Barnes LRX TTSX, which one??

[toddc]

Why didn't you watch the video?

Cuz he's smart enuf not to waste his time watching stupid internet stunts. Jackass cured me of watching stupid web shorts.

 

[toddc]

So now I think like a Neanderthal?

I will start this rant by saying that what I like about this forum is there are a lot of very great people sharing their knowledge with others.

But every once in a while an individual gets on here and tries to drive their stupid ideas down everyone's throat! This really ****es me off! Mostly because this individual reads some adventure 75% of which is BS even out of the most honest hunter! And with zero knowledge about what they are talking about, they try to keep alive an argument with a bunch of folks that already know what they are doing!

I am sure that this style of name calling has taken you a long ways in this wicked world, but I would not make a habit of name calling on this forum, it will lead to lack of participation when you do have a valid question. I have also noticed that generally name calling is a great way to get your teeth pushed in. No threat intended I am just offering my opinion.

I am not going to argue the facts you bring to this forum because I do not agree with them. Mostly because I have proved them wrong on my own time, already! I will add that the little girl who shot the cow elk at 100 yards is an awesome story and I wish her many more lucky hunts. 300 yards with a 130gr. bullet is surely not long range hunting I say congrats.

This thread was about LRX vs TTSX. Now I am sure that "500yd" has put hundreds of these bullets down range (I just cannot find the 110gr LRX) and has killed hundreds of elk so I do not mean to offend him.

That being said, I will invite anybody who knows everything about shooting to come join me any day on a wolf hunt. I would love to know everything someday. I have a perfect world renowned elk hunting location on private land, that now can barely sustain a semi sucsessful general season hunt. I will put you on a bronc and we will leave the truck at sun up and return at dark. At lunch I will find a 12 inch rock at 700 yards and if you can hit it with one shot. I will not make you walk home. Now we all know that a rock does not need retained energy, but I would say that 80-90% of the people on this forum
(me included) would miss this rock in the wind we have. Offer extended!

I added my experience with the two bullets of topic and will not revisit this thread.

Dude Im in. I jus read on the barnes website about it and my 338 with a 165 gr sumthin or other leaving my edge at 3800 will only drop 3" at 700. Ive got this dicked! Oh the koolaid wore off Im goin with a 300smk.

 

[Sako7STW]

Cuz he's smart enuf not to waste his time watching stupid internet stunts. Jackass cured me of watching stupid web shorts.

Hold your tongue! The guy coaching that gal is one of the most respected long range shooters in the industry period. He would teach you more in a hour about long range shooting than you could learn on here in a year. That was no stunt, that was years and years of experience being passed on to the next generation.

You talk about being ignorant.....Go look in the mirror my friend.

 

[jrsolocam]

Teen girls shooting elk at 700 yards with a .243.........Ya that sounds like a great idea.

After thinking about it, I am re phrasing my post. Probably not a good idea for 95% of hunters to shoot elk at 700 yards with a 243. Chances are good to start a rodeo.

I love long range hunting and target shooting. But I hear too many stories and know of many instances of people who try this without the proper equipment or practice. Its a free world though, and people can keep wounding game if they so choose.

As far as big Barnes vs little Barnes, on elk sized game I choose the SD and mass of the big Barnes.....

 

[toddc]

Hold your tongue! The guy coaching that gal is one of the most respected long range shooters in the industry period. He would teach you more in a hour about long range shooting than you could learn on here in a year. That was no stunt, that was years and years of experience being passed on to the next generation.

You talk about being ignorant.....Go look in the mirror my friend.

Uhhh I think we had the was this video stupid conversation in another thread. Trust me john poops outa the same whole you do. And no john probly wouldnt teach me a whole lot. Been there done that. I personally never agreed with a lot of the silliness he allowed on botw. He was using a marginal combo PERIOD. I dont give a fl@*#$(@ at a rolling donut who took or coached that shot if that animal had moved 1 ft in the .6 seconds that bullet was in air you had a disaster. with an edge a smaller disaster. Dont be a supporter, even smart people do silly ****.
And please would everyone quit acting impressed by the whole deal. WOW someone was able to hit a 12" target at 700 yds. Holy smokes call GUINESS. It was a chip shot with an inadequate gun and we all go oohahh cuz it was a >>>>girl. BFD

 

[toddc]

Hold your tongue! The guy coaching that gal is one of the most respected long range shooters in the industry period. He would teach you more in a hour about long range shooting than you could learn on here in a year. That was no stunt, that was years and years of experience being passed on to the next generation.

You talk about being ignorant.....Go look in the mirror my friend.

And please quit idolizing people. Every TV star Ive met in the outdoor industry has been a pretty sorry excuse for an outdoorsman. Not sayin they all are but anyone whos been an outfitter will agree on this with me. LR isnt rockeet science. Talking up his ability makes me wonder about yours. I watch this guy on TV and Im not impressed.

 

[toddc]

Hold your tongue! The guy coaching that gal is one of the most respected long range shooters in the industry period. He would teach you more in a hour about long range shooting than you could learn on here in a year. That was no stunt, that was years and years of experience being passed on to the next generation.

You talk about being ignorant.....Go look in the mirror my friend.

And while we are at it. Please dont suggest to me that I should follow the lead of someone with the following traits.
#1 Gives up the ability to target an 18" circle to target an 8" circle on an animal that will suffer if there is a near miss. Thats the difference between a boiler room and high spine shot. How many animals are wounded with that hold? Miss the center of the boilerroom by 4"=dead. High spine=wounded. What if the animal moves? Trick shooting is for targets. I got paid per dead animal on control and I didnt mess around with the look good on TV kills but went for a sure deal. The proliferation of that shot on TV is a JOKE and a disservice to hunters who do it right.
#2 Does this to produce GOOD TV.

Thats really not what I want to learn I dont care if my teacher is a movie star.

 

[500yd]

I certainly did not intend to generate such controversy when I posted the accomplishments of these young women. I am not advocating taking 700 yard shots at elk with a .243 Winchester whether using Berger's VLDs or not. Early in this thread I advised the OP that the Barnes 110 or 130gr TTSX from his 300 WSM would be suitable for both deer and elk to 500 yards. I provided these examples of elk kills by young females with bullets in the same weight class, as a demonstration of this point, one of them taking a nice bull with one of the bullets I recommended, the TTSX 130, with a single shot kill at 300 yds. No, 300 isn't 500. If I had an example at 500 I'd have posted it. But if she'd shot him at 500 I doubt the result would have been any different, as the energy drops from 1900 to 1200 ft-lbs, and anything over 1000 should be sufficient for a single shot kill with proper placement.

Given the low BC of the TTSX 110 and 130, I see 500 yds as the maximum effective range of these rounds for elk, as each has just over 1000 ft-lbs at 500. For whitetails where ~500 ft-lbs or less should do the trick, the 110 should be good to ~700 yds and the 130 good to ~900 yds. For whitetails beyond 900 yds you'd need move up to the TTSX 168 for the superior BC of .470, yielding 506 ft-lbs at 1200 yds.

So again, I think either the TTSX 110 or 130 would be a round this OP could load up in his 300 WSM and use for both animals to 500 yds. The nice advantage of the 110s is that he can aim dead on with a 275 yd zero and cut +/- 2.5 inches to 325 yds. Which is precisely why I like this bullet for whitetails. Where I hunt they rarely sit still long enough to adjust turrets, and quite often they'll close or extend 100 yds on me after I first spot them. Being able to point and shoot when they stop momentarily is a huge plus. I hunt on and around public land, and the hunting pressure keeps them on the move.

 

[Sako7STW]

Early in this thread I advised the OP that the Barnes 110 or 130gr TTSX from his 300 WSM would be suitable for both deer and elk to 500 yards.

So again, I think either the TTSX 110 or 130 would be a round this OP could load up in his 300 WSM and use for both animals to 500 yds. The nice advantage of the 110s is that he can aim dead on with a 275 yd zero and cut +/- 2.5 inches to 325 yds. Which is precisely why I like this bullet for whitetails. Where I hunt they rarely sit still long enough to adjust turrets, and quite often they'll close or extend 100 yds on me after I first spot them. Being able to point and shoot when they stop momentarily is a huge plus. I hunt on and around public land, and the hunting pressure keeps them on the move.

I agree 100%. I would go with the 130gr for the farther 500 yard shot and that is very sufficient.

 

[toddc]

500 ft lbs on a deer? Wow I can shoot to 2300 with my edge now? Also to most 1000 is a tad low for elk. Barnes makes some neat slugs but ignoring BC, SD and energy long enough will result in disaster sooner or later.
Will it work? Heck yeah! Ive seen enough deer killed with a 22 to beleive that.
Should we be doing it? I dont know should we be shooting deer with 22s?

 

[toddc]

500 ft lbs on a deer? Wow I can shoot to 2300 with my edge now? Also to most 1000 is a tad low for elk. Barnes makes some neat slugs but ignoring BC, SD and energy long enough will result in disaster sooner or later.
Will it work? Heck yeah! Ive seen enough deer killed with a 22 to beleive that.
Should we be doing it? I dont know should we be shooting deer with 22s?

 

[toddc]

My thoughts? MUCH lighter and phenominally faster.

As you already know, all Barnes X bullets are solid copper and don't deform, so you have near 100% weight retention and fantastic penetration for all bullet weights. Thus neither bullet weight nor sectional density play as much a role as with lead core bullets. For elk and deer to 500 yds I'd go with the lightest bullet for the flattest trajectory, even if you have a BDC scope or range finding equipment and turrets. Flatter is always better when all other criteria are met.

The Barnes 300 WSM load data shows the TTSX 130 with a MV of ~3450 FPS with a 24" tube. With a 250 yd zero this roughly equates to +/- 3 inches to 325 yds and 25 inches low at 500 yards. The TTSX 130 is devastating on both deer and elk with proper shot placement at these velocities and ranges.

It should be possible to load the TTSX 110 gr to 3700-3800 FPS in the 300 WSM for even flatter shooting. This yields a 110 gr .30 cal bullet shooting flatter than a 22-250 or 220 swift, with less than 24 inches of drop at 500 yds. This higher velocity tends to negate, or at least compensate for, the decreased mass vs the heavier (175/200) bullets travelling ~700-1000 FPS slower, from a penetration standpoint.

I'm planning to load up the 110s in my .308 Win @ 3500 FPS for Missouri whitetails. Given the penetration of these bullets at any weight I don't think I'd hesitate to use this round on elk at these ranges. Heck, people use 180 gr ballistic tips in .308, -06, and 300 WSM, and .270 140 gr BTs on Elk and even these heavier/higher SD BT bullets come apart inside the animal, decreasing penetration.

As always, the key to a good kill is shot placement. A head, neck, heart/lung, or shoulder/heart/lung shot with either the 110/130 in 300 WSM will be deadly. A faster flatter shooting round simply makes proper shot placement easier, whether you have fancy ranging equipment and scope or not. With the X bullets I don't think the heavier weight gains you much, if anything, over the lighter, much faster, flatter shooting bullets.

please dont take this as a personal attack. It isnt. But you are giving out advice without any basis to do so.
You post that " The 130 TTSX is DEVASTATING on both deer and elk". How would you KNOW that? Read it in BARNES website maybe? You said you had never killed an elk....and yet you know all there is to know about killing them? HMMMMMM
You also state that "Im GOING to load up some 110s". So when you stated that the OP should be shooting ELK at 500 with them you had what information to back you up?Barnes website again?
You have shot 1 deer at 400 running?(How smart is that?) and 1 at 500 and you are an expert?
My 12 yr old son has shot 2 in one day over 1000. If I caught him posting on here I'd beat him.
BC MATTERS. SD MATTERS. ENERGY MATTERS. Bullet construction and function matter also but you had better pay attention to the 1st three matters first.
This is a great place to learn and yes you can kill deer/elok all day long with the combo you suggested. But to keep it a great place to learn we shouldnt post on things we have zero experience with.

 

[500yd]

500 ft lbs on a deer? Wow I can shoot to 2300 with my edge now?

I've witnessed on at least 6 occasions the taking of bucks and does of all sizes at 400+ yards with a 22-250. That is Jamie's weapon of choice for whitetails due to the laser flat trajectory. To add insult to injury, he uses the 50 gr Win BST, which is the exploding varmint variant in .224 caliber. He prefers head/neck shots, but a couple of these he tagged in the boiler room. All of them folded over without taking a step. I know another guy pretty well who has taken quite a few at 350-400 yds with a 257 Roberts and cheap soft point non boat tail factory foddder. I didn't witness these personally. At these ranges both of these rounds are hitting with between 500-600 ft-lbs. It just doesn't take that much energy to put a whitetail down if you hit them in the vitals or CNS, i.e. make a decent shot.

Also to most 1000 is a tad low for elk. Barnes makes some neat slugs but ignoring BC, SD and energy long enough will result in disaster sooner or later.

Interesting statement. Would you hesitate on a big bull at 500 yds if you were packing a .308 Win with 180 gr TTSX or 175 gr Berger VLD at 2600 FPS MV? Most people would probably reply without hesitation, "Hell no, I'd click my turrets and let her fly". Given this, let's compare the .308 Win load of TTSX 180, Berger 175 VLD, and the 300 WSM 110 TTSX load energies at 500 yards, according to JBM.

[FONT=Courier New][SIZE=2][SIZE=2]               MV     ft-lbs[SIZE=2]@500[/SIZE][/SIZE]
TTSX 110[SIZE=2]       3800     [SIZE=2]1094[/SIZE][/SIZE]
TTSX 180       2600     1221
[SIZE=2]VLD 175        [SIZE=2]2600     [/SIZE][/SIZE]1250[/SIZE][/FONT]

The 300 WSM TTSX 110 load has 88-90% of the energy of the two heavy .308 Win loads at 500 yds. It will create a nearly identical wound cavity to this 180 TTSX load even if going through bone, because they're arriving with nearly identical energies, and bullet construction is identical. The "once inside the tissue or bone the bigger bullet has better penetration" argument is simply flat wrong. The mass of the larger bullet is already accounted for in the energy equation. So for anyone who wouldn't hesitate to lob one of these heavy .308 Win rounds at a bull 500 yds out, you'd surely prefer the flatter shooting, quicker flight time, and lower recoil of the 300 WSM 110 TTSX, given that the terminal effects will be nearly identical.

The OP is looking for a good round to be used "no more than" 500 yds for both deer and elk. As demonstreated above, the 300 WSM 110 TTSX is up to the task for taking both deer and elk up to 500 yds. It will shoot like a laser to 325 yds requiring no turret adjustments for most engagements, it will kick substantially less than the heavier loads the OP was originally looking at, and the components will be less expensive. If his criteria had been 700 yds not 500, I'd not recommend this round as it's not suitable for elk at 700 yds. Due to the horrible BC of .295 (G1) the 110 sheds velocity like a man on fire sheds clothing, and the energy drops off rapidly, down to 630 ft-lbs at 700 yds, just over half its 500 yd energy.

 

[toddc]

I've witnessed on at least 6 occasions the taking of bucks and does of all sizes at 400+ yards with a 22-250. That is Jamie's weapon of choice for whitetails due to the laser flat trajectory. To add insult to injury, he uses the 50 gr Win BST, which is the exploding varmint variant in .224 caliber. He prefers head/neck shots, but a couple of these he tagged in the boiler room. All of them folded over without taking a step. I know another guy pretty well who has taken quite a few at 350-400 yds with a 257 Roberts and cheap soft point non boat tail factory foddder. I didn't witness these personally. At these ranges both of these rounds are hitting with between 500-600 ft-lbs. It just doesn't take that much energy to put a whitetail down if you hit them in the vitals or CNS, i.e. make a decent shot.

Interesting statement. Would you hesitate on a big bull at 500 yds if you were packing a .308 Win with 180 gr TTSX or 175 gr Berger VLD at 2600 FPS MV? Most people would probably reply without hesitation, "Hell no, I'd click my turrets and let her fly". Given this, let's compare the .308 Win load of TTSX 180, Berger 175 VLD, and the 300 WSM 110 TTSX load energies at 500 yards, according to JBM.

[FONT=Courier New][SIZE=2][SIZE=2]               MV     ft-lbs[SIZE=2]@500[/SIZE][/SIZE]
TTSX 110[SIZE=2]       3800     [SIZE=2]1094[/SIZE][/SIZE]
TTSX 180       2600     1221
[SIZE=2]VLD 175        [SIZE=2]2600     [/SIZE][/SIZE]1250[/SIZE][/FONT]

The 300 WSM TTSX 110 load has 88-90% of the energy of the two heavy .308 Win loads at 500 yds. It will create a nearly identical wound cavity to this 180 TTSX load even if going through bone, because they're arriving with nearly identical energies, and bullet construction is identical. The "once inside the tissue or bone the bigger bullet has better penetration" argument is simply flat wrong. The mass of the larger bullet is already accounted for in the energy equation. So for anyone who wouldn't hesitate to lob one of these heavy .308 Win rounds at a bull 500 yds out, you'd surely prefer the flatter shooting, quicker flight time, and lower recoil of the 300 WSM 110 TTSX, given that the terminal effects will be nearly identical.

The OP is looking for a good round to be used "no more than" 500 yds for both deer and elk. As demonstreated above, the 300 WSM 110 TTSX is up to the task for taking both deer and elk up to 500 yds. It will shoot like a laser to 325 yds requiring no turret adjustments for most engagements, it will kick substantially less than the heavier loads the OP was originally looking at, and the components will be less expensive. If his criteria had been 700 yds not 500, I'd not recommend this round as it's not suitable for elk at 700 yds. Due to the horrible BC of .295 (G1) the 110 sheds velocity like a man on fire sheds clothing, and the energy drops off rapidly, down to 630 ft-lbs at 700 yds, just over half its 500 yd energy.

YOU ANSWERED NONE OF MY QUESTIONS DIRECTLY...WHY NOT?
I have killed around a thousand whitetails with a 22lr. Doesnt make it an ideal cartidge. 500 FPE isnt deer medicine.
I have shot deer control and guided for over 20 yrs now. In that time I have seen thousands of animals killed and autopsied. Thats up to 50 a day at times. This isnt something I do ever once in a while. I kill deer for money.
Also please answer my previous post instead of trotting out more JBM stats and bullet propaganda.
You are using a skewed theory espoused by a MANUFACTURER LOOKING TO MAKE A BUCK ON MARKETING TRICKS. EVEN BARNES WOULDNT BACK YOU UP and you are giving terrible advice. I know its hard to concede a point but please you are espousing a theory that you have no real practical experience with that is GOING TO CAUSE GAME AND HUNTERS TO SUFFER. Please stop. Thanks.