30-06: 168gr vs 180gr TTSX for PG?

[xbr897]

Have my first Africa and first PG hunt this summer. Largest animals will be Sable & Kudu. I've only been about to find Vor-Tx 30-06 ammo with the 180gr TTSX in stock and have been practicing with that. Although I've seen multiple mentions of using the 168gr loaded ammo, I can't seem to find it anywhere. Well, I did find 1-2 places charging nearly 2x the price of the 180s. Am I going to be at much of a disadvantage on PG using the 30-06 with the heavier 180s? I'm expecting all shots will all be within 300 yards.

 

[flatwater bill]

I’d like to chronograph each of those loads. But think you’ll do fine with 180’s. Best of luck…FWB

 

[IvW]

Heavier is always better.....

 

[Ngonyama]

168 would be ideal

 

[Ryan]

While I used the 168s with great results the 180s should do just as well. According to Barnes Vor-Tx ammo data the 180s are 100 fps slower at muzzle than the 168s and even to 300 are still going 2215 fps. 2000 fps is considered the threshhold for proper expansion with those bullets so you're well within that to 300 and chances are your shots will be 200 or less.

 

[SFRanger7GP]

We have killed a lot of plains game with the Barnes 180gr factory ammo, to include the mountain zebra in my avatar photo.

Safe hunting

 

[Paul Raley]

I mainly use 168 gr bullets in my 30-06 as they shoot sub MOA at 100m but if you can get 180 gr bullets to shoot accurately then you will have no problem taking PG with them . As LvW said , heavier is better .

 

[Joker12]

Either will work just fine.

 

[browningbbr]

Since 2009, I have used "light for caliber" TSX in my .300 Win Mag (168gn) and 7mm Rem Mag (140gn). The results have been fantastic. Mostly, the penetration is through and through. The two times that I recovered bullets, the four petals were peeled back perfectly and the weight retention was virtually 100%.

That being said, I am using "heavy for caliber" 200gn TSX in my 8x57mm Mauser and I'm getting the same kind of results, but I have not recovered any bullets.

I chose the bullet type and weight based on how consistently they grouped. After all, bullet placement is still the most important thing.

The moral of the story: As Joker12 said above, "Either will work just fine".

 

[TucsonFX4]

As Ryan stated, staying above 2000fps is the key to optimal terminal performance from the TSX line. If it hits at that velocity or higher, then they will do their job. If the ammo you are shooting is as accurate as you desire, then no need to change.
I agree with sending the rounds through a chrono so you can do some real calculations as to when velocity drops below that 2000fps threshold.

 

[xbr897]

Thanks all. I'm getting sub MOA groups with the 180s when shooting off a front rest on the bench so I feel I'm good on accuracy. Good advice on the chrono to see how my rifle stacks up vs data printed on the box.

 

[Jaegger]

I’ve successful used ‘06 w/ Barnes TTSX 180‘s on many trips & a point of consideration … I feel, 168’s would have you on the light side IF you crossed paths w/ an outstanding, cannot pass trophy in the thicker heavy boned Oryx or Blue Wildebeest, maybe Zebra, etc.

I sense, PH would prefer the 180’s w/ greater energy vs. fps.

Happy Trails

 

[Jonathan Kashouty]

Either will work if shot placement is correct. I would default to the 180 grain TTSX.

 

[Ryan]

I’ve successful used ‘06 w/ Barnes TTSX 180‘s on many trips & a point of consideration … I feel, 168’s would have you on the light side IF you crossed paths w/ an outstanding, cannot pass trophy in the thicker heavy boned Oryx or Blue Wildebeest, maybe Zebra, etc.

I sense, PH would prefer the 180’s w/ greater energy vs. fps.

Happy Trails

Between the two weights I'd say it's a " half dozen of one, six of the other" situation.

From experience 168s aren't light for any of those mentioned. Gemsbok was the first, zebra the fifth of eight animals I took with them in Namibia. I shot my zebra quartering towards me breaking the front leg and it still expanded properly and passed completely through the vitals. We found the bullet just under the skin.

 

[Osama Mahdi]

I used 308 rifle provided by my PH. 150 gr bullet federal. It dropped my Kudu at the spot

 

[Jota Efe]

I have used 180 gr factory ammo before in my 3006 musgrave but started reloading and get a better accuracy grouping with the 168gr tsx ; so these days I stick to the 168's and have taken from oryx gazella to kudu bulls , nyala ,bushbuck ,impala ,mountain reedbuck and warthog ; I don't know about the 180's for heavier game but personally I would step up to heavier bullets for zebra and wildebeest eg 375 300gr tsx .

 

[Safari Dave]

If your rifle shoots the 180g at 2 MOA or better, you will be fine.

 

[ARHinAK]

Heavier is always better.....

I wouldn’t always agree.
At least not when it comes to mono metal bullets. I shot a caribou at extended range with a very heavy for caliber TSX. Only the very tip opened up, not even to bore diameter. In this case I believe I would have been better off dropping one or two bullet weights, keeping the speed up for better expansion. With monos the weight retention is all but guaranteed, so you’ll have that momentum and as long as it’s going fast enough to expand you’ll have a nice wide and deep wound channel.
All that being said, I like the TTSX better than the TSX I was using that day.

 

[lockingblock]

168 is optimal for a monometal bullet. It needs more velocity to properly expand.

 

[Bert the Turtle]

168 is perfect. Its not how heavy it is when it comes out of the gun, its how heavy it is after it hits. That 168 will weigh 168 most of the time. The conventional wisdom about heavier bullets like 180 or higher is from a time when a 180 would way less than 168 after impact. A 168 will take a kudu, zebra, oryx or any other plains game you'd like. At least mine did.