Barnes 7mm Rem Mag TTSX BT 150gr Thoughts?!

[270person]

Originally Posted by YYC338

100-150 yards would likely put you firmly in the wheelhouse for a TTSX. At that velocity they are doing what they were designed to. And you don't see a lot of people disputing their performance at those distances. 500 - 1000 yards (if that's what they were shooting at) not so much.

He's got more than enough capability in a 300 rum with 165's at 500+ yds. I'd have no issues shooting 150's at same distance with 7RM.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by YYC338

100-150 yards would likely put you firmly in the wheelhouse for a TTSX. At that velocity they are doing what they were designed to. And you don't see a lot of people disputing their performance at those distances. 500 - 1000 yards (if that's what they were shooting at) not so much.

You can't be Serious?!
I drop animals with no problem at all with my .303 at 300 yards with 150 grain TSX'S , the 300 RUM has a pile more velocity than that
Cat

[bat119]

I used Barnes 120 TTSX in my .280 Rem for whitetail this year, at 200 yards the bullet zipped right through the chest deer only ran 30 yards, I can only assume the bullet expanded.

[CanuckShooter]

Nosler Accubonds, tried and true.

[Dubious]

I have a question for all the barns fanboys, if the minimum velocity is 1800fps then why not use a heavier barns bullet to keep the velocity higher past 300m and deliver more energy from muzzle onwards?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Dubious

I have a question for all the barns fanboys, if the minimum velocity is 1800fps then why not use a heavier barns bullet to keep the velocity higher past 300m and deliver more energy from muzzle onwards?

I have never loaded Barnes bullets that light in the big magnums like the 30/378 or the 338 Lapua.
I always load a bit heavier, but for sure the bullets are lightweight than cup and core bullets that are normally loaded.
The key , of course, is to the accuracy you need while staying above 1,800FS or so.
In my case, the olny decent monumental bullet available to me right now in .311 is the 150TSX.
There is a .310 out there that is lighter, but I haven't tried them simply because I have not run into them and am not about to start load development in -20cweather!
Plus, the 150's work just fine.

Cat

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Dubious

I have a question for all the barns fanboys, if the minimum velocity is 1800fps then why not use a heavier barns bullet to keep the velocity higher past 300m and deliver more energy from muzzle onwards?

Because most big game is shot inside 400 yards.

[Pathfinder76]

This elk was shot at 560 yards with a 270 and 130gr TSX’s. He literally went two steps. No “bang flop” CNS hit either. He died quickly because the bullet took the major arteries above the heart and made a mess of them.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Dubious

I have a question for all the barns fanboys, if the minimum velocity is 1800fps then why not use a heavier barns bullet to keep the velocity higher past 300m and deliver more energy from muzzle onwards?

Probably because the heaviest TTSX that Barnes currently lists in 7mm is the 150gr. , and the 168gr LRX requires a 1 in 8" twist. You could use a heavier TSX, but the B.C. for the non tipped TSX is lower than the TTSX, so you don't gain anything, and will be driving it slower.

[dshot]

My friend and I both shoot the 150 TTSX out of our guns, never had an issue. We made the switch a few seasons ago, so far 6 deer and 1 bull moose have been taken with no follow up shots needed.

That being said they have been impossible to find in the last 16 months, so when you find a box buy them. 140's also work great.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by Dubious

I have a question for all the barns fanboys, if the minimum velocity is 1800fps then why not use a heavier barns bullet to keep the velocity higher past 300m and deliver more energy from muzzle onwards?

Likely because we are hunters, not shooters, and if an animal is too far away, we try and put on a stalk to get in shooting range. Hunting. It’s a thing. Really.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by chuck

Because most big game is shot inside 400 yards.

Sorry, Chuck. I never saw your reply. I just started typing.

[sns2]

My longest shot was a ranged 450 yards on a cow elk. 300 WSM. Was in the middle of an open pasture. Stalking would have likely been a short endeavour before I would have been busted. Thankfully, I had a fence post to rest my gun. Double lunged and kept right on zipping through. Internals were jello, so that tells me it expanded and did it’s thing. Blood spray mega. She spun around and collapsed.

They aren’t magic, but they do break bones very well, and expand reliably at the stated velocities. I can’t think of a better hunting bullet than a TTSX for a high velocity rife.

But, there are lots of good bullets.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by chuck

This elk was shot at 560 yards with a 270 and 130gr TSX’s. He literally went two steps. No “bang flop” CNS hit either. He died quickly because the bullet took the major arteries above the heart and made a mess of them.

How high did you end up holding on that bull? That’s a nice bull and a long poke. Good shooting, but you practice for it, so there is no surprise that it worked out.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sns2

How high did you end up holding on that bull? That’s a nice bull and a long poke. Good shooting, but you practice for it, so there is no surprise that it worked out.

Approaching 5’. Practice definitely helps, but the biggest factor is wind. Conditions in this instance were dead calm. If there was any wind I would never have attempted that.

[Dean2]

Never ceases to amaze me the amount of absolute nonsense you now see posted on the web. I think it is the result of the fact anyone can write and publish, no qualifications required.

I have used a pile of different bullets, but I also shoot a wide range of calibres and cartridges. My main go to ones for hunting are Hornady, Barnes and Nosler. I have said it before, a single bullet failure is enough for me to toss it and never use it on game again. I had one of the first Berger hunting bullets that came out in the mid 80s splash on the outer hide of a Moose. I have never used another Berger for hunting, despite the fact they completely redesigned the hunting bullet because there were so many of those kinds of failures.

Pick the bullet for the application, you don't choose a 140 grain Interlock for a 30-378, the same as you don't use 180 grain Barnes TSX out of a Savage 99 in 30-30. A bullet can only be expected to do so much, it is up to you to know what the design/speed, jacket parameters are on the bullets you are picking.

In general, for most modern cartridges with a muzzle velocity of about 2600 fps, the Barnes are an outstanding choice, and for Hyper velocity cartridges they are really hard to beat.

[Twisted Canuck]

What Dean said. I like the TSX/TTSX in my 7mm RM and .300 WM, and also used it in my 7mm08 at under 200 yards. Works great.

But with my new .338 Federal, I'm going to stick to Partitions probably, although I will try Fusions and accubonds. With moderate velocity it is hard to beat cup and core type bullets.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck

What Dean said. I like the TSX/TTSX in my 7mm RM and .300 WM, and also used it in my 7mm08 at under 200 yards. Works great.

But with my new .338 Federal, I'm going to stick to Partitions probably, although I will try Fusions and accubonds. With moderate velocity it is hard to beat cup and core type bullets.

One of the younger guys I hunt with was coerced by me into buying a 7-08 as his first rifle. Nice Mesa. I had him get 120gr Barnes Vortx. Made short work of the bull elk he shot with it. 120s are bad medicine out of a 7-08.

338 Fed will be hard to beat if it shoots the Partitions well. I can’t wait to see!

[Pathfinder76]

Barnes bullets are giant killers. So what puzzles me the most is the argument that they are too hard to affectively kill a deer? The following line up (excuse my playing with a photo app today) were all killed with Barnes TSX’s. None of them were CNS hit and none of them went 30 yards. Smaller game meet the same type of demise. From a very large assortment of shot angles.

[catnthehat]

This is the exit wound on a what tail button buck that made it less than 20 feet before slid down the slope where it came to rest - blood trail that Stevie Wonder could have followed .
distance was a hair over 370 yards, terminal velocity right around 1,860FPS
I can say with all certainty that a 150 grain TTSX from a 7 Mag would be more than adequate at further ranges than my .303 with a 150 TSX
Cat

[marky_mark]

i think for the 257 cal they may need a deeper channel cut for more expansion. I just don't think they open up wide enough to cause enough trauma

[Dubious]

Cat, thanks for your insight it’s pretty clear your approach has been well thought out and applied.

Chuck, until they aren’t shot inside 400y. A lot of people still dont run range finders and just use flat shooting bullets to make up for range estimation errors.

Sns, what distance does it become shooting and not hunting? Seems like guys are using light fast low drop bullets so they CAN use them at extended ranges.

Dean I agree there are a lot of poorly thought out ideas published online especially when people are stubborn and set in their ways dont have the equipment or time to test things for them selves or can’t fathom someone needing to preform in a different applications/environment than them.

I’m not poopooing your guys beloved barns if you like them by all mean use them especially for not putting lead particles in the meat there’s no debating that bonus of them. They for sure are not magical in fact they are just another bullet marketed to make money.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

i think for the 257 cal they may need a deeper channel cut for more expansion. I just don't think they open up wide enough to cause enough trauma

Mark, I do believe there are better Barnes bullets than others. That is for sure.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Dubious

Cat, thanks for your insight it’s pretty clear your approach has been well thought out and applied.

Chuck, until they aren’t shot inside 400y. A lot of people still dont run range finders and just use flat shooting bullets to make up for range estimation errors.

Sns, what distance does it become shooting and not hunting? Seems like guys are using light fast low drop bullets so they CAN use them at extended ranges.

Dean I agree there are a lot of poorly thought out ideas published online especially when people are stubborn and set in their ways dont have the equipment or time to test things for them selves or can’t fathom someone needing to preform in a different applications/environment than them.

I’m not poopooing your guys beloved barns if you like them by all mean use them especially for not putting lead particles in the meat there’s no debating that bonus of them. They for sure are not magical in fact they are just another bullet marketed to make money.

Dubious. Very, very, very few people are guessing ranges past 400 yards and hitting the mark. It just isn’t happening. More people are shooting game at 300 yards and telling their friends they shot it at 500. No bullet was magical and you don’t fool people with marketing forever.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Dubious

Cat, thanks for your insight it’s pretty clear your approach has been well thought out and applied.

Chuck, until they aren’t shot inside 400y. A lot of people still dont run range finders and just use flat shooting bullets to make up for range estimation errors.

Sns, what distance does it become shooting and not hunting? Seems like guys are using light fast low drop bullets so they CAN use them at extended ranges.

Dean I agree there are a lot of poorly thought out ideas published online especially when people are stubborn and set in their ways dont have the equipment or time to test things for them selves or can’t fathom someone needing to preform in a different applications/environment than them.

I’m not poopooing your guys beloved barns if you like them by all mean use them especially for not putting lead particles in the meat there’s no debating that bonus of them. They for sure are not magical in fact they are just another bullet marketed to make money.

You are ignoring the fact that in 7mm the 150gr is the heaviest TTSX that Barnes currently lists, and that the 168gr LRX won't stabilize in many factory rifles. So for the 7mm cartridges, that leaves the 150TTSX as the heaviest TTSX , so shooting a heavier 7mm TTSX , is not an option. And even if there was a heavier 7mm TTSX , most people would still use the 140-150gr, because most people aren't interested in shooting at game animals past 500 yards.
As for the Barnes not being magical, neither are Bergers, yet some people would have us believe that Bergers are magical.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Dubious

Cat, thanks for your insight it’s pretty clear your approach has been well thought out and applied.





I’m not poopooing your guys beloved barns if you like them by all mean use them especially for not putting lead particles in the meat there’s no debating that bonus of them. They for sure are not magical in fact they are just another bullet marketed to make money.

That is the main ( and actually the only reason) I am shooting monometals these days, the wife started worrying about chunks of lead in our wild game so I quit shooting cup and core bullets pretty much . The 150 TSx is more than accurate enough at the distances I hunt these days and works well as far as terminal ballistics go and shoulder or heart/ lung shots .
I don't use that rifle for target shooting because I have match rifles for the range, so it is pretty much dedicated for deer , moose and such.
Cat

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by chuck

Mark, I do believe there are better Barnes bullets than others. That is for sure.

these were the ttsx's
I shot a few deer with mine that went down like they were struck by lightning
I also shot a few that didnt act like they were hit at all

I shot my bison with a 378 wby and barnes tsx's
that sucker ran too lol

I definitely think they have their place. I think the larger the animal, and when more penetration is needed. The higher they go on my list of bullet options. I was going to use them for my polar bear, but ran out of time to develop a load. But i developed a load with the a frames and i prefer their consistent expansion

[sns2]

Originally Posted by Dubious

Cat, thanks for your insight it’s pretty clear your approach has been well thought out and applied.

Chuck, until they aren’t shot inside 400y. A lot of people still dont run range finders and just use flat shooting bullets to make up for range estimation errors.

Sns, what distance does it become shooting and not hunting? Seems like guys are using light fast low drop bullets so they CAN use them at extended ranges.

Dean I agree there are a lot of poorly thought out ideas published online especially when people are stubborn and set in their ways dont have the equipment or time to test things for them selves or can’t fathom someone needing to preform in a different applications/environment than them.

I’m not poopooing your guys beloved barns if you like them by all mean use them especially for not putting lead particles in the meat there’s no debating that bonus of them. They for sure are not magical in fact they are just another bullet marketed to make money.

Dubious, that is a question that is hard to give a firm answer to. So many variables… rifle you are carrying, weather conditions, rest to shoot from etc…. Myself, I almost always carry a 7 Rem Mag. All conditions being perfect, that cow elk at 450 was my upper limit. But that’s just me. Others may be different.

My comment about hunting vs shooting was made with the extreme long range crew in mind. I respect their quest for accuracy at long range, but I just can’t get behind using majestic animals as their target. Too many things to go wrong.

Others feel differently, and I respect their opinions.

Finally, I would think that they are wanting to keep velocity up within normal hunting ranges. Barnes are hunting bullets. The BC at long ranges would offset the velocity gains of the lighter bullet at some point would it not?

Lots of room for all of us to make good choices. As I often say, there are lots of good bullets out there.

[Dubious]

Mark im currently not shooting bergers in my hunting loads am also not shooting Barnes. My question was more directed at the Barnes guys in general not specially ignoring heavier bullets for 7mmmag. With all the guys that chirped in with all their experiences in all calibers including your self in 257 it seemed like a good pool of people to ask why everyone likes to shoot lighter mono metal bullets.

Chuck if I could take you to waiparous with the amount of guys that dont have a range finder or dont know how to use them I think you would be surprised and change that statement.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Dubious

Mark im currently not shooting bergers in my hunting loads am also not shooting Barnes. My question was more directed at the Barnes guys in general not specially ignoring heavier bullets for 7mmmag. With all the guys that chirped in with all their experiences in all calibers including your self in 257 it seemed like a good pool of people to ask why everyone likes to shoot lighter mono metal bullets.

Chuck if I could take you to waiparous with the amount of guys that dont have a range finder or dont know how to use them I think you would be surprised and change that statement.

There is a wild difference between walking yourself onto a target and flinging bullets by guess and by golly at game. I’ve shot next to a bunch of guys as you describe above. I’m not thinking I’d be surprised.