Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: 210 X bullet

  1. #1

    Default 210 X bullet

    Any of you using the 210 X bullet in a .338 Mag., and if so, what do you think, is more bullet weight needed for Alaska ?

  2. #2

    Default

    .338

    I don't think anymore than 210 grains is needed for Alaska, but the .338 just performs better with a bit heavier is my understanding. I've shot the 250 noslers(federal premium) for years with excellent results.. 2660 muzzle velocity. I hunt pretty much only moose with a huge kill zone so I sight 5 high at 100.. goes 6.5 high at the peak, and is dead on at 300.. works for me.

    I did try the 200 grain SST this year on caribou.. almost 3100 muzzle.. it did a great job on the smaller bodied caribou..(pretty much broke the spine above the lungs in half). Pretty impressive. I was told by the guys at Hornaday the SST was not a good round for moose.. hard to believe after what I saw with the caribou.. and at 200 grains it sure is flat.. with an amazing ballistic coefficient.


    Have you used the X bullet quite a bit?.. I hear great things.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Barnes Bullets claims you can load their bullets lighter than others because they retain all of their weight instead of shedding 20% or more upon impact. If you believe that argument, the 210g bullet should be comparable to the 225g bullet in a non monolithic variety. Most people would agree 225g out of a 338 win mag would be ok for most all hunting, so should the 210 grain then by Barnes argument. Of course if big brown bears were on the main menu, I would load them as big and hot as was reasonably accurate and safe. Better yet, get a 416 super duper. I loaded a 338 win for a while and settled on the 250g TSX only because it shot little tiny holes at 100 yrds. In any other situation, I would shoot what was accurate 210 to 250 grains and I bet it would kill critters all the way dead.

  4. #4

    Default

    I have been using the original 250 grain X bullet in a .338 since they first came out. It has worked good for me. Been looking at the 210 grain since I have yet to recover a 250 grain X bullet. Have also been using the 180 grain X bullet in a 30-06 with good results. So I guess we have been using them for close to 25 years. But, in the big scheme of things my families big game harvest in the last 25 years is small compared to many others.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .338 mag. View Post
    I have been using the original 250 grain X bullet in a .338 since they first came out. It has worked good for me. Been looking at the 210 grain since I have yet to recover a 250 grain X bullet. Have also been using the 180 grain X bullet in a 30-06 with good results. So I guess we have been using them for close to 25 years. But, in the big scheme of things my families big game harvest in the last 25 years is small compared to many others.
    What kind of muzzle velocity are you getting with the 210 X?.. Is that a factory load?


    The SST I was shooting this Fall at 200 grains is 3060 or so.. pretty impressive ballistics, and performance(one animal shot..a caribou).

    I have to think that 210 X would be a great Alaska round...

  6. #6
    Member The Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    My only experience with the 210tsx was last fall when a buddy put two of them into a moose. As far as I know they are still orbiting unit 13 a little over a year later. Both shots were broadside chest shots and both expanded and passed through. I like the idea of 225s in the 338WM since I shoot 200s and 220s in the 06 and 250s in the Whelen. No real good reason it just seems like a fit in that space is all. If I were forced to hunt everything with the 338 loaded with the 210tsx I would not let it bother me or slow me down at all.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Kid View Post
    My only experience with the 210tsx was last fall when a buddy put two of them into a moose. As far as I know they are still orbiting unit 13 a little over a year later. Both shots were broadside chest shots and both expanded and passed through. I like the idea of 225s in the 338WM since I shoot 200s and 220s in the 06 and 250s in the Whelen. No real good reason it just seems like a fit in that space is all. If I were forced to hunt everything with the 338 loaded with the 210tsx I would not let it bother me or slow me down at all.
    Kid

    Were the two shots double lung?.. seems if you pass through both rib cages the job is done... what I am looking for is beeter penetration should my bullet hit high lung, and find spine, and more muscle..

    Or if I get a shoulder, I get them both.

  8. #8
    Member Armymark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    624

    Default

    I've killed 4 caribou with the 210 TTSX from my .338 win.mag and I doubt very seriously any moose is going to know the difference, especially if you do your part. One of the caribou I shot at 174 yards on a slight down hill. There was about 6 inches of flooded tundra behind the critter and the 210 TTSX cleared the bou and sent up a 10 foot geyser of water about 30 yards behind him. I agree with the Kid totally, the 210 will not let you down.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla, Ak
    Posts
    16

    Default

    I love the 210 x bullet have taken moose, caribou and deer all with the same bullet. i load them myself. they really work out my .338

    chris

  10. #10
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrummy View Post
    I love the 210 x bullet have taken moose, caribou and deer all with the same bullet. i load them myself. they really work out my .338

    chris
    Now that is impressive! How did you get them to stand in a row?

  11. #11
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LuJon View Post
    Now that is impressive! How did you get them to stand in a row?
    You beat me to it...
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •