Also came across the Buffalo Bore iteration of the Barnes TTSX which has some great performance:

If you really intend to shoot past 300yds, any of the Barnes will be a disappointment. There isn't enough velocity carried to create the wound channel other bullets accomplish.

 

[wind gypsy]

Numbers on a 180 partition at federals listed 2700 FPS mv, 4000' elevation, 10 mph 90 degree wind. They suck. My less than "rokslide standard" load in an 18" 223 is significantly better on drop, drift, and retained velocity. And it gets a little sporty at 500 if there's wind.


In factory ammo I'd probably look at the 178 ELDx if you're intent on being prepared for 500 yard shots.

 

[SDHNTR]

I’ve killed between 4 and 550yds several times with Barnes LRX, hammer HHT‘s and hammer hunters out of 20 inch barrel 308 and 260 rifles. Zero problems. Even further with monos out of magnums. IMO, the minimal velocity obsession. This website has with bullets is largely overblown. Be reasonable, don’t take stupid shots, put the bullet where it belongs and stuff dies quite easily.

With an accurate rifle, and a quality proven scope, within reason and under the right conditions, I don’t think there is a bullet out there that would stop me from taking a 500 yd shot with a 3006.

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Partitions are all I have used for 20 years.
Proven to get the job done.
Never shot 500 though.

 

[Aviator]

Don’t overthink it, stick with the partitions or Accubond.

 

[Mackey]

I’ve never killed an elk with one but 178 gr terminal ascents shoot extremely well in my Merkel k3. Under an inch.

Mackey

 

[06 SB]

For factory ammo, I would be looking at Barnes Vortex in 150 or 168gr and never look back.

Be ready for a 500 yard shot means practicing A LOT.

 

[Ringbill27]

Thank you, everyone. A lot of great info here. Also came across the Buffalo Bore iteration of the Barnes TTSX which has some great performance:

I have been using coppers for a few years now and have had good luck with them. I contacted Barnes inquiring about minimum expansion velocities for the following bullets:
30 cal 175 LRX = 1600 fps
30 cal 168 TTSX = 1800 fps

This was with reloading bullet and was told the bullets in loaded ammunition from Barnes are different as least from Barnes. Those tend to be a little slower yet but have a hard time believing that. These speed are to achieve 1.5x expansion and to add 200fps for 2x expansion. I’ve never recovered a bullet so I can speak to actual expansion but I’m always happy with the exit hole and how little blood shot meat there is.

I started loading the 168gr for my 30-06 and found a good fast and accurate load very quickly. Between the 130, 150, and 168 TTSX, the 168gr seemed to be the easy button.

If it were me I’d have the choice between the bullets you listed. I’d shoot 175 LRX, 168gr and the 175gr term assent(still wouldn’t scoff at the others mentioned just trying to keep speeds up) to see which one shoots tightest and maintains velocity above its minimum expansion velocity rating for the distance you are looking for.

FYI the TTSX vs LRX
The TTSX is a tougher bullet and the LRX is made softer of long range expansion. This is seen in the expansion velocity rating. At close range the LRX will loose petals due to being softer.

Most of what I’ve said is information I’ve gathered through communications with Barnes.

But at the end of all that what do I really know?