Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:02 PM
Bergerboy's Avatar
Bergerboy Bergerboy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In your personal space.
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
Lol. Your name tells me all I need to know. Those who believe that are as logical as religious zealots. You go ahead and believe what you like, I don't care. I'll give you something to think about though....your Berger bullet in an elks arse imparts the same energy to the elk as it does in his lungs. Results tend to be a little different though....
My name is just a name. I made it up for what I was loading that day. I loaded the SGK's for this season and for my late season elk hunt as I feel they are better suited than the Bergers. I load many different bullet brands. I believe the bullet should match the impact velocity and the game hunted. There is no "do all".
__________________
When in doubt, use full throttle. It may not improve the situation, but it will end the suspense.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:03 PM
ishootbambi ishootbambi is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: medicine hat
Posts: 9,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish_e_o View Post
Lol what are you talking about there is no good bullet for bum shots on animals.
According to the energy myth crowd, hydrostatic shock is the ultimate death blow. Apply a little common sense and it's clear how stupid that is...
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:04 PM
Bergerboy's Avatar
Bergerboy Bergerboy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In your personal space.
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
According to the energy myth crowd, hydrostatic shock is the ultimate death blow. Apply a little common sense and it's clear how stupid that is...
wow. happy tracking.
__________________
When in doubt, use full throttle. It may not improve the situation, but it will end the suspense.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:05 PM
dfrobert dfrobert is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 826
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
Wow...nearly 2017 and there are still guys believing in the energy transfer myth. I hate to be captain obvious, but if you're critter had a hole in the good stuff he would not have ran away. Further, there are no magic bullets that make up for poor shooting. Whether you've killed 2 critters or 200, the facts just don't change. Don't stop spewing the crap though...it's gol darn entertaining.
Pop quiz lord of all Bambi hunting......

What kills a Bambi faster and more efficiently?
A FMJ through both lungs or the same sized ballistic tip through both lungs?
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:35 PM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
How old are you? Like 250???

The more you talk about this, the less I believe you and the more it's apparent you don't know much about how bullets work.

Next you're going to tell me you've never lost an animal in all your 200yrs of hunting......

I've worked with guys that knew everything and weren't scared to let everyone know about it, the more they told me about it, the bigger my smile got.


Here, read this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
That article has contradicting arguments from several experts. Seeing as how even the experts don't agree on how much of a factor hydrostatic shock is, I certainly wouldn't rely on hydrostatic shock to provide the kills on the animals that I hunt.
I have used bullets ranging from Ballistic Tips, to Partitions to Accubonds, to the TSX/TTSX/MRX to hunt big game, and I have seen quick kills, and not so quick kills from them all, depending on the shot placement, and impact velocity. Based on past experience, I now use the TTSX in my 7mmstw whenever I hunt elk or moose, or on combined species hunt, because when driven at high velocity, they always seem to expand adequately, and they always provide more than enough penetration. When hunting deer or similar sized game with my 270wsm or 6.5x55 or my 243win, I use Accubonds, because they provide dramatic expansion, with plenty of penetration for deer sized game. I shot a coyote at 250 yards, couple of years ago using the 140gr TTSX in my 7mmstw, and the damage was very extensive, it certainly didn't pencil through without expanding, in spite of the animal being so small.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:41 PM
ROA ROA is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Under your stairs
Posts: 633
Default

"Energy transfer" is a misnomer What people are really trying to discribe is the explosive force that tears a very large hole. This explosive force can also disrupt spinal function knocking the animal down instantly. Also there is the phenomenon in rapidly expanding bullets that will cause a pressure wave that CAN travel trough the blood vessels to the brain causing instant knock out. There was a study done on this and I wish I still had it as I would site it here.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:43 PM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish_e_o View Post
Lol what are you talking about there is no good bullet for bum shots on animals.
Horse feathers. I've driven bullets through hips to get to vital organs more than once. But it sure as shootin wasn't a Berger or a ballistic tip.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”

-Billy Molls
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:47 PM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROA View Post
"Energy transfer" is a misnomer What people are really trying to discribe is the explosive force that tears a very large hole. This explosive force can also disrupt spinal function knocking the animal down instantly. Also there is the phenomenon in rapidly expanding bullets that will cause a pressure wave that CAN travel trough the blood vessels to the brain causing instant knock out. There was a study done on this and I wish I still had it as I would site it here.

I have witnessed animals being knocked down instantly, by a strike close to, but not damaging the spine. I have also witnessed some of those animals get back up and run off requiring being shot again, or tracking to find them.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:49 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11 View Post
That article has contradicting arguments from several experts. Seeing as how even the experts don't agree on how much of a factor hydrostatic shock is, I certainly wouldn't rely on hydrostatic shock to provide the kills on the animals that I hunt.
I have used bullets ranging from Ballistic Tips, to Partitions to Accubonds, to the TSX/TTSX/MRX to hunt big game, and I have seen quick kills, and not so quick kills from them all, depending on the shot placement, and impact velocity. Based on past experience, I now use the TTSX in my 7mmstw whenever I hunt elk or moose, or on combined species hunt, because when driven at high velocity, they always seem to expand adequately, and they always provide more than enough penetration. When hunting deer or similar sized game with my 270wsm or 6.5x55 or my 243win, I use Accubonds, because they provide dramatic expansion, with plenty of penetration for deer sized game. I shot a coyote at 250 yards, couple of years ago using the 140gr TTSX in my 7mmstw, and the damage was very extensive, it certainly didn't pencil through without expanding, in spite of the animal being so small.
The article is similar to this thread, they state the opinions of different people, but they show the study where hydrostatic shock destroys tissues and disrupts nervous systems. Your STW is the perfect platform to use TTSX bullets I agree, but like you have chosen, it's not the optimum choice for slower cartridges, like 95% of firearms are. I agree with everything you said about that.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 12-13-2016, 10:55 PM
ishootbambi ishootbambi is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: medicine hat
Posts: 9,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11 View Post
That article has contradicting arguments from several experts. Seeing as how even the experts don't agree on how much of a factor hydrostatic shock is, I certainly wouldn't rely on hydrostatic shock to provide the kills on the animals that I hunt.
I have used bullets ranging from Ballistic Tips, to Partitions to Accubonds, to the TSX/TTSX/MRX to hunt big game, and I have seen quick kills, and not so quick kills from them all, depending on the shot placement, and impact velocity. Based on past experience, I now use the TTSX in my 7mmstw whenever I hunt elk or moose, or on combined species hunt, because when driven at high velocity, they always seem to expand adequately, and they always provide more than enough penetration. When hunting deer or similar sized game with my 270wsm or 6.5x55 or my 243win, I use Accubonds, because they provide dramatic expansion, with plenty of penetration for deer sized game. I shot a coyote at 250 yards, couple of years ago using the 140gr TTSX in my 7mmstw, and the damage was very extensive, it certainly didn't pencil through without expanding, in spite of the animal being so small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
Horse feathers. I've driven bullets through hips to get to vital organs more than once. But it sure as shootin wasn't a Berger or a ballistic tip.
Now here's a couple guys who understand guns, shooting and ballistics quite well. No crap about, "I'm a guide so I know best" or "One time I failed so it's gotta be the equipment's fault". Just two guys with a heck of a lot of experience behind them that are willing to share it. I have learned a lot from both on this forum...and in fact they are the reason I have NOT tried Barnes bullets. While they have shown plenty of evidence that they will do the job, it's the finicky loading characteristics that don't impress me. While I do hand load, I don't have the patience to be fiddle farting with seating depth and chasing velocity to find perfection. I'm sure I could make em work, but it seems to be a bother I'm not interested in.
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 12-13-2016, 11:03 PM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
Now here's a couple guys who understand guns, shooting and ballistics quite well. No crap about, "I'm a guide so I know best" or "One time I failed so it's gotta be the equipment's fault". Just two guys with a heck of a lot of experience behind them that are willing to share it. I have learned a lot from both on this forum...and in fact they are the reason I have NOT tried Barnes bullets. While they have shown plenty of evidence that they will do the job, it's the finicky loading characteristics that don't impress me. While I do hand load, I don't have the patience to be fiddle farting with seating depth and chasing velocity to find perfection. I'm sure I could make em work, but it seems to be a bother I'm not interested in.
Quite honestly, I haven't found the TTSX to be at all finicky in my rifles. I start out at .050" off of the lands, and of all of the rifles that I have developed loads for, they actually shot quite well using that figure. I did fine tune a bit in some cases, but I always ended up in the .040" to .070" range, and the differences were fairly minor in my rifles. I also find that I can vary the velocity a fair bit, with little effect on accuracy with my rifles.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 12-13-2016, 11:10 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
Now here's a couple guys who understand guns, shooting and ballistics quite well. No crap about, "I'm a guide so I know best" or "One time I failed so it's gotta be the equipment's fault". Just two guys with a heck of a lot of experience behind them that are willing to share it. I have learned a lot from both on this forum...and in fact they are the reason I have NOT tried Barnes bullets. While they have shown plenty of evidence that they will do the job, it's the finicky loading characteristics that don't impress me. While I do hand load, I don't have the patience to be fiddle farting with seating depth and chasing velocity to find perfection. I'm sure I could make em work, but it seems to be a bother I'm not interested in.
Dale, I thought you didn't want to engage with me? That's the exact condescending tone I'm talking about. So if you want to insult someone, don't be surprised when it comes back at you.

Did you read the link I posted? None of the experts deny hydrostatic shock exists, it's the degree in which it affects the animal that is in debate. It also has a scientific study which shows damage caused by hydrostatic shock. Furthermore, it's not just hydrostatic shock that plays a role in a ballistic tips killing ability, a much bigger factor is its fragments.

Being that I'm a guide doesn't make me an expert on ballistics, but after nearly 20yrs of doing it, it sure does stack up some experience. I don't consider 45 days hunting whitetail in a year a very high number, it's good for a weekend warrior tho.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 12-13-2016, 11:20 PM
ROA ROA is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Under your stairs
Posts: 633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11 View Post
I have witnessed animals being knocked down instantly, by a strike close to, but not damaging the spine. I have also witnessed some of those animals get back up and run off requiring being shot again, or tracking to find them.
Yep can happen. But. Would you rather have had the animal not fall down or show any indication of a hit at all and use those seconds to run flat out instead ....not to mention it only having a hole in it half to 1/4 the size? X users say yes.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 12-13-2016, 11:53 PM
bighorn1 bighorn1 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: RMH
Posts: 662
Default

please everyone cool your jets ffs !! there are a lot of people here that contribute a lot to this forum that i would rather not see the banned camp beside there names.

Things are just getting silly with all the bullet wars in the past few days.

lets move on so that we are all still here, after all dead is dead and it don't matter if you used the old 303 britt with factory loads or your ttsx, gmx, accubond who really cares lets not see major contributors to this forum getting banned over this bs.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 12-14-2016, 12:07 AM
JD848 JD848 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,844
Default

Tons of animals have been shot by other bullets, and all died ,millions if you want to push it and 99.999999 were not shot with a barnes.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:15 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bighorn1 View Post
please everyone cool your jets ffs !! there are a lot of people here that contribute a lot to this forum that i would rather not see the banned camp beside there names.

Things are just getting silly with all the bullet wars in the past few days.

lets move on so that we are all still here, after all dead is dead and it don't matter if you used the old 303 britt with factory loads or your ttsx, gmx, accubond who really cares lets not see major contributors to this forum getting banned over this bs.
Thanks for the splash of cold water!

You're right. Sometimes in the off season it's easy to get caught up in these threads, specially when it's about the one that got away!
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:17 AM
Slicktricker Slicktricker is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,338
Default

Il be trying the 160 grain tsx in my 7mm R.E.M. This year hoping there the ticket to finally get good accuracy. Kurt if you have nothing good to say about Barnes why are you shouting the ttsx out of your kimber then?
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:21 AM
bighorn1 bighorn1 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: RMH
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Thanks for the splash of cold water!

You're right. Sometimes in the off season it's easy to get caught up in these threads, specially when it's about the one that got away!

shut her down bud, i do not want to see that logo beside your handle.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:30 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicktricker View Post
Il be trying the 160 grain tsx in my 7mm R.E.M. This year hoping there the ticket to finally get good accuracy. Kurt if you have nothing good to say about Barnes why are you shouting the ttsx out of your kimber then?
I do have good things to say about Barnes, I just have other bullets I like better. Barnes are the most readily available bullet on the market, they are relatively cheap, and I don't think I've ever had a rifle that I couldn't get them to shoot under 1" MOA. My problem I have with them is their expansion, I hope the LRX expands a little better because so far that's what my Nula likes.

I don't shoot magnums anymore, and I think that's where the Barnes bullets shine. I was however shooting a 300wsn the day I lost my buck.

I'm going to experiment with a few different bullets this winter and see if I can find one both me and my gun like!

PS, try pushing those Barnes with some 7828ssc in that 7mag, should give you some good speed and accuracy.

Last edited by Kurt505; 12-14-2016 at 01:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 12-14-2016, 06:48 AM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicktricker View Post
Il be trying the 160 grain tsx in my 7mm R.E.M. This year hoping there the ticket to finally get good accuracy. Kurt if you have nothing good to say about Barnes why are you shouting the ttsx out of your kimber then?
Personally, I find that the higher the impact velocity, the more that the TSX/TTSX expand, which is why I like to use lighter bullets to drive them faster. I use the 140gr TTSX in all of my 7mm rifles except one, and that is my current 7mmstw that shoots the 150gr TTSX slightly more accurate. The people that tend to not be happy with the expansion, are generally the people using these bullets in heavy for caliber weights.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 12-14-2016, 05:48 PM
huntingfamily huntingfamily is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD848 View Post
Tons of animals have been shot by other bullets, and all died ,millions if you want to push it and 99.999999 were not shot with a barnes.
Yup. This^^^
Dead is Dead!
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 12-15-2016, 08:46 AM
BackPackHunter BackPackHunter is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,345
Default

.277
140 g
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_0138.jpg (25.8 KB, 114 views)
__________________
.....Only here for buy n sell....
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 12-15-2016, 08:56 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BackPackHunter View Post
.277
140 g
.284 140gr TTSX

Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:12 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,530
Default

I wonder if those were extreme angles on bone when they hit?
I know Kurt you said yours was a head shot IIRC?
I remember on another website years ago there was a fella who shot a deer with Barnes bullets that resulted in a nasty splash with very little penetration on the one side and had to shoot it again.

The one thing about it is , like John Barsness ( and many others) have stated ,There is no perfect bullet , they may work 99% of the time, it's that 1% that makes you scratch your head!
Cat
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:29 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
I wonder if those were extreme angles on bone when they hit?
I know Kurt you said yours was a head shot IIRC?
I remember on another website years ago there was a fella who shot a deer with Barnes bullets that resulted in a nasty splash with very little penetration on the one side and had to shoot it again.

The one thing about it is , like John Barsness ( and many others) have stated ,There is no perfect bullet , they may work 99% of the time, it's that 1% that makes you scratch your head!
Cat
Ya it was a head shot, and it was at quite a distance as well.

I agree with what John said, and I know many other do too. The best you can hope for is the optimum scenario and hope the bullet does it's job. The Barnes bullet works well when it's traveling fast, the ballistic tip works well when it's traveling slow, but the cup and core just flat out works..... imo.
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:33 AM
Pioneer2 Pioneer2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 303carbine View Post
I don't have any pictures of my bullets as they all passed clean through.
They are not some new fangled solid copper projectiles, rather just some heavy 45 caliber lead slugs out of my Winchester 86 45-70.
Call me old fashioned..............
More like old school ........practical Harold
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:54 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,530
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Ya it was a head shot, and it was at quite a distance as well.

I agree with what John said, and I know many other do too. The best you can hope for is the optimum scenario and hope the bullet does it's job. The Barnes bullet works well when it's traveling fast, the ballistic tip works well when it's traveling slow, but the cup and core just flat out works..... imo.
By far the majority of rifles I have owned over the years were chambered for slower cartridges, the fastest being the swift ( varmint so doesn't count) and my 6.5/WSM wildcats.
Most of my cartridges dawdle along between 1,500 and 2,700 FPS out of the muzzle and I tend to use heavier bullets, so the cup and core styles lie the Hot core and SGK and the C.I.L. bullets of yesteryear are my goto bullets.
I am loading my .303 this year with Barnes TSX and the bullet did exactly what it was supposed to this year because it went where I aimed it
( 117 yard bang flop )

I have a mess of cup and core bullets however and will continue to use them, as well as hard cast bullets.
Cat
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!

Last edited by catnthehat; 12-15-2016 at 10:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:57 AM
molsoncanadian's Avatar
molsoncanadian molsoncanadian is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 57
Default

I handloaded some 130 grain tsx for my 30-06 this year. Always wanted to try these bullets. Used partitions previously but just wanted to experiment. I found them very accurate (0.8" @ 100yrds). I shot 2 deer with them. One was 100 yards and the other 380 yards. Both shots went through both lungs. Both deer ran about 100 yards and then fell over dead. I was surprised how much bloodshot meat I had to cut away when processing. There was a little less wasted meat than when I used the partitions though. I found it odd that the bullets hit about 4-5 inches behind the shoulder yet there was still bloodshot meat in the shoulder muscles. I am happy with the bullets however....will use them again especially since they are so accurate.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 12-15-2016, 10:56 AM
markg markg is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Calgary Area
Posts: 2,377
Default Viagra

Quote:
Originally Posted by BackPackHunter View Post
.277
140 g

I think that bullet needs some Viagra!
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 12-15-2016, 04:36 PM
Bowser Bowser is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 87
Default

Try'm , they're accurate and devastating. I've been shooting them all the way back to the Lubalox trials. Only serious bullet for slamming critters, period.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.