@Scott McDonald --- Bingo! Well said. There was a firearms magazine named "Gun Facts" which did honest product reviews. It was in about 1969 or 1970(?). They were in business for one year, then had to quit publishing because the advertising revenue dried up. Gun and ammo and accessory makers do NOT like truthful reviews of their products. I wish that they were still around. "Gun Facts" magazine (It may have been a compound word --> "Gunfacts") was founded/edited by Ken Warner, who also had much to do with telling people about custom knife makers.

Keep in mind that good expansion does not always equate to good performance.

@@veteranironoutdoors8320 Expansion at particular velocities is the main topic of discussion in Randy's video. If the bullet expands it will dump it's energy efficiently and do lots of tissue damage. It's up to the shooter to put that energy in the right place. Lots of experienced hunters love mono bullets when they try them because they tend to retain pretty much 100% bullet weight as opposed to many led core bullets. They penetrate well because of that weight retention. I would be all over them if they didn't cost so much.

Yeah it’s a little more nuanced than a blanket single velocity for all copper bullets. There are enough different intended uses for individual calibers that it can be different. 45-70 tsx bullets expand down well below 2000 fps for example. But, for most traditional longer range rifle calibers, it’s going to be somewhere north of 2000fps.

@Ben --- Ballistic gelatin has NO hide. Ballistic gelatin has NO bones. The video maker is talking about bullets in Game animals, not blocks of gelatin. I'm surprised that your post got more than one "Like". 🤕

I use the Barnes TTSX bullets exclusively in my 257 Weatherby mag and have enjoyed too many to count one shot clean kills. The 100gr TTSX is absolutely incredible and effective to my max range of 500yds on deer and 400yds on elk. I also cant remember any animal requiring a finishing shot!

John could you tell us what you and your sons max distance you would shoot.

@@dpwhitaker7088 400 yards for both of us. We shot elk last year at just over and just under 300 yards and both rounds did their job perfectly.

Me too Juan!

650 wow

Speer & Nosler have been my choices bullets for years as well. I have quite a few Barnes, but never quite trust them. It's just as he describes. Love the Nosler Accubonds & Hot-Cor/Grand Slams from Speer though. I trust Swift bullets as well, basically a slightly tougher partition.

Placement of a PROPER bullet. That is my point, these copper bullets are Not Proper Bullets for hunting IMIO (in My Informed Opinion)

I’m shopping for some good 30-30 options. I plan to hunt on public land in thick woodland. What grain would you choose in that caliber?

Completely agree 👍

I’ve seen and know people who have a better track record shooting game at 500-800 yards than people taking the old 30-06 with core lokts at 70 yards .

@Stephen Land - Bingo! They are not hunters actually. They are wannabe Palma / Wimbledon target match shooters. Nobody should be shooting at a game animal that far away. If they are too lazy to call/stalk the animal, then are they actually going to walk on their own legs to go and tag / field dress the animal 800 to 1,000 yards away from their shooting position? Doubtful.

@@gusloader123what is the definition of hunter? Hunting? I don’t remember there being a given distance in the definition. Don’t be jealous just because you can’t do it.

@@jerryhorton2899 You write like a Weatherby owner/ space-gazing telescope buyer / ammo wasting, animal wounding problem causer. If the game animal is out of plain sight with your eyeballs (or prescription lenses) , then it should be out of range for ethical hunting. Save the long-range shooting for paper targets, not game animals! Hunters/explorers/fighters such as Daniel Boone, Etham Allen, Jedediah Smith used Flintlock rifles with round lead balls and black powder and "brought home the venison" and defended their kinfolk usually from 15 to 100 yards distance. I suggest that you get and read a copy of "Traditional Bowhunter" magazine and read/see how hunting is done.

There shouldn’t be an extra space between “is” and “not” in your previous statement.

The 120 grain TTSX has been a very solid choice in my 7mm/08 as well.

7x57 is slow? I'm pushing the 140 Federal Fusion at 2850fps with Win760

I'm limited to a copper bullet in my state. I've been using 180 grain in 30-06 at 250 to 400 yards on Muley's with no issues. However I'm new to .308 and within those ranges any suggestions for bullet weight in Barnes TTSX?

@@jeffp.8718 Hello. The .308 Win cartridge is about 200 Feet Per Second slower that the time proven .30-06 Springfield cartridge. I suggest you leave the .308 Win rifle at home and keep using what you know will work on the Mule Deer. If you have to use the .308 Win because you no longer own the .30-06, then get much closer to the game animal! Hope this helps you.

Yep. Too many people do NOT stalk / hunt the game animal. Very lazy. They are the same people that drive around the grocery store parking lot until there is a empty space close to the front door. Also - many folks {Mega scopes and mega magnum guns} seem to fantasize that they are a sniper in the military trying to take down a Jihadi from a mile away, instead of hunting a four-legged critter that can put meat on the table.

Yes. The age old excuse of "You cannot get closer due to terrain etc" is hogwash. If that is the case then you need to find some place else to hunt. If you can recover the carcass you can get close enough.

The mkz cbb projectiles are in stock. Was very happy with blood trail on doe last season with 6.8 spc. I have also used lrx copper on game and prefer lead or aforementioned mkz. I shot a coyote with copper 380 and did not recover it. It stopped messing with me and my dog so it sort of worked.

"Blood trail" says it all. We are used to deer dropping in their track, or so much blood you absolutely know i tis in the brush right in front of you.@@29rca

120 ttsx has been great out of my 7-08. I was going to use the 140 but the 120 has left absolutely nothing to be desired. Not a single deer has made it farther than 30 yards. Penetration is never in question either, I’ve always gotten a full pass through.

Thanks for watching and commenting, from us both. Yes, part is supply chain with things held up, but a lot of it, too, is hoarding. Take care.

Forgotten Hillbilly, You are absolutely correct on your analysis of fragmenting bullet designs. I once, and only once, used a Berger 115gr in a .257 Weatherby to take a deer at 185yds and was rewarded with a dead deer alright, with the meat full of 'lead dust', never again!

Velocity is every bullet's best friend and every bullet's worst enemy. When you understand that, all of these arbitrary rules go out the window.

I thonk you read those results backward. More velocity equals more rotational velocity equals less likely to tumble upon entering a more dense medium.

@@jasonshults368 I don't recall spin rate being mentioned in the report, but there are several factors that affect projectile stability - shape, velocity, spin, mass, and length. What the study did show was a phenomenon common to firearms. When the projectile first existed the muzzle it was unstable and wobbly. The spin soon mitigated this problem and stabilized the round so it traveled downrange with minimal yaw and greater accuracy. However, some yaw remained and it is this yaw which was presumed to initiate tumbling once the projectile impacted the target. The greater the yaw at the moment of impact, the greater the probability of tumbling, but the effect of that tumbling is further enhanced by impact velocity (faster means better). However, because the rounds were well stabilized (due in part to the fast twist rate required to stabilize the 62 grain bullet in the M4 and M16A2) soldiers were noticing it often took multiple hits to down an opponent. Forensic examination indicated the rounds were tumbling only 50% of the time at ranges beyond about 200 meters (as I recall). The temporary workaround was to fire at least two shots into the body, thus increasing the probability of tumbling to greater than 50/50. Their conclusion was the faster a bullet travels, the greater the likelihood of a devastating impact IF it struck the target at maximum point of yaw. If not, then it was more likely to make pencil holes as it passed through (assuming it did not encounter material or bone that caused tumbling or breakup). When impact velocities dropped below 2500 FPS, the likelihood of a devastating wound channel was markedly reduced. Reduced hydrostatic shock may come into play here or other factors may be at work. At best this is an imprecise science and subject to many exceptions. I am only speaking in generalities.

I can take a swing, though i make no guarantees of correctness. Part1: the monometal leadfree bullets tend to be tougher, as our professor mentions here, so they don't deform as much our as quickly on impact. This means they will have a fairly smooth tapered surface for longer while inside the animal. Part 2: resistance traveling through a medium is a function of the speed of the projectile, the density of the medium, and a few other things (but we focus on those for now). This would mean there's more resistance against the bullet when it enters the body of the target, which lines up with your scenario. Part 3: body tissue isn't uniform. Even in the same muscle, there are fibers that are more/less dense than the fiber right next to it. Part 4: a force applied to a tapered surface can be equated to a set of two component forces. One perpendicular to the surface, one parallel. The perpendicular component would work to push the bullet side to side, while the parallel component would offer friction that would attempt to 'torque' the bullet about its center of gravity. Part 5: the projectile often enters a target surface at a slight angle due to the orientation of the barrel with respect to the target. The barrel is not pointed directly at the target, but rather above, allowing gravity to pull the projector down and still have it impact the target. Part 6: the projectile is constantly rotating at extreme speeds from the rifling, and due to the drop from gravity, the bottom surface of the bullet has more sideways friction force applied than the upper surface. If you combine these, you have a scenario where the high velocity projectile enters the body, maintains a relatively uniform shape/surface when compared to lead, encounters differing resistance from all sides, chooses the path of least resistance, and is also pushed/torqued differently on all sides due to the differing tissue qualities, friction forces, and net normal (perpendicular) force, thus allowing the projectile to rapidly curve while in the tissue. Again, i make no guarantees on the accuracy/validity of these theories, there is always more to learn and understand.

@@Th200Ponies that is a lot of

@@Th200Ponies that is a lot to unpack lol. I have never had that happen with a lead core bullet though. Only monometal and only from high velocity impact. I still think it is due to one half of the bullet retaining it’s petals and the other side having them shear off causing severe uneven resistance on the bullet. I may be wrong but i still think it makes sense

I have had same experience with the Federal Fusion bullet in .270. About a 100 yard broadside shot on a decent sized whitetail buck. Took a heart shot,,, perfectly round hole through the heart and then exited the same side of the animal near its upper rear flank - NO other damage on opposite side of the animal. Was the darndist thing I've seen from a bullet yet.

Sounds like a good theory. Thanks for watching!

@larrybulthous455, we can't read all of the comments, but we do see most if not all of the comments with questions. I'll be glad to talk with you. You can find our contact information on our website, shown at the last of every video. Thanks for watching.

No a 168 grain eldm would have been better

@@Dcm193 I like the Accubond

Because velociry is every bullet's best friend and every bullet's worst enemy. When you understand this deeply, most bullets out of most cartridges will do exactly what you want, simply by tailoring the impact velocity through loading and range.

I suggest learning which bullet shoots the best at the maximum range you will shoot.

It doesn't interest me, though I have considered it. Thanks for watching.

I use NP or Grand Slams. Never an issue. Put the bullet where i needs to be within in the proper range and all is good.See no reason to change. I shoot a 270 and a 308 Norma magnum.

They aren’t really new and they’ve proven to be very reliable and deadly over many years.

1) lead bullets kill raptors 2) I shot a cow elk through both shoulder blades with a 100 grain Barnes ttsx shot out my .25-06. you won't get that kind of performance with a lead bullet.

They kill hard with the range of usefulness, nothing below 2300 fps, and they are very accurate. As for killing raptors, maybe some but so do wind farms and solar panel farms, as well as power lines... Thanks for watching!

Chris, see my other comment and, as well, I kill elk to eat, and my purpose is to chose a shot that does as least damage to the least meat, while making a clean kill. So I don't choose the double shoulder shot.

I am interested how your barrel was bent. Never ran across this.

@@dpwhitaker7088 A little abuse, was leaned up against a building behind a tractor after I had finished shooting for the day, while I was picking up my targets, my dad needed to move said tractor and didn't see the rifle, because it had fallen over. Backed over the barrel before he saw it.

@@bradleyhughes6853 Oops! Stuff happens.

We are concerned and there are cases in WY now and even in our county.

No. Just no. Large frontal area means ping pong ball. Aluminum isn't very dense, which means ping pong ball. Use what you want, but that combo sounds ridiculous.

i mean, big bore aluminum core bullet that flare out imideately after couple inches of penetration without losing mass, larger frontal area to maximize terminal balistic, that carrying energy through speed not mass. instead of copper core bullet that carry energy through mass. the main idea is not about bullet drop or retained energy over long distance. but explosive bullet that create huge wound channel and cavity, not just throwing bullet shard inside the flesh. my imagination is a 500sw trapper would reach 3000fps with relatively okay recoil, that have insane terminal ballistic. but hey im fan of that cartridge, well in rifle form. cheers brother

Speer HotCor is still good! Thanks for watching!

It's another way to make a barrel, very expensive and as for performance, I don't see enough difference in my favorite barrel maker, Hart, given the price difference. Thanks for watching!

In my younger days, particularly in my teenage years, I ate so many lead pellets in upland game and waterfowl meat. I remember finishing off some remnants of turkey soup once that had about a teaspoon of shot in the bottom of the pot. Lead pipes are still used to transport potable water in many places. People have been fearmongered to the point where they can't grasp reality.

@@jasonshults368 My whole childhood and half of my adulthood i drank from lead pipes. I didnt know i was drinking poisoned water. Ate birdshot also. Now i prefer not to do that. Its not as bad as they say it is, but its not good either. Almost the same as playing, working with, or swallowing mercury. Though mercury is far worse.

No. Inaccurate.

I have so many to chose from, but after so many, many years and compiling data from every rifle and every caliber I've loaded for, I have my own "manual" to go back to. Thanks for watching!

@@TheRealGunsmith If I were only buying one mor two, what would you recommend. Thanks

Irregardless is a word, it's in the Cambridge dictionary.

@@derekmcmurry Fair point, however to address the original point, being non- standard does not make it is not incorrect to use it. 'Regardless' sounds better to me but I guess people get in the habit of using certain words.

@@derekmcmurry "Irregardless" may not have been considered as an acceptable "word" back when you were a boy, but in this day and age, it is. The word "firstly" and "conversate" are also in common use and accepted by today's standards as well. As are others. Things change. The English language and how it's used is one of them, due to cultural diversity, whether we like it or accept it or not! It is a part of the changing world that we live in and being a "Grammar Nazi" on the internet is much less "acceptable" than using nonstandard English.

I agree with "To each his own". I just thought that I would proffer up my thoughts, sense you felt obligated to do so. Have a Blessed day my friend.

Wrong, it is a word.

It is the thin jackets and no control to stop expansion. Thanks for watching.

That's not how that works. The 180 gr 7mm bullet will indeed "catch" and pass the 180 gr 30 cal bullet.

And it's utter fiction.

Yes, if the fit is right, and you don't push them too hard. The tiniest groups I've shot with 30-06 were bullets I cast and coated, 215 grains, shooting about 2000 fps using IMR 4198. Between .20" and .25" groups. About 1/3 the size of the best I've done with jacketed bullets.

At what point in the animal's recovery did you determine the bullet failed?

Eldm. Trust me brother

What’s wrong with a 22-250? With a properly constructed bullet, it’s more than adequate for deer sized game.

One minute we shouldn’t shoot past 400 yards then the nest video he shoots a elk at 850 make up your mind !!

Agree with you GS took a few deer with a 22 250 proper shot placement and it works I live in Alabama so idk much about elk hunting but with white tail I've killed plenty with bullets that blow up and create massive wounds and don't pass through and killed a few with copper bullets that just blow through shot placement is the key to everything.

He's a hypocrite. He's killed lots of animals beyond 600, and at least one beyond 800 yards. He's a "do as I say, not as I do" guy.

There is such a word. Check the modern dictionaries. And blame Bush, Jr.