Well, I’ve got my retirement battery worked out but need help with some bullet selections. I am looking for Barnes X weight retension combined with the lower impact velocity requirement, lower pressure and barrel stress, and much less jacket fouling of the Nosler Partition.

I was one of the earliest adopters of the Barnes X over 20 years ago when they were first introduced. It only took a few range sessions for me to decide that nothing was worth what they were doing to my rifle bore. So I will never fire another pure copper jacket bullet in one of MY rifles. If I borrow YOUR rifle, that’s a different story. They seem to perform well on game provided impact velocity is high enough.

I really like Nosler partitions. Open up even at sub 2000 fps impact velocities. The lead core allows the jacket to yield inward as it is engraved by the rifling, keeping pressures and radial barrel stresses reasonable. And their cooper-zinc guilding metal jackets minimized jacket metal fouling of the rifle’s bore. But while the jacket and rear core stay intact, the front core is usually shed after impact.

I know that no lead core bullet is going to retain 100% weight like a mono-metal hollow point. But I’d like to find a copper-zinc gilding metal jacketed lead core bullet that would mushroom well like a Nosler Partition but still retain a lot more weight than a Nosler Partition will.

I would like to find both spitzers and round nose 180gr or 200gr for my .30-06, both spitzers and round nose 250gr for my .338 Win Mag and both spitzers and round nose 300gr for my .375 H&H.

I want to find soft points for the ’06 and .338 that would handle a shoulder shot on a giraffe or eland and a soft point for the .375 that would handle a shoulder shot on cape buff.

Any suggestions? What are the best, available in the U.S., choices?

Brazos Jack

You seem to ahve already answered your own question vis a vie the Nosler partition....


Thatbeing said the jacket fouling is part myth, part misinformation and what reality there is comes as a result on incomplete cleaning.

I've found that properly and completely cleaned of guilding metal jacket material will not foul enough more with pure copper projectiles to worry about.

But the other side of that is the simple reality that pure copper fouling is actually easier to remove than guilding metal fouling.
Pure copper fouling is both softer than guilding metal
and more soluble in the various copper removing bore cleaners.

I'll say more or less what I've said before, methinks thou dost worry too much about trivial details.

as for the people who are going to come tromping into this topic shortly spreading their poo-poo over the entire idea of "premium bullets"... GET A LIFE!
The bullets you handload into hunting ammunition is the cheapest part of the hunt.



AD

Allan,

No offense meant, but our experience varies. I discovered the heavy, uncleanable metal fouling of pure copper jackets first hand before any of the gun rags had the guts to offend the bullet makers.

In my experience guilding metal jackets never leave heavy fouling abd I have never had a problem removing guilding metal fouling with Hoppes No. 9 or similar ammonia based solvents.

Also, the higher pressures and higher radial barrel stress of mono-metal copper projectiles has been well documented. I'm sure anyone on the double rifle forum will explain this to you.

I have seen state game department statistics that show clearly that for sub 400 pound medium game like white tails, non-premiums kill quicker.

But for big game (elk, big bears, etc.) I agree with you that even the most expensive premium is the cheapest part of the hunt and well worth it. That's why I'm here trying to identify the best.

Not intended to offend or be silly, but wouldn't the best bullet, premium or not, be the most accurate one when fired from the rifle in question? Of course M.O.A. is the holy grail and not always an achievable goal, but a 4" pattern will always remain unacceptable for a bolt action rifle in good working order.

You've answered your own question. Though expensive & not really necessary for deer size game, you want a NorthFork. I use 225 gr. NF's in my .338 mag. with devastating results on moose. I find they are slightly more accurate than Partitions - which I love, and they seem to retain more weight. On my desk right now is a .338 NF weighing about 218 grs. I've weighed it but forgot exactly how much offhand. It originally was 225 grs. I pulled it out of a moose I shot about 3 years ago. In .338 cal., they have both a 225 gr. and a 240 gr. bullet. I spoke to the owner one time about the 240 gr. He said, as I recall, that the 240 gr. bullet was designed for use on the large bears and that it's accuracy tended to fall off at longer ranges. If I were going for brown bear, that's the bullet I'd use.
When the weather warms up, I'm going to try their 130 gr. 27 cal. bullet in my Kimber .270 WSM. Since It won't shoot any 150 gr. bullet, I'm hoping to be able to use their 130 instead.
One thing about the NF's is cost - they are expensive. Once a load is worked up per their instructions, use a less expensive bullet for practice. To buy them, you'll have to go online & order them but they've always been quite good on delivery & they don't charge you an arm & a leg for it. Good luck.
Bear in Fairbanks

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
I am looking for Barnes X weight retension combined with the lower impact velocity requirement, lower pressure and barrel stress, and much less jacket fouling of the Nosler Partition.

Jack, the Barnes TSX is actually a WHOLE lot better than the original X when it comes to fouling. In addition, whereas the orginal X bullet was sensitive in terms of pressure generated, the TSX actiually seems to generate less pressure than many lead core bullets. On top of all that, TSX bullets have shot remarkably well in many of my rifles, something I can't say about the original X.

If you need something that opens up at lower velocities, a plastic tipped bullet may be called for. Barnes TTSX would provide you with a combination of high weight retention and deep penetration. I also very much like the Nosler AccuBond, although it probably sheds as much weight as a Nosler Partition.

Don't forget, weight retention is one side of the coin, but penetration depth is another. The two do not necessarily go hand in hand. Penetration has at least as much to do with frontal, expanded diameter as it does with weight retained.

Finally, bullets like Swift A-Frames and North Forks might work well for you.

- mike

buckshot,

For hunting this is completely wrong. Sierra match bullets are perhaps the most accurate on the planet. But they break up too rapidly on impact, fail to anchor anything over 300 pounds, and lead to a tracking job of dubious success.

The more complex premiums - partitions or bonded core - are never as accurate as simple non-bonded cup and core bullets like sierra makes. But they are easily capable of 1.5 MOA or less in good rifles and will hold together to break heavy bone and penetrate to the vitals to anchor game on the spot.

The requirements for match bullets and big game hunting bullets are quite different. I'm not going to snipe at Alaskan brown bear at 400 yards, so 2 MOA is more than adequate, even if I'd prefer sub MOA. But if my bullet breaks up without adequate penetration, the bear is likely to come over and "discuss" it with me.

quote:

Bear in Fairbanks

Bear in Fairbanks

Northfork bullets are pure copper with a small front core in front of a solid copper mono-metal shank. Not in my rifles. I've been that route as explained and won't go that way again.

mho, see comment above, gooves or no grooves - TSX's are still pure copper mono-metal bullets.

Swifts are a good design with the bonded front core that I wish Nosler would addopt. But the jacket is pure copper, so no thanks. An A-Frame with a guilding metal jacket would be just the ticket though.

quote:

I want to find soft points for the ’06 and .338 that would handle a shoulder shot on a giraffe or eland and a soft point for the .375 that would handle a shoulder shot on cape buff

that is asking an awful lot for an 06 or 338, giraffe is one huge animal, weighing in at almost 3 times the average buff.

I agree on the demand for MOA accuracy as being unnecissary.

How close together you can get two or three bullets from a bench removes a variable in the field to be sure, but what the bullet does when it gets there is just as important.

I'm perpetually amused by the guys I meet at the range that announce they are choosing one load that's 250fps slower than another because the slow load groups at .6" while the fast one only shoots into .75, at which point I say "Oh Please!" and walk away...

Generally I'm far more interested in where a rifle puts the first round from a cold barrel
provided the second round <ten seconds later
is within an inch or three all is "fine" in my personal universe.

Frankly I don't really expect to need a second shot, much less a third.
Oh, I've fired two rounds at a game animal, I've never fired a third, but truth-be-told the occasions (Twice in 30 years) I fired a second round I THOUGHT I had missed with the first (And I was wrong)

as for copper fouling?

Ok, with your guilding metal fouling clean your rifle as carefully and throughly as you can and put it back in the safe.
two days later take it out of the safe and clean it with copper remover again and look at the patches....

I find that I can get ALL the copper out in ONE cleaning session, but to remove ALL the guilding metal fouling from a barrel takes several attempts on seperate days.

copper remover works on copper, not on Zinc, Tin or intermetallic compounds.

And I have TWO rifles I currently load Barnes bullets in.

my 45-70 has a particular like for 400gr "Originals" (the old copper
tube jacket pure lead core bullets)

And my Hart barreled 7mmMag has a particular affinity for 140gr TSX/TTSX/MRX bullets.

But you must remove all traces of guilding metal fouling with the fervor of an obsessive-compulsive on meth or you will only be applying a layer of pure copper over the tiny traces of guilding metal you left in the bore from other bullets.

But as an alternative to PArtitions have you tried the accubond?

AD

Jack,

I'm with butchloc on the giraffe. The only expanding bullet I'd use is the Triple Shock and definitely not in an '06. From your previous comments it would seem you already know as much as most of us about bullets so recommendations seem to be friutless.

The fouling issue in my opinion is really a non issue as long as you use Wipe Out or some other modern product to remove fouling. I retunrned this year after a month in Africa during which time I did not clean the bore on my 375 Weatherby. I fired about 30 rounds of 300 grain Triple Shocks in all. When I decided to clean it on my return I let the rifle set overnight with Wipe Out in the bore, ran a couple patches through it the next day and did the Wipe Out treatment again. The following day after a few strokes with a nylon brush and some powder solvent plus a couple of patches the barrel was as good as new. I checked it with a borescope so the fouling was gone. Given this I don't think the fouling qualities of a bullet should factor much in choice.

I also find the comments about lack of accuracy from Nosler Partitions to be interesting as I have several loads that will cloverleaf NP's into .4"-.6" I think they are like any other bullet. You just need to fiddle with the load until you get the results you need. They obviously don't work in every rifle but they've been a standby for me in 270, '06, 300WM and 338WM for many years.

Good luck in your quest!

Mark

quote:

I'm perpetually amused by the guys I meet at the range that announce they are choosing one load that's 250fps slower than another because the slow load groups at .6" while the fast one only shoots into .75, at which point I say "Oh Please!" and walk away...

Generally I'm far more interested in where a rifle puts the first round from a cold barrel
provided the second round <ten seconds later
is within an inch or three all is "fine" in my personal universe.

I always get a kick out of that as well as the guys shooting 50yds from a stand & worried about "match" accuracy of their NBTs when they really need terminal performance form a better bullet design.
Hornady has a good rep for cup/core bullets. especially in heavier for caliber weights. I would be quite happy w/ the NP in any caliber for any game animal antelope & up. I can't get them for my 404j, so bought a bunch of NFs before Mike sold. My other hunting rigs are either 7mm or 338 maybe one 6.5 & all will run fine w/ the NP.

The Nosler Partions and Accubonds are very accurate. I am a fan of both because I have had good success with them in my rifles. I have shot basically a one hole three shot group with Partitions at 100 yards from my 338 wm. For longer ranges try the Accubonds if accuracy is a priority. They are tack drivers too. Many posts about them here and on other forums. Both are devastating on game.

Jack,

I have seen rifles that fouled badly and very, very fast. I wonder if this is not part of your problem. I solved one rifle to a usable level with Ultra Bore Coat. I solved a Parker Hale for a friend that would shoot Speed 150s into <3/4 inch, but shot 3 inch groups no matter what I tried with Barnes bullets. The First two-three Barnes out of the gun were usually good, but by the time I ran four through that gun it was opening out to three inch groups. Cleaning back to bare metal took a couple hours minimum or I could use CR-10 which is not so barrel friendly and get it clean in an nour. After UBC it cleaned up with Shooters choice copper remover or Butch's in fifteen-twenty minutes and the gun would shoot at least a dozen or so without losing accuracy. I didn't push it to see how many it really took. I could see no reason for the barrel to foul so badly. It appeared very smooth. I JBed it several times to make sure it was decently smooth and as part of making sure it had no copper in it. It kept fouling badly and fast until I UBCed it. My best guess is that something about that alloy and those bullets just didn't go together.

Everything I put UBC into cleaned easier and faster. There was no adverse effect in any rifle. No change to any loads or seating depth.

The Barnes bullets are still on occasion with a specific rifle a pain in the ass to find the right seating depth. But, they are accurate, as tough as bullets come and still will open decently (especially the TTSXs). I don't think you will find a better bullet for your needs as you describe them than the Barnes. You might oughta think about trying UBC.

Dave

Brazos Jack, if you like the Partition then how about the Swift A Frame. I don't have a lot of experience with them but they seem to retain weight very well.

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
Allan,

No offense meant, but our experience varies. I discovered the heavy, uncleanable metal fouling of pure copper jackets first hand before any of the gun rags had the guts to offend the bullet makers.

Poor barrel.

A properly lapped and broke in barrel solves that problem.

Also an agressive solvent like the Barnes CR-10 specially designed to use on copper with added conditioner does not harm the barrel. It has ammonia in it and of course can't be left in all night!

quote:

Also, the higher pressures and higher radial barrel stress of mono-metal copper projectiles has been well documented.

Sounds like your experience is with the old X bullets. The grooves cut in the new series TSX/TTSX solve that problem.

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
buckshot,
The more complex premiums - partitions or bonded core - are never as accurate as simple non-bonded cup and core bullets like sierra makes. But they are easily capable of 1.5 MOA or less in good rifles and will hold together to break heavy bone and penetrate to the vitals to anchor game on the spot.

Jack -
that's exactly the message I was trying to convey. M.O.A. or less will always be the holy grail, but 1.5 MOA is perfectly acceptable for hunting at reasonable ranges.

That said, I differ with you where "premium" bullets are concerned. My experience with 200 grain Accubond bullets in a 300 H&H has shown me that they shoot as well as ballistic tips do and they hang together at high velocity. I've had stellar results with Nosler's partition in almost every calibre except 257 Roberts.

A few thoughts on your fouling issues if you'll allow me...
I had severe copper fouling in a 270 Weatherby back in the 90's when I tried the original "X" bullet. I scrubbed the barrel until phosphor bronze brushes melted, then is scrubbed them with nylon brushes until I couldn't stand it, and still I had fouling issues. Just when I'd given up hope the new "blue" Barnes's showed up. They helped with some of the fouling, but they (even the boat tail variety) didn't shoot any better. To make a long story short it took several cleanings with both nitro and copper solvents to clean that rifle. I believe the severe fouling was caused by the much harder copper left from using cup&core bullets in the first place. Once I got to bare metal my headaches were largely gone, but accuracy with those early bullets remained lackluster.

Having said that, I think you might reconsider visiting Barnes bullets, this time in the Triple Shock. I've not used them, but as I understand it they have a much larger hollow point to facilitate expansion at lower impact velocities. They also have a series of concentric rings to reduce pressure, and most importantly, they have gained a good reputation for being accurate.

Butchloc, I’m just learning how large some African non-dangerous game, like Giraffe, gets I guess I’ll use the .375 H&H on it.

Allen DeGrout, I haven’t tried Nosler accubonds. Has anyone got any comparative expansion and weight retension info on them compared to partitions?

Mark H. Young, I haven’t tried Wipe Out as it wasn’t out yet when I started working overseas. But I’ve heard good things about it and want to try it.

I didn’t mean to imply that the partitions and accubonds aren’t accurate. It’s just that from what I’ve seen in accuracy, Sierra slightly trumps Ballistic Tips which slightly trump Partitions, which slightly Trump Accubonds. Not that even that worst of them aren’t more than accurate enough for the most demanding medium or big game requirements.

Miles58, I’ve never heard of “Ultra Bore Coat”. What is it?

I’ve heard good things about the Australian Woodleighs. The weld cores are said to hold together and retain weight. They have guilding metal jackets and bonded cores. But I’ve never seen them for sale in the US. Are they available in the US?

quote:

Originally posted by mho:

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
I am looking for Barnes X weight retension combined with the lower impact velocity requirement, lower pressure and barrel stress, and much less jacket fouling of the Nosler Partition.

Jack, the Barnes TSX is actually a WHOLE lot better than the original X when it comes to fouling. In addition, whereas the orginal X bullet was sensitive in terms of pressure generated, the TSX actiually seems to generate less pressure than many lead core bullets. On top of all that, TSX bullets have shot remarkably well in many of my rifles, something I can't say about the original X.

If you need something that opens up at lower velocities, a plastic tipped bullet may be called for. Barnes TTSX would provide you with a combination of high weight retention and deep penetration. I also very much like the Nosler AccuBond, although it probably sheds as much weight as a Nosler Partition.

Don't forget, weight retention is one side of the coin, but penetration depth is another. The two do not necessarily go hand in hand. Penetration has at least as much to do with frontal, expanded diameter as it does with weight retained.

Finally, bullets like Swift A-Frames and North Forks might work well for you.

- mike

Plus 1 on the comment above.

I too tried the original X bullets around 1990 as well as the blue coated ones. Not only did 2 different rifles (270 and 338) not like them, they fouled badly.

Fast forward to today, the TSX is a totally different bullet. In my 270 WSM (Smooth Lilja barrel) lightweight rifle from Rocky Mountain Rifles, 68.0 gr R22 with a 130 TSX moves out at 3329 fps and 3 shots routinely go in 0.3 to 0.35". Have harvested 3 elk and 5 deer with this bullet and have had outstanding performance. One elk that was lasered at 346 yds, I recoved the bullet just under the skin. It could have been used as one of the pictures on the cover of the Barnes manual. Perfect expansion with the petals peeled back.

In 30-06, worked up a 168 gr TSX load for a pump and harvested a moose at 168 yrds this fall and never recovered either bullet (I always shoot until they go down) that broke shoulder bones. No fouling problems in a factory 760 pump that I inherited from my late father.

For 30 years I thought the conversation started and ended with Nosler Partitions. Based on how the game reacts I am starting to sway. In fact, I just bought 200 gr 35 cal FB TSX to work up loads in my 358 Win (Model 88) and 350 Rem Mag (673). As soon as my 338 returns from the bedding job it is out getting, I will work up a load for it.

Sounds like you and I have been at this a while. You really owe it to your self to try the new ones. I am glad I listened to my friend who suggested I try them too.

Best of luck in your search for the "ideal" bullet for your "specific" requirement.

Jack,

http://www.ultracoatingsinc.com/

It is what it says it is and it works.

Bear in Fairbanks

Northfork bullets are pure copper with a small front core in front of a solid copper mono-metal shank. Not in my rifles. I've been that route as explained and won't go that way again.

I'd like to know where you got that idea. I have on my desk this minute, a perfectly mushroomed NF out of my .338 mag. The entire face of the mushroom is LEAD!!!!
This bullet weighs in the neighborhood of 218 grs. and I took it out of the 1st moose I ever shot with a NF. A 225 gr. NF in .338 cal. is 1.306" long, the mushroomed bullet I have is about 0.58" long on the shank. That means about 0.72" of bullet formed the mushroom portion.
Mostly copper? I think not but to each their own.
B.I.F.

Bear,

Yes, on the Northfork the small front core is lead. But the monolithic shank is pure copper with no alloying elements to prevent it heavily fouling your barrel

I note that the Nosler E-Tip and the Hornady GMX are similar to the Barnes X but are made of guilding metal alloy. So they should foul much less. Has anyone got any experience with these on game?

Brazos Jack

Buy some Wipe Out and forget about the fouling issues you seem to be so hung up on. The bullets you describe and want are all going to have pure copper jackets, or be solid copper like the Barnes. The new TSXs and TTSXs foul way less than the originals and are the most accurate bullets I have shot in any of my rifles. Combine their sub MOA accuracy with unmatched penetration and they are the whole package, IMO.

Barnes TSX don't foul like old Barnes, they may as well be a whole different bullet. Discounting arguably one the MOST popular bullet styles on this forum, be it in the small/medium/big bore forums or any of the hunting forums based on what happened with a bullet designed decades ago is very limiting. You're losing out by falling back on an old prejudice. I also don't buy the cup and core will always be more accurate, its just not true. Key word, always. The E-tips and new GMX are in the same league as the Barnes, and keep in mind....they're jumping on the band wagon after the TSX came out and started dominating the market.

Buy a box, load em. Give it a shot at least, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised! There are more then a few guys here who shunned Barnes based on your exact experiences, but are now solid TSX supporters.

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
Allen DeGrout, I haven’t tried Nosler accubonds. Has anyone got any comparative expansion and weight retension info on them compared to partitions?

I have yet to actually stick an accubond into anything.

I have one rifle (a Remingon semi-auto) that I've been feeding 165gr ballistic tips since Nosler introduced them... but I can say that the loads that the rifle is happy with with Ballistic tips translate directly into "happy loads" with the Accubonds.

From EVERY comment I've ever seen on the accubonds they behave like partitions and
But I can't testify to that...
I can attest that they shoot like ballistic tips.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
Allen DeGrout, I haven’t tried Nosler accubonds. Has anyone got any comparative expansion and weight retension info on them compared to partitions?

I have yet to actually stick an accubond into anything.

I have one rifle (a Remingon semi-auto) that I've been feeding 165gr ballistic tips since Nosler introduced them... but I can say that the loads that the rifle is happy with with Ballistic tips translate directly into "happy loads" with the Accubonds.

From EVERY comment I've ever seen on the accubonds they behave like partitions and
But I can't testify to that...
I can attest that they shoot like ballistic tips.

Only in wetpack tests, but the NBA retains about the same wt. as sim. wt NPs.

My experience is that if you stick with TSX and start with a clean barrel they dont foul. I have been training with Sierra's and hunting with TSX and when you switch, the barrel fouls badly each way.

My next test is to use Hornadys for all, I guess they use tha same jacketmaterial as their gildingmetalbullet.

This is to solve a problem I dont have since Accubonds are great shooters and hunting bullets.

Just my view at this moment.

Brazos Jack ----- North Fork bullets were grooved because they had a solid rear shank that made the bullet a little longer than a lead core bullet. The purpose of the grooves is to present only half the bullet to the lands and grooves of the barrel, thus reducing the fouling of the barrel. Barnes started the same thing with their TSX bullets. If you are worried about fouling the barrel, clean it properly as all shooters should do regularly, and it is a moot point anyway. Each barrel will have it's own cleaning schedule, it is up to you to find it. Good shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

quote:

Originally posted by Brazos Jack:
Allen DeGrout, I haven’t tried Nosler accubonds. Has anyone got any comparative expansion and weight retension info on them compared to partitions?

I have yet to actually stick an accubond into anything.

I have one rifle (a Remingon semi-auto) that I've been feeding 165gr ballistic tips since Nosler introduced them... but I can say that the loads that the rifle is happy with with Ballistic tips translate directly into "happy loads" with the Accubonds.

From EVERY comment I've ever seen on the accubonds they behave like partitions and
But I can't testify to that...
I can attest that they shoot like ballistic tips.

My experience with Accubonds was not good. I bought some of the 200gr 30cal and 140gr 270cal versions soon after they hit the market. The first year I used them in CO. on mule deer the 270-140 performed horribly, IMO. Deer was shot quartering away from about 200yds and after the first shot it went over the hill looking really sick. I got over there to find it still standing so shot it twice more from 75yds before it fell. The deer died but the bullets broke apart badly and did not exit. Largest piece I found weighed about 50grs, IIRC. Next year I had the 300Wby loaded with the 200gr version, made a broadside shot from about 200 yards. Deer fell right over but when we field dressed it the bullet had once again came unglued and failed to exit. The largest piece weighed around 70grs. A bonded core 200gr bullet ought to be capable of 100% penetration on a mule deer from 200yds broadside. I quit them after that and shot the rest up at the range. I never had a partition behave like these bullets did, and I've used them since 1973 on way more game than I'd care to remember.

180 grain Partition 300 Weatherby (whitetail deer)
160 grain accubond 7mm remington mag (Dall sheep,Elk)
180 grain barnes copper 300 wsm (blackbear)
180 grain barnes tsx 300 wsm (Oryx New Mexico)
180 grain Nosler E-Tip 300 wsm (Mule deer,Elk)
All of these bullets are great bullets, no question, but the Nosler E-Tips seem to be in a class by themselves. They seem to hit very hard,harder than anything I can recall and still exit. Where you hit them is sill the number 1-2-3 issue. My guide said you sure have the Elk load, pretty impresive when you can drop them right there.

Has anyone tried the Trophy Bonded Bearclaws?