Barnes bullets have done something quite impressive in the Tipped TSX line.

A Tipped TSX 350 grain bullet in .416 is now available.
Bullet length is 1.603"
BC is an impressive .444

What does this mean?
If you handload a 416 Rigby with this bullet to 2800 fps, the Rigby will shoot as flat as a 338 WM with 225 grain bullets.
_____________muzzleV______100 yard_____300 yard_____400 yard
350 TTSX ______2800fps _____ +2.0" ______ -7.2" _________ -21.7"

If a 3.0" max arc height is desired one gets the following.
_____________muzzleV______100 yard_____300 yard_____400 yard
350 TTSX ______2800fps _____ +2.7" ______ -5.1" _________ -18.9"

This raises the 416 to a new level and makes it a true plains-game rifle with the wallup and diameter that will ease the mind of a PH when hunting buffalo.

You may ask about downrange energy levels:
The above load is 6092 ft lbs. at muzzle, which is a Rigby handload, not for Remington or Ruger.
At 100 yards the bullet hits with 5093 ft lbs.
At 200 yards the bullet hits with 4558 ft lbs.
At 300 yards the bullet hits with 3914 ft lbs.
At 400 yards the bullet hits with 3343 ft lbs.
Those are impressive energy levels and the monometal composition means that the bullet will stay together to deliver those energies.

So we can forgive Barnes when they come to their senses on the flat-nose solid issue, and thank them for this innovation in the big bores.
(OK--little big bores.)

They have also put out a 250 grain TTSX in 375. That bullet is a little light for buffalo in .375, equivalent to the 300 grain .416 in SD. So I would call the .375 250 gr.TTSX a plains-game-only bullet. Broadside it would work, but I would want more bullet.

Would you use the 350 TTSX in the THICK BUSH for buffalo?

The 250 .375 TTSX has a BC of .424. My 375 AI starts it at 3150 fps (5500 ft#). Is that enough for buffalo?

AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Would you use the 350 TTSX in the THICK BUSH for buffalo?

The 350 .375 TTSX has a BC of .424. My 375 AI starts it at 3150 fps (5500 ft#). Is that enough for buffalo?

AIU

Two separate questions.

1. In thick bush, the ideal bullet would be a FLATNOSE solid. Cutting Edge, Northfork, and some others still make them. Scopes set to the lowest power. And thickbush, with flatnose solids, is why they invented larger calibres. 500 B&M, 500 MDM, 500 Acc Rel, 500 ASquare, 500 Mbogo, 500 Jeffrey, 505 Gibbs, all come to mind. A couple of years ago while sighting in on a hunt, my first shot with the 416 had a perfect, sideways, 'keyhole', with a 350 grain TSX. It had obviously found a branch or stick on the way to the target that I hadn't seen. That was a sobering reminder to be careful out in the forest.

2. On the 375, that sounds like a nice load. Your numbers may have a typo, though. You seem to have conflated two bullets, the .375" 350 grain TSX (no blue tip, BC .425) and the .375 250 grain TTSX (blue-tiped boattail, BC=??).

Your ftlb. number suggests that this is the 250 grain bullet. (Unless your 375 is capable of generating 7700 ftlb. ) Most 375s are loaded to 4500-4700 ftlb. And .424 is a reasonable BC for a boattail blue-tip, if that in fact is the case. Yes, I would hunt mr. Mbogo with that load and cartridge. But I've opted for the .416 350 TTSX at 2800. And if choosing between a .416 in 300 grain or 350 grain, I would go with the 350 (for comparison with SD: this would be like a .375 in 285 grains)

Barnes is posting the BC for the 250 TTSX as .424 now. Yes, I'm pushing it to 3150 fps and I could do more, if I wanted with the 375 AI, but that's enough.

I'll be hunting Tanzania (Luke Samaras) with a 416 RUM (aka. 416 UltraCat), which I anticipate will push the 350 TTSX to 2900 fps. But, I'm told that the 400 gr. TSX or Nosler Partitiion or TBBC would be better in the thick bush. Saeed disagrees saying that a 300 gr. .375 pushed to 2800 fps is enough and that all bullets regardless of caliber or wt. can deflect. Your thought? AIU

Is the 350-TTSX for the 416 a flat base like the 350-TSX, or is it a boat tail?

Yes they are boat tails. I just loaded some up in my rigby. They are very long for there weight so I'm shooting for 2500-2600 fps for now. If they are accurate, this will be one he'll of a bullet.

One side note:
the tips get crushed in a regular seating die because they are generally made for rn bullets, but I spent a little time drilling out the bullet seating plug and now they seat perfectly

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Barnes is posting the BC for the 250 TTSX as .424 now. Yes, I'm pushing it to 3150 fps and I could do more, if I wanted with the 375 AI, but that's enough.

I'll be hunting Tanzania (Luke Samaras) with a 416 RUM (aka. 416 UltraCat), which I anticipate will push the 350 TTSX to 2900 fps. But, I'm told that the 400 gr. TSX or Nosler Partitiion or TBBC would be better in the thick bush. Saeed disagrees saying that a 300 gr. .375 pushed to 2800 fps is enough and that all bullets regardless of caliber or wt. can deflect. Your thought? AIU

Thanks. I checked and you are right, Barnes already lists .424 for the BC, while .425 is their .375 350 TSX.

2900 with the 350 grain .416? It's probably doable but that would be pushing things, especially in a "416 RUM". I would assume that the RUM is less H2O than a Rigby, maybe 120 grain H2O?. Our Rigby at 2800 already clocks 2825 as the barrel warms up and we like to leave some room for a hot noon sun. So far all cartridges in three 416 Rigbys just slide out happy and smooth, primers normal. 2900 is listed on an occasional 416 Weatherby load, and they do like to push things.

On deflection I agree with Sa`iid, anything can deflect. But flat is better than pointed. An accurate rifle with a scope might help, but my sight-in story above shows that even that isn't foolproof. And if 300 grain .375 at 2800 is enough (it is) then 350 grain .416 at 2800 is better, assuming equal bullet construction. My biggest concern is that my CZ 416s are 16.5" twist, which means that 400 grain monometal FN solids are only marginally stable. So I stick with 350 grain. If it gets thick, you be careful, and get to know your trajectory, on the way up and down.

quote:

Originally posted by gohip2000:
Yes they are boat tails. I just loaded some up in my rigby. They are very long for there weight so I'm shooting for 2500-2600 fps for now. If they are accurate, this will be one he'll of a bullet.

One side note:
the tips get crushed in a regular seating die because they are generally made for rn bullets, but I spent a little time drilling out the bullet seating plug and now they seat perfectly

Let us know how they do. My rifles and bluetips are half a world apart.

Boys-- Trust NOTHING in the brush! Even the big bores! Nothing in brush is immune to veering off course--even a big flat nose solid!

If there is brush in the way---Wait until the animal clears it- End of story.

Anything else, will and can cause an issue.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Boys-- Trust NOTHING in the brush! Even the big bores! Nothing in brush is immune to veering off course--even a big flat nose solid!

If there is brush in the way---Wait until the animal clears it- End of story.

Anything else, will and can cause an issue.

Michael

Amen.

And even so, grass may not be seen.

And even clear shots over/under/around a branch need a safe margin.

Tanzan, how do you know the BC for the 350 TTSX .416 is .444? I couldn't find it posted. Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Tanzan, how do you know the BC for the 350 TTSX .416 is .444? I couldn't find it posted. Regards, AIU

personal communication

Tanzan, do you think there would be significant advantage of the 400 gr. TSX over the 350 gr TTSX in killing buffalo? - that is, given that both hit in the same place (say, the high heart-lung shot). AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Tanzan, do you think there would be significant advantage of the 400 gr. TSX over the 350 gr TTSX in killing buffalo? - that is, given that both hit in the same place (say, the high heart-lung shot). AIU

It's a perennial question with these new mono-metal bullets: to add weight or not? that is the question.

My son shot a buffalo last October at 200 yards with the 350 TSX and there was a full pass through and exit. So I would say that 350 (T)TSX has enough weight. The PH friend who was along had thought that 350 grains was light for the 416, but then again, his feelings are mainly based on experience with lead bullets. He would normally not recommend a 200 yard shot on buffalo, but was happy with the way my son handled his shooting. He was impressed that the 'little' 350 grainer had exited even on a 200 yard shot.

Before making a decision on 350 vs. 400 you must consider your barrel twist. Barrel twist will affect the stability of a follow-up shot with a SOLID. (Mushrooming bullets are usually stable in tissue, solids are finicky.) If your barrel is 12" twist, then you can confidently consider a 400 grain FLAT-nose solid with 65% meplat. (That is, the 2010 version Barnes solid would be excellent.) If your barrel is 14", and especially if 16" twist, then you might want to consider a shorter Flat-nose solid. Northfork does a 370 I think, and Barnes has a 350 Flat Nose (2010 version--avoid the new 'round-nose'. If necessary, order the Flat nose direct from Barnes.) Naturally, the TSX should be matched in weight to the solid. So if the solid will be 350 grain, then the TSX should be 350 grain.

Back to the question. If you have a 12" twist you can use a 400 solid and I would choose 400 grain TSX's when stalking the buffalo. You never know how much buffalo your bullet will need to pass through.

But you must also have first learned where the 400 grains shoot in relation to the 350 grain. You could walk the woods with 400 grainers in the rifle, maybe loaded to 2550-2600 fps. Then if a long eland or hartebeest presents itself you could slip in a 350 grainer, making mental adjustment for the different sight-in and trajectory. Or on some days, the opposite: sight in with the 350s, and carry some 400's if you unexpectedly divert to a buffalo hunt. Again, you must know whatever changes will occur in trajectory and windage of the 400 grainers. (If one shoots 1" right and 2" up or down, then you need to know that. With a good quality scope that 'tracks' you can make the adjustment. But slowly, make sure that you do this correctly and don't move the scope 'backwards'. If you do this wrong, you could wound a buffalo.) Excuse the dwelling on detail, but when after buffalo, everything needs to be worked out ahead of time so that one can act quickly and decisively when the time comes. Confidence in the equipment needs to be 100%.

When I shoot homogenous bullets like Barnes, I almost always drop down in bullet weight. In my 30-06, 165 grain TSXs. In my 9.3X62, 250 grain TSXs. In my.416 Rigby, 350 grain TSXs. In my .450 Dakota, 450 grains TSXs. I think you will find that in almost every case, the lighter TSX will out penetrate a heavier conventional lead core bullet even a Nosler or a Swift.

Like Tanzan said in the about post, his son shot through a buffalo at 200 yards with a 350 grain TSX. IMHO, Barnes bullets are simply the best over the counter bullet you can buy. There is simply no need to shoot a bullet of conventional weight. The lighter TSX will shoot flatter, provide less recoil, and provide more than adequate penetration.

Tanzan, while shooting in the thick bush, do you think the 350 TTSX will deflect more easily and further than the 400 TSX? AIU

I shot the 350 gr tsx flat base out to 400 yards and held .5 moa from the bench. I used it out to 350-375 yards on blue and black wildebeast with great results. 225 on zebra. 125 on eland the first shot a pass through and second sent thought the shoulder was founds under the skin, The ttsx will only work better.
It also shot flatter than the 270 .375 tsx.

JD

I took an old dugga boy in Tanzania in 2006 with the 350 gr Barnes X from a Rigby at 2700 fps.

The only bullet recovered was from a finishing shot taken on the ground from behind. I honestly could not see that well ... bullet entered the right thigh, smashed the femur (which is huge bone on a Cape Buffalo), went up through the gut and engine room. It lodged underneath the skin on the front of the chest.

Total penetration length was well over 6 feet! I would not hesitate to use the 350 gr X, TSX or TTSX again!

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Tanzan, while shooting in the thick bush, do you think the 350 TTSX will deflect more easily and further than the 400 TSX? AIU

Well, from between the lines above, your first shot needs to be taken when clear, so that neither bullet will deflect. And your follow-up shot needs to be a FLAT-nosed solid. The follow up shot may need to pass through brush.

I remember a story from James Mellon hunting a duiker in thick brush [note: small, non-dangerous game]. He carried a .458 with solids because of the possibility of needing to shoot through brush or perhaps transversing a stock of bamboo.

In my 416 Rigby I plan to use the 450gn Woodleigh RNSN (and solids) at 2350fps for buffalo, and the 300gn TSX for plains game. Using the 300gn TSX I can get 0.8 MOA and 2920fps with a reasonably mild load (2 grains below max in my rifle), and it shoots flatter than my 338 Win Mag with 225gn (and above) bullets. I think 2800fps with the 350gn bullets would be a fairly hot load, and a velocity of around 2650fps would be a better working load particularly in hot climates. Plus the 300gn Barnes would be more than enough for any plains game.

quote:

Originally posted by 338User:
In my 416 Rigby I plan to use the 450gn Woodleigh RNSN (and solids) at 2350fps for buffalo, and the 300gn TSX for plains game. Using the 300gn TSX I can get 0.8 MOA and 2920fps with a reasonably mild load (2 grains below max in my rifle), and it shoots flatter than my 338 Win Mag with 225gn (and above) bullets. I think 2800fps with the 350gn bullets would be a fairly hot load, and a velocity of around 2650fps would be a better working load particularly in hot climates. Plus the 300gn Barnes would be more than enough for any plains game.

You might want to check your trajectory tables out at 300 and 400 yards. When shot at similar pressure/energy levels and sight-in, the 350 TTSX has the same drop at 400 yards as the 300 TSX, but more remaining velocity and quite a bit more energy due to the sleek BC.

300 TSX/2920fps is 5679 ftlbs and -23.4" at 400 yards when sighted in +2.0"/100 yard,
but bullet only travelling 1856fps with 2293 ft lbs;

350 TTSX/2703fps is 5678 ftlbs and -24.2" at 400 yards when sighted in +2.0"/100 yard.
and bullet still travelling 1993fps with 3085 ftlbs.)

However, you may need to consider bullet length: the 350 TTSX is 1.6" while the 300 TSX is about 1.3"

[I happen to like 6100 ft lbs. in the big CZs: too hot would be 2900 'Weatherby loads', but the 2700 fps loads are excellent, too. Find what your rifle likes and learn to like it, too.]

PS: the Woodleighs are nice and when I get a nostolgic mood I think about loading up some 450's for the next year, up to 2450 fps/6000 ftlbs. Some people love them, others say they expand too easily. When it comes to guaranteed penetration I keep coming back to the TSX's. Both should be great, the important thing is to have something to shoot at.

Thanks for posting that comparison. Those numbers are interesting. I did my comparisons with the older 350gn TSX and the 300gn load was flatter shooting out to 500yds and held more energy from about 60 or 70m (using 2907fps and 2708 fps respectively MV), so that plastic tip and boattail design must make a big difference. It may be worth switching, but I am probably more interested in the trajectory out to 300m, I rarely take shots longer than that, so that will narrow the difference a bit. Where did you get the BC, it is not on the Barnes website? Also, in my rifle (23 inch barrel) I doubt if I will be able to get the 450gn bullet past 2400fps (I use AR2209, and so far I have worked up to 94gn for 2350fps, but I think the next grain up wil be maximum (I still have to try that). What Powder do you use.

Tanzan, do you know when Barnes is going to post the .444 BC? AIU

For 338 User:

The difference in the BC between the 350 TTSX (.444) and the 300 TSX (.298) is quite significant. Until they put a blue tip on the 300 grainer, I would think that most people will opt for the 350. That is what I did. Last year I was going to get some 300's and load them up for long range impala or hartebeest. I even put in a request for a 'new product', thinking that Barnes should add a .416 blue tip and that the 300 grain bullet would be the logical choice. In some ways the 300 would have been the natural choice for an elk bullet, but I'm grateful that they chose the 350, since that extra weight is useful where I hunt (TZ).

On hunting trajectories, you are correct, it is quite rare that a person wants to shoot over 300 yards, at least in Africa. But the closer in a person gets, the less difference velocity makes. At 250-400 yards there is less than 0.8 inch height difference. But the windage is highly significant: check out the .444 BC vs .298 BC. Even at 250-300 there is more possibility of error with the 300 TSX, almost 3 EXTRA inches at 300 yards. That is why long distance target shooters are so concerned about BC. A couple hundred feet velocity at muzzle is nothing compared to .100 or .200 BC.

__________mzl________100_____200____250_____300_____400_______500 yards
350TTSX __ 2704fps ____ +2.0 ___ +0.1 __ -3.3 ____ -8.3 ____ -24.2 _____ -48.8"
velocities_____________2515 ___ 2333 ___2246 ___ 2159 ___ 1993 ____ 1835 fps
energies___5681 ftlb____4914 ___ 4231 __3918 ___ 3623 ___ 3087 _____ 2616 ftlbs
windage (10mph)_______ 0.8 _____ 3.4 ___ 5.3 ____ 7.8" ____ 14.5 _____ 23.5"

300TSX __ 2920fps ____ +2.0 ____ +0.4 __ -2.7 ____ -7.5 ____ -23.4 _____ -49.4"
velocities_____________2628 ___ 2354 ___2223 ___ 2096 ___ 1856 ____ 1635
energies___5679 ftlb___4600 ___ 3689 ___3290 ___ 2926 ___ 2293 ____ 1781
windage (10mph)_______ 1.0 ____ 4.4 ___ 7.0 ____ 10.4" ____ 19.6 _____ 32.6"

On powders: I use the new Reloder 17.
102.5 grains with Hornady cases and Fed 215 Match hit just about on 2800fps with the 350 TSX. I have not tried the TTSX yet, though I imagine that it might want a grain of powder LESS (maybe 101.5 in my rifles). Naturally one works up from below.
As for the Woodleigh 450, I haven't used or loaded them. My calculation of 2450 fps was only based on what the catridge would be predicted to handle if the rifles already handled 6100 ft lbs with the 350's. 2400fps is probably plenty since Woodleighs are not designed for higher velocities. Every year I load up, I end up opting for all-copper.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Tanzan, do you know when Barnes is going to post the .444 BC? AIU

Haven't a clue. I wrote them and they were kind enough to provide the .444 BC and 1.603" length data on the 350TTSX in an email. They have been a little slow on some of the web postings.

I shot some of these out of my CZ rigby. I didn't have a good rest, so I can't say weather they are accurate, but I did place a few holes on top of one another.
A few things to note:

1) With the shape of the ogive you can seat these bullets out to the second groove, giving you that room back in the case

2)I'm not sure about in other rifles, but in a CZ, with the top round in the mag, the bullet nose comes in contact with the feed ramp even when the bolt is closed over the top of it.
(This causes the tip of the top cartidge to break off under recoil. That tip falls into the magazine or action and jams it up.)

So I would say it's a great bullet as long as you aren't hunting dangerous game, are willing to hunt as it were a single shot, or have a rifle that doesn't break the tip off under recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by gohip2000:
I shot some of these out of my CZ rigby. I didn't have a good rest, so I can't say weather they are accurate, but I did place a few holes on top of one another.
A few things to note:

1) With the shape of the ogive you can seat these bullets out to the second groove, giving you that room back in the case

2)I'm not sure about in other rifles, but in a CZ, with the top round in the mag, the bullet nose comes in contact with the feed ramp even when the bolt is closed over the top of it.
(This causes the tip of the top cartidge to break off under recoil. That tip falls into the magazine or action and jams it up.)

So I would say it's a great bullet as long as you aren't hunting dangerous game, are willing to hunt as it were a single shot, or have a rifle that doesn't break the tip off under recoil.

This is helpful.
Would it be solved if only the first round were a TTSX, thus no recoil on it?
Would it be solved if seated deeper?

416 Tanzan, thanks for posting that info. I have only tried Relaoder 17 in my 338 Win Mag, using the 160gn Barnes TTSX, and with Norma cases, FED215 primers and 81gn Re17 I get 3390fps, 0.9 MOA and a very flat shooting and devastating load. I will have to try Relaoder 17 in the 416 Rigby. I hope Barnes bring out a plastic tipped boattail 300 grainer, that would be awsome, but in the mean time I am going to try some of those 350gn Barnes TTSX.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by gohip2000:
I shot some of these out of my CZ rigby. I didn't have a good rest, so I can't say weather they are accurate, but I did place a few holes on top of one another.
A few things to note:

1) With the shape of the ogive you can seat these bullets out to the second groove, giving you that room back in the case

2)I'm not sure about in other rifles, but in a CZ, with the top round in the mag, the bullet nose comes in contact with the feed ramp even when the bolt is closed over the top of it.
(This causes the tip of the top cartidge to break off under recoil. That tip falls into the magazine or action and jams it up.)

So I would say it's a great bullet as long as you aren't hunting dangerous game, are willing to hunt as it were a single shot, or have a rifle that doesn't break the tip off under recoil.

This is helpful.
Would it be solved if only the first round were a TTSX, thus no recoil on it?
Would it be solved if seated deeper?

Yes, If you only loaded the first round with a ttsx, that one would be safe followed by something else. Seating depth doesn't make a difference on the tip breaking off.

This is just in a CZ, I don't know if other types of rifles would have this same issue.

quote:

Originally posted by 338User:
416 Tanzan, thanks for posting that info. I have only tried Relaoder 17 in my 338 Win Mag, using the 160gn Barnes TTSX, and with Norma cases, FED215 primers and 81gn Re17 I get 3390fps, 0.9 MOA and a very flat shooting and devastating load. I will have to try Relaoder 17 in the 416 Rigby. I hope Barnes bring out a plastic tipped boattail 300 grainer, that would be awsome, but in the mean time I am going to try some of those 350gn Barnes TTSX.

Sounds good on the 160 for light-bodied deer. I loaded up some 160 TTSX last fall and had settled on 79 gr. R-17. The chamber is .002" overspec wide in the body base on that rifle so it only shoots 3250 fps. I might try 81 grain myself later this year. I would expect accuracy to be fine, but the aluminum scope ring on my Tikka ripped loose so that accuracy that session was compromised. I've got some steel Warne rings waiting for the gun for the next session. For Africa we chose 185 TTSX as our minimum weight, though we've only used 225 TTSX's in 338. Those just do everything and have a .514 BC.

Thinking about it, that .338 225 TTSX at 2800fps with a 514 BC is just about a perfect "light" rifle. The new .375 250 grain TTSX only has a .424 BC. That makes it an awfully close call. The 375 can be loaded to 2900fps. A little more punch, maybe a little less penetration or resistence in the wind.

quote:

Thinking about it, that .338 225 TTSX at 2800fps with a 514 BC is just about a perfect "light" rifle.

I agree. I do most of my shooting with 225gn bullets in the 338 Win Mag. I only use the 160's for smaller game, eg goats, pigs, chital deer, fallow deer etc. That load for the 160gn Barnes is a maximum in my rifle. I got good accuracy from 79gn to 81.5gn, but at 81.5gn I got just over 0.0003" head expansion, and I like to keep head expansion below 0.0002" so I settled on 81.0gn as a max. Some people drive their loads harder than that. Just for info, at 79.0gn I got 3270fps.

quote:

Originally posted by gohip2000:

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by gohip2000:
I shot some of these out of my CZ rigby. I didn't have a good rest, so I can't say weather they are accurate, but I did place a few holes on top of one another.
A few things to note:

1) With the shape of the ogive you can seat these bullets out to the second groove, giving you that room back in the case

2)I'm not sure about in other rifles, but in a CZ, with the top round in the mag, the bullet nose comes in contact with the feed ramp even when the bolt is closed over the top of it.
(This causes the tip of the top cartidge to break off under recoil. That tip falls into the magazine or action and jams it up.)

So I would say it's a great bullet as long as you aren't hunting dangerous game, are willing to hunt as it were a single shot, or have a rifle that doesn't break the tip off under recoil.

This is helpful.
Would it be solved if only the first round were a TTSX, thus no recoil on it?
Would it be solved if seated deeper?

Yes, If you only loaded the first round with a ttsx, that one would be safe followed by something else. Seating depth doesn't make a difference on the tip breaking off.

This is just in a CZ, I don't know if other types of rifles would have this same issue.

Sounds good. Again, thank you. Both of my current 416s are CZ. I am happy to hunt with two solids down and one TTSX on top.

I am curious about your 'second band width' seating.
Is that still off the lands?
If so, about how much?
All copper bullets are noted for requiring a little more velocity when engaging the lands for best accuracy, typically about a 0.050" jump.

Let us know when you have some more data. We don't have the luxury of extensive testing in Africa. We have to load up rounds based on previous testing with the rifle and bring/import everything 'as expected'. We can adjust and reload the same bullet and powder, but it is much easier if we get it right the first time.

Also--is there any difference in powder necessary to achieve the same velocity between the TSX and the TTSX 350 grainers? (Though probably too small to get an accurate measure with temperature fluctuations between testing sessions. We can live with a 25 fps difference, but we'd prefer getting it about the same when talking 2800fps.)

I've been shooting the 250 TTSX in my 375 AI with hot loads. Some of the tips get damaged while in the magazine from recoil. This could be a problem, if those tips break off. AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
I've been shooting the 250 TTSX in my 375 AI with hot loads. Some of the tips get damaged while in the magazine from recoil. This could be a problem, if those tips break off. AIU

This is vital information. You mention "if the tips break off".
Did they in fact break off?
What kind of damage are you talking about?
Better for us to know now than when walking the bush.

Any pictures?

He mentioned if the tips break off because in my 416 rigby the tips in fact do break off. I think as long as the top round in the mag doesn,t leave the tip exposed to the feed ramp when the bolt is closed, the tips should not break off, even thoug they may get squished a bit under the recoil

either way, this is a bullet you want to test the function before you even think about any potentially dangerous game

416Tanzan and gohip, I noticed one tip was clearly loose after exposure to just one recoil, others were dented or mildly bent. The loose tip I pushed back in place and fired without incident. Big bore magnum recoil is something to take seriously.

I suggest that all who plan to use these bullets hunting dangerous game, first test the TTSX bullets in the magazine and subject them to multiple recoils from hunting loads.

Each can then decide if the tips will hold up under stress.

I plan on further testing, since I haven't made up my mind yet. The 250 .375 TTSX is a sleek bullet with a first-rate BC and it shoots extremely accurately in my gun, even up to 3150 fps. At this velocity my 375 AI becomes a 338 RUM in long-range performance. I'm very reluctant to dump this bullet. If the tips become a problem, I may just shoot them one at a time, loading each into the gun separately.

Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
416Tanzan and gohip, I noticed one tip was clearly loose after exposure to just one recoil, others were dented or mildly bent. The loose tip I pushed back in place and fired without incident. Big bore magnum recoil is something to take seriously.

I suggest that all who plan to use these bullets hunting dangerous game, first test the TTSX bullets in the magazine and subject them to multiple recoils from hunting loads.

Each can then decide if the tips will hold up under stress.

I plan on further testing, since I haven't made up my mind yet. The 250 .375 TTSX is a sleek bullet with a first-rate BC and it shoots extremely accurately in my gun, even up to 3150 fps. At this velocity my 375 AI becomes a 338 RUM in long-range performance. I'm very reluctant to dump this bullet. If the tips become a problem, I may just shoot them one at a time, loading each into the gun separately.

Regards, AIU

My son had a 338 tip knock loose once before ever putting in a gun. We didn't think anything of it at the time, though now I think that it is a consideration for all of these tipped bullets. When it comes to 'dented' or 'mildly bent' bullets, the BC value just dropped considerably. That isn't much different, of course, from what old lead-tip, cup+core bullets have always done. The answer in that case was to always have a 'fresh' bullet on top or for any shot over 250-300 yards. For a long shot it is always comforting to know that the bullet and load is perfect and ready to do its exact job.

For dangerous game I think that one piece of the picture is already in place.
It appears that the following piece of advice needs to go out with this new technology:

FOR DANGEROUS GAME these bullets should only be used ONE AT A TIME
from the TOP of the MAGAZINE, with only solids or TSX's underneath.

That is a significant piece of collective knowledge. I hope that we never hear that it was necessary, too late.

Like many things in hunting, there should not be any problem when everything is accounted for and done in a proper order. Let's see: barrel clearn? Yes. solids in magazine? Yes. Tipped-TSX ON TOP? Yes. Scope clean? Yes.

By the way, have any of you put little balloons on the end of your rifle to keep rain and debris out? I've often heard that one can shoot right through it without a change in impact or stability, but I've never tested it personally. This is probably a question asked by anyone from 243 on up, but there is nothing wrong about asking it for the larger bores either. Dirt and debris can hurt any barrel and is quite dangerous. Any testing with balloons?

Does anyone have any differential data yet on loading a TSX vs. a TTSX in .416" 350 grain?

Is there any any velocity/pressure difference with the same powder charge?

Data from the .375" TTSX would be good, too, but it doesn't have a corresponding 250 grain TSX. Did you notice needing to make any adjustments in estimated powder due to length of bullet?