Bullets

[dave-t.]

Is there any sense in developing a new load for a rifle that is not a TSX or "green" type bullet?


Looking at the TSX's and what folks are doing with them, dropping wieght, gaining speed, and possibly reliability.....I'm just looking for the down side. What negatives are there with using them?

Will folks be loading their 270 with either the 85grn or 110grn TSX's for deer and dropping the standard 130-150grn options?

Is there a downside to shooting a deer with a light mono bullet faster than the standard cup and cores can be safely/reliably used?

[Herne]

I personally wouldn't go lighter and faster, simply because lighter and faster still means a smashed up carcass for very little gain in trajectory.

The reliability, penetration and increased flexibiltiy because of the retained weight are huge bonuses. I don't see the rest as being of much use in the field, at the ranges that most deer hunters work at.

I'd just shove a 150g TSX up the front and go away happy.

[southtexas]

I still have a boat load of ol' timey boolets with that nasty ol' lead in them. They seem to work fine on them little Texas deer. Think I'll work on using up my lifetime supply before investing in monolithic bullets.:)

But seriously, to answer your question, if you are shooting a 30/06, 270, 280, 308 type of round for deer, I really don't see much advantage. If you want to use a super-speed mag, or you are going after larger critters, then X-type bullets would make more sense to me. JMO

[snake river rufus]

No real advantage for deer with the TSX (unless you live in a lead free zone) and I don't drop down in weight. But I do believe that using a premium bullet lets you take bigger game with the same weight bullet. I like to play when a rifle is new but after that I kind of like haveing one load that is good for deer and bigger game. TSXs, Partitions, and A-frames allow me to do that.

[dave-t.]

I guess I am in a "Grass is greener on the other side" type of situation. I have bought 117g spbt hornady's to reload for my 257 Roberts, a bullet that has been very accurate in my rifle, but I keep seeing the Barnes bullets in 100g and 80g, and looking at the speeds that are possible with them is impressive. 3400+fps with the 80g! :eek:

Even if the 80g bullet, or the 100grn were driven at closer to normal velocities in the 2900-3000 range, and kept to the very tame side of the reloading charts would there be a down side to the light kicking 80-100grn loads moving along at 117 velocities, as compared to the 117g loaded full steam?

These bullets seem too good to be true. The folks who use them report to be awefully impressed with the accuracy and affects on game though.

So far price seems to be the biggest advantage (maybe only advantage?) for the cup and core projectiles.

[Herne]

Dave - they are great bullets. Frankly I'd change tomorrow (if I didn't have a very good 270 load and a pile of bullets and enough H4350 to last for years).

I'd just stick to the same old 150g load because I know it, and I have faith in it and I know it works: mouse to moose. I can visualise where I need to aim for pretty well any conditions and so on. So I wouldn't lose that, and the TSX would be even more reliable. Thats why I'd stay with a 150 load - and I could shoot a buffalo with it too, probably. We don't have many of them, of course, but if I met one I could shoot it with confidence.

Do you need the speed? Medium, in midrange of design parameters, tends to be good, and extremes are usually not great and need excuses!!! As they say, the best is the enemy of the good.

[dave-t.]

Honestly I'm just curious about the hype. The speed numbers are impressive, but its been a long while since I shot over 300yds. There are a lot of folks who like the 100grn bullet wt for the 257R, and it would make sense using a TSX if going to that wieght.

I guess I'm stuck in the old way of thinking that an 80grn 25cal bullet is not a deer bullet....but it seems with the TSX, that is really could be.

What it seems that barnes has done is to give mild cartridges a new aplication, whether it is good or bad. Take for example a .308, you can now shoot 110g deer capable bullets at astounding speeds, or for elk take a 150-165grn while keeping speed, decent trajectory, and recoil tollerable.

It seems like the barnes takes away any need at all for the bigger magnum chamberings, no matter the distance or size of the quarry.

[southtexas]

Dave, I think you are right. I haven't tried them but a lot of guys just love the 100gr TSX from a 257 or 25/06 for deer. And it seems to me a 140TSX turns the 270 into a pretty respectable elk cartridge, too. (I know, Herne, it already is a pretty good elk cartridge with your 150gr Hornady's :))

From a practical standpoint, you sound like me...mostly a deer hunter and seldom shoot over 300 yds, your 117gr Hornady will kill, 'em just as dead. But it might be fun to see what an 80 or 100gr TSX would do.

BTW, Herne, glad you switched your name back.

[Herne]

ST :)

Perhaps this penetration/retained weight is the great leap forward. We agree - the smaller milder rounds have suddenly been given a great shot in the arm.

As for 100/117g in the Roberts. I used both and got a better load with the 117 (more accurate) and so went with it, and that suited because we were shooting a lot of muntjac on the same land as big deer (fallow)(same hunt even) often at very short ranges. Realistically, the real reason for going for hte heavier bullet in cup and draw is to gain reliability by keeping the velocity down at short range. (while have a sensible 300 yard capability) . That would seem not to be an issue with the TSX. So in truth, there is no huge advantage either way - whichever shoots best. Even with the lighter one, the expanded in carcass weight is far heavier than with bigger calibres C&D.

[Smokey]

These bullets continue to receive great comments from most people that use them. I also like the idea of them showing more power/killing capabilities with the smaller calibers as most people do shoot these calibers better than the larger calibers.

But, I have been very successful using the Rem. Core Lokt bullets over all the years in the standard calibers. On elk I used to use 338's and 300's. They worked great particularly the 338's. Now I'm using 308 and 30-06's on elk and these and 270's on deer and could not be more pleased.

All of us watch these hunting programs on TV. Do you notice how often these animals run out of sight? That doesn't happen to me very often. Maybe something will run 60 yards sometimes but not often. I have had bull elk just stand there and look at me as if to say what are you doing after being hit with a 180 grain 308 or 30-06. And, remain there till I shoot it the second time. As I said before, in most instances these animals fall within sight of being hit initially.

I currently have a fair amount of ammo. I have not rushed out to try this ammo. I will probably try some as I start to run low on some of my current ammo.

[snake river rufus]

I guess I'm stuck in the old way of thinking that an 80grn 25cal bullet is not a deer bullet....but it seems with the TSX, that is really could be.

What it seems that barnes has done is to give mild cartridges a new aplication, whether it is good or bad. Take for example a .308, you can now shoot 110g deer capable bullets at astounding speeds, or for elk take a 150-165grn while keeping speed, decent trajectory, and recoil tollerable.

It seems like the barnes takes away any need at all for the bigger magnum chamberings, no matter the distance or size of the quarry.

An 80 gr might very well be OK as a deer bullet ( I suspect that it is) but I still want a bit more mass.
Your second opinion is mostly correct but the 110 gr example might be extreme.
as far as "barnes takes away any need at all for the bigger magnum chamberings, " Heresy! but premium bullets do add potential.

[Herne]

Heresy - not really.

With respect, but everyone is fixed on the idea that a bullet of a certain weight is required to do so much penetration/damage etc.

Well thats not actually true.

What gives you penetration is retained weight, after expansion. In most cases, half of the arriving mass (SD) is gone in that initial expansion. Not so with the TSX where retained weight is what 70-90%. More very often. So now to get an expanded proj of say 150g, I can shoot a 270 round 150g. and it will arrive at about 2800fps. A 300Winnie round firing a 200g Partition will arrive at about the same velocity, and you can expect it to lose a massive chunk - about 1/2. So which is going to penetrate further, irrespective of initial SD, which is now become irrelevant. My 150TSX, or the 200g Winnie. Why the 270, and by a considerable margin.

Of course, you could go to a 200g TSX, if you wished, but why bother with the heavier rifle, more recoil blast noise etc, when you can take the much milder and more pleasant to shoot 270 and do a very similar job.

[crawfish]

I was loading X bullets for both the .243Win and .257Roberts way back when. Loaded a 80g X in 243 and a 90g X in the 257. I have always sought out the means to kill game Real Dead Real Quick. I was never one to enjoy traipsing allover the woods looking for an animal that didn't realize it was dead. The way I did that was to load an X to just shy of max then shoot to break both the front shoulders. I never recovered a bullet from deer so I don't know from retained weight. I do know that all the deer I shot dropped within hands length from where they stood when shoot. Over that time frame (10 years) I'd say close to 300 NC deer were killed with those two rounds by me and my family. We had 5 hunters at that time; sons #1&2, daughter, wife and I. We were shooting a Ruger #1 .257 and a Savage .243. I still have about 60 loaded X bullet rounds for the .257 I my gun room. I currently load the 85g TSX in .243WSSM for son #2. It still kills deer Real Dead Real Quick.

[Herne]

Crawfish, I think the retained weight bit comes from Barnes. Ballistic gelatin tests and also at one stage they were giving away fired bullets - point blank into water, which did make the 100% point.

TH used these - and shot the better part of 30 odd fallow wiht them in 2 weeks towards the end of our last hunting season as commercial stalkers. Chronoed at 2850 odd (308/150).

They behaved very well - H&L, the deer died like normal. Some ran some didn't. The telling point was a couple of deer shot in the head where clearly the bullet exited. As you know, normally with a head job its all so deranged you cannot tell what the bullet did beyond disintegrate. These TSX held together - on one I saw strike on the ground beyond the deer.

[Bushman]

I went to the TSX's in my 7mm-08 to get away from the nose of the bullet battering in the magazine from the recoil. I always want an exit wound for the blood trail and TSX's seem to give me an adequate, but not huge exit wound. As Herne mentioned, they do not blow up when you hit a bone and they go through in a straight line after. I'd taken a couple of neck shots and got drt results with a tidy exit. Last year's deer took a 140 grain TSX through the top of the heart and while the first blood was 20 yards down the trail, it was easily followed after that. They seem to cut their way through which results in less bruising around the bullet track. For deer I don't think that they are needed, but I like the assurance that if I ever mess up and don't recover the deer that I don't need to blame the bullet.

Smoky, I think that the more recent hunting shows directors are telling the hunters to move the poi farther forward or cns for a drt result. These shows are little more than 30 minute infomercials and a drt result looks more humane and deadly than if the animal runs off. Most of the non-hunting public does not realize that animals do that lots of the time with a h/l hit. My wife happened to be walking past once when they shot a deer on TV and she said ha ha, they missed it.

[GF.]

It seems like the barnes takes away any need at all for the bigger magnum chamberings, no matter the distance or size of the quarry.


I'm gonna agree with ya here... ;)

To Herne's point -it's not the mass or the velocity upon arrival that matters, really, but the mass and the velocity of the bullets as it passes through the center of the chest cavity.

So if you send a screaming fast, heavyweight .300 mag bullet onto a shoulder and you scrub off a whole bunch of mass and a whole bunch of speed in the process, is your wound channel really any 'better' than you would have gotten with a .170-grain load out of a .303-30? Likely not, but you're pretty well guaranteed a total loss of that shoulder....

Now, I have to admit that I was wondering what your ballistics tables would have to say about an 80-grain quarterbore bullet doing 2700 fps, but then reality set in. How many fpe do we get out of our bows? Maybe 80? Out of a screamin' fast 70-poind compound? I wonder what the charts would say about a 175-fps 425-grainer out of my recurve?

But we both know that 80 fpe is plenty of whomp to drill through an Elk... and then some.

So now, despite a long-held bias toward bigger, heavier bullets..... I mean, seriously. The 7-08 is a Dragon-slayer on deer with a 140 grain cup & core bullet at something under 2800 fps, and chances are good that you'll lose 40% of that lead on impact, along with more than 100 fps. So with a monolithic bullet that starts off at 60% of that 140 and a reduced expansion profile translating into a lower % loss in velocity, is there going to be any difference between an 80-grain from a Bob and a 140-grain Partition out of my 7-08?

Well, let's see, the powder charge will have to be higher for the 7-08 and the recoil level will go up.... and the bigger gas cloud coming out of the pipe is going to raise a bigger ruckus (so your ears won't last as long), but is the deer ever going to know the difference?

Not hardly.:cool:

I suppose some guys would feel horribly emasculated if they didn't shoot a .3XX Whoopass with a muzzlebrake and a report that sends guys 3 benches down runnnig for cover, but personally, one of those 80-grain monos at 2400 fps would probably cover all of my whitetail hunting for the rest of my days, and the neighbors would probably be the happier for it. I'm sure I'd shoot better, too, seeing how rarely I get to a rifle range anymore :rolleyes:

I suppose it's crazy to advocate smaller, lighter, quieter and more efficient in the land of the Outlaw Monster Tractor Pull, but I'm feeling a sudden longing for a Bob... :D

[dave-t.]

I bought into the hype but went with the 100grn ttsx. I don't know that I'll gain anything, but I'll at least see if I can get them to shoot decently.

[southtexas]

dave: sounds like fun. Let us know how they work!

[dave-t.]

After getting the ttsx's delivered, I haven't loaded any yet, but they are almost exactly the same length of the hornady 117grn btsp, in fact, the 100grn ttsx is a hair longer than the heavier bullet. I imagine the 80grn ttsx stacks up to the 100grn cup and core bullets pretty closely too.

What some folks who don't reload might be surprised by, is that the .308 180grn Hornady sp interlock is all of about .09" longer than the .257 117gn hornady. With all of the talk about safe minimums for deer bullets, when you look at one projectile and compare to the other, to think that one is over kill, and the other a safe minimum, it all seems pretty ludicrous.

Does the difference of .051" in width and .09" in length really seal the deal between one being "much too big", and the other being the safe side of small? :rolleyes:

[Herne]

Is there much difference? Well yes in terms of volume which equates to energy.

Is that going to make much difference in the field - no unless you are talking of the limits of performance, (or limits in terms of size of animal.)

Since Trev H my partner used a 308 for almost all of his deer, and a 300Win for a few, and at the time I was using a 275r with 117 Speers, I have a basis for comparison. I can honestly say that given decent placement, I was at no disadvantage with the 257R out to 300 plus compared with the 30cals. You hit the deer right - they died. Equally 6.5 and 270. (talking of fallow now which are whitetail sized - indeed they are bigger than many whitetails since a doe will go about 200 live weight, and some bucks will go 200 dressed, head and legs off, dealers weight)

I prefer the other 2 as all round calibres, because both are much more capable when you start taking on the very big deer like lowland reds at long range. By capable I mean a pass through for a blood trail, and by long i mean 300 plus which was often forced on us by the very convex slopes found in Devon - so that you always seemed to end up shooting across gullies, or being dragged too far forwards down the slope otherwise) However that argument may well be a lot less good when one is talking of the TSX type bullet.

Would I change form the 6.5/270 mentality. No - because I have a certain expertise with those calibres, and I'm comfy with them mentally (even though I sold the 6.5 - but that was only because the 270 was the nicer of the two "identical" guns). Realistically with modern ammunition, that's prejudice.

[bugsNbows]

I love the TSX / TTSX bullets. Performance has been awesome. The 100's in my 25-06 have been "the bugs nuts". The biggest negative is cost, but all ammo costs have recently skyrocketed.

[Chuck S]

The X bullets are great for some folks within certain parameters. They are expensive as noted, they are longer than comparable lead/copper bullets and they do not fragment, in part (i.e. Nosler Partition) or mushroom quite as fast or as radically as many other bullets. They penetrate well for their weight and can be souped up a bit for a wee bit more penetration but this is good only if you desire a long narrow wound channel over the more traditional reversed bell shaped wound upon entry and funneling down to a medium and narrow exit channel. Round nose or fast expanders give a lot more hydrostatic shock soon after entry and coupled with a bit of shrapnel do a lethal job on the tissue/air spaces of the lungs and if done with proper shot placement waste little edible meat.

Penetration is dependent on several factors including the type of tissue, bone, fur and skin that is encountered. The ability of the bullet to maintain shape is another huge penetration factor. The X bullets nose peels back into four petals a bit and then holds it shape relatively well when compared to any conventional expanding big game bullet. The weight of the bullet times the velocity, or momentum, is another huge factor in penetration. Big heavy bullets penetrate far better than lighter ones, all things equal. Here you can run into a bit of a rub as to get the heavy weight with an X, the bullet becomes too long for correct chambering in some weapons. It also takes up valuable powder space more so than a conventional round. On the other hand due to it's slight expansion, the penetration is still good.

Note: for those of you who are of the opinion that hydrostatic shock isn't one of the lethality factors, speak to UDT folks as it becomes deadly when unequal expansion occurs between air/tissue barriers such as occurs in the lungs.

At any rate, good discussion thus far and for deer, X bullets are very hard to beat but like so many here, I've a lot of the older bullets to go through before I spend more money on the latest offering from Barnes or other manufacturer. Speaking of Barnes, many do not know that in part what made their stellar reputation was the Barnes Classic Bullet, a tough lead cored, jacketed bullet that came in heavy weights such as the awesome 250 grainer for 308 caliber. In the proper rifle, this bullet gave you essentially a 358 Win Mag, 350 Rem Mag or a 35 Whelen in a 30-06. By the time you fed it into a 300 Win, Weatherby or 308 Norma, it was becoming comparable to the 338 Win Mag.

Back to a more "in the box" way of thinking for a moment. How about the old 6.5x55 and when loaded with a long, slower, round nosed load it was deadly on most any of the deer family. Same goes for the 7x57 loaded with the long, round nosed, slower 175 grain pill. Of course if you are more shooter than hunter, the longer range capability of the pointy, lighter, flatter shooting cartridges loaded with X bullets will tickle your fancy for sure.;)

[kenjs1]

I like trying different things but I will be the odd man out here. For my hunting I have tended towards less is better when it comes to speed. I have taken a grand total of one deer (I can recall) over 200 yards. I load slower and bigger and am happy -no ecstatic, with the results. This is strictly for my environment. I am sure the Barnes are awesom but can't talk myself into needing or wanting them. Biggest deer I might be lucky enough to see is a 200 pound axis buck if he is huge. Speed is needed in certain places but I wonder about 3400fps velocities whizzing through smallish deer and would feel much more comfortable if nearby hunters used something else. This is in NO WAY a knock on anyone here or the X bullets at all. Just how I view where and what I hunt.

[GF.]

Hey, if you're gonna take a handle that's going to force me to keep 'Der Ault Jaeger' straight from our old friend AltJaeger, then I'm gonna have to bust on ye a little...;)

But seriously.... A 'reverse bell'-shaped wound channel tells me that the load is blowing off a lot of steam early and then limping along the rest of the way through. That means you're using a bullet design/velocity combination that's going to bruise up more meat than is necessary (unless you manage to hit only through the rib cage every single time).

The super-penetrators--very much like a the big, hard-cast lead slugs of old--don't waste velocity or dump bullet mass on impact. They just drill a couple-inch-wide channel from A to B, and if that won't cut it, you obviously put the hole in the wrong place, so you can't fault the load.

Hydrostatic shock? 'Shrapnel'? Who cares? You don't get either one from an arrow, and they kill about as fast as a bullet, practically speakin'. Just gotta shoot OK.

I'm not going to advocate launching miniaturized superpenetrators at 3600-odd fps, but man, you give me a bullet that will penetrate like the back end of a 7mm/140-grain Partition, spit it out at a perfectly usable 200-yard velocity that saves me the wear & tear on both shoulder and ears, and I'll be in business.

Except on those days when I'll take the .54 roundaller or the .45/70 off the rack... just to be a crusty old fart before my time.:cool:

[Bushman]

For those perfect h/l or cns shots that I have been taking lately with my 7mm-08 and 140 grain TSX's, I have been well satisfied. While I strive to make that kind of shot all the time, sometime it goes a little pear shaped. I am remembering an 8 pointer that was walking that I hit a little too far back low liver lobe and gut with a 165 TBBC from a .308. That deer went off and it took me half a day to find it again. It needed shooting again as it ran up a hill a quarter mile away. My dad shot a buck one time right in the middle gut with a softer 180 grain Remington round nose Core-Lokt and that deer was doa 150 yards away. Dad's had a blood trail, mine did not. That round nose Core-Lokt is still one of my favorite deer bullets out of a .308 or .300 Savage.

Minimal snow this last deer season and one of the ways that I knew where my 200 yard buck was standing was the big divot that the TSX plowed up in the hillside behind him so I know those TSX's have a lot left out the back side of a deer. Granted I like the clean wound channel that I get with a TSX and so far an adequate $.50 size exit, but a softer bullet would leave a larger size exit wound and more blood on the ground. I think that the TSX will enable the bullet from a smaller cartridge to penetrate farther and prevent the bullet from a larger cartridge from ruining the carcass with bloodshot meat. Too much cartridge in my 7mm RM is why I went to a 7mm-08 in the first place.

Some years back I shot an elk in the liver with a 160 grain Partition from my 7mm RM back when I thought that those were great bullets. That elk needed it's neck broken with another shot, but it sure did not go very far before it lay down. Softer bullets have their place it would seem. I was getting small size exits from Partitions so I stopped using them for lack of good blood trails, but they sure made a mess of the plumbing when I used them on deer.

[GF.]

Does anybody feel like there's much of a difference in the exit wound caused by a smaller-diameter super-penetrator that exits with quite a bit of steam on vs. a larger-diameter expanding design that punches through and falls into the dirt a (relatively) few yards away?

I wouldn't, but I haven't shot anywhere near enough head to know if there might be an actual difference or not. With 90-odd % of my not-so-many shots inside of 50 yards, I've seen a Ballistic Tip leave a longer, poorer blood trail than any of several Partitions, and I've seen boom-flop results with everything from 150 and 154 grainers out of the 7-08 to a 54 RB at a whopping 1700-1800 feeps MV... but never with a 140 grain in the 7-08--not even with the Ballistibomb. Come to think of it, some of the biggest exits I've seen have come from the roundball, too. And that said, I think the biggest exit of all came from a broadhead, so what does that tell you?


:confused:

[Herne]

I'm no great believer in broad for calibre wound channels I'm afraid. Fast expanding frangible bullets (at speed especially) cost you deer, and GF has summarised the physics or mechanics of penetration and residual energy very well.

I have, as many know, a very simple take on this. One round - heavy for calibre and properly placed. I have never known any deer to argue with one of those. Not ever.

Improperly placed, and it becomes a different story every time. :)

As for the 6.5 - the problem with it with the heavier bullets is that you start getting a lot of drop at long range. I know you gents are limited by SAAMI loadings for 1 lug surplus rifles which is a pity. The absolutely best load for a 6.5 is for me, the 129 g spitzer at full throttle. Its not 270/130 carcass smashing fast, but zeroed at 200 (2") its a 400 yards rifle capable of killing deer in the 6-700 lb liveweight class, and exiting cleanly through a shoulder. With a TSX of course you could go much larger.

[Chuck S]

"A 'reverse bell'-shaped wound channel tells me that the load is blowing off a lot of steam early and then limping along the rest of the way through." The many deer, antelope, bear and elk I've shot were shot with Nosler Partitions, Grand Slams, Sierra Pro Hunters and Core Locts all of which produce the cavity I mentioned. All to some degree throw some shrapnel, and all but one Core Loct exited quite nicely to the point I'd say they weren't just limping along. One specifically, the Sierra 220 gn round nose produced almost instant death with it's sledgehammer effect as it hit the near shoulder, expanded and then continued on through both shoulders of a rather large Black Bear.

Varmint grenades such as some of the light offerings for caliber by Sierra, Hornady, Speer and others are largely responsible for the huge explosion/cavities you seem to be referring to but are not what I had in mind at all.

As for the nic, couldn't get in using my old nic Chuck S as my email back then is kaput and I couldn't recall the password. Good Discussion anyway folks and over the years I've tried most bullets, even the Barnes X offerings which do have a place. One I really liked was the Win CT bullets and do like most of those but they discontinued them in part. (the Partition Gold adn the Fail Safe with an edge going to the Gold)

[Hi Ball]

Dave-T..........I think it is one of those deals were 50% of those who use them become satisfied for one reason or another and people like myself, who are always running tests on loads and have several rifles, see what happens when they don't do as advertised. :(:rolleyes:

I myself will NOT spend anymore time on Barnes bullets simply put. It cost money to work up loads, not to mention time and they don't give those bullets away cheap. There are just to many other Premium Bullets on the market that do open up on targets or animals shot and not just give pass throughs when hunting big game. :eek:

[Spino~]

It's been some time since I've been on this site, but I'm glad to see the experience is still flowing through. I'm a believer that if your gun will shoot them with accuracy, then accuracy kills. Cost my scare some, but I don't mind. I use them and they haven't failed me. I've got a .270WSM that shoots the 110gr TSX like some sort of death ray... I've had deer drop right there and some run 30yds or so... Dead deer.. Last year my wife shot a buck at 180yds right behind the shoulder and the buck piled up right there... Here comments were exactly this " That's the way I like to see them drop"..... :D

Spino~

[Hi Ball]

The tightest group I ever fired from one of my .338 caliber rifles, was when I was shooting and testing those Barnes XLC bullets. You know, the one's that Barnes said would give you 200fps more velocity!!!:D

Well, that NEVER happended through my 2 Chrony's let me tell you for a fact. :rolleyes: However, I once placed a 5 shot group through one ragged hole in butcher paper at 100 yards. Then thinking I really have a group this time and what a group. Now that day I did not take my Chrony's to the range. The next day I did shoot some of the same loads through those Chrony's to double check velocity and they shot SLOWER than a 30-06 load. Yes, my velocity with the .338 mag and 225 grain bullet was 2490fps on average. Not what I was looking for in an elk load for hunting in the mountains. The groups was sure pretty though next to those blue bullets.:D

[Herne]

Does that matter HiBall?

100fps here or there isn't going to make any difference, and with the extra retained weight you still have, effectively, a lot more shunt than you had before.

Stick with a 270 mate. Good round. :)

Being serious a second, I may have it wrong, but I thought the reduced bearing area of the TSX was what gained the velocity. The Xs rather lost velocity (despite claims), because of the extra work done to squeeze a very solid bullet. Coppering and all that, and the blue coating was just an attempt to get some reliability and consistency into a pretty mediocre design.

I have to admit, without much experience, but I was never much taken by the plain Xs. Far too patchy is how I'd describe their performance.

[Chuck S]

Perhaps the slicker bullet results in less than needed pressure being built up before exiting the rifle in your case High Ball. I've wondered if those claims of bullet velocity was powder dependent requiring a faster burning powder to get the pressure and velocity??

[Hi Ball]

Herne......I mean to tell you Mate, the Bloody Queen herself could not pry that .270 Winchester from my vault. We have at least 2 last count, maybe three....gotta check. The one is a custom by a Texas gunsmith (Kleingunthar)and it will NEVER go any place but passed down to the grandkid.

Now Herne this load was in the .338 Win mag caliber and I was getting ready for an elk hunt in the high country. I wanted at least to be able to drive a 225 grain bullet at 2700fps or better from that muzzle of that model 70 Winchester.

If my memory serves me correctly, I was getting something less than 2500fps. Now it was a very accurate group on paper but I am not sure they would even open up at 300 yards. I ended up using Nosler Partitions and Trophy Bonded Bear Claws on that hunt.

Now on whitetail deer, I don't believe one can use a better bullet than Remington Core-Lokts and yes even Hornady in the proper bullet. However, I always use a premium bullet on any money hunts I go on. It is nothing more than a cheap insurance policy simply put. Deer are not that hard to bring down, especially when you use a .270 Winchester Mate!!!;) :D :D

[manwithaplan]

One big downside I can see to nontox rifle ammo is availability locally and the biggest reason I stay clear is the price. I don't handload and don't really desire to and at sometimes 3x the price of regular ammo such as core-lokts premium ammo is not going in my gun especially them high dollar barnes loaded by federal. I've killed plenty of deer (and larger stuff) with core-lokts to know they work and work well.

[Herne]

Hi Ball - I'm glad to see you are still well - not insane from the search for more speed :). No good having the things in the cabinet- a fine calibre like the 270 should be in use.

I just found the 270 rather effective on game which perhaps some might think needed a bigger calibre.

Also I'm not over keen on being kicked about - you must have more recoil tolerance than I!