strike 4 with a barnes tsx

[suzukisam]

lloyd, I've shot several deer with an 85gr tsx out of a 243 win, and never even had one take a step, I've shattered bone and destroyed tissue, out of a 223 with a 70 as far as 350 yrds they have dropped right there.. not sure why your having trouble with them, but in any-06 cartridge I'd be running a lot heavier bullet then an 80, though the 85 6mm bullets work VERY well

 

[Lloyd Smale]

bottom line is and ill say this as my last post on this. Lots of opinions here most of the negitive ones are from people who havent even used them. I do appreciate both sides from the guys who do and did use them. All i can say is theres post all over the gun fourms about barnes tsx bullets. Alot more negitive then positive so im not the only one that got burned buying into the barnes line of crap. If you like and and want to use them go for it but ill guarantee that you will eventualy regret it. They may work on larger game but there sure not a whitetail bullet. Ive threw back my sholders and took all the expert opinions here that said i cant shoot i cant track and i dont know how to load ammo all from guys who have loaded and shot less in there lifetimes then i do in a 6 month period. Your all right and im wrong hows that

 

[ZeroJunk]

Well, the recent popularity of small calibers as opposed to mostly 30-06's and such 50 years ago is largely because of the newer design bullet's improved performance. But, the bullet does have to perform correctly in a smaller caliber when in 30 caliber and above maybe not so much.

None of these bullets perform like the sales photo 100% of the time. Bigger is still more reliable IMO.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

By the way and believe it or not this isnt meant to be sarcastic but why would anyone use a 2 bladed broadhead on deer. I could see if you were hunting cape buffalo or elephants with a bow but the only advantage i see to them is they do penetrate a bit better but not a whole lot better then a cut on impact 3 blade and the 3 blade broadheads fly better and kill better.

At the time, I was using a Recurve Long Bow (was a long time ago). That was before my compound days. Was back in the early 80's when Magnus first came out. Their first couple of heads didn't have the little "bleeder blades" and would sometimes fail to leave a really good blood trail. Good cut on impact 3 blade braodheads were few and far between back then. Archery was not nearly as popular as it is these days so research and development was badly lacking. Actually, the first 6 bow kills I ever made were with hand made cedar arrows with Flint heads made by my Great Grandfather for me. Went a lot of years before Aluminum arrows and steel heads. In all actuality, I kind of miss those days. Now, my slowest bow cooks off the rest at 285fps with carbon arrows, plastic vanes, surgical steel cut on impact 3 blade G5 Montecs, and lit fiber optic sites! Yet the deer get just as dead.

As to the Barnes debate, I have never been a big Barnes fan as I have never had a rifle that they would shoot well in. By well I mean the best of all the bullets I have at my disposal. Accuracy is my first choice followed up by terminal performance. Doesn't make a tinkers damn if you can't hit the animal where you aim to! Nosler, Hornady, Sierra, and believe it or not, Remington Corelocks have always seemed to be preferred by my hunting barrels. I, like you, have heard a lot of horror stories about the TTSX from guys that I KNOW are excellent marksmen and hunters as well as a lot of praise from some others.

 

[castingdonkey]

Smoked a fork horn mulie, no bullet recovered, through and through shot at 200 yards. Shooting 270 130 gr. barnes tsx 55 gr of H4350 velocity around 3140. Deer ran 30 yards and set down. Took some cell pics I'll post them tomorrow. I was amazed at the damage done to the vitals. For a bullet that doesn't desinegrate like the CL or other similar bullets it sure makes a mean path on it's way through.
Here's the pics


The heart damage


Liver damage

And the late night delicious heart and cold beer

 

[Lloyd Smale]

freedom fighter i will say this about the tsx bullets. They SHOOT. All three of those guns a #1 2506 a weather vanguard 257 and a weather vanguard 300wby all shoot the most accurate groups theyve ever shot with those tsx bullets. All three did sub moa with them. I wish things would have worked out differntly because they shot them so well that i would have used them for the rest of time in those three guns.

 

[castingdonkey]

Lloyd, I do have something to say in defense of your hunt and opinion of the Barnes bullet. I have been reading a book by Jack Occonor and he clearly states that solid "type" bullets are no good for small thin skinned game. He recommends bullets that pretty much splatter or explode on contact.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

I like your last picture best. PLEASE flame me, swear at me, call me a girl but dont say that anything jack o conner said agrees with me. I allways thought he was the biggest blow hole who ever wrote for a magazine and to this day i refuse to have a 270 in my house because of it. Not that a 270 isnt a fine round for deer hunting its just that everytime i see one i think of him and half the hunting population that believes that buying a 270 majicaly makes them into some kind of gun expert and please dont think in any way this is a comment directed at you. You seem very knowlegable

 

[cat9x]

there's nothing informative in this entire thread beyond opinionated jibberjabber.

If there's some scientific testing done on the inconsistency of Barnes TSX bullets then let's see it. Everything else I've heard here is just

 

[castingdonkey]

LOL.. I could see how the way J.O. wrote could turn people off. I bought my 270 long before I had ever heard of J.O. My neighbor turned me onto his book and I have found it interesting. I am puzzled that a guy who's best ever 3 shot group with a 270 was over an inch and writes for magazines. I sure wish someday though that I could have the opportunity to hunt the animals that he has. Thanks for the compliment. I really just argue better some people. Picking up info as people put it down makes me more a smart A$$ than knowledgable.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

there's nothing informative in this entire thread beyond opinionated jibberjabber.

If there's some scientific testing done on the inconsistency of Barnes TSX bullets then let's see it. Everything else I've heard here is just

Don't worry Lloyd, I got this one.

cat9x, could you please describe to me what you mean by scientific testing? Better yet, let me educate you in what TRUE scientific testing is. It is field testing! The opinions of those of us who have had both good and bad experiences with a certain product is absolutely the BEST way to get real life product information out there. If you want to go by what some lab geek with no practical experience says, then by all means do so. If you want REAL world experience with products, then come right on in and join. Hitting a ballistic gel block, while effective for gathering some data, will not in any way give you a TRUE accounting of terminal performance. Different field conditions such as, but not limited to, angle, distance, weather conditions, size of animal, condition of animal, and many other various factors contribute to bullet performance. These things can NOT be tested by the lab geeks.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

thanks for fielding it. Next time i do penetration tests ill use science books soaked in water. Maybe that will make it scientific enough for him. Thats the problem you have a good number of young hunters on fourms that believe you can solve everything with a math problem. Kind of like how many ft lbs of energy your 44 mag load has. It means about as much in the killing of a deer as what colar shirt you wear when you do it. cat9x you should believe everything barnes has tolds us about them. After all they sure wouldnt bs anyone to get them to by a product. That would be a shamefull buisness practice. Hell they might even employ a scientist.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

Next time i do penetration tests ill use science books soaked in water. Maybe that will make it scientific enough for him.

^^^ Now that was funny I don't care who ya are!!

 

[cat9x]

a miniscule group of internet opinions is by no means a legitimate review of the performance of a bullet.

The scientific research I'm refering to is in regards to all the talk about non-expansion with the TSX.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

a miniscule group of internet opinions is by no means a legitimate review of the performance of a bullet.

And just how do you think reviews are to be gathered there cat9x? The pony express? And miniscule? Do you not know how many members we have here on this site alone? And MANY of us are actual HUNTERS that get out in the field and test these products. THIS is what the discussion is about. PERFORMANCE! Not what some labcoat wearing lackie that is PAID by the companies to say what they want them to say.

I and many others have had issues with the Barns TTSX and others have had zero issue. It all comes down to various scenarios in the hunt. What may work great for some will not work worth a tinkers damn for someone else. THAT is the point of these types of discussions. To match experiences and to see what does best for different situations and loads. You little book worms need to get out a little more.

 

[35 Whelen]

I know this is off the subject, but I can't resist....

I could see how the way J.O. wrote could turn people off.

Me too...guess that's why no one read his articles, bought his books, or subscribed to the magazines he edited. (Where's that that "tongue in cheek" smilie....)

I am puzzled that a guy who's best ever 3 shot group with a 270 was over an inch and writes for magazines.

Ah, it's true....youth is wasted on the young. What you must realize is O'Connor began writing about the .270 shortly after its inception which was in the 1920's. Jacketed bullets were still new and their quality, and hence their accuracy, was nowhere near what it is today. One of his favorite bullets, the Nosler Partition, was in the early years made with a brass jacketed that was turned on a lathe! Accuracy was the furthest thing from John Noslers mind; he wanted a bullet that would hold together. Likewise, O'Connors rifles typically wore 4X scopes with the Lyman Alaskan 2 1/2X being one of his favorites in the early years. Most importantly, it didn't matter that he and his rifles produced groups of "only" 1" or so, what mattered was that they brought home game. Do you honestly think a rifle capable of 1/2" groups is any better for big game hunting than one that is only capable of 1 1/2" groups? That's silly.
But most importantly, J.O. didn't have an internet with "hunters" spewing their B.S. about 1/2" groups and 1000 yd. shots on game.

As a youth, I imbibed everything I could get my hands on by O'Connor (and no, I don't own a .270). His writings are still pertanent today.

35W

 

[castingdonkey]

I think your a little off pace with me 35w. Though I am appreciative of you answering some of my questions, I don't appreciate you asking me questions to try to make me look like a moron. I stated clearly that I enjoyed reading J.O's writing's. I did by the way learn a tremendous amount from him. Yes I do think a rifle that is more accurate, is better for hunting (too a degree). You know damn well 1 1/2'' vs sub MOA means nothing in the world of realistic ranges. Your rediculous example of 1000 yard groups is silly and shows immaturity. I have shot many sub MOA groups with factory loads and factory rifles. The fact that you don't shoot well is clear in your trashing of 1/2'' groups calling them BS. You sure have a bunch of crap titles under your name. For the time you take to talk trash to people on here one would think an instructor to be at a higher level.

 

[suzukisam]

the only thing I can say about the tsx, that might give someone trouble is that the tsx is actually designed around a specific cartridge, not caliber. that is why they make .30 and .45 caliber bulllets that are cartridge specific, you shoot a 460 bullet out of a 45 lc than you have basically an fmj. and vise versa it may break apart. but the 70 gr 223 have broke bone, and dropped them dead. 85 gr tsx out of a 243 has killed 'em quick every time with monotonous reliability, maybe your pushing too small of a bullet too fast. In a velocity range it wasn't designed for?

 

[ZeroJunk]

a miniscule group of internet opinions is by no means a legitimate review of the performance of a bullet.

The scientific research I'm refering to is in regards to all the talk about non-expansion with the TSX.

I've never used a TSX , so maybe they changed the design to correct my problem. I killed several doe with the original X having to trail them to kingdom come and finding that the bullet pretty much poked a bullet size hole straight through.

I don't know how much more I need to form an opinion about them.

 

[Shurshot]

the only thing I can say about the tsx, that might give someone trouble is that the tsx is actually designed around a specific cartridge, not caliber. that is why they make .30 and .45 caliber bulllets that are cartridge specific, you shoot a 460 bullet out of a 45 lc than you have basically an fmj. and vise versa it may break apart. but the 70 gr 223 have broke bone, and dropped them dead. 85 gr tsx out of a 243 has killed 'em quick every time with monotonous reliability, maybe your pushing too small of a bullet too fast. In a velocity range it wasn't designed for?

hey suzukisam, I took your advise from awhile back and have 600 85gr TSX .243 (600 Gamekings too) and all the fixins to load them up. I have been stocking up on supplies but still haven't loaded any yet so I can't speak to thier effectiveness just yet... I hope I can prove all the nay sayers wrong. I'll get around to it one of these days, I promise!

hang in there Lloyd!

 

[sKunkT]

Thanks Lloyd for the field report, I'll stick to Nosler for now.

 

[35 Whelen]

My father and I were elk hunting a few years ago when he hit a big NM bull with a .338", 210 gr. X (not TSX) bullet out of his 338-06 AI, MV about 2750 if memeory serves. The bull showed NO signs of being hit and stepped behind a tree where he continued feeding as he was prior to the shot. Finally he walked out and Dad shot him directly in the arse with my Whelen and a 225 gr. TSX which penetrated from said rectal orifice to the right shoulder:

Good news is the bull died shortly after the 225 gr. hit him:


Upon skinning the bull we found the original shot with the X bullet had hit too far back and evidently entered and exited without expanding. I say evidently because the entrance and exit hole were exactly the same size. If you look closely at the pic below, you can see the exit hole in the hide. IMHO and experience, an expanded .338" bullet should have made a MUCH larger exit hole.


I've used this same bullet and load (.358", 335 gr. TSX) on two other bulls with complete and predictable satisfaction; the bullet entered, expanded and exited in both cases.
FWIW,
35W

 

[H&Hhunter]

As I've said about the TSX. I've killed several hundred head of game with the TSX in .308, 180 gr, 168 gr, and 165 gr bullets in the .308 win .30-06, .300 Wthby and the .300 WM, in the .358 Win using 225 gr TSX, in the .375 H&H using primarily the 270 gr TSX and also one cape buffalo with the 300 gr TSX, I've also killed a pile of critters with to include feral hogs, cape buffalo and elephant with the .470 NE using 500 Gr Barnes X and Barnes solids.

I've never had one fail to open. The only failures I've ever read about have been on the internet.

My personal experience with them has been outstanding.

 

[UpTheIrons]

Thumbs up here for Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets.

Just a couple of observations about this weekend's hunt with Barnes bullets.

I run 150gr Tipped TSX bullets (Barnes VOR-TX ammo) in my .308 for Texas Whitetail, which aren't known for their toughness. Both lung shots this weekend left ~1.5" exit wounds and chest cavities full of blood and pureed lung.

Both shots were ~60 yards away and neither deer ran more than 30 yards. There were gouts of blood to follow, had I needed to use it to trail them. One was hit high enough to sever the artery that runs down the spine. The other was a center of chest-cavity shot.

My father wanted to try out his new .257 Weatherby Mag on the same wimpy Texas deer, using Weatherby ammo loaded with 100gr Barnes TSX bullets (NOT tipped TSX).

Doe #1 was hit a bit too far back on a quartering shot about 75 yards away: entry was in the chest cavity, exit was just behind the diaphragm into the guts - she ran 70 yards and dropped. We didn't open the chest cavity for a look because we didn't want to deal with the smell, but the exit wound was close to 1" across.

Doe #2 was shot at 60 yards in the neck. He purposefully aimed a bit low to not break the neck to make skinning easier. He blew out the plumbing just in front of her chest: arteries, veins, windpipe and esophogas. She dropped on the spot and bled out in ~15 seconds.

No bone was hit on his second shot, yet the Barnes TSX bullet did as advertised: expanded and violently shredded tissue to cause a quick death, even on a reatively small, thin target.

Obviously, 150gr bullets are fine for any North American game, but I was surprised to see the similarity in performance between the 150gr TTSX and the 100gr TSX bullets.

I have no qualms recommending them. I wouldn't drop below that 100gr threshold though - I see the OP has acknowledged that 80gr may not have been the best choice for Michigan bruisers.

FWIW, YMMV, etc.

 

[wankerjake]

The fact that you don't shoot well is clear in your trashing of 1/2'' groups calling them BS. You sure have a bunch of crap titles under your name. For the time you take to talk trash to people on here one would think an instructor to be at a higher level.

I don't always agree with 35 Whelen, but he is one of the few people on this site that backs up his opinions with pictures of dead animals. I've seen several very heated posts in his direction lately and don't understand why. Anyone can tell from his posts that he actually hunts, and is actually successful. Maybe his opinion should at least be taken into consideration once in awhile...

I've stayed out of this argument mostly because I have little experience with Barnes bullets. I'm recently running them in two of my rifles but have yet to shoot a big game animal thru the body; Shot one coatimundi with one (it died) and one cow elk thru the neck (it died). I can't legitimately testify one way or the other on Barnes bullets yet, other than that they shoot well in 2 of my rifles. But I will say that I cannot believe so many people demanding that an 80gr bullet out of a 25-06 is too light for deer. In the next thread, half of the same people will go on to say that a sturdy, well placed bullet out of a 223 is adequate for deer...which is true. An 80gr TTSX at 3500+fps is probably enough to get the job done. The most likely scenario I keep coming up with is that the deer in the original thread weren't hit well.

I've never had one fail to open. The only failures I've ever read about have been on the internet.

My personal experience with them has been outstanding.

A significant reason I'm running Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets right now is from recommendations from H&H Hunter and other hunters who have proven success with them. My personal observations are that most SUCCESSFUL hunters who have used Barnes bullets are very happy with them. There are exceptions, as with any product.