|
|
|
Discussion Forums
Forum Index
> Rifles general discussion
> TSX vs TTSX??
TSX vs TTSX??
@ 08:37 am (GMT) |
Daniel SchindlerGreetings.Embarking on loading, experimenting with some 130 gr TSX in my 30-06 and 300 Win - per Nathan's favorable comments. Ammo shortage being what it is...I cannot find the 130 gr TTSX anywhere locally. Did purchase 1 box of 130 gr TSX. These are newer Barnes bullets. I spoke with the Barne's Rep and he said there are no performance differences between the TSX and TTSX in this application. Asking you...do your experiences concur. Thank you. |
Replies
@ 08:12 am (GMT) |
Nathan FosterRe: TSX vs TTSX??Hi Dan, there are actually three to compare, the TTSX, the TSX and the TSX flat base.All three work well in close, then as velocity falls away each lose the ability offload kinetic energy at varying rates. All are potentially useless at impact velocities below 2200fps, regardless of expansion. TTSX - has a fairly wide meplat under the tip which helps to encourage rapid expansion combined with plastic tip to help maintain BC. The slight / subtle difference between tipped and non-tipped may sometimes be seen by comparing entry diameters at the rib cage at lower impact velocities. The downside of the tip is that it makes an already long projectile even longer, making the design unsuitable for some cartridge / rifle combinations (e.g. 223 Rem). Stated BC .350. TSX - the generic copper pill. Stated BC .340. TSX flat base - generic copper pill but loses velocity somewhat faster than its kin. Stated BC .264. As a basic summary to all three (and pretty much all mono copper pills), expect good wounding and fast kills down to 2600fps, relatively clean but somewhat delayed kills as wounding tapers off between 2600 and 2400fps. A more noticeable reduction in wounding and an increase in dead run length occurs between 2400fps and 2200fps. Expect (avoid) narrow wounding and slow killing at and below 2200fps. Keep your shots well forward for best results. A fourth option is the 120gr Tac-TX which features an extremely large meplat. The entire ogive section is weak with petals prone to break away unevenly, helping to offload kinetic energy as hydraulic force along with mechanical action. I have spent quite a bit of time testing these bullets. Most definitely superior to the former vegan offerings (somebody got a clue), especially at the lower impact velocities. The Tac-TX proves that all other things being equal, the width of the meplat (and hollow point) has a major effect on performance. Stated BC is .358. The .30-06 is one of the better cartridges if using prius bullets. Driven as fast the rifle will allow, a light mono pill is capable of producing good wounding. Just don't push the ranges too far and keep an eye on individual batch quality. The demand for copper (cars / devices) is at an all time high while mining consents are at an all time low. Quality is effected accordingly. I have one batch of Barnes XPB sitting here now that will not expand in flesh at a distance of 5 yards. The choice of a 130gr projectile is not exactly the most efficient way to utilize a .300 Magnum, perhaps somewhat like burning coal to charge an electric car. Throat wear will be relatively high. Nevertheless, the results are far better than can be obtained using these same bullets in modern low powered cartridges. 'More power' is simply the better option if going the copper route. OK, hope that helps a bit. |
@ 09:30 am (GMT) |
Scott StruifRe: TSX vs TTSX??I would look at the new Hornady CX offerings. They’ve got three weights in 30 cal: 150, 165, and 180, with BCs of 418, 440, and 469. Plus, they’re selling Superformance loads. The 30-06 150 grain is advertised at 3080, which should get it to 350 yards or so and within Nathan’s parameters. |
|
@ 09:01 am (GMT) |
Daniel SchindlerRe: TSX vs TTSX??[quote]Hi Dan, there are actually three to compare, the TTSX, the TSX and the TSX flat base.All three work well in close, then as velocity falls away each lose the ability offload kinetic energy at varying rates. All are potentially useless at impact velocities below 2200fps, regardless of expansion. TTSX - has a fairly wide meplat under the tip which helps to encourage rapid expansion combined with plastic tip to help maintain BC. The slight / subtle difference between tipped and non-tipped may sometimes be seen by comparing entry diameters at the rib cage at lower impact velocities. The downside of the tip is that it makes an already long projectile even longer, making the design unsuitable for some cartridge / rifle combinations (e.g. 223 Rem). Stated BC .350. TSX - the generic copper pill. Stated BC .340. TSX flat base - generic copper pill but loses velocity somewhat faster than its kin. Stated BC .264. As a basic summary to all three (and pretty much all mono copper pills), expect good wounding and fast kills down to 2600fps, relatively clean but somewhat delayed kills as wounding tapers off between 2600 and 2400fps. A more noticeable reduction in wounding and an increase in dead run length occurs between 2400fps and 2200fps. Expect (avoid) narrow wounding and slow killing at and below 2200fps. Keep your shots well forward for best results. A fourth option is the 120gr Tac-TX which features an extremely large meplat. The entire ogive section is weak with petals prone to break away unevenly, helping to offload kinetic energy as hydraulic force along with mechanical action. I have spent quite a bit of time testing these bullets. Most definitely superior to the former vegan offerings (somebody got a clue), especially at the lower impact velocities. The Tac-TX proves that all other things being equal, the width of the meplat (and hollow point) has a major effect on performance. Stated BC is .358. The .30-06 is one of the better cartridges if using prius bullets. Driven as fast the rifle will allow, a light mono pill is capable of producing good wounding. Just don't push the ranges too far and keep an eye on individual batch quality. The demand for copper (cars / devices) is at an all time high while mining consents are at an all time low. Quality is effected accordingly. I have one batch of Barnes XPB sitting here now that will not expand in flesh at a distance of 5 yards. The choice of a 130gr projectile is not exactly the most efficient way to utilize a .300 Magnum, perhaps somewhat like burning coal to charge an electric car. Throat wear will be relatively high. Nevertheless, the results are far better than can be obtained using these same bullets in modern low powered cartridges. 'More power' is simply the better option if going the copper route. OK, hope that helps a bit. Helped a bit??? Oh hell yeah Nathan. You just saved me from wasting a lot of time, components and $. Why do I venture off the path of using components that have already been proven to work...and work well... for decades??? Thank you Nathan, for the time you spent responding and sharing your invaluable experiences. Very much appreciated! God bless and all the best to your family. [b] |
|
@ 09:08 am (GMT) |
Daniel SchindlerRe: TSX vs TTSX??Thanks Scott. Wise counsel. I got tempted to go below the standard 30 cal 150 gr...won't do that again. I appreciate your responseand will look at the CX offerings.Dan I would look at the new Hornady CX offerings. They’ve got three weights in 30 cal: 150, 165, and 180, with BCs of 418, 440, and 469. Plus, they’re selling Superformance loads. The 30-06 150 grain is advertised at 3080, which should get it to 350 yards or so and within Nathan’s parameters.[/quote] |
Please wait
ABOUT USWe are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.
|
KNOWLEDGEBASE |
KNOWLEDGEBASE |