Effective Range?

G. McAlister · Jun 26, 2017

Alright guys, I have a very accurate handload using 140 grain TTSX bullets and big game powder in my 7mm-08. After running all the data in a ballistics calculator, it shows that the velocity is 2140 fps and an FPE of 1424 at 350 yards. Would this still be an acceptable range based on the data or should I limit shots to 300 yards with a velocity of 2231 and FPE of 1547? My biggest concern is the bullet underperforming or not expanding at all. I only plan to take broadside and slight quartering shots.

nidahunter · Jun 26, 2017

Barnes says 1800 fps is minimum for expansion of that bullet. If it is accurate at that range, 350 yards should be fine.

Brachii · Jun 26, 2017

You're missing many other variables -- wind, altitude, size of elk... in a vaccuum against a cow elk, you'd be fine, but nature isn't always that kind.

MinnesotaHunter · Jun 26, 2017

nidahunter said:
Barnes says 1800 fps is minimum for expansion of that bullet. If it is accurate at that range, 350 yards should be fine.

This^

It sounds like a good recipe.

jryoung · Jun 26, 2017

You should be fine right there, if you wanted to tinker, a 145 LRX has a BC of .486 and the 140 etip has a BC of .489. Assuming you could get 2,875fps like you are with the 140 you'd have an extra 100 FPS at 350.

LopeHunter · Jun 26, 2017

Have you considered going to a slightly heavier bullet for shots on elk beyond 200 yards?

belly-deep · Jun 26, 2017

I wouldn't get too hung up on FPE, but that aside, you should be ok

G. McAlister · Jun 26, 2017

LopeHunter said:
Have you considered going to a slightly heavier bullet for shots on elk beyond 200 yards?

I have considered it, but 140 grain bullets seem to be that intersection between speed and weight. I'm not afraid to try new premium bullets since this caliber has a smaller margin of error than others. Realistically I would like to be as close as possible, but I want to be comfortable with some distance if I need it.

whiskeydog · Jun 26, 2017

I wouldn't worry about it...in my opinion, you have more than enough for a 300 yard shot on an elk, bull or cow, and I wouldn't hesitate. I've been shooting a 6.5x284 for several years now and have taken 5 of them in 4 years with 140gr Berger Hybrids and 143gr Hornady ELD-X. The last one was at 450 (2385 FPS & 1806 ft-lbs), and he took about 2 steps. Everyone always gets so hung up on thinking they need the biggest fastest bullet to down an elk. If your bullet is designed to perform at or above 1800FPS, I'd use that as your cutoff. Everyone always wants to shoot a 300 or 338 so they have safety factor on a bad shot...fine...don't take bad shots. If you have a bad rest, too much wind, or aren't comfortable, then wait for a better shot. There isn't a shot I'd pass on with my 6.5 that I would be willing to take with a 300.

BuzzH · Jun 26, 2017

I wouldn't recommend a heavier bullet...but perhaps a different one, if you have the luxury. If you're hung up on using the TTSX, I would take the advice that others have given...I don't know much about the TTSX except what I've read. Which is to say, they need a bit more velocity to have reliable expansion than other bullets.

I use the 140 Accubond and while I don't know what the "maximum" effective range is, I can tell you that they have worked well for me on elk from 25 yards to 629 yards with the 7-08. I've shot a majority of the elk with it, in that 150-250 yard range with no problems. IMO/E I'm comfortable with bullet performance of the 140 AB on elk to 500-550. I think the one I took at 629 was perhaps pushing the effective range just a bit for elk, but in fairness, the performance was most impressive.

The thing to keep in mind is that a vast majority of elk are shot at reasonable ranges.

elkaholic06 · Jun 28, 2017

According to Barnes, expansion should be ok at that range. But when they say minimum expansion is at 1800 fps, they truly mean minimum (as in the nose just barely peeled back). You will probably be good at 2100 fps, but with monolithic bullets I prefer to have higher velocities. If I were you, I would try other bullets like the interbond, accubond, partition, etc. My only experience with barnes ttsx was with a .300 win mag, and they worked great at 330 yards on a 6x6 bull. My opinion is that monolithic bullets should be used at higher velocities, and as such I don't see them being used in standard cartridges except in lighter bullet weights. Too many horror stories of them acting like FMJs...supposedly.

HighDesertSage · Jun 28, 2017

I think your cartridge and bullet selection are fine, probably can even stretch out a bit further to 400 or so. Most important is what your groupings and accuracy look like at those distances.

NVDesertHunter · Jun 28, 2017

Having tested the Barnes TTSX and TSX quite a bit at those ranges, I would recommend a minimum velocity of 2000fps. Using a 270 Winchester firing 130 TSX into water at 100-400 yards the expansion drops considerably around 2100-1900fps. This goes for most non-lead bullets like the TTSX, E-tip and GMX. For photos you can look at them here. http://www.huntingwithnonlead.org/bullets_long_range.html

There is a EXCEL spreadsheet on the website page that will tell you expansion range.

Hope that helps and happy hunting.

Gunner46 · Jun 29, 2017

Ask Buzz, he's the 7/08 Elk Guru here.

3855WIN · Jun 29, 2017

I'd shoot 350 and not worry about it.

Flatland Crusoe · Jun 29, 2017

elkaholic06 said:
According to Barnes, expansion should be ok at that range. But when they say minimum expansion is at 1800 fps, they truly mean minimum (as in the nose just barely peeled back). You will probably be good at 2100 fps, but with monolithic bullets I prefer to have higher velocities. If I were you, I would try other bullets like the interbond, accubond, partition, etc. My only experience with barnes ttsx was with a .300 win mag, and they worked great at 330 yards on a 6x6 bull. My opinion is that monolithic bullets should be used at higher velocities, and as such I don't see them being used in standard cartridges except in lighter bullet weights. Too many horror stories of them acting like FMJs...supposedly.

The reason they are used in "lighter bullets" is that the density of copper is less than lead. The same shaped mono bullet will end up around 15% lighter than a bimetal bullet. A 150 gr mono has the same volume as a ~172 gr bimetal bullet.

Here is a TTSX I recovered with impact at 2700 fps

Here is a TTSX I recovered with impact at 2100 fps

The minimum opening speed of the Barnes bullets is within 100-200 fps of most heavier constructed bimetal bullets. Weight retention on the Barnes has always been 98%+ in my experience.

If you use the rules around 1200 ft-lbs and minimum opening velocity for elk rounds most of the intermediate rounds in the 6.5-7mm range are capable to 350-400 yards with the right loads.

Laelkhunter · Jun 29, 2017

Flatland Crusoe said:
The reason they are used in "lighter bullets" is that the density of copper is less than lead. The same shaped mono bullet will end up around 15% lighter than a bimetal bullet. A 150 gr mono has the same volume as a ~172 gr bimetal bullet.

Here is a TTSX I recovered with impact at 2700 fps

Here is a TTSX I recovered with impact at 2100 fps

The minimum opening speed of the Barnes bullets is within 100-200 fps of most heavier constructed bimetal bullets. Weight retention on the Barnes has always been 98%+ in my experience.

If you use the rules around 1200 ft-lbs and minimum opening velocity for elk rounds most of the intermediate rounds in the 6.5-7mm range are capable to 350-400 yards with the right loads.

Flatland, what caliber and weight were those? Were they recovered from game?

Flatland Crusoe · Jun 29, 2017

Laelkhunter said:
Flatland, what caliber and weight were those? Were they recovered from game?

6mm 80 gr .243 win. recovered from an antelope and whitetail both with quartering shots where they went shoulder to hind quarter.

I'll likely be running 145 gr 7mm LRX on elk this fall from a 7mm Mag.

The value with the mono bullets is they hold together with fast rounds and add an element of reliability to calibers that are on the lighter side for given game. Also they are non toxic which is a plus.

Effective Range?

Active member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page