.

Barnes Triple Shock bullets

jbw1776jbw1776 Member Posts: 3,056
edited August 2005 in Ask the Experts
Has anyone used these bullets before? I was thinking about loading some up for my 30.06 for hunting whitetail. I was thinking about using 180gr. Where I hunt, my shots are made at 100yds or less. Is this a good choise or is this bullet to slow expanding for the thin skin of a whitetail? Thanks,

Ben

James Willis

Comments

  • SnellstromSnellstrom Member Posts: 1,085 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This bullet will kill your whitetail dead, and you will not recover a bullet they will pass clear through. Thats not saying it's not a good bullet but where this bullet really shines is on larger game like elk where some help is needed to hold together and break bones and still exit. They are great bullets but may be overkill if there is such a thing for deer size game. If your gun shoots them well big deal just shoot them.[;)]
  • hadjiihadjii Member Posts: 971 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have used Barnes bullets for several years now, from muzzleloader bullets to hunting whitetails in the swamps of Louisianna. I can't imagine a better bullet than barnes, maybe some equal too, like swift bullets, but not better than. In my honest opinion, 180 grains for whitetail is too much. I have shot several with the 140 grain X bullet out of my 30-06, at ranges from about 75 to about 175 being the longest shot. They performed flawlessly, plus with the 40 less grains, you get some extra velocity. I would imagine the triple shock is everything they say it is, but the X bullet will serve you wonderfully on whitetails at any range.
  • mrbrucemrbruce Member Posts: 3,374
    edited November -1
    That is not the ideal bullet for your smaller built whitetail deer, and they are pretty pricy to boot.
    They will certainly kill your deer plenty dead, but it's not really what they were designed for.
    If you do use them be careful and pay real close attention to the loading data that must be used with them.
    A plain old flat based 165 gr anything would be better than the 180 gr Barnes
    Triple Shock on deer inside of 200 yds.............

    Gun control is hitting what your aiming at.
  • buddybbuddyb Member Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    My hunting buddy shot a whitetail buck that weighed about 170 pounds with a 160 grain Triple Shock from a 7mm WSM last season.At 150 yards he hit the deer in the chest from straight on and we the recovered the bullet under the skin on one of the rear hams.The bullet performed perfectly and still weighted 158 grains.But I agree with mrbruce that they are too pricey,so I still use Sierra bullets.
  • dcso3009dcso3009 Member Posts: 2,350 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I use the Barnes TSX on everything but varmits. I have found them to be very accurate, and have yet to use/need more than 1 shot since the change. I am shooting a 150gr TSX from my 30-06 with RE19 loaded very close to listed max, and .003" off the lands. I also load the TSX for my 308 Win, and my friends' 270 Win and 7mm Mag. These have all been used for everything from coyotes to elk and performed incredibly. Yes they may be overkill for whitetail and smaller animals, but they are very effective! My advice is to try different weights and take what shoots best from your rifle.
  • dallas.comdallas.com Member Posts: 214 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    My 2 cents on this one:

    excellent bullet but for white tail is probably an overkill. I have been using sierra gameking for years with excellent results and at a fraction of the cost
  • hadjiihadjii Member Posts: 971 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Why is it everybody is willing to spends hundreds of dollars on a specific rifle, and then spend hundreds more dollars on a specific scope, and then choose the cheapest bullets that money can buy. Shute, the bullet is the investment there is when it comes to putting together an outfit to hunt with. Heck, I don't care how much a Barnes bullet or a Swift bullet costs, I'd buy one of them bullets anyday over getting a whole truckload of cheaper bullets for free. It all comes back to the fact that "You get what you pay for."
  • hadjiihadjii Member Posts: 971 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Why is it everybody is willing to spends hundreds of dollars on a specific rifle, and then spend hundreds more dollars on a specific scope, and then choose the cheapest bullets that money can buy. Shute, the bullet is the cheapest investment there is when it comes to putting together an outfit to hunt with. Heck, I don't care how much a Barnes bullet or a Swift bullet costs, I'd buy one of them bullets anyday over getting a whole truckload of cheaper bullets for free. It all comes back to the fact that "You get what you pay for."
  • jbw1776jbw1776 Member Posts: 3,056
    edited November -1
    Thanks everybody for your input. From all your post, I feel that 180gr. is a little too heavy for what I'm going to be shooting at such close distances. I think I might still try the TSX bullets, but maybe try the 150gr. instead. I appreciate all your time. Thanks,

    Ben



    Theres room for all Gods creatures, right next to the mashed potatoes.
  • Jim RauJim Rau Member Posts: 3,550
    edited November -1
    Use the one that your gun shoots the best, deads dead!!![^]

    Self defence is an ablsolute and natural right. Keep your powder dry! J. Rau, Alaska
  • bperdue21bperdue21 Member Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    i don't think they are saying buy cheap bullets. it sounds to me that they are saying the 180 gr triple shock will be too much bullet for whitetail hunting. a whitetail is a thin skinned light boned animal and it doesn't take a whole lot to tear one up. as for the quality of the so called "cheap" sierra gamekings, i have no idea what you are talking about.

    I'm not an expert, but i did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
  • gskyhawkgskyhawk Member Posts: 4,773
    edited November -1
    there are very few bad bullets on the market today , and there is such a thing as throwing your money away,
Sign In or Register to comment.