Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Copper bullets.

What velocity are you getting?

Classifieds <G>

I'm not the OP, but have a 130 TTSX load for my 308. H4895 gives me just shy of 3100 (3092 avg to be exact from a 22" Kimber) at MOA.

For another data point of the 130 TTSX in the .308 Win, I'm getting 3075 fps with TAC out of a 18" barrel.

Thank you fellas.

Are the 30cal. 150gr. TTSX bullets loaded in factory ammo different than the component bullets I have on the shelf?

The ones loaded in 308 are. I asked Barnes.

My load is 46.2 gr Varget, WLR, PMC brass, 2950 fps from a 19" barrel

Yes. The 308/150 loaded ammo use a 150 TTSX but it's designed to expand at lower velocities (1500 if I recall correctly). The 150 TTSX component bullet needs 2000 ft/sec min velocity to expand.

The difference lies in the use. The 150 component bullet is uses by guys running 30 cal magnums at warp speed, while the 308 loaded ammo has a captive audience as it where and moves along at sub 3000 ft/sec.

Frankly I don't see the difference between the LRX at faster velocity and a 150 TTSX designed to open at a lower belocity. I'm sure there might be some lost petals but who cares - blunt nose bullet should operate like a LBT design hard cast.

I don’t know why Barnes doesn’t change the whole TTSX line to open at 1500. But then it would be harder to sell the lrx I guess. Lrx straight up kill.

i have purchased over a few years 8 - 257 Robert rifles all different brands but mostly Rugers for the family. my thought is for deer hunting i will load either 103 gr. or 75 gr. Hammer hunters i see no reason to shoot a bigger grain bullet anymore if we use copper bullets. with respect right or wrong myself, ladies and kids with the 75 gr. bullet still will have around 3,000 FPS , less recoil ,good accuracy and decent ballistics with a smaller cartridge too.

Barnes has painted themselves into a corner by claiming near 100% weight retention. The only way is to make the 150 tougher to stand up to magnum high velocity impacts

It’s not as large a sample size as some members here, but I stopped counting the BG animals I have shot or witnessed being shot with Barnes bullets at about 150. Those bullets ranged from .243” to .338” and included X, TSX, TTSX, and LRX. I have not witnessed a failure to expand, that I could tell, and I was involved in the dressing/deboning/butchering of all or nearly all of those animals. I have noticed that the TTSX and LRX tend to expand a little more violently and do a little more damage than the X and TSX. Contrary to what others have observed, I also haven’t seen animals travel further or take longer to die than when shot with C&C bullets. In fact, my experience has been the opposite. Of course, there are many factors involved here, including the fact that shot placement has tended to be behind the front leg when using C&C bullets, and the shooter has typically been unconcerned with including bone in the wound channel (or even does it intentionally) when shooting monos.

My experience and observations as well

My understanding was that the LRX would open at a lower velocity than the Ttsx for long range hunting? That would also lead me to believe that the LRX would open fast at close range?

In general, yes. But the 150 TTSX that is designed to open at 1500 fps has a lower speed threshold than most LRX and other TTSX models.

That's my understanding, but others know more than I do. The 168ttsx fits this too.
My plan is to do some testing with the 139's in a 7-08 this year. If it works out, I'll be switching over to just using monos.

In reality, just about ALL expanding big game bullets open up just about as "fast" as the rest, usually within the length of the bullet after it hits hide.

The big differences are not in how fast they expand, but how violently--and how much weight they lose. Again in general, the more weight lost up to around 50%, the faster they kill, due to more tissue destruction.

The LRX is indeed designed to open at lower velocities--but so far I haven't been able to tell any difference in how they perform at "normal" ranges than TTSXs of the same approximate diameter and weight. Haven't recovered any.

Both copper and lead based bullets work well nowadays, they have, are continuing to tweak them for better results.
Copper bullets are costly, and not all work well in some rifles/calibers.
Lead bullets are normally cheaper, and usually there are a several types/weights that will shoot in most rifles.
Lead bullets will leave shards of lead in some meat/bones ect , and are known to cause lead poisoning in bald eagles and other critters.
When butchering, take a couple of minutes and look around, they are there, you can, will find them.
This is becoming an issue with the eagles and throwing the deer carcass out to feed the yotes and such.
I still do this, however, I do take 5 extra minutes and cut out/chop off, any of the "wound Channel" and the 4" or so around it, and toss that in the garbage bag/can for the land fill.
I am not a bunny hugger, but I like to watch and listen to the eagles, and I do not want the dnr to MANDATE that we use copper only.
I use mostly Hornady interlocks and Sierra pro hunters, both work, no issues with either.
Getting a few copper only 358 tssx for trying out, cannot comment on those yet.
I do believe that will have copper only some time down the road, just not sure how soon.
IMO

Good luck whatever way you choose.

Cutting Edge and Hammer are newer technology copper bullets. They’re more expansive than Barnes, designed to frag.

Not sure about CEB, but Hammer offers bullets of varying degrees of expansion with different percentages remaining in the core. Pretty interesting concept. One can match velocity with critter being hunted, for optimal terminal performance. Accuracy is excellent.

Expensive but IMO, worth it.

DF