.308W On Black Wildebeest

Gary wrote earlier:

"Been playing with the ballistic charts. If the 165 grain TTSX will perform at 2000 fps I will be good to 300 yards with this bullet. I doubt that it is going to open up at that velocity."

Gary my own experience with the Barnes TSX is limited to mid range behaviour. I know the Peregrine VRG-3/4, because it expands in a perfect mushroom shape and not with individual petals has the same expansion from 3,000 - 1,800 ft/sec impact velocity.

The following weight bullets of premium design will completely penetrate eland shoulders side on at 150 yards and therefore all North American game including bear:

• 160 gr from a 65x55 Swede

• 175 gr from a 7x57

• 175gr from a 7x64 Brenneke

• 200 gr from a .308W

• 215 gr from a .303 Brit

• 220 gr from a 30-06

• 250 gr from a .338 Win Mag

• 275 gr from a .35 Whelen

One has to observe the penetrating ability of the 7x57/175gr; .308W/200gr; .303/215gr; 30-06/220gr to appreciate why these are so popular in Africa as one-shot killers on all big game.

Son Louwrens is confident about putting the 150gr Interbond bullet into the heart of any animal out to 300 metres and in this case it was the perfect choice because he saw that shooting would be beyond 220 metres, so the 2,250 ft/sec impact velocity favoured the light-weight bullet. 100 metres closer and penetration would have been less due to higher impact velocity and lesser weight retention by the bullet.

He had initially sighted with 180gr Hornady Interlocks having expected maximum 200 metres shooting but his field trajectory experience with this bullet is limited to 200 metres - so he re-sighted his rifle to be 2" high at 100 metres with the 150 gr Interbonds which he knows very well.

Opps. Sorry about the typo Mr. "Angry", heh.

Gary is right, Angries. The only time I had previously heard of the Whelen was when my now deceased gunsmith swore that was the only caliber he ever used. Then Mississippi started allowing single shot 35 caliber guns with an external hammer to be used in smokepole season! Suddenly everyone in Mississippi and then Louisiana had a 35 Whelen single shot! The performance of that gun has been so drop dead phenomenal that many hunters use it all year long.

Well... of course the .35 Whelen will kill a bear or elk the same way as a .375 H&H... so will a European or locally loaded 7x57 with 175 gr. good bullets. ;-)

Far better to find out such things before heading to the field. Makes it much easier to pick the rifle for the occasion. I, too, am disappointed that frhunter13 is leaving his Whelen behind. The 35 Whelen is growing in popularity, somewhat due to primitive weapon seasons in some states allowing calibers 35 and above in certain single shot rifles. Hunters try one for primitive weapon season and fall in love with it. It has a reputation for being deadly on the big bears. I have read a number of times where some prefer it to the 375 H & H. They say that it holds more rounds, recoils less and it kills just as well. As you have said in other post the only way to find out is to try it in Africa.

Thanks again for your help.

Very good information, Andries. It never really crossed my mind that there could be so much leeway in calculating ballistic coefficients. My son and I both shoot the Scout Rifle. He will be interested in what you have come up with. I love the little rifle, but was aware that there would be shortcomings with the shorter barrel. I have been trying to work out its limitations and you have been a big help with that.

Both the Hornady and Barnes 150 gr compare their drag coefficients to the old G1 standard, and the .42 BC value of the Barnes is particularly optimistic - not a lie, but likely at the low speed end of the trajectory as marketing men are apt to do.

I am rather inclined to give the 150gr Interlock a G7 BC of .32, and the Barnes a .31 index - both a mid range drag value, starting out at 2,640 ft/sec. So my sheet then shows:

Barnes 150gr TTSX: (.31 BC) 200 yds = 2,098 ft/sec | 250 yds = 1,974 ft/sec.

Hornady 150gr Interlock: (.32 BC) 200 yds = 2,114 ft/sec | 250 yds = 1,993 ft/sec.

Bullet ballisticians do not always consider all the drag-creating influences of supersonic shock wave patterns on their bullet designs and clearly Barnes does not integrate skin friction of their grooved bullet surface into their drag calculations.

My calculations may not be exactly correct but they are more accurate than the .42 BC and .349 BC of the Barnes and Hornady values. In practice you will see no difference in trajectory between the two.

By the way, that 150gr Interbond on the wildebeest broke the shoulder bone and went through a rib on entry, broke an opposite rib and stuck in the opposite shoulder joint and retained 86% weight. It is almost twice as expensive as the Interlock but well worth the money.

"... the 150 grain Hornady Interlock is at the same velocity at 200 yards as the 150 grain Barnes TTSX is at 250."

What BC are you using for the Barnes bullet, Gary? I am going to do a comparison using an averaged drag figure that has not failed us in practice.

Certainly due to the solder bonding process the Hornady Interbond has better weight retention than the Interlock above 2, 500 ft/sec impact velocity. Also its average drag coefficient will be very similar to the Barnes - but at the muzzle velocities you envisage the somewhat cheaper Interlock will prove to be just fine. I'll be back soon with that velocity retention.

Member frhunter13 has the same good experience with the 225gr Barnes TSX in his 35 Whelen and I was hoping he would bring his Whelen along next week (it is totally unknown here) for his hunt for kudu, blue wildebeest, black wildebeest, blesbok and impala but he decided to bring his 30-06.

My favourite Speer bullet (in fact the only one I liked) was the Deep Curl and it is a loss for reloaders that they withdrew that. Looking at a .308W 165gr Federal Fusion last week I believe that is where the Deep Curl is now.

The comparison I was attempting to make was that, according to my ballistics calculator, on paper at least, the 150 grain Hornady Interlock is at the same velocity at 200 yards as the 150 grain Barnes TTSX is at 250. Past 250 yards the Barnes bullet really slows down. I agree that 250 yards is the limit with this rifle. Having not used the Interlock I will bow to your experience and give them a try. I went to Barnes bullets primarily because of problems I have run into with others. The Barnes have always been accurate and have performed well. But, at a cost. I am very wiling to try something else.

Along those same lines, I have recently been experimenting with a 250 grain Speer Hot Cor for my 35 Whelen. My go-to bullet in the past has been the 225 grain Barnes TSX. I am getting very good accuracy from the 250 Hot-Cor and good velocity. I am anxious to try them on hogs. All of my reading points to this bullet being a very good all around bullet for the Whelen and much less costly.

That velocity you will have at even 80 yards will not be detrimental to the integrity of the 150 gr Interlock bullet - it compares almost exactly to our PMP ProAmm series and these 150 gr maintain 80% weight on elk size shoulder at 2,300 ft/sec impact velocity.

For the Encore the 180gr Interlock SP has a .423 BC. I am unsure which phase of the trajectory Hornady and Barnes each select for their advertised BC values - but it will not disappoint you.

I know you compared the 150gr Barnes and Hornadys regarding the "effective range". Quite honestly with that short barrel I would limit myself to under 250 yards.

As I will be doing close range hunting with the short barrel 308 I am a little concerned as to how the Hornady Interlock will perform at ranges inside of 100 yards. If ballistic coefficients are of any value, going from a Barnes TTSX to a Hornady Interlock will reduce the effective range by about 50 yards assuming the same velocity. Your were spot on in that the Barnes 150 TTSX drops below 2100 fps just a little past 250 yards. The only way to know how the interlock will really do is to try it and see. That I will do. THAnks again.

I, too, have had some disasters with the Nosler Ballistic Tip. Our problem with the SST was with body shots as you suggest. If there is that much difference between the SST and the Interlock I will certainly give them a try.

Sure the SST is almost as useless for body shots as the Nosler Ballistic Tip - if we ever use it it only is for brain shots when culling - or my younger son who only shoots brain shots when hunting. It IS an extraordinary accurate bullet. 150gr SSTs from his Musgrave 30-06 at 2,996 ft/sec group into 3/4" at 220 yards.

Regarding the comment immediately above, I miss-read your post regarding the Barnes bullet and velocity. I see now you were referring to the barrel and not the bullet.

Thanks Andries. I will look into the 150 grain Hornady interlock. We have had some bad experiences with the Hornady SST bullets in that weight. Interesting that the Barnes is that much of a drag on velocity. I am going to go through my stash and see if I have some other 150 grain bullets to try, simply to compare velocity. I found, only a few minutes ago, a box of 165 grain Hornady interlocks that I had tucked away. I will try some loads with this one, also.

Thanks again for your input. Gives me something to work on.

"Been playing with the ballistic charts. If the 165 grain TTSX will perform at 2000 fps I will be good to 300 yards with this bullet. I doubt that it is going to open up at that velocity."

I agree. I would stay with the 150gr - keeping in mind:

1. With a heart shot it is immaterial whether the bullet expands or not as its internal cavity will be at least 2x calibre.

2. The plastic tip will force some frontal area increase even it is simply cylindrical - which is the best geometry for a good wound channel and for the supersonic shock wave becoming a subsonic pressure wave to enlarge the wound channel.

Gary it seems to me the 150gr (T)TSX should be your one and only load for that short barrelled rifle. It will perform perfect with a heart shot. That bullet has been factory tested here at 2,819 ft/sec 10 shot average from a 24" Musgrave barrel at 59,305 psi using the local Somchem S321 propellant which has burn rate halfway between RL10 and RL7.

My rough guess is that at 250 yards impact velocity from your rifle will be below 2,100 ft/sec which is good enough - but here is my silent question: Why would one need a premium bullet when shooting beyond 120 yards from a short barrel that lowers velocity to about 200 ft/sec from a 24"barrel? ONLY IF IT IS THE MOST ACCURATE LOAD.

A 150 gr Hornady Interlock at that lowered velocity will perform exactly as the Barnes beyond 120 yards or so. Impact velocity of that 150gr Interbond on the black wildebeest was about 2,250 ft/sec and frontal angled diagonally through the right shoulder it could not exit, angled onto an opposite rib as it was.

Been playing with the ballistic charts. If the 165 grain TTSX will perform at 2000 fps I will be good to 300 yards with this bullet. I doubt that it is going to open up at that velocity.

Thank you Andries. I ask not out of idle curiosity. I have an issue with my short barrel Ruger Scout Rifle in 308 Win. The barrel is 18.7". It shoots best with 165 - 180 grain bullets, but is OK with 150s. Accuracy is best with near full power loads. 2525 fps with the Barnes 165 grain TTSX and between 2400 and 2450 with 180 grains, depending upon which one. It shoots both the Hornady 180 grain round nose and the new Hornady 178 grain ELD-X in to one small hole at 50 yards. I was concerned that the lower velocity with the heavier bullets might be a handicap. If I limit my 180 grain loads to shots within 150 yards or so I should be OK. My hunting with this gun will be deer and hogs in the thickets. Problem is, I do not want to be caught short if I a nice one walks out on a high line at 250 yards while I am in route. The 150 grain Barnes TTSX is most accurate running an average of 2640 fps. It is sufficiently accurate and I am thinking of simply using this bullet exclusively. Within 100 yards or so the point of aim difference between the 150s and the 180s is minimal and I can adjust for it. I am somewhat reluctant to have two different weights of bullets in my pocket and trust my memory to assure that I have the correct bullet for the circumstances at hand. I feel that the 150 grain TTSX at 2, 640 will handle anything I am likely to run across. I need to do some more shooting with the 165 Barnes and call Barnes to see what is the minimum velocity they recommend for this gun. I would prefer to use the 165s if I can get sufficient velocity at the maximum distance I am likely to engage a deer.

My other gun in 308 Win. is my new Encore with the Match Grade Machine barrel. It much prefers the 178-180 grain bullets. With its 26" barrel, velocity is not an issue. If I am going to hunt pipe lines or cutovers, this is the one I will be using. I cannot do any significant real world testing on game animals this time of year. Only hogs are legal and with the heat and humidity right now

hunting them is a hot and close range proposition. Heat index tops 100 each day. Hunters and hunted do not move around much.