TTSX at Long Range?
- Thread starter Coloradotank
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Outlaw6.0
Well-Known Member
Being an avid Barnes user, I do have some Bergers, Swift, Hornady & pretty much anything else...
The Barnes will never expand to the size of "more conventional" designs, i.e. Accubomb, PT, SST, Scirocco etc. Barnes weren't designed to do so. What they were designed to do is break bone & track straight. It is called the conservation of angular momentum. The larger the cross sectional area of the "mushroom" the more resistance the bullet encounters: the more resistance, the less penetration you will achieve. The increase in cross sectional area of the mushroom the larger the amount of rotational velocity required to retain appropriate gyroscopic stability to achieve a straight wound channel.
Think about the figure skaters you see during the olympic events. While spinning at obsene velocities (makes me dizzy just watching) the hands & arms of the skater are tucked tightly to the body, when they desire to stop they simply stick out their arms & leg.... voila! They stop VERY quickly.
No rotational velocity = no gyroscopic stability. Inadequate stability equates into a substantial increase in the possibility of events like tumbling or inadequate penetration or finding the bullet or exit hole in really weird places....
Berger brings a new pattern to the game, from what i've seen (VERY limited knowledge here), they don't mushroom to an enormous amount. They fragment, thus retaining an acceptable frontal profile. The caveat here being, the heavy for caliber Bergers being used offer 2 positive points to the shooter. One being the high increase in BC & we ALL know the merits of BC
Two being the extra weight necessary to a highly fragmentive bullet to retain enough weight to actually exit the animal. Sectional Density is a wonderful thing....
Barnesuser, the ad on their website is mostly marketing hype. the Berger will wipe the floor with Barnes on "hydralic shock". The Barnes will wipe the floor with Berger on Penetration, it's all in the characteristics of the bullets.
We ALL need to decide for ourselves, how much "deposited" energy & how much structural integrity is required to do the job for us on based on our INDIVIDUAL needs. As we all know, there is no "one bullet fits all". Which only enhances our knowledge as we all strive for perfection.
With the advent of the TTSX & LRX, I honestly believe Barnes has identified & improved upon the "questionable expansion" topics we all love to hash. The polymer tip WILL initiate expansion at lower velocities, but REMEMBER what most (if not all) Barnes shooters have learned (sometimes the hard way). Break bone, break bone, break bone. They were NOT designed to slip behind the shoulder at extended ranges, they WILL zip right through with minimal expansion "penny size or so" just as they were DESIGNED to do.
Just my .002 (yes thousandths) worth of diatribe.... Good shooting to all!gun)
The Barnes will never expand to the size of "more conventional" designs, i.e. Accubomb, PT, SST, Scirocco etc. Barnes weren't designed to do so. What they were designed to do is break bone & track straight. It is called the conservation of angular momentum. The larger the cross sectional area of the "mushroom" the more resistance the bullet encounters: the more resistance, the less penetration you will achieve. The increase in cross sectional area of the mushroom the larger the amount of rotational velocity required to retain appropriate gyroscopic stability to achieve a straight wound channel.
Think about the figure skaters you see during the olympic events. While spinning at obsene velocities (makes me dizzy just watching) the hands & arms of the skater are tucked tightly to the body, when they desire to stop they simply stick out their arms & leg.... voila! They stop VERY quickly.
No rotational velocity = no gyroscopic stability. Inadequate stability equates into a substantial increase in the possibility of events like tumbling or inadequate penetration or finding the bullet or exit hole in really weird places....
Berger brings a new pattern to the game, from what i've seen (VERY limited knowledge here), they don't mushroom to an enormous amount. They fragment, thus retaining an acceptable frontal profile. The caveat here being, the heavy for caliber Bergers being used offer 2 positive points to the shooter. One being the high increase in BC & we ALL know the merits of BC
Two being the extra weight necessary to a highly fragmentive bullet to retain enough weight to actually exit the animal. Sectional Density is a wonderful thing....
Barnesuser, the ad on their website is mostly marketing hype. the Berger will wipe the floor with Barnes on "hydralic shock". The Barnes will wipe the floor with Berger on Penetration, it's all in the characteristics of the bullets.
We ALL need to decide for ourselves, how much "deposited" energy & how much structural integrity is required to do the job for us on based on our INDIVIDUAL needs. As we all know, there is no "one bullet fits all". Which only enhances our knowledge as we all strive for perfection.
With the advent of the TTSX & LRX, I honestly believe Barnes has identified & improved upon the "questionable expansion" topics we all love to hash. The polymer tip WILL initiate expansion at lower velocities, but REMEMBER what most (if not all) Barnes shooters have learned (sometimes the hard way
). Break bone, break bone, break bone. They were NOT designed to slip behind the shoulder at extended ranges, they WILL zip right through with minimal expansion "penny size or so" just as they were DESIGNED to do. Just my .002 (yes thousandths
) worth of diatribe.... Good shooting to all!gun)
Tikkamike
Well-Known Member
an antelope wont know the difference in a 140 or a 150, and elk certainly may in some circumstances, I recommend going as heavy as possible for elk.
Tikkamike
Well-Known Member
Very well said!!! however I would like to add that an animal will still die even if the bullet doesnt expand much when hitting behind the shoulder might take a couple minutes but it WILL die soon. I have killed a lot of animals with Accubonds PT's and SMK's also so they all do it.Being an avid Barnes user, I do have some Bergers, Swift, Hornady & pretty much anything else...
The Barnes will never expand to the size of "more conventional" designs, i.e. Accubomb, PT, SST, Scirocco etc. Barnes weren't designed to do so. What they were designed to do is break bone & track straight. It is called the conservation of angular momentum. The larger the cross sectional area of the "mushroom" the more resistance the bullet encounters: the more resistance, the less penetration you will achieve. The increase in cross sectional area of the mushroom the larger the amount of rotational velocity required to retain appropriate gyroscopic stability to achieve a straight wound channel.
Think about the figure skaters you see during the olympic events. While spinning at obsene velocities (makes me dizzy just watching) the hands & arms of the skater are tucked tightly to the body, when they desire to stop they simply stick out their arms & leg.... voila! They stop VERY quickly.
No rotational velocity = no gyroscopic stability. Inadequate stability equates into a substantial increase in the possibility of events like tumbling or inadequate penetration or finding the bullet or exit hole in really weird places....
Berger brings a new pattern to the game, from what i've seen (VERY limited knowledge here), they don't mushroom to an enormous amount. They fragment, thus retaining an acceptable frontal profile. The caveat here being, the heavy for caliber Bergers being used offer 2 positive points to the shooter. One being the high increase in BC & we ALL know the merits of BC
Two being the extra weight necessary to a highly fragmentive bullet to retain enough weight to actually exit the animal. Sectional Density is a wonderful thing....
Barnesuser, the ad on their website is mostly marketing hype. the Berger will wipe the floor with Barnes on "hydralic shock". The Barnes will wipe the floor with Berger on Penetration, it's all in the characteristics of the bullets.
We ALL need to decide for ourselves, how much "deposited" energy & how much structural integrity is required to do the job for us on based on our INDIVIDUAL needs. As we all know, there is no "one bullet fits all". Which only enhances our knowledge as we all strive for perfection.
With the advent of the TTSX & LRX, I honestly believe Barnes has identified & improved upon the "questionable expansion" topics we all love to hash. The polymer tip WILL initiate expansion at lower velocities, but REMEMBER what most (if not all) Barnes shooters have learned (sometimes the hard way
Just my .002 (yes thousandths
The mule deer that I shot two years ago was a double lung shot behind the shoulder. It died about ten feet from where it was shot. After it was shot it was like it didn't even know it was hit. It took two steps and bent its head down to eat and blood just started pouring out of its mout and nose and then it just fell over head first. When I gutted it, there was blood in the chest cavity but the organs were very clean and there was a small dime sized hole going through both lungs and no other damage to the lungs. Also a dime sized exit. I don't much like that. If I am going for vitals then I want the vitals blown up inside. I agree that Barnes bullets work MUCH better if you break bones. I am a behind the shoulder shooter so I had to switch to bergers.
Dr. Vette
Well-Known Member
I have to chuckle a bit at people who complain that their dead animal isn't dead enough. Don't get me wrong, we're all able and allowed to choose a bullet based on our own personal parameters and everyone is free to voice an opinion.
However, dead is still dead and as long as I don't have to track an animal a long distance I'm OK with dead.
Poor results (that is, not dead for a loooong time), poor shot placement, those are things that aren't much fun.
However, dead is still dead and as long as I don't have to track an animal a long distance I'm OK with dead.
Poor results (that is, not dead for a loooong time), poor shot placement, those are things that aren't much fun.
rscott5028
Well-Known Member
Bigngreen is dead right.
Proper ballistics studies confirm that "Hydrostatic" shock doesn't kill for the same reason rifles don't blow people through doors and walls like in the movies. Similarly, a karate kick to the chest won't give a bull elk a heart attack.
Damage to vital tissue is what kills. And, that is caused by the bullet, or fragments of bullet and/or bone tearing away at tissue.
Barnes makes an excellent product. I've had good success with TTSX on whitetails. But, the opportunity/need to hunt with them past ~200yds hasn't arrisen. They have great accuracy and penetration especially when it comes to breaking bones. They are effective in a number of applications. But, they just aren't generally going to be as effective at the longer ranges as Berger. Convesely, I wouldn't shoot a buffalo with a Berger.
Load and shoot 100-200 Bergers and shoot them at 1000yds and do the same with TTSX or LRX (if you can afford it). ...then, let the wind decide.
-- richard
I have to chuckle a bit at people who complain that their dead animal isn't dead enough. Don't get me wrong, we're all able and allowed to choose a bullet based on our own personal parameters and everyone is free to voice an opinion.
However, dead is still dead and as long as I don't have to track an animal a long distance I'm OK with dead.
Poor results (that is, not dead for a loooong time), poor shot placement, those are things that aren't much fun.
It's not that it's dead enough or not. It's the fact that with the small wound channel with minimal tissue damage will sooner or later give you an animal that will run off a long ways and I don't want to take that chance.
FishPermitonthefly
Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 21
Any hole will do...
Ok guys, I hear this hydrolic shock/energy debate all the time and it baffles me. I understand a little physiology that might shed some light on this subject and I wish someone with some know how, in the shooting/hunting sports world would pipe up and clear all the hook and bullet b.s. away, without me doing it...
First of all, energy is required for penetration but not much. Only enough to penetrate the membranes of the heart and lungs. The frontal area of the bullet is of little consequence. A pin sized hole will do. You have two pleural layers surrounding the lungs (parietal and visceral) that serve two purposes. Only one is germaine to this conversation. It is this: These pleural layers adhere to each other via surface tension with each then adhering to other surfaces, the thoracic cavity and the outer lung tissue itself. It is this tension that holds the lungs to the thoracic cavity wall during both inspiration and expiration (requiring contraction of external intercostal muscles and diaphragm in the case of inspiration and relaxation of these during expiration). I will also mention -- and this is critical, that the lung is also held against the thoracic wall by intrapulmonary pressure which is higher inside the alveoli of the lung than the intrapleural pressure exerted in the pleural cavity between the visceral and parietal layers.
Now, once a hole has been created in the pleura, atmospheric pressure rushes in to the pleural cavity exerting a force greater than intrapulmonary pressure held inside the lungs. This intrapleural pressure is now enough to collapse the lung resulting in atelectasis or collapse of the lung --which starves tissue of oxygen etc resulting in death of the cell and death of the organism.
This is why you see animals die just as quickly with a 270 as a 338 when it is a lung or heart shot. Likewise , the heart is completely unable to seal or heal itself when a hole is poked in it (of any size). I hear folks all the time say that a 338 will kill an animal faster than a 270 citing anecdotal evidence. Most of us have had enough experience to know otherwise. Shot placement is critical. A larger hole does not always mean quicker or certifiable death...
There. I said it...
Ok guys, I hear this hydrolic shock/energy debate all the time and it baffles me. I understand a little physiology that might shed some light on this subject and I wish someone with some know how, in the shooting/hunting sports world would pipe up and clear all the hook and bullet b.s. away, without me doing it...
First of all, energy is required for penetration but not much. Only enough to penetrate the membranes of the heart and lungs. The frontal area of the bullet is of little consequence. A pin sized hole will do. You have two pleural layers surrounding the lungs (parietal and visceral) that serve two purposes. Only one is germaine to this conversation. It is this: These pleural layers adhere to each other via surface tension with each then adhering to other surfaces, the thoracic cavity and the outer lung tissue itself. It is this tension that holds the lungs to the thoracic cavity wall during both inspiration and expiration (requiring contraction of external intercostal muscles and diaphragm in the case of inspiration and relaxation of these during expiration). I will also mention -- and this is critical, that the lung is also held against the thoracic wall by intrapulmonary pressure which is higher inside the alveoli of the lung than the intrapleural pressure exerted in the pleural cavity between the visceral and parietal layers.
Now, once a hole has been created in the pleura, atmospheric pressure rushes in to the pleural cavity exerting a force greater than intrapulmonary pressure held inside the lungs. This intrapleural pressure is now enough to collapse the lung resulting in atelectasis or collapse of the lung --which starves tissue of oxygen etc resulting in death of the cell and death of the organism.
This is why you see animals die just as quickly with a 270 as a 338 when it is a lung or heart shot. Likewise , the heart is completely unable to seal or heal itself when a hole is poked in it (of any size). I hear folks all the time say that a 338 will kill an animal faster than a 270 citing anecdotal evidence. Most of us have had enough experience to know otherwise. Shot placement is critical. A larger hole does not always mean quicker or certifiable death...
There. I said it...
rscott5028
Well-Known Member
Re: Any hole will do...
FishPermitonthefly,
You make some good points. i.e. A hat pin through the heart is more lethal than a bowling ball in the buttocks.
The question that's usually up in the air is what bullet weight, sectional density, construction, velocity, etc... is most likely to damage the most vital tissue given that pinpoint accuracy may not be attainable either due to a lack of understanding of biology, environmental conditions such as distance and wind, or poor shooting skills.
Dead is dead. But, it's nice to have some margin for error.
Some choose a strategy of maximum penetration, exit hole, blood trail. Others side with maximum expansion, perhaps even fragmentation to cover a larger area within the cavity.
Some might even fall prey to marketing gimmicks such as "Zombie Killer" ammo.
They can all succeed or fail depending on the circumstances.
Besides.... what else are a bunch of old farts going to do when we're not out hunting.
-- richard
FishPermitonthefly,
You make some good points. i.e. A hat pin through the heart is more lethal than a bowling ball in the buttocks.
The question that's usually up in the air is what bullet weight, sectional density, construction, velocity, etc... is most likely to damage the most vital tissue given that pinpoint accuracy may not be attainable either due to a lack of understanding of biology, environmental conditions such as distance and wind, or poor shooting skills.
Dead is dead. But, it's nice to have some margin for error.
Some choose a strategy of maximum penetration, exit hole, blood trail. Others side with maximum expansion, perhaps even fragmentation to cover a larger area within the cavity.
Some might even fall prey to marketing gimmicks such as "Zombie Killer" ammo.
They can all succeed or fail depending on the circumstances.
Besides.... what else are a bunch of old farts going to do when we're not out hunting.
-- richard
I have used Barnes bullets for many years. And as stated several times; these bullets are bone breakers. I learned it first hand on a short 400 yard shot hunting mule deer. I put a 100gr tsx right in the boiler and the animal never reacted. My guide thought I missed, but that never happens. To prove him wrong I decided to put another round in the chamber and settle the cross hairs on the shoulder. But before I could settle the crosshairs, the animal just dropped over. When recovering the animal, I found the pencil hole in / dime sized hole out, as previously mentioned. Since then I have used shoulder or high shoulder shot on every game animal. One would argue that this is the only way to harness an animal on the spot. I cannot speak for Berger bullets, but what I can say is that I have never found Barnes bullets to lack penetration when hitting heavy bone.
I must admit, however, that I have seen a barnes bullet frag. I was on a caribou hunt with some friends, one of which was a barnes rep. My buddy put a 180gr 300 mag through both shoulders of a caribou at about 500 yards. When we recovered the animal, we discovered that the bullet actually came apart and one of the petals traveled up through the neck and blew a golfball sized hole out through the jaw. I have not since observed anything like this, but assure you that that particular animal was DRT.
I guess it all depends on what you are comfortable with. Best of Luck....
ERIK
. To prove him wrong I decided to put another round in the chamber and settle the cross hairs on the shoulder. But before I could settle the crosshairs, the animal just dropped over. When recovering the animal, I found the pencil hole in / dime sized hole out, as previously mentioned. Since then I have used shoulder or high shoulder shot on every game animal. One would argue that this is the only way to harness an animal on the spot. I cannot speak for Berger bullets, but what I can say is that I have never found Barnes bullets to lack penetration when hitting heavy bone.I must admit, however, that I have seen a barnes bullet frag. I was on a caribou hunt with some friends, one of which was a barnes rep. My buddy put a 180gr 300 mag through both shoulders of a caribou at about 500 yards. When we recovered the animal, we discovered that the bullet actually came apart and one of the petals traveled up through the neck and blew a golfball sized hole out through the jaw. I have not since observed anything like this, but assure you that that particular animal was DRT.
I guess it all depends on what you are comfortable with. Best of Luck....
ERIK
barnesuser28
Well-Known Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Well the video pretty much just makes Mikes post spot on. If you are going to shoot through shoulders everytime then the Barnes bullet is the way to go. I myself have never retrieved a Barnes from an animal because it has always passed through. So the bone crushing power of that bullet is one of the best.
If you are a behind the shoulder shooter then the Barnes is not such a good choice. If you watch that video and watch the initial explosiveness of the ballistic gel when the bullet enters, all that gel comes back together and with the Barnes bullet you will find that it penetrates all the way through but has a very small wound channel. At long range the wound channel will be even smaller as it won't open up as much due to lack of velocity. At long range a thinner jacket will do better with the lower velocities because it takes less velocity for the bullet to open up.
If you shoot shoulder shots, the Barnes bullet would be my go to bullet.
If you are a behind the shoulder shooter then the Barnes is not such a good choice. If you watch that video and watch the initial explosiveness of the ballistic gel when the bullet enters, all that gel comes back together and with the Barnes bullet you will find that it penetrates all the way through but has a very small wound channel. At long range the wound channel will be even smaller as it won't open up as much due to lack of velocity. At long range a thinner jacket will do better with the lower velocities because it takes less velocity for the bullet to open up.
If you shoot shoulder shots, the Barnes bullet would be my go to bullet.
Broz
Well-Known Member
But with the Bergers at long range a shoulder hit is not a problem either. The Berger will also penetrate the shoulder, and the farther the shot the more penetration you will have. With in reasonable distances of course like 1500 and back, maybe farther. So you have a wider margin to get into the vitals. Elevation calcs are a given within the accuracy of your skill, your rifle, and ammo. Wind drift is a whole different matter. If I miss calculate it will most likely be in wind drift. So I will take the most accurate bullet with the highest BC that will work at long range anywhere in the vital area. Seen it and done it. This is why I choose the Bergers.
Jeff
Jeff
