A few folks swear by these bullets for the single shot specialty pistols. For me, I have never been impressed by the old X or the newer TSX for any of the medium velocity cartridges.

The bullet above was shot into a test medium that is harder on bullets than flesh and bone. It's a repeating setup consisting of 1/4th inch plywood, 2 inches of wet newsprint, 1/4th inch plywood and 2" of water.

As you can see, expansion was minimal. I guess some would consider this good performance as weight retention was 118 grains, but I am not impressed by that at all. This may be the cat's meow for heavier, stouter game, but for deer, a bullet that transfers more energy is my preference. Yes, I prefer a bullet to exit, and projectiles like the Sierra 6.5mm, 140 grain GameKing, when launched at medium velocity, will destroy tissue and generally exit -- and these cost muc less than a TSX.

In my 26" 6.5 Bullberry IMP, I shoot the 140 grain A-Max and the Sierra GK; the MV is 2600 fps. At these pedestrian speeds, on-game performance is fantastic. Here, a premium just isn't necessary...

I completely concur. I've had a few issues with "premium" bullets on deer, and I pretty much decided that using anything with stout construction on whitetails is a waste of time - unless you consistently take shoulder shots and try to break them down. I really like the Nosler ballistic tips on whitetails for the same reason. I'll take more expansion every time for deer. better blood trails, better tissue damage, and they've all exited (so far). They're not animals that require stout bullets, and often those bullets result in long trails, even with excellent shot placement. JMHO

gd

Bobby,

I am sorry to see your poor on deer results. Next season, I may have no choice but to use an all copper bullet. A ban on lead bullets is coming here in California to protect the endangered Condors. And Nosler will probably be slow in getting out their 6.5 E-Bullet, their answer to the lead bullet bands taking place across the globe. The E-Bullet is made of 100 percent jacket material copper, and is said to have solved the early copper fouling problems the X-Bullets had. The E-Bullet is also supposed to be very accurate and to expand to a larger frontal area than the TSX Bullets do at lower velocities.

The GS Custom Bullets didn't stabilize in my barrel at the speeds I was able to drive them. While waiting for the E-Bullets to appear in a 6.5 version, do you know of any other deer effective copper bullets that I might be able to try?

Rusty

No, Rusty, I don't. I guess we just have to keep our fingers crossed that Nosler hurries and gets the e-tip out there in various calibers and weights.

Until then, shoot for the shoulder as the secondary bone fragments will certainly open up a nice wound channel.

"Ban on lead bullets"

Hmmmmm, have you ever heard of the concept of a "drop gun"? Same general idea applies to a drop cartridge, you hunt with it and drop it on the way out? I've heard that some people did such a thing with lead shotgun shells until better stuff than steel came along.

BTW, Bobby, I'm certainly not arguing that TSXs are perfect or even the best for deer hunting, but that one you pictured probably has an effective diameter of at least .50 and is going to punch that hole in one side and out the other. I don't know what deer can survive much of that, assuming a well placed shot.

The Department of Fish and Game in California has DNA testing abilities. In one of the first poaching cases tried after getting DNA testing capabilities, the DFG was able to tell how many different deer and their sexes the poacher had shot from the meat in the culprit's freezer. I am sure the DFG could also tell a lead shot deer from one that wasn't if they felt the need to do so in this state to keep those honest who aren't. Personally, I feel the best course of action is to always do the right thing by your state's game laws.

Hopefully, you are right on the TSX's effectiveness. My problem is, what if the TSX's velocity is considerably below the 2,500 fps that Bobby was running at impact? Will the TSX still expand to game taking dimensions below 2,000 fps? I believe it is highly likely that it won't. Perhaps someone would be so kind as to run some tests at 200, 300 and more yards to see and let us all know what kind of expansion the TSX is capable of out of handguns at those ranges.

Rusty

What does it take to impress you, Bobby Tomek?

Dave-

In the medium velocity cartridges we are discussing, I AM impressed by consistency in both terminal performance and accuracy, and to that end, the TSX does not measure up.

In the photo below, the Sierra 140 grain, 6.5mm GameKing shows excellent expansion and reasonable weight retention for a medium that is harder on the bullet than flesh and bone. In any of my medium-velocity 6.5s, I fully expect massive tissue destruction and -- more often than not -- an exit from this bullet given broadside presentation on deer and hogs, the latter which is a pretty stern test of a bullet as well.

If I'd be shooting something that truly taxed the integrity of a bullet, then the TSX may get the nod. However, it would have to stand in line behind the Partition and Accubond...

RustyHook:

Good for you, and I'm sure you also don't disobey the speed limits, etc.

Personally, I follow one of my favorite movie lines.....from "Hud".....Hud speaking (may not be an exact quote, but it is close) "I interpret the law leniently....sometimes I lean one way and sometimes I lean another." (while making appropriate motions)

Gatogordo-

That TSX, at the listed impact velocity, will certainly kill a deer with relative ease -- there's no argument there. (Been there and done that a time or two)

But at an impact velocity of 2008 fps, this particular lot does not expand at all. (I'll get a picture of it later on and post it, too)

I'm simply saying that for the medium-velocity cartridges, there are much better choices out there.

Bobby, I appreciate your experience and trust your testing and results.

Now IF a handgun hunter needs to use a non-lead based bullet, I'd say a larger diameter bullet stands to have more resistance (greater frontal area) that will result in opening, perhaps a 30-35 cal, lighter bullets at higher speeds to help expansion, smaller cal's need the highest velocity I'd reckon, i.e. 70 grain in 6mm, etc......

Nice performance on those Sierra's. Again, handgun performance is different than rifle, due to speed differential.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
But at an impact velocity of 2008 fps, this particular lot does not expand at all.

Have you reported this gross malfunction of expected bullet performance to Randy or Connie Brooks at Barnes? I'm sure they'd like to test the remainder of that bullet lot in their own facility.

No, I haven't -- and I won't. Here's why:

In the 90s, when I ran into a problem with the .25 caliber, 85 grain X, I contacted Barnes immediately and was told to send in every bullet from that particular lot that I had. I even went to the trouble of pulling quite a few bullets.

During the initial contact, Barnes acknowledged an ongoing problem with managing the hardness of the copper and that they were aware of bad lots out there, but they wanted to test these for themselves to determine if this lot fell under the same "problem" umbrella.

They assured me they'd replace all of the bullets I sent in to them.

Several conversations over the course of a number of months always yielded "we're still working on it." Then I simply dropped the matter for a few more months before calling again. I was then told they couldn't locate my file or the bullets and in fact blamed as much on a former employee.

Not that it's a big deal, but to this day, I never received replacement bullets or a simple "thank you for bringing this to our attention."

Customer service with other companies has been much better. I had a number of cans of the recalled Re-22 a few years ago, and they were promptly replaced. I had several cans of Hornady One-Shot case lube that had a manufacturing defect, and those were immediately replaced. When I bought a box of Hornady bullets that had perhaps a dozen with a misplaced cannelure, I simply sent them in to point out the problem. They had my address on file and sent me a new box, something I never desired or anticipated. When a custom rifle took a fall during a photo shoot (my fault) and the Nikon Monarch scope took the brunt of the impact, I sent it in for inspection, explained what I had done and had it back within days -- at no charge. And after shooting many thousands of and taking a ton of game with Sierra's 7mm, 130 grain SSP, I ran into a hard lot that would not expand from my 7BR. That, too, was quickly addressed, and there was terrific communication throughout.

Granted, that was one single customer service problem with Barnes -- and perhaps an isolated instance at that. I'll certainly give them the benefit of the doubt.

But I won't waste my time (and postage) to send in any more bullets to Barnes. Instead, I'll just say caveat emptor.

6.5 BR-

Your thinking is right on the money. Of course, maybe the new Barnes Tipped TSX will solve the problems as they are supposed to have a more cavernous hollow point along with the polymer wedge to initiate upset.

Time will tell...

Expansion is way over rated anyway. In addition, Barnes bullets probably tumble. That causes at least as much damage as expansion would.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
No, I haven't -- and I won't.
...I won't waste my time (and postage) to send in any more bullets to Barnes. Instead, I'll just say caveat emptor.

With so many instances of bad Barnes bullet performance and bad customer service under your belt, why do you still use them? Using up remaining inventory?

Grumulkin-These were shot in a 1:8. I seriously doubt a 120 grainer would tumble.

onefunzr2 wrote:

quote:

With so many instances of bad Barnes bullet performance and bad customer service under your belt, why do you still use them?

Not trying to be disrespectul here, but why would what I use be any of your concern?

Also, stop playing Mr Dramatic: "so many instances..." ???

Give me a break. I mentioned one instance in the 90s and this current test.

So why is my post getting under your skin? Is your last name Barnes???

Dave-I just saw this thread and though you may find it interesting.

Remember, my thread was about the usefulness of the TSX in medium velocity cartridges and single shot pistols, which operate at lower velocities than comparable rifle rounds.

But I guess you won't want to see this posting, either.

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/913102147

Dave-If you would have bothered to comprehend what was written, I noted the INCONSISTENCIES in the bullets as the primary reason they aren't best for medium velocity cartridges. I have never, ever "condemned" them...

I personally took a good bit of game with a 15" XP in .250 Savage using the 85 grain X. And then the dreaded non-expanding lot surfaced.

Barnes still is not without problems today, as witnessed by the lot of 6.5/120s. On the other hand, I have seen the same bullet taken from a whitetail laced stem to stern, with no major bones impacted, and it was fully expanded to the depth of the cavity. And the impact velocity was only around 2100 fps.

That was textbook performance from the TSX.

But bullet performance should not be a gamble. That's why I elect to go with the most consistent-performing bullet for the gun and the velocity range I am operating at. At this point in time, it 'aint Barnes...

I have no explanation for your sorry results in that wood\paper\water medium.

I looked through that big bore DG thread. I thought this was about thin-skinned game performance?

I've not yet gone on a DG hunt. But I did kill 14 Namibian plains game animals in September '04 using only Barnes X bullets. (Which I had never used before other than paper targets.) Only three required a second, finishing shot. All were complete pass throughs; not a single bullet was recovered even though I changed my point of aim to the shoulder of each animal after the first gemsbok went ~60 yards before piling up, being shot broadside through both lungs. Zebra, warthog, hartebeaste, springbok, steenbok, hyrax and 2 kudu only went one way when hit--straight down.

Dave wrote: "But I did kill 14 Namibian plains game animals in September '04 using only Barnes X bullets...Only three required a second, finishing shot."

And you were impressed???

Anyway, this thread is about velocities achieved in medium velocity rounds and single shot pistols (that IS the forum you are on). Your rifle loads are actually of little significance here.

Again, I never said the TSX won't expand. I simply said they are not the best choice for ME and my choice of hunting cartridges.

Dave: To clarify for you, THIS is what I wrote as an opening statement (I did NOT pose a "question.").

It's what the entire thread is based on:

quote:

A few folks swear by these bullets for the single shot specialty pistols. For me, I have never been impressed by the old X or the newer TSX for any of the medium velocity cartridges.

Use the wet news print first and I bet the results will be different...........

Actually, I have tried that, and the results, for all practical purposes, are the same -- well, except for the fact that it's a little more time-consuming for me to set up that way.

Bobby Tomek,

I'm not trying to bully you into using any form of Barnes bullet. I'd change too if I thought the bullet at fault. Any brand of bullet. But I was under the impression that the triple shocks were designed to expand at least down to 2000 fps. Maybe even lower. So not having fully expanded petals at 2600 fps, like your Sierra GK example, is bewildering.

Are you basing your judgment on live game use or only using the wood\paper\water medium?

Barnes claims they'll open down to 1600 fps. I have a 130 grain, 6.5mm TSX recovered from the same medium that expanded to the full depth of the hollow cavity. It looks just like the bullets you see in the ads. And the impact velocity was only around 2000 fps (I'd have to look up the exact figure).

But, unfortunately, they don't always perform that way. Whether it's a metallurgy issue or simply the dynamics of an insufficient hollow cavity that could become plugged or pinched and thus retard expansion, TSX bullets have obvious consistency problems from time to time.

Perhaps that is why Barnes is working relentlessly to get the new Tipped TSX on the market. The hollow cavity will be much more cavernous, and the polymer tip will initiate positive expansion. Maybe then the bullets will shed some of their earlier reputation...

I take that as a "no" answer. You have yet to use them on game because of the erratic results on your wood\paper\water medium?

Dave-

Go back up in the thread a bit. Unlike you, I HAVE used the TSX on game -- and I've used the old X as well. (I didn't answer/address that in the last post because I hate to keep repeating myself.)

The last thing I have shot with a 6.5mm, 120 grain TSX, launched at 2700 fps MV, was a coyote at 170 yards. The coyote, shot through the chest, made nearly 200 yards before giving up the ghost. Yes, he was dead, but that's not the type of performance that rates highly in my books.

I started testing the TSXs again just because of such results.

What else do you want to know?

You know, experience is the best teacher. Instead of questioning my results, why don't you go out and actually try at least a dozen or so boxes of the TSXs for yourself???

Bobby, the last 2 coyotes I shot were with 6br, one at 170 yds head shot, the other about 60 in the chest, both with 105 amax.

Guess what they both did? Yes, feet up in the air, D O A. The way I like it.

Now to your point about inconsistency. A former friend, an MD who has been on at least 3 safaris took his deceased fathers '06 to africa, a pre 64 26" , used worked up loads 165 x bullet, about 2800 or thereabouts IIRC. His first hunt, great results, the next trip.....disasterous. He swore never to use them again and went back to Nosler PT.

Consistency is key, and I don't knock you one bit as when you get burned, it's hard to put your hand near the same flame again! Now to those who have had 100% success, I cannot argue but I trust Bobby's experience and won't argue that either.

My one experience, rifle=243 85x old style, picture perfect bullet just under hide of a hog at 240 yds, DOA. I was impressed, but it is not I believe the 'end all' of bullets, as there are many idiosyncracy's of various bullets, and the application must be correctly matched with bullet used IMHO. I expect to use a few more 85x's if I am expecting to shoot another hog with a 6mm round....but rather the Sierra BTHP for deer, it kills like lightning in a 243, as my 105 amax (prefers faster twist often than factory 243) does in 6BR.

After using my 6BR w/105 AMAX (2815 mv)and have every animal drop in tracks save for one deer that traveled maybe 25 yds after double lunged -exited, around 400 yds I am convinced expending energy rapidly inside an animal, esp. soft skinned, is often much quicker in death than energy fully transferred in an animal. Different game require different needs from bullets, deer are not tanks.

Guy yesterday at the range was going to Accubonds, why? His 7mag shed the core/jacket on his 150 ballistic tip. Target, deer. Range 80 yds!!!!! Velocity.....only 3300 fps!!!!!!

My god, I did not ask but that deer surely did not go far, his concern was the bullet vaporized.

Save for lead contamination and meat damage, DEAD is DEAD and a bullet need not be 'picture perfect' for the bullet to 'make the grade'....I don't argue with this guy using the 7mag, but odds are, if he rarely shoots more than 300 yds or so, he might be better off using a 7/08 about 400-500 fps less. I think too many people 'overly concern' themselves to where they end up using the wrong tools for the job at hand.

Sometimes 'less IS more' and Bobby's experience may not be good news to Barnes, but it may save a few bucks from getting away......dollars and deer.

I think when you have 2 things you have success in hunting, 1) shot placement 2) a bullet despite brand or construction, penetrates through vitals and causing damage via expansion and transferring hydrostatic shock adding effectiveness beyond the 'permanent wound cavity.'

I am liking the 140 grain A-Max in 6.5mm more and more every day.

At moderate velocities, it is truly devastating on thin-skinned game and dumps a massive amount of energy -- just as you have been experiencing with the 105 grain version in 6mm.

And it shoots like a dream, too.

As to the X bullets, when the 85 grainer was doing so well in my custom XP in .250 Savage, I was tickled and used that rig on a good bit of game. But like others have experienced, a bad lot can send the end-results south in a mighty big hurry.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
What else do you want to know?

Nothing. You convinced me that TSX is not a good choice for thin-skinned game.

I have yet to put a TSX bullet downrange as I have about 20 boxes of X flatbase bullets in various calibers. So when I use them in the future and a thin skinned animal falls over, I'll just chalk it up to dumb luck.

Thanks for your insight and best of luck to you with whatever other bullet brand you decide on.

I would ask you to reconsider telling Barnes about this lot number. You'd be saving other users a lot of grief, or even wounded animals.

onefunzr2 wrote:

quote:

So when I use them in the future and a thin skinned animal falls over, I'll just chalk it up to dumb luck.

Here we go with the over-dramatization again. You are obviously having problems comprehending what this thread is about and simply digging yourself deeper and deeper with every fruitless foray.

No one said a Barnes can't kill thin-skinned game. No one made a broad generalization that they're all bad.

And no one is talking about conventional RIFLE velocities here, either. Again, this is the single shot pistols forum, and the thread is about specialty pistol cartridges and/or medium velocity rifle cartridges and nothing else. How many times have I already said this???

As to the lot #, it's 2821-1 -79G NL

Bobby I cannot recall anything negative about amax's on game, most notably deer. I have heard many 6.5, 7mm, and 30 cal users obtain great kills on deer, inc. some long range, like 600 yds with 260/ai.

On the x bullets, I did get horrible fouling with some 120 gr in 708 while back in a M70 carbine, bore might have been rough, but that was old style bullets as well. Would be ok to shoot a few to sight, and try a few on deer, but doing fine with others so not sure I want to 'experiment', likely do well in my 708 at 3100 mv, my 7br rifle does 2875 with Hornady 120's.....content w/cup core in it due to milder speeds.

I don't recall anything negative about the A-Max either. The only thing I don't like is that some places now only carry the moly version -- and I don't want anything to do with that.

By the way, today, just for grins, I recovered a 6.5mm, 130 grain Accubond fired into the same medium as the 120 grain Barnes TSX. Muzzle velocity was within a few fps of each other.