Overthinking Bullet construction on Elk

[Laelkhunter]

What did the TTSX do to the moose that you would want to avoid when you are hunting your elk? Sounds like you already have a load for that bullet, and you know it works.

 

[roymunson]

What did the TTSX do to the moose that you would want to avoid when you are hunting your elk? Sounds like you already have a load for that bullet, and you know it works.

it performed fine. I just wanted to try something different. I've shot a couple animals with the TTSX and felt like I left a lot of energy in the dirt behind the animal after it passed thru. PLUS it's a slow time of year for hunting and chasing things on the reloading bench is fun.

 

[RockAndSage]

Not peculiar at all IMO. The 200 is designed with a short nose to work in traditional magazine length and throat constrained cartridges. The 212 has a much better form factor (BC for its weight) that can take advantage of the PRCs longer COAL and throat.

This is similar to something Barnes does with their TTSX - the .30cal 165s are meant more for .300WM, while the 168s are for other .30s.

 

[Laelkhunter]

If you can get the Swift A-Frame to shoot well in your rifle, they are excellent. They are built like the Partition, but are bonded. Problem has been finding them lately.

 

[wind gypsy]

I've found the same thing with 7 rem mag... Hornady only loads up to 162 gr, but has data for 190-200 gr bullets. Only thing I can think is they don't want to produce any that completes with the 7 PRC.

Hornady has been loading for 7 RM since long before the PRC was on the radar. I'd guess hornady doesn't load 175/180 elds in the 7RM for the same reason federal doesn't load anything but soft points heavier than 168 gr in 7RM - the cartridge's saami specs were not configured for the long and slick bullets. Doesn't mean they cant work and work well in it though.

 

[35WhelenAI]

it performed fine. I just wanted to try something different. I've shot a couple animals with the TTSX and felt like I left a lot of energy in the dirt behind the animal after it passed thru. PLUS it's a slow time of year for hunting and chasing things on the reloading bench is fun.

You said it all right there. Stick with what works, the enemy of "good" is "better". Meaning, "it worked so good I quit doing it..."

If energy does make a difference (which it does not), who cares? Putting more "energy" in the animal is going to destroy more of the eating part, fact.

The frangible quick expansion bullets work but 30 years of experience says there's a hell of a lot other bullets that leave nothing on the table, actually, they leave more on the table if you eat it...

Those that say the animals got away with X, Y or Z bullet, they can't tell if the shot really hit where they thought.

Guys in camp that see kills with mono bullets, without fail, comment "wow, it didn't ruin almost that whole shoulder, like mine did". And those guys are shooting traditional cup and core bullets, not ones designed to come apart even faster.

Bonded, controlled expansion, or monos make the most sense, IMO. However, somebody has to keep the ammo companies in business buying their frangible fan club marketed bullets.

 

[Pharmseller]

She was slightly angled and what was left of the bullet went just in front of the shoulder. I don’t think those fragments would have went through the off shoulder if she was squared to the shot

I was just having fun with you.

No such thing as a rear shoulder.

No such thing as a front shoulder, for that part.





P

 

[Timberline001]

I was just having fun with you.

No such thing as a rear shoulder.

No such thing as a front shoulder, for that part.





P

I apologize for not using scientific terms.

 

[Pharmseller]

Accepted

 

[roymunson]

You said it all right there. Stick with what works, the enemy of "good" is "better". Meaning, "it worked so good I quit doing it..."

If energy does make a difference (which it does not), who cares? Putting more "energy" in the animal is going to destroy more of the eating part, fact.

The frangible quick expansion bullets work but 30 years of experience says there's a hell of a lot other bullets that leave nothing on the table, actually, they leave more on the table if you eat it...

Those that say the animals got away with X, Y or Z bullet, they can't tell if the shot really hit where they thought.

Guys in camp that see kills with mono bullets, without fail, comment "wow, it didn't ruin almost that whole shoulder, like mine did". And those guys are shooting traditional cup and core bullets, not ones designed to come apart even faster.

Bonded, controlled expansion, or monos make the most sense, IMO. However, somebody has to keep the ammo companies in business buying their frangible fan club marketed bullets.

You have a good point. I killed a mule deer with a 150 TTSX from my 7rm. First shot anchored him, but it was a little forward and 15 minutes later when I got up to him, he blinked at me. Had to finish him. Shot wasn't far in front of where I wanted to be, but didn't get the expansion you would have with a cup n core.

The moose was similar, though really not the bullet's fault. My scope had gotten bumped and I hit him in the spine back by the tenderloin. (once again not the bullet's fault). When I got up to him he was trying to get away on his front legs. Not convinced a splashier bullet would have done better, but I wanted to see what was out there. Thus this thread.

Plus I enjoy the chase of finding this round. I'm in Ohio and don't have the chance to get out into the mountains often. This is one way of staying engaged.

 

[rootacres]

Been reloading my 300 WSM and I can get a number of rounds within 1.5 MOA, however the most accurate has been the 178 ELD-X. Those were well under 1 MOA.

You can read anything online and some people will crap on it, but in terms of accuracy they go like this:

TIER 1 (under 1 MOA)
178 ELD-X

Tier 2 (1-1.5 MOA)
Partition 165s
Sierra 165 Gamechanger
Barnes TTSX 180 (This is what worked for my moose)

If the ELD-X are marginally better, is that the bullet to go with? I see some negative things online about their terminal performance. Or should I play with the Tier 2 bullets to try to get down around that 1 MOA range.
Odds are I'm 500-600 yards and in.

I know I'm over thinking it, but I don't know how well some of you guys are getting your hunting bullets to shoot.

I think you might be overthinking it a bit. There are a lot of guys that don't manage expectations. They will buy cup and core bullets, shoot an elk and then complain about not getting an exit hole. Or they will by a mono and wonder why the wound channel wasn't more dramatic. A 178 ELDX out of a WSM will be just fine. You may not get an exit hole, that's not necessarily a bad thing. I would take the most accurate option you have of the 4 listed.

FWIW my dad and brother shoot 300 WM's with 180 gr TTSX. They have done great on every elk they've shot. Ive only recovered 1 of their bullets and it looked exactly like their advertisements. On the opposite side of the spectrum I shoot a 7 SAUM with 168gr VLDs. None of my elk/deer ever have exit holes, but they never make it more than a few steps either. Some guys rip on the Bergers the same way they rip on the ELDX.

Apples and Oranges but same results. Just know what to expect with a particular bullet construction.

 

[roymunson]

I think you might be overthinking it a bit. There are a lot of guys that don't manage expectations. They will buy cup and core bullets, shoot an elk and then complain about not getting an exit hole. Or they will by a mono and wonder why the wound channel wasn't more dramatic. A 178 ELDX out of a WSM will be just fine. You may not get an exit hole, that's not necessarily a bad thing. I would take the most accurate option you have of the 4 listed.

FWIW my dad and brother shoot 300 WM's with 180 gr TTSX. They have done great on every elk they've shot. Ive only recovered 1 of their bullets and it looked exactly like their advertisements. On the opposite side of the spectrum I shoot a 7 SAUM with 168gr VLDs. None of my elk/deer ever have exit holes, but they never make it more than a few steps either. Some guys rip on the Bergers the same way they rip on the ELDX.

Apples and Oranges but same results. Just know what to expect with a particular bullet construction.

Probably good advice. I only get to do this every few years, so I enjoy the buildup ,and I want to give it my best effort. thanks for the insight, but ultimately, hole in 2 lungs and they don't live long.

 

[jimh406]

Take a look at some of the gel tests on YouTube. From what I've seen, the performance seems to vary by caliber.

Other than that, the length of the bullet seems to make an accuracy difference for some rifles. You seem to be comparing different length bullets. For what you listed, I believe the 165s are shorter and the 180 will probably be significantly longer as a copper bullet. Granted, bullets can be hard to find in different sizes.