quote:

I just have confidence in Barnes Bullets and they have done the job I want done for 20 years plus years, I see no reason changing.

Guaranteed penetration and meat on the table builds confidence.

416Tanzan, This is certainly "Not" a slam on NP's, but, I found the same as you with the NP 's. Especially, if high velocity impact at close ranges. Many "slam" the X's for inadequate expansion, but praise the partitions in spite of their; losing the nose with approx. 1/3 of bullet weight, which resulting in smaller sound channel and subsequent loss of penetration. Just Saying!!! memtb

The Partition makes a large wound channel during that initial high speed impact
and resulting fragmentation. So do the most ordinary of cup and core bullet. The concern with the cup and core is that some people are terrified that that explosive wound channel the size of their head might in some cases not be deep enough. The Partition addresses this fear by offering a guarantee that no matter what, a good portion of that bullet will keep going even if it's just a jagged solid. A jagged solid is better than nothing and is a good plan B.

A mono bullet starts out as a jagged solid and will never be more than that. The best it's ever going to be is "better than nothing".

What does it REALLY matter???

PLEASE answer that!!!!!!

As LONG AS THE HUNTER IS GETTING THE PERFORMANCE THEY WANT What does it REALLY MATTER TO ANYONE ELSE!!!!!!!!!

WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO PERSONAL PREFERENCE???????????????????

as a personal matter i will not use barnes bullet in smaller caliber for small big game ...

i had enough bad experiences tracking some barrenground caribou shot with a 270 win and 130 gains ... but who cares this is my personal choice ...

for those that want to know: the bullet pencilled and did not expand when no big bones were hit ... as we use the meat we were not aiming the shoulder ...

It still works out that if we shoot at enough animals with enough different bullets and calibers, things will go WOBBLY! It is merely a fact of life, especially if a person shoots at enough critters.

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
as a personal matter i will not use barnes bullet in smaller caliber for small big game ...

i had enough bad experiences tracking some barrenground caribou shot with a 270 win and 130 gains ... but who cares this is my personal choice ...

for those that want to know: the bullet pencilled and did not expand when no big bones were hit ... as we use the meat we were not aiming the shoulder ...

I could be wrong since I don't know much about bullets, but like you I believe that smaller game up to deer don't always offer enough resistance to the nose of a bullet such as a TBBC, Barnes-X, or the older Winchester FS. If the bullet hits bone, of course it will brake it and do a lot of damage, but not always on a lung shot.

My own experiences is that a .33-caliber Bernes 3-shock does a great job on moose-size animals and large bears, because these offer a lot of resistance to the bullet's travel. For example, a long time ago a trapper and friend of mine caught a marmot with one of his traps, but it was very much alive. The marmot was around 100 yards away, and my friend asked me to shoot it with my .338WM. The rifle was loaded with the old Lubalox-coated 230-grain FS. I took the shot, and it killed it instantly, but it didn't even move from the spot. The bullet penciled through, leaving behind a tiny hole. Not even blood flowed out.

But a couple of years later I shot a moose with the same bullet, and it dropped like hit by lightning. The moose was broadside, around 200 yards away. It broke the shoulder bone on the way in, clipped the heart's arteries, and stopped on the hide at the far side. I recovered that bullet.

I have shot a couple of moose through the lungs with the 225-grain Barnes 3-Shock, and again it has put the moose down pretty fast.

For large animals such as bears, moose, and bison I prefer a monolithic bullet like the Barnes (or similar), simply because I have more confidence that it will break bone if I want it to. But if the shot was through the lungs, a 250-grain NOS Partition loaded under 2,700 fps also does a great job.

I have settled on the 225-grain Barnes 3-shock tipped (TST-X or whatever it's called), since it is a good compromise relating to penetration first, and some expansion. But again, I am not a ballistics expert.

Ah the myth /faerie tale/ legend / lie / illusion of the pencilling through bullet

A Barnes TSX that does not "open up" does not pencil through ! it tumbles ! then if you are lucky or not it exists !

That unopened TSX is highly unstable and will overturn in short order !

Alf
That sounds testable. Yes? I follow your logic and science on the matter but I would think overturning in a marmot would result in 1/2 a marmot.
I am pretty sure overturning and exiting boat tail first is what was happening with the early 165 X in deer we shot. But that too is a best guess. Looking forward to your thoughts.

I did not know that we were hunting marmots and mice with bullets larger than the target itself !

My mistake I should have paid more attention

I'm with Larry Shores on this one. I don't like Barnes bullets and I think there are better bullets out there. I'm a strong Northfork bullet fan and love the Swift bullets and also shoot a lot of Accubonds.
I guess that's why they make vanilla and chocolate.
Barnes bullets have always fouled badly in my rifles. That's the main reason I don't like them.
As a benchrest shooter, I just can't get past the fact that the Barnes people tell me to jump the bullets at least 50 thousands to get them to group half way decent.
Just not for me. Best of luck to those that choose the Barnes bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Ah the myth /faerie tale/ legend / lie / illusion of the pencilling through bullet

A Barnes TSX that does not "open up" does not pencil through ! it tumbles ! then if you are lucky or not it exists !

That unopened TSX is highly unstable and will overturn in short order !

This is just not true in real world applications. I have guided white tail hunters that used factory ammo with Barnes bullets and witnessed the shots. Deer appeared hit and run off. A careful inspection of the site and no blood, just a few hairs. Lots of looking and finally find deer with no blood trail. After skinning, a .308 hole going in and .308 hole going out. No expansion. It appears that the hide slipped over the bullet holes and left no blood trail. Shots were good and were fatal. However, the amount of time expended looking for the deer is unacceptable. To circumvent this, I have loaded light for caliber TTSX and used them for culling. Around 10% of the culls have resulted in a long tracking job due to a lack of expansion. 90% of the shots are lightning bolts with complete penetration. I think high speed and light for caliber works best for Barnes. I have shot hundreds of game animals in Africa and here in the States. There will be strange things that happens with all bullets. I have an A-frame on my desk that the nose pinched shut on a wildebeest, did not expand and snaked thru the body finally breaking the pelvis. I have shot small white tails with 180 grain Speer Hot Cor bullets and one had a cup/core separation and very little penetration. In the 1/10,000 of a second that penetration/expansion takes place, every bullet will have a problem if you shoot them enough.

I'm a relative neophyte and nobody compared to most of you here when it comes to hunting, but in my limited experience, TTSXs and TSXs are offer the best balance of penetration AND expansion of any hunting bullet. That and the fact they are the most consistently accurate hunting bullet I've used.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I'm a relative neophyte and nobody compared to most of you here when it comes to hunting, but in my limited experience, TTSXs and TSXs are offer the best balance of penetration AND expansion of any hunting bullet. That and the fact they are the most consistently accurate hunting bullet I've used.

Yup. Hemorrhage, whether external or internal (type and amount) and "drop on the spot" is related to bullet placement, not caliber, velocity or bullet type.

quote:

This is just not true in real world applications.

I love this statement:

If in your real world you require spin to stabilize your bullet from your gun when guiding your White tail deer then you had better accept that, that the bullet you are shooting will tumble in target if it does not expand or fragment !

And that is real world ballistics !

quote:

Originally posted by FMC:

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I'm a relative neophyte and nobody compared to most of you here when it comes to hunting, but in my limited experience, TTSXs and TSXs are offer the best balance of penetration AND expansion of any hunting bullet. That and the fact they are the most consistently accurate hunting bullet I've used.

Yup. Hemorrhage, whether external or internal (type and amount) and "drop on the spot" is related to bullet placement, not caliber, velocity or bullet type.

Are you saying that caliber, velocity and bullet type don't matter?

Alf,
Could we not prove that in ballistic media? I still have some of those 165 Barnes X Boat tails I would gladly donate.
".308 hole going in and .308 hole going out."
That does not rule out "turning over" and leaving backwards correct?

So a guy on the internet has a theory about what bullets perform the best and which ones suck, and other people call him out on it; pretty normal day on the internet, right. We all have anecdotal evidence to support what we are confident using.

Then, the guy comes back in the same thread saying that he went out and killed 500 deer in a week using all the bullets discussed in this thread. He then claims the results where exactly what he predicted they would be earlier in this thread. There is no proof of any of his results.

Yet, people are taking his story seriously????

And people on AR think Capstic's stories are far fetched!!!

Why do you suppose that is?

Possibly because that person deliberately rigged the "Test" so that his pronouncements would have a better chance of happening.

We all get it, you and others have no confidence in Barnes Bullet, and No One is going to change your mind!

How about trying this concept out, YOU are NOT going to change the minds of those of us that have confidence in the performance of Barnes Bullets!

Anyone that posts a Negative comment about Barnes Bullets, only confirms YOUR beliefs.

Anyone that posts a Positive comment about Barnes Bullets, only confirms the beliefs of those of us that use them and like them.

Those TSX's are fricken accurate ! I use them in a wide array of calibers and they all shoot very very well

For those who only read in black and white:

3 shots:

A: behind the shoulder high lung- lung collapses, animal exsanguinates but also get spinal cord shock -> drops on the spot

B: behind the shoulder mid lung- lung collapses, animal exsanguinates pink frothy (oxygenated) blood trail usually light as the blood vessels in the base of the lung are not as large as the ones more central and located close to the heart - animal does not drop on the spot and the distance travelled 20-100 yds depends specifically on how long it takes to exsanguinate (larger, more vessels 20 yards, smaller 100+).

C: behind the shoulder low - heart shot, animal exsanguinates dark blood (mixed blood) animal will rare up or go a few strides


Substitute now- Velocity 257 Roberts vs 257 Wby, Mass 130 gr vs 150 gr, Construction TSX vs partitions, Caliber 7mm Rem vs 30-06 etc into A, B or C etc. And you can always make the your POS _________ sucks argument.


IOW its what you hit.


There is logic to the guide's favorite "shoot at" spot- the high shoulder-> you increase the likelihood of anchoring your game because of 1. bone damage or 2. nerve damage or both 1&2 to diminish locomotion as the animal exsanguinates......

I like a high shoulder shot myself.

Regarding "B". Since a large wound channel bleeds out faster, and some bullets make larger wound channels than others you're making my case for me. Wound channels are inextricably linked to construction, and construction to velocity.

quote:

There is logic to the guide's favorite "shoot at" spot- the high shoulder-> you increase the likelihood of anchoring your game because of 1. bone damage or 2. nerve damage or both 1&2 to diminish locomotion as the animal exsanguinates..

I do a little guiding from time to time and favorite shot, either when I am shooting or a client is doing the shooting is a "Dead Center" shoulder shot, not high/low or behind, but dead center to get the critter off its feet.

Ammunition is the cheapest element involved in a hunt, so having to put in a finisher on a downed animal is a small price to pay.

One aspect that some may not consider, many probably never have to where they are hunting, is that a wounded animal making 100 yards or more, may or will cross a boundary fence and then legally unless your on great speaking terms with your neighbors you are going to have to get a Game Warden involved and waste a lot of time trying to recover the animal.

I plagiarized this from a 24HCF forum, but found it very enlightening.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com...lling-results#UNREAD

I was asked to post some results of a recent deer cull hunt we did in Southern Australia, so here goes. There were 2 shooters, 3 calibers and 7 bullets used, and 500 animals taken, mostly fallow does and red hinds.we were expected to differenciate between male and female hornless yearlings too. Bear in mind that a hunt conducted to help control population may be lacking in some of the comforting niceities, and there is next to nothing pretty about it. On the other hand, its a lot of shooting. we averaged about 35 a day apiece.

So anyways here's the Readers Digest condensed version.

I was using a completely stock but very accurate Weatherby Lazerguard in .257 Weatherby as a main gun. The base load that I brought with me was the 115 grain NBT loaded with IMR 7828. The air-line limit of 5 Kilograms allowed 170 rounds. Three other loads were assembled in camp on a hand press, namely the 110 Accubond, 100 grain Swift Scirroco and finally the 80 TTSX all using ADI powders which as many of you know produces the Hodgdons powders we use over here. Ranges varied from zero to 700 yards, with most somewhere around the middle.

The 115 grain NBT is a bit sturdier than people give it credit for. It was a fast killer of the little fallows which are about pronghorn sized, and entirely adequite for the red hinds which ranges from the size of small whitetail for yearlings on the low end to some that would pass for a really nice cow elk. Exits were routine and DRTs likewise routine. I believe that the 100 grain would have been the perfect match for the fallows.They are pretty small.

Next in line is the 110 Accubond. It was surprisingly close to the NBT in performance, perhaps a little slower on rib hits on the little fallows and good on the reds. Exits could be expected. Shoulders were better than ribs. This H1000 load ( A2217) didn't survive the American to Australian translation well, and I was reluctant to shoot it much past 500. It also started showing pressure signs even when I backed it off a couple. These things happen.

The Swift proved to be a pretty tough bullet. If you just got lungs on the fallows you could count on a run even if it wasn't a long one, shoulders were much better. The bullet came into its own on the reds. Getting twofers on purpose with it became a bit of a game when my driver/guide/spotter/identifier/friend asked for them. Picking the right animal out of the herd and not killing the one behind it or in front can be frustrating, but sometimes two you want will line up. He was also prone to asking for random head shots, sometimes for no particular reason. What can I say, he's an Aussie. They do that.

The wheels fell off with the TTSXs. I was at least hopeful that the 3950 fps velocity would compensate for the copper bullets but that didn't prove to be the case.If you ever have a pressing need for something to die somewhere else this is your bullet. Practically everything that wasn't spined or brained ran, and many that fell to the shot got up an ran. you can't hear them hit, and most animals didn't even look hit. When we weren't looking for cripples we were getting the dogs to look for them. finding blood was a fantasy. We went out lamping one night (just once) with a another guide and a neighbouring property owner who is in the deer business as well as we could have some witnesses. Comments there were pretty damning. My favorite was "they shouldn't be allowed to sell those foooooking things".

So there you have it. I was predicting that the results would come in in a fastest killing order as presented. Softest to hardest, which also translated to least penetrating to most penetrating. It hasn't completely escaped my notice that the order is also heaviest to lightest, and slowest to fastest but they aren't that far apart except for the 80 grain outlier.

Yeah, wrote that up last night.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
Yeah, wrote that up last night.

Last night I read about the dangers of lead poisoning.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
Yeah, wrote that up last night.

Last night I read about the dangers of lead poisoning.

Find anything on lead in primers? There's another's evening reading for
you.

for the non believers there are questions you should ask:

are the testers paid by a bullet company?
why i will never trust what other seen?

im doing a test bullet on 9.3x62 and before i started it i knew that some wont believe what i found out and you are proving that i was right ... i ve done three parts already and yes there is some findings that i didnt like and some findings that i was thinking will be that way before shooting again i was right: that doesnt mean i was biaised before the test ...

if there is something working for you that is great but that doesnt mean some others will do the same. luckily when your paying yourself your bullets and the hunt you have the last word coming from your money.

a test or an experience is what it is not the end of the world ...

and i will finish by a nice quote from a fellow hardcore poster that is defending so highly the barnes bullet:
...``...
If you're so irritated, have you considered leaving? ...``...

enjoy all the day.

All of us, are the sum of OUR EXPERIENCES.

Case in point for myself, I developed a REAL dislike for the .243 back in the 70's.

What actual experience did I have using the .243, NONE!

My "Experience" was based TOTALLY on watching some friends that at that time were more experienced with handloading/reloading than I.

What took me years to understand, and while PERSONALLY, I will not own or shoot a .243, I do willing recommend the .243 as a perfectly good choice for Whitetail and Pronghorn, was that my friends were loading 70 grain Varmint bullets in their rifles!

Head and Neck shots produced spectacular kills. Shoulder and chest cavity shots produced spectacular wounds, with even 100n pound Whitetail does requiring a second or third shot to keep the animal down.

I openly admit to NOT having the level of experience many on here have or claim to have, but in 50+ years of hunting, the ONLY GUARANTEED, "Dead Right There" results with ANY BULLET OF ANY CALIBER is a brain or spine shot, and even with spine shots, I have seen animals still thrashing around 20 minutes after they were hit!

They were down, could not get on their feet, But They Were NOT Dead, and required a finisher.

Don't like or want to use Barnes Bullets, DON'T!! Just do not expect others to jump on your bandwagon.

This seems like a good place for this:

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/articlegad.html

Food for thought from the article!

Shot placement As it relates to recovering deer, please keep in mind that Habitat type affects recovery Deer are often shot in poor light It can be difficult for hunters to determine where the deer was standing and the direction it traveled. Particularly on long, narrow roads or food plots.

Now, here are the Conclusions from the study, PLEASE explain HOW these conclusions PROVE that TSX and TTSX are NOT adequate Hunting Bullets?????

Conclusions Shooting percentages about 82%.

The farther the shot, the lower the chance of getting the deer.

Deer ran about 62 yards on average.

Shot placement is determining factor.

All things considered, broadside shoulder shot worked best compared to others.

About 50:50, deer run vs. deer don’t run.

Trained dog expedited recovery of all deer that ran.

Dog very important in recovering 61 deer that left poor/no sign, 24 deer judged unrecoverable, and 19 live/wounded deer.

Dog accounted for approximately 15 – 20% of total harvest on hunting area, i.e. 75 – 100 deer.

No difference in effectiveness of various calibers.

No difference between factory vs. custom firearms.

Significant difference between bullet types.

This study indicates that rapidly expanding bullets lead to deer running less often and less distance and when they run they leave better sign.

What is it about the concept of PERSONAL CHOICE, that FRIGHTENS PEOPLE??????????????

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
All of us, are the sum of OUR EXPERIENCES.

Case in point for myself, I developed a REAL dislike for the .243 back in the 70's.

What actual experience did I have using the .243, NONE!

My "Experience" was based TOTALLY on watching some friends that at that time were more experienced with handloading/reloading than I.

What took me years to understand, and while PERSONALLY, I will not own or shoot a .243, I do willing recommend the .243 as a perfectly good choice for Whitetail and Pronghorn, was that my friends were loading 70 grain Varmint bullets in their rifles!

Head and Neck shots produced spectacular kills. Shoulder and chest cavity shots produced spectacular wounds, with even 100n pound Whitetail does requiring a second or third shot to keep the animal down.

I openly admit to NOT having the level of experience many on here have or claim to have, but in 50+ years of hunting, the ONLY GUARANTEED, "Dead Right There" results with ANY BULLET OF ANY CALIBER is a brain or spine shot, and even with spine shots, I have seen animals still thrashing around 20 minutes after they were hit!

They were down, could not get on their feet, But They Were NOT Dead, and required a finisher.

Don't like or want to use Barnes Bullets, DON'T!! Just do not expect others to jump on your bandwagon.

I loved my 243 but moved up to a big gun (270 Win) when I moved to grizzly country. My favorite deer load was a 105g Speer at 3000 fps. Was a killer load, fast, accurate, expanded and penetrated well.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Food for thought from the article!

Shot placement As it relates to recovering deer, please keep in mind that Habitat type affects recovery Deer are often shot in poor light It can be difficult for hunters to determine where the deer was standing and the direction it traveled. Particularly on long, narrow roads or food plots.

Now, here are the Conclusions from the study, PLEASE explain HOW these conclusions PROVE that TSX and TTSX are NOT adequate Hunting Bullets?????

Conclusions Shooting percentages about 82%.

The farther the shot, the lower the chance of getting the deer.

Deer ran about 62 yards on average.

Shot placement is determining factor.

All things considered, broadside shoulder shot worked best compared to others.

About 50:50, deer run vs. deer don’t run.

Trained dog expedited recovery of all deer that ran.

Dog very important in recovering 61 deer that left poor/no sign, 24 deer judged unrecoverable, and 19 live/wounded deer.

Dog accounted for approximately 15 – 20% of total harvest on hunting area, i.e. 75 – 100 deer.

No difference in effectiveness of various calibers.

No difference between factory vs. custom firearms.

Significant difference between bullet types.

This study indicates that rapidly expanding bullets lead to deer running less often and less distance and when they run they leave better sign.

What is it about the concept of PERSONAL CHOICE, that FRIGHTENS PEOPLE??????????????

your choice is not the same as for everybody why are you trying to impose your choice?

I wish that they would define "shoulder shot" more clearly.

My general impression is that it is on the front high side of the heart.
Six-eight inches from there at "8 o'clock" can result in a clean miss or non-fatal brisket hit. While six-eight inches from there at 4 o'clock will result in a lower lung back of heart fatal shot.

Of course, six inches from there at 9 o'clock should catch the neck spine aorta complex and drop the deer on the spot.

Where I have trouble following descriptions is when people talk about a "high shoulder" shot.

quote:

your choice is not the same as for everybody why are you trying to impose your choice?

I am not trying to impose anything on anyone, I am merely pointing out that NOT EVERYONE believes TSX and TTSX bullets are unreliable.

My CHOICE, is Freedom Of Choice

Did you selectively not notice these two comments?

quote:

Now, here are the Conclusions from the study, PLEASE explain HOW these conclusions PROVE that TSX and TTSX are NOT adequate Hunting Bullets?????

quote:

What is it about the concept of PERSONAL CHOICE, that FRIGHTENS PEOPLE??????????????

Wow, six pages of failures, and perfect results. What comes to mind with me on this is like the .458 win., the 45-70 for instance, opinnions vary to a great degree..I write them off as where there is that much smoke their must be fire...

As to myself, there are a lot of super bullets out there to use, and bullet failure, at least with me, was way back when, and yes Barnes bullets failed for me on several occasions, so I quit using them. I believe the small Hollow point pinches shut and things go haywire...If a bullet fails for anyone, especially a few times, its time to move on, simple as that, if it does not then keep using it..

Will I try Barnes' new bullets, probably since they sold the company and I don't have to listen to Connie Barnes' arrogant replys to why those bullets failed way back when..

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

your choice is not the same as for everybody why are you trying to impose your choice?

I am not trying to impose anything on anyone, I am merely pointing out that NOT EVERYONE believes TSX and TTSX bullets are unreliable.

My CHOICE, is Freedom Of Choice

Did you selectively not notice these two comments?

quote:

Now, here are the Conclusions from the study, PLEASE explain HOW these conclusions PROVE that TSX and TTSX are NOT adequate Hunting Bullets?????

quote:

What is it about the concept of PERSONAL CHOICE, that FRIGHTENS PEOPLE??????????????

Adequate doesn't take much. What's that phrase? Damning with faint praise?

I sort of liked the part about the heart-shots running about as far as the lung shots. Were you the "never saw a heartshot run" guy or the "rear up and fall over guy"?

quote:

I sort of liked the part about the heart-shots running about as far as the lung shots. Were you the "never saw a heartshot run" guy or the "rear up and fall over guy"?

Neither one!!! You really do not pay a lot of attention do you?????????

I am the one that has related on here, about 3 times if not more, a shot I made on a normal sized 8 point Texas Whitetail buck that ran about 70 yards before piling up and when I field dressed him, the whole top third of his heart was gone and what was left was hanging loose in his chest cavity.

That shot was made with my .375H&H at about 45 yards using a 235 grain Barnes "X" Flat Base, BUT, It HAS NOT STOPPED ME FROM USING/LIKING BARNES BULLETS!!!!!!!!!!

I am the Son Of A Bitch that says if a person shoots enough critters, they will see all sorts of strange things happen!

I am going to continue using Barnes Bullets as long as I am able to hunt!

And that surprised you?