Anyone use this for Elk with a 300WM??
Thanks

No, but I used 180gr TSX on Kudu and Waterbuck in my .300WM. I can't imagine it not being a good round if it's accurate in your gun. I've used 160gr NP's on elk in my 7mm for elk and Shiras moose. I'm sure the 168gr TTSX would do the job.

168 TSX is one of JJ Hack's favorite loads for all African plains game. I think he gets ~2800 fps from his .30-06. I've seen blue wildebeest killed quickly with that round, so can't imagine that it wouldn't be a great load for elk.

Clarence

I don't have a 300wm, but I use them in a 30-06 A.I. So far I've shot 3 cow elk with them. Last year I shot a moose and bison with them. Worked great.

I use it in a 308 at 2600 fps and have killed 1 elk and a pile of nilgai antelope with it. I'm getting 4-5' of penetration in BULL nilgai. It is more than good medicine for large game.

Perry

I used the 168 grain TSX in the .300 Win Mag on a couple red stag, 3 muskox and a moose. They can shoot through a big animal lengthwise, with the compromise being that the wound channel is smaller the whole way.

If you want to pile up animals with a Barnes, plan on hitting some bone. If you don't hit some major bone, plan on your elk dieing somewhere else.

I shot my last elk with a .300 WM loaded with 168 grs TSX. No complaints, did not recover bullet.

- mike

I think the 168 TTSX in a 300 WM is great a decision for elk. While I have a set of 168 TTSX loaded and ready to hit the range, I used the 180 TSX exculsively last year in my 300 WM.

With it I took the following: bull elk (~200 yards), 2 kudu (168 and 225 yards), black wildebeest (271 yards), mountain reedbuck (125 yards), blesbok (70 yards), common duiker (30 yards), scimitar horned oryx (265 yards) and blackbuck (75 yards).

All shots were complete pass thrus and only the blesbok and SHO required an additional shot.

Last year was the first time I had used the TSX bullets and to say I was impressed would be an understatement. I'm only pushing these bullets at 2815 fps using IMR7828; however, the load is very accurate. Prior to using the TSX, I was strictly a Nosler Partition user, but having such great success last year, I'm leaning to the Barnes bullets in all of my rifles.

I hope I can send another TSX thru the boiler room on a large black bear here in Colorado within the next couple of weeks!

Good luck!!!

168 is OK, but why not go with the 180gr TSX? It will shoot a very adequate trajectory and give you a lot more umph. Why not take advantage of the extra weight instead of handicapping yourself with less? See no reason to go smaller in bullet weight than 180gr. in a 30 calibur of any kind for elk. I guide for and hunt elk in NM and elk can be tough critters. FWIW no body hunts elk in my camps with less the 180 gr 30 calibur. Just my rule, based on personal experience.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Thanks for all the posts guys. I think I'll take Larry's advice and stick with the 180TTSX. I will have to start working on a load. I'll be hunting in some open areas with longer shots the norm and thought the 168's might be a better choice. My .338WM is the normal first choice.

I pulled a Barnes Vortex 180 TTSX factory load apart and it had 70.6 grains of IMR 4831. They list this load at 2997 fps and 3590 ft lbs of muzzle energy.
I load mine with 71 grains IMR 4831 and get .6" groups out of a Weatherby Accumark. It is safe in my gun but you should work up to it safely as always. I hope this saves you some load development time. Barnes website lists this as their accuracy load for the 180 TTSX.

You are not handicapped with the 168 vs 180. The difference is minute at best.

In a monometal bullet like barnes, I see no reason to go BIGGER then 165/168 gr in a fast 30. Makes no sense. Remember Barnes bullets are much longer for weight then normal bullets. That 165 is the same length, maybe even longer, then some 180's. The 180's are closer in length to 200gr. Even Barnes themselves recommend "stepping down" from conventional bullets. IE 180 > 165, 165 >150, 150 >130

You will get just as much penetration with (slight) less drop, a bit more speed, and a bit less recoil.

heavy for caliber is a great suggestion for cup and core bullets, not so much with monometals

Sid, Thanks for the load. I did try 71gr.IMR4831, 4 horizontal shots measuring 3". The TTSX 168 shot 3 covered by a dime. Never saw a group like the 180's before. Wonder what's going on?
Looks like the 168's will have the nod. Thanks Mile High.

Do you know what twist rate your barrel is? It may be a slower twist that will not stabilize the heavier bullets.

Mile High is correct on his advice. The mono metals shoot like heavier core and cup bullets. I have had members suggest I shoot 350 grain TSX in my 416 Remington. They have confirmed kills on Cape Buff with the lighter TSX and say performance was outstanding.

From my load notes you can get that 168 to speeds over 3200 fps......thats smoking!!

I would think the twist is 1-10. Its a Rem. 700.
I'll bet the 350 TSX would be a good load too. I used a 400 gr. TSX .416 Rigby on Cape Buffalo in '09. The outfitter said I didn't need to bring solids. One shot was all he needed.

I load the 168TSX for 2 friends, one has a 300wsm and the other a 300Winm. Both rifles shoot at about 3,200fps, sub-MOA, and just hammer Elk. You will not be undergunned using the 168TTSX.

Heck, I use a 130gr TSX in my 270 and have only recovered one Barnes from an Elk. All others have been pass throughs.

I'm reading some interesting posts on this thread.

I killed my first bull elk 45 years ago when I started working northwestern Colorado. Back then, the local elk hunters there thought that the .30-06 was a big rifle for elk. I followed the advice of the locals, and got a .30-06 for my first elk rifle.

I've chosen to live in elk country in Colorado and Montana, and have hunted elk almost every year since 1966, and have killed an elk most of those years.

quote:

[I] See no reason to go smaller in bullet weight than 180gr. in a 30 calibur of any kind for elk. I guide for and hunt elk in NM and elk can be tough critters. FWIW no body hunts elk in my camps with less the 180 gr 30 calibur. Just my rule, based on personal experience.

I guess rules like that are one reason that I've never hunted elk with a guide.

I just checked my records, and 4 or 5 of my first 5 and 6 point bull elk were one shot kills with 150 gr cup and core bullets from my .30-06. Years later, one of my largest 6 pt bulls dropped in his tracks from a single 117 gr Sierra GameKing bullet from my .257 Ackley. I also killed a bull one year with an arrow, but I'm pretty sure the arrow diameter was larger than .30 caliber, and I know it weighed more than 180 grains. Another year I killed a cow elk with a 160 gr Accubond from my 7 mm Rem mag. Both of those were also one shot kills.

quote:

If you want to pile up animals with a Barnes, plan on hitting some bone. If you don't hit some major bone, plan on your elk dieing somewhere else.

I've always wanted a .300 Weatherby, and a couple of years ago, I finally bought one. I've worked up both 168 gr and 180 gr TSX loads for it. Last year I took my .300 Wby on it's first elk hunt, and I put a 168 gr TSX bullet just behind a 5 point bull's shoulder. When the bullet hit him, he stumbled, turned, took two steps and fell dead. The bullet passed between the ribs on both sides and didn't hit any other bones.

quote:

You are not handicapped with the 168 vs 180. The difference is minute at best.

Both of my 168 gr and 180 gr TSX loads are near the maximum loads listed in my Barnes loading manual. Based on their chronographed velocities, there is only 10 foot-pounds of energy difference between them.

I've shot about two dozen animals in North America and Africa with Barnes TSX bullets in my .300 Weatherby and my .375 RUM. Most of the bullets completely passed through the animals, and the few that didn't and that I recovered were the advertized Barnes mushroom.

Pick the bullet that is most accruate in your rifle, and don't worry about the 12 grains difference in bullet weights.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
If you want to pile up animals with a Barnes, plan on hitting some bone. If you don't hit some major bone, plan on your elk dieing somewhere else.

I guess the bull elk I shot last year hadn't read this statement yet!

Shot from high above him at roughly 200 yards thru the upper back portion of the left lungs exiting out the lower right front portion of the right lungs. He made it maybe 10 yards from the point of impact.

Whew!!!! I must have gotten lucky!!!!!

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Dogleg:
If you want to pile up animals with a Barnes, plan on hitting some bone. If you don't hit some major bone, plan on your elk dieing somewhere else.


I guess the bull elk I shot last year hadn't read this statement yet!

Shot from high above him at roughly 200 yards thru the upper back portion of the left lungs exiting out the lower right front portion of the right lungs. He made it maybe 10 yards from the point of impact.

Whew!!!! I must have gotten lucky!!!!!

Graybird

So Graybird, who are you going to believe? Free internet advice or your lying eyes?

quote:

Originally posted by buffybr:
So Graybird, who are you going to believe? Free internet advice or your lying eyes?

I think I'll lean towards my lying eyes!

I must have ran into a pile of stupid animals last year though who didn't know they were to "die somewhere else". Of the animals I listed in my previous post, the longest that one made it was the first kudu at 168 yards, which was shot right on the point of the shoulder on his left, exiting middle of his rib cage on his right. He made it a grand total of about 60-75 yards. Whew, lucky again!!!! I hope an old black bear doesn't read this thread between now and next weekend!!!

I'm 100% sold on Barnes bullets.

GB,

There is probably some truth on both sides of the TSX argument. But if you keep your velocity up, and your ranges moderate, I don't think the elk will like the results.....

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
GB,

There is probably some truth on both sides of the TSX argument. But if you keep your velocity up, and your ranges moderate, I don't think the elk will like the results.....

My velocities are well below average at best. For example, I'm only pushing the 180 grain TSX at 2815 fps out of my 300 Win Mag. I've yet to collect a bullet from the 9 animals that have received one. The furthest thus far has been a black wildebeest at 271 yards, so we're not talking long distances.

My son and I have taken 4 elk with the 168gr TTSXs, two ran at most 50yds before expiring and 2 of them were DRT. We also did not recovered a single bullet from those elk, all bullets went clear through while doing a tremendous amount of damage along the way. Rifles used were a 300Win mag and a 300Wby., shots were from 200yds to just over 400yds. I can't see how a 180gr version would do any better.

Said it before and say it again. If the 168 TTSX coming out of 300 WBY is not the best elk round it is high up in the top 5!

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
If you want to pile up animals with a Barnes, plan on hitting some bone. If you don't hit some major bone, plan on your elk dieing somewhere else.

I guess the bull elk I shot last year hadn't read this statement yet!

Shot from high above him at roughly 200 yards thru the upper back portion of the left lungs exiting out the lower right front portion of the right lungs. He made it maybe 10 yards from the point of impact.

Whew!!!! I must have gotten lucky!!!!!

I have easily killed 4 dozen big-game animals with TSXs of different calibers from .257 to .416, includeing 8 with the specific bullet in question. I stand by my observations.