Barnes tipped TSX 168 or 180 gr. for elk?

[dmax1800]

Which Barnes bullet do you recommend for elk? The 168 shoots a tad bit flatter since it has a better BC and a tad bit faster. Barnes (Ty) recommended the 168. Or do I need the extra penetration of the 180 gr ?
This is my first elk hunt, so I'm trying to get it right the first time.

 

[Broz]

Where did you read the 168 has a better BC than the 180?

I will always pick a 180 or larger over a 168 for elk no matter what chambering I am shooting. Same caliber the heavier bullets will carry the best BC most of the time.

jeff

 

[dmax1800]

I stand corrected. The BC of the 180 gr is .484 and the BC of the 168 gr is .470

 

[longrangehunterII]

The performance of the Barnes bullets allows one to "step down" in bullet weight and still have adequate penetration. I'd use the one that shot the best and leave it at that.

 

[rharfo]

I shoot the 168 TTSX out of my HS precision SPL 300 WM. I have shot one mule deer with it so far. 360 yards bullet hit low in the ribs, dropped him DRT. I have a elk hunt this fall, my buddy is hunting a bull and I have a cow tag. He cant believe I would shoot a 168. I am loading him 180 Accubond for his 300 WM. But I am VERY confident in this bullets capability. Even if I had a bull tag I wouldn't change ammo. Its already been said, use the one that shoots best in your heater and let it eat. Got git sum............................................

 

[375fan]

180 hands down. More energy at all ranges.

 

[Nomosendero]

I shoot the 168 TTSX out of my HS precision SPL 300 WM. I have shot one mule deer with it so far. 360 yards bullet hit low in the ribs, dropped him DRT. I have a elk hunt this fall, my buddy is hunting a bull and I have a cow tag. He cant believe I would shoot a 168. I am loading him 180 Accubond for his 300 WM. But I am VERY confident in this bullets capability. Even if I had a bull tag I wouldn't change ammo. Its already been said, use the one that shoots best in your heater and let it eat. Got git sum............................................

I agree

The BC difference does not amount to much & the diff in vel. will negate this small difference for a good ways. Keep in mind the 168TTSX will penetrate as much as a 180 Partition & I doubt anyone would say the 180 partition will not penetrate enough,

 

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

I note the OP did not mention range or the rifles chamber.

 

[bigngreen]

Thee last bullet I will shoot at an elk is a 168 Barnes and I've shoot quite a few elk with them from a 300 WBY, over and over and over!!

 

[Dr. Vette]

I'd go with the 180 if they both shoot well, else if one shoots a lot better I'd use that one. I'll take accuracy and precision over 12 grains of weight at this caliber.

The 150gr TTSX worked well in my Dad's 7mm Wby last year for both elk and deer. So, I would not hesitate to use either weight you mention.

 

[lloydsmale]

Ive been working up loads for a 300 ultra. I settled on the 168 tsx. Main reason was that the 180 and 168 tssx bullets shot the best out of that particular gun. I shot probaly 20 differnt bullets and it came down to those two. The 168 gave slightly better groups so thats the way i went. I get consistant 3/4 inch 5 shot groups with that bullet at about 3500 fps. I wouldnt be afraid to hunt any game animal in the US with that combination. If i lost an animal to that load id have to put the blame squarely on the man pulling the trigger.

 

[TOM H]

Which Barnes bullet do you recommend for elk? The 168 shoots a tad bit flatter since it has a better BC and a tad bit faster. Barnes (Ty) recommended the 168. Or do I need the extra penetration of the 180 gr ?
This is my first elk hunt, so I'm trying to get it right the first time.

Since you already talked to guide about yardage etc as some mentioned if equal accuracy I'd take the 180gr. Might want to try some 180gr Partitions and I know few that are using the A-Frame.

 

[idaho elk hunter]

I would rather have a 168 gr bullet with great shot placement than a 180gr with poor placement. Shoot what you feel good with according to recoil and shoot what your rifle is more accurate with.
I believe many people get book wise on Sectional density numbers and ballistic coefficient numbers but are not skilled in the field. I refer
to people like this as Barr stool knowledge.
Think about this a high BC bullet in the hands of a Bar Stool, know it all shooter, making a 100 yd shot and hitting a animal in the guts. Greatest whizgun) bang bullet that all the internet forums and magazine writers are talking about. Gets the bar stool, know it all people recommending it and a animal without a clean kill.
Old school Bullet out of a smaller rifle and a woman or child shooting the animal right in the heart or vitals....Which do you think will get the job done better.
Get the best bullet you can but don't rely on the numbers and bar stool knowledge to make your decision for you.. By the way I really like the Barnes bullet and the Accubond if the rifle will shoot them.

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

My brother dropped 4 elk with 6 shots with the 165 grain barnes out of a 300 win on a cull hunt back in '11. All were through and through. A 165-168 is PLENTY of pill for elk unless the range is up there. Then you ought to think 338 anyway.