300wsm165 ttsx

[buck400]

Hi I would like to know if any of you guys would use it for grizzly bear 165ttsx. 180tsx work really good out of my tikka L/s but hard to find. 165ttsx shoots the same cloverleaf holes with them as well I know would be shy to shoot moose with them.if you have any experience with the 165ttsx let me know how it did thx

[Gateholio]

Would you use a 180 gr Nosler Partition? Most would. Any of the TTSX from 130-180 gr will penetrate as much or more as a 180 NP

I think you would be fine.

[todbartell]

I've seen a 168 TTSX go through enough big elk to feel comfortable suggesting its use on any large game in North America. You will get plenty of penetration with any Barnes bullet weighing over 150grs in 30cal

[stinkyduck]

The 180 gr. would be my first choice, but if you put it in the boiler room they both will get the job done! Bigger heavier bullets would be a good choice if the beast sees you and charges!!!

[RiverOtter]

Haven't killed anything with a 165TTSX, but based on what I've seen a 168TTSX do to an elk, moose and a couple deer, I'd have no concern sticking one in a G-bear.

Definitely won't bounce off an onside shoulder, or stop short on a skull or full frontal shot......

[lightmag]

all i shoot are 165 TTSX!! love them !! knocked down many a moose, couple alaskan moose, 1 at over 300 yards!! straight thru!! dropped 3 good blackies ...only 1 went anywhere..20 yards :)

recovered only 2 bullets, both on same moose, both on outside shoulder against hide, 99% retention!! i would and will use them on G bears!!

[knightcc]

165 TTSX are great bullets. As others have said before, I wouldn't hesitate to use them on anything North America has to offer especially out of the WSM. I have killed moose with them out of a 30.06. You should be fine. Shot placement is key.

[BlacktailStalker]

Yep the kill shot on my brothers grizz was a 168tsx from a 300wsm this spring. 8'6" bear.

[tuffteddyb]

165 ttsx?on a griz?DEFINATLEY!!!
Moose?,elk? definatley.

[curt]

hey I switched to that very bullet this year I was shooting the accubond but thought i'd give the ttsx165 a try, one of my close hunting buddies had a bad penatration issue with the accubond so we switched it up. I'll tell you this I dumped a bison on his ass with that 165ttsx and the weight retention of the recovered bullet was awesome so the short answer is hell ya 165 will do the job just fine!!

[buck400]

[QUO.TE=buck400;1441336]Hi I would like to know if any of you guys would use it for grizzly bear 165ttsx. 180tsx work really good out of my tikka L/s but hard to find. 165ttsx shoots the same cloverleaf holes with them as well I know would be shy to shoot moose with them.if you have any experience with the 165ttsx let me know how it did thx[/QUOTE]

thank you guys for all the information really appreciate it I think that I will be switching to 165 Ttsx. this is what I'll be hunting with for moose, grizzly, then.

[j270wsm]

hey I switched to that very bullet this year I was shooting the accubond but thought i'd give the ttsx165 a try, one of my close hunting buddies had a bad penatration issue with the accubond so we switched it up. I'll tell you this I dumped a bison on his ass with that 165ttsx and the weight retention of the recovered bullet was awesome so the short answer is hell ya 165 will do the job just fine!!

isnt it illegal to shoot bison with bullets smaller than 175gr????

[Timberjack]

isnt it illegal to shoot bison with bullets smaller than 175gr????

That's correct. Straight from the LEH synopsis.

TJ

[Gateholio]

isnt it illegal to shoot bison with bullets smaller than 175gr????

Mine of the more ridiculous rules, but yes.

[RiverOtter]

Serious question, has anyone ever been checked and had a CO pull a bullet and weigh it?

Not endorsing illegal activity, but bullets have evolved a bit since that rule was put in place......

[curt]

They recommend 175 but my muzzle energy was more than adequate so I went with it.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Some use 165 TTSX and some the 168 TTSX in there 30 cals ? WHY ? :confused: RJ

[Nechako Outdoors]

165gr TTSX has a shorter ogive than the 168gr TTSX, better fit in a 300WSM or 308 Win (when Overall length is a concern). BC is .442 (165) vs .470 (168 )

[REMINGTON JIM]

Thank You ! :-D RJ

[todbartell]

who said you were too old to learn anything ;)

[BlacktailStalker]

Some use 165 TTSX and some the 168 TTSX in there 30 cals ? WHY ? :confused: RJ

165 are for little boys or girls and real men use 168gr :)

[Andrewh]

Has anyone measured the ogive differences between the two? We talking 2 thou or 40 thou differences?

165gr ogive is .680"

168gr ogive is .750"

[Jagermeister]

WTF is the boiler room? Lungs and heart? Next to a gut shot, probably the worst place to plant a shot. You want to immobilize the g-bear. Otherwise he is going to bolt, either away or toward you. Neither scenerio is what you want.
Remember that incident in Montana a couple of years back? The one where the black bear hunter mis-identified the g-bear and wounded it. Bear bolted for the thick crap and then ambushed the hunting partner, killing him, when he ventured in to finish the job his incompetent partner created.
Do yourself a favour and use at least a 180 gr. bullet, better still a 200 or 220 gr.

[RiverOtter]

Bullet weight isn't the "Grail" anymore Jagr, a 165/168 TTSX will spank a 180 Nobler Seperation.......

[Jagermeister]

I took some 300WSM load data from the Barnes site and ran them through a ballistics calculator. The ballistics calculator's only concern is ballistic coefficient and bullet weight.
From Barnes site:
Loading the 165 tsx with 58.5gr of RL15 gives a M/V of 3060 fps. @250 yards this equates to 2175 ft/lbs
Loading the 180 tsx with 69.5gr of RL19 also gives a M/V of 3060fps. @250 yards this equates to 2558 ft/lbs. (A difference of 383 ft/lb which is about the same force as a 45 gr 223 bullet at 310 yards from an initial M/V of 3496fps)
It doesn't matter who manufactures the bullet, if the parameters match the above in bc, weight and velocity, the end results with be the same with maybe some slight variation.
The point being that a heavier bullet at the same velocity is going to deliver greater force at any given distance.

[RiverOtter]

I'm pushing 168's at 3300fps(300WSM), via moly.....Can't imagine trying to match that speed safely with a 180......but if it makes your point, have atter.....

[Gateholio]

Yeah, but you would be shooting the lighter bullet at higher velocity.

Regardless, a 165gr TSX bullet will completely penetrate both shoulders of a grizzly bear, so not sure if it matters if the bear is dead or 15gr extra bullet dead.

[Jagermeister]

I'm pushing 168's at 3300fps(300WSM), via moly.....Can't imagine trying to match that speed safely with a 180......but if it makes your point, have atter.....Are Barnes moly coated bullets available over the counter? Not everyone is moly coating their bullets nor would they want to. The load data provided by Barnes for the 168 gr TSX BT is the same as for the 165 TSX BT, MRX BT and the Banded Solid Spitzer.
http://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/300WSMWeb.pdf



Yeah, but you would be shooting the lighter bullet at higher velocity.

Regardless, a 165gr TSX bullet will completely penetrate both shoulders of a grizzly bear, so not sure if it matters if the bear is dead or 15gr extra bullet dead.
Not so my friend. The numbers that I quoted in the previous message are the maximum loads for the respective bullets as posted by Barnes for the 300WSM. It just so happens that they have the same velocity.

Regardless, a 165gr TSX bullet will completely penetrate both shoulders of a grizzly bear
There are probably other bullets of other manufacture that are capable of that as well, but the key is shot placement. TSX bullets are not magical and compensate for poor shot placement and correct to take out the shoulders on.
It boils down to if you can get the heavier bullet to match or nearly match the velocity of the lighter bullet, you're better off energy wise using the heavier bullet.

[curt]

exactly!!!
Yeah, but you would be shooting the lighter bullet at higher velocity.

Regardless, a 165gr TSX bullet will completely penetrate both shoulders of a grizzly bear, so not sure if it matters if the bear is dead or 15gr extra bullet dead.

[Gateholio]

Are Barnes moly coated bullets available over the counter? Not everyone is moly coating their bullets nor would they want to. The load data provided by Barnes for the 168 gr TSX BT is the same as for the 165 TSX BT, MRX BT and the Banded Solid Spitzer.
http://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/300WSMWeb.pdf



Not so my friend. The numbers that I quoted in the previous message are the maximum loads for the respective bullets as posted by Barnes for the 300WSM. It just so happens that they have the same velocity.
There are probably other bullets of other manufacture that are capable of that as well, but the key is shot placement. TSX bullets are not magical and compensate for poor shot placement and correct to take out the shoulders on.
It boils down to if you can get the heavier bullet to match or nearly match the velocity of the lighter bullet, you're better off energy wise using the heavier bullet.

Your numbers aren't a complete look at the picture. There are only a couple of loads listed on there.

You can't get a 180gr bullet to go as fast as a 165gr bullet, no matter what data you are cherry picking from.

The Barnes manual lists top velocity with the 165gr bullet at 3148fps, the top velocity with the 180gr bullet is only 3036fps. From my 300WSM I shoot TSX or TTSX 130gr-3500 150gr -3300 168gr -3200 180gr -3000

Shot placement matters regardless of what size bullet you are using, of course. If I was going grizzly hunting with my 300WSM I'd grab the 180's just because they are on the shelf and the 168gr TSX never shot that well in my rifle, but if it was the other way around I wouldn't feel bad about using the 165gr instead.

[RiverOtter]

Hmmm...I have The Barnes #4 sitting right in front of me and nowhere does it list a 180TSX at 3060fps. The fastest listed is 3036fps with a compressed load of R'19(107%), but on the average max velocities are much closer to 2900fps.

The 165/168's average around 3050fps across the board, with a peak of 3148fps with IMR 4350. Safe to say they got 100-150 fps over the 180's on average.

That said, bullet energy is about as important as sectional density, or in other words, doesn't mean shit.......

Most of the time, where Barnes bullets are concerned, left over "energy" is expended into the scenery behind the animal that just got shot.

[RiverOtter]

Apparently I type too slow....Gates beat me to it....:)

[Salty]

FWIW I'm going to load up a hundred rounds for friend for his 30-06 its his only high powered rifle and he agreed with me that about half high quality hunting rounds to get about all he can out his rifle and half plinkers sounded good. I went with 165 gr ttsx as my estimation of the best way to go, and 165 IL for plinkers etc. I realise that a 300wsm can push 180 gr ttsx pretty fast but all things weighed imo I'd go with the same bullet for them. I personally think its the sweet spot for these bullets the old adages of 180s and up only make sense with yesterdays lead core boolits.

[cody300wsm]

I shot my moose and elk this year with them this year both of them went in and out and both animals fell in there tracks so with a grizz i cant see any issue they are awesome rounds

[Jagermeister]

That said, bullet energy is about as important as sectional density, or in other words, doesn't mean shit.......



I am curious. If bullet energy (ft/lbs of force) and sectional density do not mean shit, IYO, what does mean shit?

[todbartell]

I'd say shot placement and bullet construction. You can have a 30cal 240gr match bullet launched from a 300 Mag, it would have huge sectional density and huge downrange energy, yet be a terrible performer on game

[REMINGTON JIM]

I'd say shot placement and bullet construction. You can have a 30cal 240gr match bullet launched from a 300 Mag, it would have huge sectional density and huge downrange energy, yet be a terrible performer on game

GREAT example for sure ! I agree shot placement and bullet construction are the 2 key words to killing properly ! RJ

[RiverOtter]

I am curious. If bullet energy (ft/lbs of force) and sectional density do not mean shit, IYO, what does mean shit?

So long as there is enough "energy" to expand and penetrate, results boil down to what TB and RJ have already stated.

[Jagermeister]

To the OP. Your choice of bullet is fine. It comes down to you as the shooter. If your skills are such that you can confidently smack a bullet into the shoulders of a grizzly thereby disabling it, then go for it with the pill of your choice.
Regardless of what others say, energy (foot pounds or newton meters) is important. Let me state energy this way. You get a love tap from your wife or girlfriend and later you get stroked by some bigass dude. Think of the love tap as a 110gr bullet and the bigass dude stroke as a 220gr bullet. You're going to sustain the love tap but you're going to be on your back with the bigass dude stroke.
On sectional density which most of us overlook. A little dissertation by Chuck Hawks on the subject.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd.htm

[RiverOtter]

If ChuckKawks said it, it must be true........:roll:

A 110 passing through an animals heart, lungs and/or shoulders is gonna have the same end result as a 220...

Skinning........

[338 Mag]

Switched to this 165 ttsx this year,no worries,it will do the job,shot a moose and elk with my 300wsm T3 Tikka this last season, shot the moose in the neck at 100 yrds ,moose did a back flip and never moved awesome ammo.

[Gateholio]

Energy is important to deliver the bullet to the target, expand the bullet and penetrate sufficiently to put holes in the vital organs.

At 150 yards the difference between a 180gr at 3000 and a 165 gr at 3150 is about 75 ft lbs. to put that into perspective, a 22lr generates about 125-150 ft lbs at the muzzle

[BCBRAD]

Energy is important to deliver the bullet to the target, expand the bullet and penetrate sufficiently to put holes in the vital organs.

At 150 yards the difference between a 180gr at 3000 and a 165 gr at 3150 is about 75 ft lbs. to put that into perspective, a 22lr generates about 125-150 ft lbs at the muzzle

I suppose if you want a real bump in performance look at the 200gr Accubond in a 30 caliber.

[Jagermeister]

An interesting read. Try to read it unbiased, expand the chart to get a better look.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/barnes-tests-proves-why-berger-hunting-vlds-are-so-successful/

[Gateholio]

I suppose if you want a real bump in performance look at the 200gr Accubond in a 30 caliber.

depends on the performance you want, really.

[Gateholio]

An interesting read. Try to read it unbiased, expand the chart to get a better look.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/barnes-tests-proves-why-berger-hunting-vlds-are-so-successful/

If I want to shoot a deer at 700 or more yards I would look at Berger. For busting both shoulders of a grizz, I pick Barnes.

[BCBRAD]

depends on the performance you want, really.

I want it all, trajectory (banjo string) , performance on game ( unsurpassed), doable in a '06 case and more (easy). Barnes mono - metal bullets hit a wall at ~300m the NAB works near and far. And, if the Sako dispensed a beer after the shot (bonus)

[Gateholio]

Barnes wall is much further than 300 :)

[BCBRAD]

Barnes wall is much further than 300 :)

Some times I invision a target rich environment out at 1000 and barnes just is not included in that dream:)

[Gateholio]

I know I would take an Accubomd over a Berger :)

A 200gr NAB is going to do it all, close or far. Still would prefer a Barnes for grizzly though :)

[BCBRAD]

I know I would take an Accubomd over a Berger :)

A 200gr NAB is going to do it all, close or far. Still would prefer a Barnes for grizzly though :)

Yup, a barnes in a 9.3 wood reduce the pucker factor by a small amount:)

[REMINGTON JIM]

I know I would take an Accubomd over a Berger :)

A 200gr NAB is going to do it all, close or far. Still would prefer a Barnes for grizzly though :)

YEA ! And a 300 gr ACCUBOND out of a H&H will look after that situation even better ( G BEAR ) ! :-D RJ

[Gateholio]

YEA ! And a 300 gr ACCUBOND out of a H&H will look after that situation even better ( G BEAR ) ! :-D RJ

I would take a 250-270 Barnes over the 300 NAB for that, but I'm sure both would work very well