Non lead bullets and performance at distance

[willfrye027]

Yes, I should have said that. 270win. A side by side comparison would be great.

Well I stand corrected. Compared your LRX load to a 150gr VLD (can run in 1:10 twist, G1 .518). Not a dramatic difference in hit rates at 600 yards 10in circle.

Set at 1.5 moa precision, 10fps SD

Using 10mph with 4mph uncertainty in wind call it’s 47% for the LRX and 50% for the Berger.

5mph with 2mph uncertainty it’s 72% vs 75%

I guess the BC on the LRX is decent (if not inflated).

Still would not personally shoot something beyond 500 yards with them, personally.

Compared to my 25 creedmoor with match bullets the hit rates are 15-18% higher..similar with 22 and 6.5 creedmoor.

 

[JFK]

Well I stand corrected. Compared your LRX load to a 150gr VLD (can run in 1:10 twist, G1 .518). Not a dramatic difference in hit rates at 600 yards 10in circle.

Set at 1.5 moa precision, 10fps SD

Using 10mph with 4mph uncertainty in wind call it’s 47% for the LRX and 50% for the Berger.

5mph with 2mph uncertainty it’s 72% vs 75%

I guess the BC on the LRX is decent (if not inflated).

Still would not personally shoot something beyond 500 yards with them, personally.

Compared to my 25 creedmoor with match bullets the hit rates are 15-18% higher..similar with 22 and 6.5 creedmoor.

Appreciate that you took the time to run it and post it up. Thank you.

 

[z987k]

Well I stand corrected. Compared your LRX load to a 150gr VLD (can run in 1:10 twist, G1 .518). Not a dramatic difference in hit rates at 600 yards 10in circle.

Set at 1.5 moa precision, 10fps SD

Using 10mph with 4mph uncertainty in wind call it’s 47% for the LRX and 50% for the Berger.

5mph with 2mph uncertainty it’s 72% vs 75%

I guess the BC on the LRX is decent (if not inflated).

Still would not personally shoot something beyond 500 yards with them, personally.

Compared to my 25 creedmoor with match bullets the hit rates are 15-18% higher..similar with 22 and 6.5 creedmoor.

What software is that?

 

[Harvey_NW]

What software is that?

Applied Ballistics WEZ.

AB Analytics Package - The Science of Accuracy

Applied Ballistics Analytics program for your computer - full suite of conventional ballistics features including WEZ (Weapon Employment Zone)

thescienceofaccuracy.com

 

[bkraushaar]

Me to Barnes:
“What’s the minimum velocity I need to get a 168 TTSX to “open” reliably? How about the 150 gr? I heard the 168 gr bullets were specifically designed to open a lower speeds—any truth to that rumor?”

Barnes to Me:
“The rumors are true. The 30 cal 168 gr TTSX, designed for 308 Win and 30-06 velocities (though it can be effectively used from the 300 Magnum cartridges) has a minimum impact velocity of 1500 fps which will get you about 1.7x expansion of the bullet’s original diameter. If 2x expansion is desired then add approximately 100-200 fps.

The 30 cal 150 gr TTSX, on the other hand, has a higher, 2000 fps, minimum. At the request of many 300 Magnum shooters, we increased the minimum so that should a high velocity impact occur at close range their is less chance of loosing weight from petal loss.”

If it helps anyone else, I can confirm this info. I just spoke with Barnes customer service yesterday regarding .30-06 VOR-TX ammo (w/TTSX bullets). For the 168gr TTSX, the minimum expansion velocity is 1500fps (1.7x caliber diameter expansion), +100fps for 2x expansion. For the 150gr TTSX, those numbers are 1600fps (1.7x) and +100fps for 2x expansion.

As a last note, the gentleman I spoke with noted that specific bullets/weights within a certain caliber are anticipated to be shot in different catridges, so are designed with subtle differences to have slightly higher/lower expansion velocities.

This might all be common knowledge, but thought maybe it'd provide some info for folks

 

[z987k]

If it helps anyone else, I can confirm this info. I just spoke with Barnes customer service yesterday regarding .30-06 VOR-TX ammo (w/TTSX bullets). For the 168gr TTSX, the minimum expansion velocity is 1500fps (1.7x caliber diameter expansion), +100fps for 2x expansion. For the 150gr TTSX, those numbers are 1600fps (1.7x) and +100fps for 2x expansion.

As a last note, the gentleman I spoke with noted that specific bullets/weights within a certain caliber are anticipated to be shot in different catridges, so are designed with subtle differences to have slightly higher/lower expansion velocities.

This might all be common knowledge, but thought maybe it'd provide some info for folks

There is no way I'd trust any mono that slow. Ballistics gel tells a different story, and every mono, even the ones that do open a little slower looks nothing like I want a bullet to look at 15-1600fps.
I wouldn't even trust a lot of lead bullets down to 1500.

I keep all my impacts with monos at or above 2000fps. At normal hunting distances, this isn't hard to do.

 

[Macintosh]

If it helps anyone else, I can confirm this info. I just spoke with Barnes customer service yesterday regarding .30-06 VOR-TX ammo (w/TTSX bullets). For the 168gr TTSX, the minimum expansion velocity is 1500fps (1.7x caliber diameter expansion), +100fps for 2x expansion. For the 150gr TTSX, those numbers are 1600fps (1.7x) and +100fps for 2x expansion.

As a last note, the gentleman I spoke with noted that specific bullets/weights within a certain caliber are anticipated to be shot in different catridges, so are designed with subtle differences to have slightly higher/lower expansion velocities.

This might all be common knowledge, but thought maybe it'd provide some info for folks

Totally true. The issue as I see it, is that 1) if you talk to different people at Barnes yuou get different answers on minimum velocities, 2) the minimums seem to represent an optimistic best-case with very little in the way of objective info available for anyone to use in their own decision making, and 3) none of this is written down anywere, making it akin to vudoo. Frankly, it's pathetic communication and they seem to be falling back on a "the customer is too stupid to give them the truth" answer.

 

[bkraushaar]

There is no way I'd trust any mono that slow. Ballistics gel tells a different story, and every mono, even the ones that do open a little slower looks nothing like I want a bullet to look at 15-1600fps.
I wouldn't even trust a lot of lead bullets down to 1500.

I keep all my impacts with monos at or above 2000fps. At normal hunting distances, this isn't hard to do.

One last bit of information that was passed along by Barnes, that maybe(?) informs this topic is that their 165gr TTSX bullet in their .300 Win Mag ammo has a minimum expansion velocity of 1800fps (1.7x expansion; +100-200 for 2x) versus the 1500/1600fps i noted above for the 168/150gr TTSX bullets. The gentleman noted that different in expansion velocity was because Barnes anticipates that being shot out of their 300WM ammo the 165gr will be hitting an animal at a much higher velocity than the 150/168 gr bullets being shot out of their .30-06 ammo. Maybe these sizable differences in desienged expansion velocity between very similar bullets (150 vs 165 vs 168) could be a partial explanation for why some people are okay shooting TTSX bullets slower and some people want to shoot them faster...because there are big differences between the individual bullets? (Anyhow, when I have a chance to shot an animal with either the 150 or 168 i'll report back and let you know what happened.)

 

[Macintosh]

Its kind of an asinine way for barnes to think about it. Losing weight from petals (ie fragmenting, as in the “killing bullets” touted here and elsewhere) is a total non-issue and may even be beneficial, yet they are throttling the effective range of the very bullets designed to be shot out of the larger cartridges…which are typically chosen in large part for the ability to use at longer range.

 

[z987k]

One last bit of information that was passed along by Barnes, that maybe(?) informs this topic is that their 165gr TTSX bullet in their .300 Win Mag ammo has a minimum expansion velocity of 1800fps (1.7x expansion; +100-200 for 2x) versus the 1500/1600fps i noted above for the 168/150gr TTSX bullets. The gentleman noted that different in expansion velocity was because Barnes anticipates that being shot out of their 300WM ammo the 165gr will be hitting an animal at a much higher velocity than the 150/168 gr bullets being shot out of their .30-06 ammo. Maybe these sizable differences in desienged expansion velocity between very similar bullets (150 vs 165 vs 168) could be a partial explanation for why some people are okay shooting TTSX bullets slower and some people want to shoot them faster...because there are big differences between the individual bullets? (Anyhow, when I have a chance to shot an animal with either the 150 or 168 i'll report back and let you know what happened.)

As someone that exclusively hunts lead free(when I don't have to), I'd really really recommend not shooting animals with those impact velocities. I've shot animals with the ttsx, the lrx, hammers, badlands and cutting edge. I've really gone down the hole of trying to figure out the best non-lead bullets from a terminal perspective and nothing has good results that slow except the handgun bullets I've used from cutting edge, but those are very different.

As to the impact velocity of the 165 vs 150 in the ttsx line, that's entirely dependent on distance. If you shoot an animal at 250 yards with the 150 out of an -06 and 450 with the WM, the -06 will have a higher impact velocity. A WM is just an -06 plus ~200fps. And since the BC on the tsx/ttsx line is rather crap, it slows fast.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

As someone that exclusively hunts lead free(when I don't have to), I'd really really recommend not shooting animals with those impact velocities.

Agreed.

Folks hear "minimum expansion velocity" and seems like they associate that with a fully peeled back barnes bullet which would be a really bad association as we know. Those values barnes is giving out will BARELY start expansion of the bullet and hundreds of feet per second more velocity is needed to get good expansion. People should really start asking barnes "What is the minimum velocity for FULL expansion to the root of the hollow point?"

 

[Trackselk]

Been forever since I estimated the speed. But, if you want to crunch the numbers: I shot 2 different bulls at 400 yards out of my 308 win with an 18" barrel and factory 150gr ttsx's. It destroyed both of those elk with excellent expansion. One of them dumped about a gallon of blood immediately and fell right there. I shot 5-6 other bulls with that same combo, similar results, but the ranges were shorter. So, if you're hunting within 400 yards with that combo or better, just punch both lungs and eat well.
FWIW