Are Barnes TSX worth the extra 10 dollars per box?

Especially for accuracy and terminal performance. I like the claimed BC for the 150gr in .284 and the 180gr in .308

I have been less than thrilled with my 160gr Accubonds in my 7mmRemMag and 180grainers in my 300WSM. I had one not exit my antelope and one perform similar to Hornady SST on a muley doe on Sunday. Both shots I found fragments throughout the shoulders even though I am a chest shooter. The distances were between 150-200 yards on both.

That depends on how important that 10 dollars is to you? If it is the difference between eating or going hungry then no.

If you are looking for a bullet that offers accuracy and superior terminal performance then I don't think you will find a better bullet. With the TSX's you generally get what you pay for.

Just my opinion NO. I do not think for a minute that an antelope or a mule deer require that type of a bullet. Too many million antelope and mule deer had already hit the dirt for years WAY before the TSX concept was born. Are they good bullets YES. Your question is are they worth the extra money.......No. There are other bullets out there that on thin skinned game work just as well.

I love the TSX. Have used them in both my 30.06 on African and American game and in my .416 on African game. They work as advertised: perfect mushroom with cutting edge petals, little copper fouling. A much improved design over the X's and XLC's.

John

My use of them have proven that they are a hardy bullet, no question. Tough game or not they have proven to be effective and very accurate. For my hunting requirements it is a contender for all my hunting needs. Not saying anything less of other bullet makes I use these are reliable in every way is all. Cost of a bullet is second to me and given the shot makes for a good kill. make sense?

If you only shoot the TSX bullets during sight in and hunting that $10 extra a box will be stretched out over several years. The expense is not even worth considering in my opinion.

Okay now a second question.

Would you use 168gr or 180gr TSX for large game (elk/giant muleys) in 300WSM?

quote:

Would you use 168gr or 180gr TSX for large game (elk/giant muleys) in 300WSM?

Either is fine. Barnes generally says you can drop one bullet weight due to weight retention. I would go with the 168's if you are hunting open country and 180's if your shots wont be too far. Either will work fine and I would be comfortable with both.

quote:

Originally posted by JMJ888:

quote:

Would you use 168gr or 180gr TSX for large game (elk/giant muleys) in 300WSM?

Either is fine. Barnes generally says you can drop one bullet weight due to weight retention. I would go with the 168's if you are hunting open country and 180's if your shots wont be too far. Either will work fine and I would be comfortable with both.

I second the choice of the 168gr for open country.

The 168 TSX match bullet is what I use in my 300 Wby.

Very accurate.

I shoot the 168gr TSX in my .300 H&H now exclusively. Amazingly accurate bullet. Ditto for the 270gr TSX in my .375s. Yes, in my opinion, they are worth the extra $.

Out of genuine curiousity why do some of you state that for open country the 168 is a better bullet to select over the 180? From what I can tell theres just a smigent of difference in drop. I know my situation is a little different than some of you guys for the simple fact that bear encounters are all too common in our high country so a guy has to find a happy medium between what is best for the game at hand and still having adequate capability for dumping a predator(bears) and thats why I chose 180's. Actually I dont reload and 180's are all I could find in the TSX's.

quote:

Out of genuine curiousity why do some of you state that for open country the 168 is a better bullet to select over the 180?

Theoretically, you should be able to push a 168 a bit faster allowing slightly flatter trajectory. I haven't looked at the ballistic tables but I suspect it is maybe a 1/2" difference at 3 or 400 yards so it isn't anything extremely material. In reality I don't think it makes much difference.

I'll give you a little description of how lethal the TSX is. A buddy of mine was brown bear hutning last fall on the Alaska Peninsula. They had made an agreement that they would both shoot simultaneously on each others bears so no narly tracking would be involved, the area was just crawling with browns since there was so many fish coming in the mouths of the creeks. They were shooting a 416 Rem and a 338 Ultra, they hit a 9 foot boar, one shot through one shoulder and took out vitals (quartering) the other other took out the hips and both shots were almost instantaneous. The bear literally bang flopped on the beach, didn't go 3 feet. The destruction on both ends of him was dramatic to say the least. He's sold big time of the TSX's. This is a little different than hunting deer but the ultimate test IMO.

My thoughts on 168's was you can push them a little faster (though I see no need to put too much speed on bullets), but I hunt deer with my 300WSM and 180's aren't necessary and I have had adverse effects with bullets (Interbonds) penciling through if not placed on the shoulders.

Are the Interbonds a bit too tough for deer-sized game? Or was velocity too low to generate the expansion? (too low to begin with or too far at impact?)

Too tough. I think that if they do not encounter the muscle and bones that the do not expand as well as if they hit shoulder. The exit hole on my mule deer doe I shot in 2004 was not much larger than the entrance. I forget what my load was but I want to say around 63 grains of IMR4350. That is why I tried SST's (what can I say I'm a Hornady fan) and then Accubonds.

Things may have been different with a lighter bullet.

I am considering TSX because they claim expansion with weight retention and accuracy.

TSX's for me aren't worth it even if they were free...

For some reason, maybe it's due to my own fault reloading, but I just can't get them to shoot as well as accubonds or ballistic tips. I even have some rifles shooting under 1/2 MOA with accubonds that will give me 2 MOA with TSX's.

They probably are worth the extra 20 bucks over ballistic tips just to try out, and if they happen to shoot well for you, then great.

They have expanded fine for me through the lungs or shoulder on deer.

Choosing between a 168 and 180 TSX is tough. Depends on the accuracy at 100 and 200 yds. For me the 180 is just a little tighter. In a couple weeks I am going to try a comparison at 200.

I shot 2 mangement bucks at the ranch this weekend weighing 125lbs and 140lbs. I used a 7x57 with 140gr tsx's at 2800fps. One buck taken at 221yds the other 260yds both quartering towards me, bang flops. I recovered both bullets in their hind quarters and they were perfect mushrooms/X's. One weighed 139.0grs the other 135.3 (one pedal was half gone) after I cleaned all the gore out of them. I dont think you could have acheived better performance with anything else. I'll attach pictures this evening.

Perry

quote:

Originally posted by MThuntr:
My thoughts on 168's was you can push them a little faster (though I see no need to put too much speed on bullets), but I hunt deer with my 300WSM and 180's aren't necessary and I have had adverse effects with bullets (Interbonds) penciling through if not placed on the shoulders.

I posted some interesting results last week about the speed thing on these. My 180's were 200 fps slower than the 168's and hit the same elevation on the targets at 100 yds. The ogive is different on them and the number of rings cut on them is also different. Both shot good groups but the targets were really strange. I also shot fouling rounds before I started so the conditions were the same for each. A different rifle may have yielded different results. Definitely interesting and confusing.

You know Dwight I noticed something similar with my 300 wsm. The 165 grain fusion I have been using for fouling shots which is lighter and has a faster MV has a siginifcantly lower POI on the target than the TSX 180's. The accubonds in 180 were identical as far as poi goes just shot larger groups than the TSX's did.

I don't feel so dazed and confused now that someone else has seen the same thing. I feel that once I check the 200 yd groups that I will find the 180 the best choice. We will soon find out.

If you're going to launch bullets 3000 fps and up, then yes to me it's certainly worth the extra money for a TSX, a-frame or Northfork. If you're launching @ 2800 and below, std cup cores do the job fine on non-dangerous game.

I think one problem folks have with the TSX is they don't drop down over their conventional bullet weight to increase velocity. They like to be pushed fast, and are devastating when pushed fast.

I would settle the question as to witch TSX to shoot in your 300 WSM, simply by seeing witch one shoots more accuratly from your rifle.
As for the big ule deer. I think most any bullet will do, elk, thats another matter alltogether, the TSX or a partition , and hit them well...tj3006

quote:

Originally posted by MThuntr:

Are Barnes TSX worth the extra 10 dollars per box?

Yes

Excellent accuracy, minimal meat damage.

Aim for the shoulders under 200 yards and the boilerworks over 200 yards.

Definitely the 180 gr, try 69 gr RL22.

Of course, I am a member of the Heavy Bullet Mafia

Your question utilized the word, "worth." That is up to you. IMO, absolutely. They are worth every penny of $10 more than ABs if that is the case. You still get a dead animal regardless.

If I haven't bothered to state it already, I'll say it now, it is my favorite hunting bullet. I have yet to load for a rifle that didn't take these all copper slugs and print more than satisfactory groups.

I still have partitions, ABs, SSTs, Btips, and a few others on my bench and will still use them but if I could only have one bullet type, it would be the TSX.

I also vote for the 168 in 30 cal. It is only 12 grains less than the 180, makes a better fit and finish load in the short mag, and trajectory is slightly flatter. This is the bullet I push from my .06, my brother's 300 SAUM and my friend's 300 SAUM.

I vote this wt. also because I can personally attest to what it will do to deer at close and long range.

FORMER member of the Heavy Bullet Mafia!!

(I can promise you that if a 110 TSX from a 270 will dump a buck deer at over 300+ yards, a 168 will pulvarize any deer tissue from a 300 short mag).

Yes, they are worth the extra money IMO.

I would choose the 168gr if it shoots, which shouldn't be a problem. Every TSX I have loaded shoots great.

I have used 22 caliber 53gr TSX's on a bunch of deer and have been extremely satisfied. (3800fps)

I have use 338 caliber 210gr TSX's on elk and have been impressed. (2850fps)

I shot an antelope with a 277 caliber 110gr TSX and it worked. (3260fps) I plan on shooting all my deer this season with that same combo.

Go for it, I can almost promise you that you will like them.

The TSX bullets are undoubtedly tough and have shot well for me in .25, .30, and .375 calibers. They have recently revised their BC's down on them quite a bit, so check their website and update your info before you become to excited about their long range ballistics.

Cheers,

Dan

why do you all want the bullet to exit the animal and with 100% weight retention? i quite like it when a bullet fragments a bit and makes a mess of all the organs rather than punch a neat half inch hole through one or two organs.

Honestly I don't really give a crap what the bullet looks like, how much wt it retains, etc. etc. Exits, ie, 2 holes, explodes within, no exit, I really don't care.

JUST SO LONG AS IT IS KA-BOOOM, FUH-LOP.

All my hunting rifles this year are loaded with TSX bullets. I tested them last year and 5 large bodied deer were shot with a 300 wby 180gr tsx ~3200fps between myself, friends and familiy. Shots were from 50y to 280y. All 5 shots exited, shots ranged from perfect broadside to breaking both shoulders to pulverizing 8 inches of spine. It's a tough bullet that just keeps on going. It's nice to know that no matter what angle shot you have the bullet will do it's job. Definatly worth the money IMO.
Aim, shoot and eat steaks.

quote:

Originally posted by AlaskaCub:
Out of genuine curiousity why do some of you state that for open country the 168 is a better bullet to select over the 180? From what I can tell theres just a smigent of difference in drop. I know my situation is a little different than some of you guys for the simple fact that bear encounters are all too common in our high country so a guy has to find a happy medium between what is best for the game at hand and still having adequate capability for dumping a predator(bears) and thats why I chose 180's. Actually I dont reload and 180's are all I could find in the TSX's.

I just chose the 168 gr TSX because I use them for Coues deer. I don't need any more for a 110 lb. animal. It's overkill now I guess.

I would bump up to the 180 gr for Elk though.

Considering that you can get Partition 2nds for around 14.00 per 50 through nosler. Yes,the tsx is over priced. So are the northforks and swifts. None of them perform better on game then the partition. At 14 bucks a box,you can justify actually shooting large quantities of partitions at various ranges to determine performance,rather then hope for good results from the other without actually burning rounds up..

The premium bullet market has breathed some serious money into the shooting industries.And the majority of it,is nothing but bullshit claims designed to make people pay more for bullets. The MRX is a prime example of this.

Just my observations on the TSX. I recovered two bullets in 300 grain, 375 from Cape Buff and they looked like advertisements and performed perfectly. Last weekend, I was on a guided elk hunt in Colorado. A hunter who was about three hundred yards from me, hit a five-point with a 225 grain TSX in .338. Hit in one lung, the elk ran, although he clearly was going to die soon. He stopped about seven hundred yards from the shooter and a measured five hundred and ten yards from me. My outfitter asked that I shoot him, so he didn't get with the rest of the herd and maybe get lost from us recovering him. I shot him with a 150 grain TSX in a 7mm Rem Mag, muzzle velocity, 3050. I don't know how fast the bullet was going when it hit him, but it couldn't have been going too fast and still the recovered bullet showed perfect expansion for about a quarter of its length. A final observation with that elk. Twenty minutes later when several of the guys got to the downed elk, he was still alive and from about five yards was shot with a 115 grain TSX in 257 Weatherby. That recovered bullet had all of the petals torn off and I would guess expansion about one quarter to one third down the shank.

quote:

why do you all want the bullet to exit the animal and with 100% weight retention? i quite like it when a bullet fragments a bit and makes a mess of all the organs rather than punch a neat half inch hole through one or two organs

I process all of my own meat. I have come dislike the bullets that blow up and make a mess of the meat. Let me punch a nice neat hole through the critter.

That is one of the main reasons that I have shot a bunch of deer the last couple of years with the 22-250. Also to prove a bunch of internet armchair experts that say a 22-250 isn't big enough for deer. Stay away from any heavy bone and you a nice clean hole and a dead deer.

I also process my own mean, welll all i do is dress it out, and mince parts up that arent worth putting into steaks.

im not into eating the organs so im not too worried if there are bullet fragments through out it, nor am i worred if i completly ruin a front leg, atleast then the dogs get a feed!

but if your into the eating of organs or whatever, you could just shoot it in the neck...

If you're a cheap bastard, then get interlocks. They're accurate and cheap. Hell just buy factory ammo if you're pinchin pennies.

If you reload then yes, TSX. They are very accurate, hold up well-very tough. Trophy bonded bear claws would be my next bullet choice. They're all I use in all my rifles from 270-416.

Partitions are overrated, I don't like em, never been able to get them, swifts or speers to shoot worth a shit.

If bullet weight to animal size is unimportant: If you reload and can get the 180s to the same velocity as 168s use the 180s.

Remember gravity does not effect the bullet weight (galileo and the bowling ball tennis ball analogy). The drop due to gravity in and of itself will be equal. However when taking air resistence etc the momentum of the 180 has an edge over the 168 again assuming the same initial velocity.

Thanks for the tips guys. I picked up the last box of 168 TSX at Scheels and I also got a box of 165gr Interbonds just for shits-and-giggles.

I'm going to use which ever shoots better with XMR-4350.

Seat the TSX at .05" off the lands. That works out to about the best average of seating depth for accuracy. Sometimes it gets a little better down to .035" but some here have mentioned an improvement when they got out as far as .065".

Woods, I really like that quote from Roosevelt that you are capping your posts with. That needs to be printed wherever we can get it!

Thanks--Don