I'm trying to do some load development for next year's deer season and I would like to use the Barnes TSX 130 gr. BT. Does anyone know offhand what my lowest velocity and energy requirements are going to be for proper expansion for maximum terminal effectiveness? As far as game size goes, Eastern Washington whitetails range from 100 -- 200 pounds and mule deer range from 150 -- 300 pounds. I hear that these bullets are hard to beat for elk and since deer, around here anyway, quite a bit lighter I was just wondering on how low I could go. Thanks in advance...

Don't worry about slowing them down. Find a good accurate load. The good think about barnes is they don't become grenades inside an animal--usually a "garden hose" sized hole with very little bloodshot meat around it.
I'm trying the 130 for my 308 thinking of trying to get the velocity up a little more for a little more "shock" on impact to try and reduce the odds of tracking.
FWIW--I think barnes advertises that they get the bullet opening at speeds as slow as 1600 fps. It does seem to me that the hollow point is a little more generous on the lighter barnes bullets.

In either the 30-06 or the 308W I would use the XLC's instead of the TSX's, TSX's are "new" but also more expensive.

There is no differences in terminal performance, but I think the XLC's leave less metal in the bore. They certainly can be fired faster...

In the 30-06 the 130gr XLC's can be pushed to ~3350fps
with three different propellants (BigGame, W748 & W760)
Fast 130's should recoil less (and thus be a bit more controllable) than a 3050-3100fps load with 165gr XLC's

In the 308Win, BL-C(2) will get you a very respectable 3288fps! (W748 is good for 3224fps)

AllanD

My experience is a bit different. I can drive the 185 gr TSX to 3000 fps in my 338-06 with near zero "leading". The XLC's left a little something more to clean up. Also saw last seasons bull elk drop at the shot with such load at a lasered 269 yards. My partner and I were bewildered at the collapse of the old bull. It also groups better than any other bullet I have tried. I am hooked on the TSX.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

There is no differences in terminal performance, but I think the XLC's leave less metal in the bore. They certainly can be fired faster...

AllanD

Not so

In a regular X bullet when the copper is engraved by the rifling, it has no where to go so ends up being scraped off into your barrel. Called copper gauling. With the Triple Shock the rifling pushes the excess copper into the grooves on the bullet so there is less copper fouling. Same principle as used in Northfork Technology bullets and GS Custom bullets.

In my experience (I have loaded over 400 loads in 240 Wby, 264, 270, 7 mag, 300, and 338) the TSX leaves much less copper fouling, is faster, and is not finicky like the old X bullets.

As far as 130 grain in 30-06, IMHO, you will lose so much sectional density shooting such a light bullet in such a large caliber that the bullet will probably do strange things and you will lose penetration capabilities. You can load the 168 grain match TSX to shoot as flat as a 270 and it will be a much better performer.


Without guns we are subjects, with guns we are citizens

Does anyone really READ?

I wasn't talking about the original X-bullets, but the COATED ones.

As for your other response the whitetail that you need a 180grain bullet to kill hasn't been born, 180's (in lead core)
are "Moose bullets", not whitetail bullets and that is what the original question was about.

Barnes 165's are (According to Barnes) Elk/Moose bullets, in essence a substitute for a lead core 180gr, so they are also "overkill" for whitetails, but if you are loading for one load to do all your game hunting a 165grain Barnes is probably OK.

a 150grain Barnes will shoot about 100fps faster (3100-3150) than a 165gr Barnes, but a 150 Barnes is a substitute for a 165gr lead core, so is somewhat "overkill" for whitetail.

a 130grain Barnes is intended as a substitute for a 150grain leadcore bullet, and 150's are "about right"
for Whitetail sized game...even a 130grain Barnes isn't going to "blow up" like any lead core bullet would on a whitetail, so I'd expect they'd work quite well.

Barnes says the 130grain XLC is a deer bullet
(Actually Pronghorn/Deer/Sheep according to their Pictograms) I tend to believe THEM.

If they shoot "well enough" and they shoot flat enough to meet your needs then use them.

I don't choose to load them myself, I'll load 165's, but the original question was posted by someone who wanted to shoot light bullets.

Mind you though I choose to load 165's a 165 Barnes is a
"Moose bullet" (Deer/Elk/Moose according to Barnes little pictograms)

But I have hopes of drawing an elk tag in the lottery this year so I'll work up my loads to meet that purpose...

Though it isn't "my thing", I can see how a MV of 3350fps would be attractive to someone.
That 300fps translates into a significant increase in "Point blank" range.

Recoil would probably be less with a 130gr bullet for those who worry about that...

AllanD

I really HATE that I can't get the "edit" to work...

I really garbled the first paragraph....

The guy wants to shoot Mule deer with the 130's.

Since lead core 130's from a 270Win worked well for Jack O'Connor on Elk, a Barnes 30caliber 130 should work on Deer.

Frankly I like 165's myself, but...

AllanD

Thanks for everyone's valued opinions. They have given me many different schools of thought to add to my research. Thanks again...

Caught the "C" in XLC. Just disagreed about the amount of copper fouling. Used to load XLC's. Couldn't get them to shoot and, in my experience, they fouled the hell out of barrels. Also, when seating the bullet, the blue crap scraped off the bullet into the bullet seater. What a mess!

IMO, that blue crap, what didn't get scraped off by the neck, would just fill the grooves, and the lands in the barrel would still cut into the copper of the bullet and cause gauling

http://www.northforkbullets.com/FAQ.htm

There are differing opinions on sectional density and it's effect on penetration. Penetration is certainly a consideration in selecting an appropriate bullet for game. The low sectional density of the 130 grain .308 bullet (.196, which is lower than a 85 grain 243 or a 70 grain 223) would make it marginal for the large size Flying Ace originally posted. Antelope/deer/sheep seems to imply a range of 80 to 150 pounds. I think it was Jack O'Connor himself who said the 130 grain 270 was appropriate for Elk because of it's sectional density of .242.

I guess I don't really understand this craze for inappropriately light and fast bullets.

Check out what other posters are also saying about this

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3221043/m/154106042



Without guns we are subjects, with guns we are citizens

I load the 130gr TSX bullets for my grandsons. The deer we shoot here are mulies, although the state does have whitetails. So far have loaded them in both Thompson/Contender .30-30 carbines and a .308 with excellent results and lower recoil.

The main reason for the 130 gr. bullet is because my dad has severe arthritis in his shoulders so I was thinking that the 130 gr. can help reduce recoil and still have enough velocity to expand correctly out to at least 300 yards on a slightly reduced load. Just in case anyone was wondering.

Go for the 168 TSX and you will not be disappointed. For deer though, the good old Hornady Spire Point has always worked for me. A bit less money and typically very accurate. Jump to elk and bigger than the TSX is the way to go.

Now this is interesting. When the Barnes X was first developed I believe it was tested in Australia on ferals such as horses/donkeys etc... a few hundred were culled. Bob Penfold was the outfitter for the trip. He wrote an article based on the trip that stated how surprised he was at the performance of the Barnes X 150gr in the .308 that was used for testing. Based on what he saw, performance on those animals was comparable to the 338WM. It has always been my belief that the monometal bullets performance can be compared to at least one weight above in a conventional bullet. One advantage to the monometals was the ability to push a lighter bullet faster (flatter trajectory) and not have it come unglued. Now it seems that we're replacing a 180gr conventional for a 180gr Barnes. I would have thought a 130gr monometal from a 30/06 ideal for deer sized game if not larger.
Cheers...
Con

Con,

I was thinking pretty much the same thing.

And from all accounts, not only those reported by Barnes, it seems that for a particular sized game going 20grains lighter on a Barnes bullet than you would normally use on game of a particular size is probably true.

From that guideline in a 30-06 I'd think most people would normally use a 150grain bullet in a 30-06 against either Whitetails or Mulies, so a 130gr Barnes is right there...

Of course you could be cautious and use a 150gr but that'd defeat the purpose of reduced recoil with an '06

I don't think a lighter Barnes is going to have the penetration issues that a lead core bullet would have
as I do believe that the sharp edged petals will do as designed and corkscrew the bullet into and potentionally through the target.

I would suggest erring on the side of caution and be careful with shot placement.

Frankly, another reason I load 165's is because on a Whitetail they are an "Any aspect" bullet.
I do not have an issue with recoil with my 30-06.

AllanD

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:
Does anyone really READ?

As for your other response the whitetail that you need a 180grain bullet to kill hasn't been born, 180's (in lead core)
are "Moose bullets", not whitetail bullets and that is what the original question was about.

Does anyone really READ?

Went back and read myself to see where the 180 grain came from. I recommended the 168 grain

quote:

As far as 130 grain in 30-06, IMHO, you will lose so much sectional density shooting such a light bullet in such a large caliber that the bullet will probably do strange things and you will lose penetration capabilities. You can load the 168 grain match TSX to shoot as flat as a 270 and it will be a much better performer.

Flying Ace, you supplied the missing link with

quote:

The main reason for the 130 gr. bullet is because my dad has severe arthritis in his shoulders so I was thinking that the 130 gr. can help reduce recoil and still have enough velocity to expand correctly out to at least 300 yards on a slightly reduced load. Just in case anyone was wondering.

Go for it


Without guns we are subjects, with guns we are citizens