Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Copper...barnes vs hornady

  1. #1

    Default Copper...barnes vs hornady

    Recently, we showed our recovered Barnes copper TSX bullets. I showed mine from a poor man's africa trip and bragged about them.....they certainly make things get dead right now.

    Today, I talked with a Hornady rep who is a hunter. He told me about their fairly new Copper GMX bullets. Said they are not 100% copper like barnes, but 95% copper and 5% zinc to reduce foulingand glide better, says he is biased, but thinks they are better because they foul less, have six pedals instead of 4, and are a little softer to spread faster at under 2000 fps (shortly after muzzle velocity), they stay together better, fly much better and are cheaper. They are 2 fluted and polymer tipped.

    I'm thrifty, but would still pay 92 cents per round instead of 76 cents (approx) to have a dead now anminal instead of a track down or heart break . Has anyone got first hand expierence with the Hornady bullets? He especially bragged on their 165 grain .30 cal. Thoughts, recovered pics, stories? I'm open minded, but have a good track history with the power of barnes even on less than perfect shots. Can they really fly like an AMax and hit as violently as a barnes TSX?

  2. #2
    Member rimfirematt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    I shoot the 150's (hornady GMX) out of my 300 win mag. First kill was a dall sheep at about 200 yards. I cant remember the exact range. The bullet hit solid in the ribs, liquified the lungs and went out at an angle at the back of the rib cage. Sheep just hunched up for a minute then dropped.

    Also I shot a spike moose this year with the same load. I estimate the distance to have been about 150 yards. Maybe a touch further. My bullet hit high, just got the tip of his scapula then went through the spine. It was pitch dark while dressing him out. And honestly I didnt pay much attention, I was working the back half, but the bullet was never found. Im not sure if it exited or not.

    I like the bullet and even though the weight I chose is a little on the light side, they shoot flat and accurate out of my gun. And 2 for 2 is a good track record to start.

    I dont have experience with the barnes

  3. #3

    Default

    A Hornady GMX?

  4. #4

    Default

    I just like that Hornady claims to have not watered down their load data like other copper bullets.

  5. #5
    Member GrizzlyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rifleshooter View Post
    Recently, we showed our recovered Barnes copper TSX bullets. I showed mine from a poor man's africa trip and bragged about them.....they certainly make things get dead right now.

    Today, I talked with a Hornady rep who is a hunter. He told me about their fairly new Copper GMX bullets. Said they are not 100% copper like barnes, but 95% copper and 5% zinc to reduce foulingand glide better, says he is biased, but thinks they are better because they foul less, have six pedals instead of 4, and are a little softer to spread faster at under 2000 fps (shortly after muzzle velocity), they stay together better, fly much better and are cheaper. They are 2 fluted and polymer tipped.

    I'm thrifty, but would still pay 92 cents per round instead of 76 cents (approx) to have a dead now anminal instead of a track down or heart break . Has anyone got first hand expierence with the Hornady bullets? He especially bragged on their 165 grain .30 cal. Thoughts, recovered pics, stories? I'm open minded, but have a good track history with the power of barnes even on less than perfect shots. Can they really fly like an AMax and hit as violently as a barnes TSX?
    Barnes fixed that with the new TTSX bullet. Do some net surfing on the subject. Barnes new they had a barrel fowling problem with the TSX's. All fixed now and Sportsmans has the new TTSX's in stock. Thats my new load from now on. Cleaning empty cases as I'm typing this to start loading up.
    Barnes X bullets is best in my book. JMO of course
    I can do the impossible right away. Be patient, miracles take me a bit longer.

  6. #6
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Hornady's GMX is a relatively new bullet. I think its been in the works for several years, but availability has been an issue until rather recently. There are certainly differences in gilding metal (GMX) and pure copper (TSX/TTSX), but in reality each of them have attributes that amount to some real advantages & disadvantages. I suspect that both Barnes & Hornady can make an excellent argument why their particular design is superior. I also suspect that the real differences in their performance (whether considering exterior or terminal ballistics) is difficult to establish for the average hunter/shooter.
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

  7. #7

    Default

    Yea,
    Just doing the winter quarterbacking.......should just stick with the Barnes. They have done so good by me.....wish I could add 3 filmed Africa shots using Barnes (two Safari Club gold medal animals out of 9 Plainsgame record book animals) I'm feeling unfaitful for considering the all night searching for a good shot animal with a flashlight crap from bad bullets. I once emptied my .300 at 30 yds at a moose (4 shots) before grabbing my brother-in-laws rifle for another shot......5 shots in a basketball sized chest area with store ammo before it fell and showed that it was hit. Barnes has showed me about 13 times that it don't play that! someone slap me to my senses. I'm just mad that Barnes waters down their load data up to 5 1/2 grains of powder.

  8. #8
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GrizzlyH View Post
    Barnes fixed that with the new TTSX bullet. Do some net surfing on the subject. Barnes new they had a barrel fowling problem with the TSX's. All fixed now and Sportsmans has the new TTSX's in stock. Thats my new load from now on. Cleaning empty cases as I'm typing this to start loading up.
    Barnes X bullets is best in my book. JMO of course
    The transition in design occurred from the original X bullet to the Triple Shock X (TSX) bullet. In the late 80's and early 90's I shot a good many X bullets (.257, .277, .284, .308, .338, .416). Fouling was frequently significant and accuracy was often poor. The grooves in the TSX serve to help alleviate both issues. My limited experience indicates that while the newer design does not improve the terminal aspect of the original X bullet (it performed admirably from the beginning), fouling and accuracy in the TSX is generally much better.

    The more recent development of the TTSX was not a metallurgical improvement nor was it an attempt to upgrade their terminal effect; rather the TTSX is a mild change in form to increase the ballistic coefficient for improved exterior ballistics. I also suspect that the blue tip simply adds value in a very competitive market.
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

  9. #9
    Member GrizzlyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rifleshooter View Post
    Yea,
    I'm just mad that Barnes waters down their load data up to 5 1/2 grains of powder.
    All manufactures water down there load data because of liability issues. Doesn't mean you can't up the anti a little on your own loads as long as you do it in small steps and watch for pressure signs. All factory ammo sucks in my book, because of the limitations they have to follow in loading for the public. I guess you can't really blame them tho.
    I can do the impossible right away. Be patient, miracles take me a bit longer.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GrizzlyH View Post
    All manufactures water down there load data because of liability issues. Doesn't mean you can't up the anti a little on your own loads as long as you do it in small steps and watch for pressure signs. All factory ammo sucks in my book, because of the limitations they have to follow in loading for the public. I guess you can't really blame them tho.
    GrizzlyH, you are right. My problem is that my old Speer manual (1983 pre-lawyer) told it like it was as far as max loads. I'm pushing 50 and young reloaders sometimes raise their eyebrows at my loads that I've safely used sucessfully for years. However, it must just be in-grained in me not to vary from published data because in the day it was Really the max (or very close) for most factory rifles. I just wish that I felt more expierenced to vary from today's fine bullet data. Watching signs is great advice....but I need / want a more expierenced guy to show me the ropes / signs of pushing it. I used to get more velocity from the 30-06 than my .300 Win Mag.
    I shot a wildebeest at 257 and 358 yds with 200 gr Barnes TSX FB and 66.5 grains (barnes max)of IMR 4831, and wondered if I could have really used 72 grains.

  11. #11

    Default

    Yes, the GMX flies better than the TSX and I question the violent impact of the TSX as though they are some wonder bullet that you don't have to end up tracking your game. Tried the TSX for quit a few years on game and it was not a favorable experience compared to other bullets I had used in the past on the same game. I am trying the Hornady bullet at this present time. It is easier to find an OAL that produces accuracy, it does fly better at long distance and I am having more consistent groups with the GMX than I did over multiple groups of five shot groups with the TSX. I am able to go longer before having to clean my barrel. I sure hope it is a quicker killer over a good number of game than the TSX's that I tried. They all died using the TSX but there were much fewer DRT (only two) kills with the TSX than with other bullets I had used up to that time. The group of killed animals numbering 18 with the TSX over the few years I tried them where on (coyote, cow elk, black bear, hogs-smallest 220 largest 350, white tail, and mule deer).
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beartooth View Post
    Yes, the GMX flies better than the TSX and I question the violent impact of the TSX as though they are some wonder bullet that you don't have to end up tracking your game. Tried the TSX for quit a few years on game and it was not a favorable experience compared to other bullets I had used in the past on the same game. I am trying the Hornady bullet at this present time. It is easier to find an OAL that produces accuracy, it does fly better at long distance and I am having more consistent groups with the GMX than I did over multiple groups of five shot groups with the TSX. I am able to go longer before having to clean my barrel. I sure hope it is a quicker killer over a good number of game than the TSX's that I tried. They all died using the TSX but there were much fewer DRT (only two) kills with the TSX than with other bullets I had used up to that time. The group of killed animals numbering 18 with the TSX over the few years I tried them where on (coyote, cow elk, black bear, hogs-smallest 220 largest 350, white tail, and mule deer).
    Good report!

  13. #13
    Member Dan in Alaska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    854

    Default

    I am a huge fan of the TSX bullet. But, I bought a bunch of the Hornady 7mm/139gr GMX's (I got them really cheap) to try in my .280AI. If all goes well, I'll whack a nice black bear with this combo in the spring. I'm anxious to see how they do.

  14. #14
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    I haven't had a chance to try the GMX, but might have to give them a go.

    As to the comment regarding "watered down" load data, the old loads weren't tested with the same level of dilligence that the manufacturers currently use, i.e. piezi electric strain gauges vs. copper crusher. Some of those old loads have been tested with current instrumentation, and have been found to be too hot.

    More than one gun has been blown up by somebody figuring the factor data was too week, so they kept adding powder. I've never cared for that approach, if I want magnum performance, I buy a suitable gun, I don't try and hot rod a smaller chambering.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul H View Post
    I haven't had a chance to try the GMX, but might have to give them a go.

    As to the comment regarding "watered down" load data, the old loads weren't tested with the same level of dilligence that the manufacturers currently use, i.e. piezi electric strain gauges vs. copper crusher. Some of those old loads have been tested with current instrumentation, and have been found to be too hot.

    More than one gun has been blown up by somebody figuring the factor data was too week, so they kept adding powder. I've never cared for that approach, if I want magnum performance, I buy a suitable gun, I don't try and hot rod a smaller chambering.
    AMEN!!! +1 If you want magnum performance don't try to get it out of a lesser cartridge. You want a hot rod, then buy one, don't push a sedan past the redline, just buy a Corvette.
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  16. #16

    Default

    Amen +2!!!

    You haven't lived till you've seen a few Marlin 1895 chambers so swelled that a scope base won't sit flat on the now rounded receiver. Speaks wonders for Marlin that the guns held together, but it casts serious doubt on some of the non-manual +P loads being touted for the 45-70.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    895

    Default

    I looked into Barnes vs Nosler vs Hornady copper bullets for the 300 RUM. It seems to reasons to pick copper bullets are to improve weight retention and to avoid getting lead in your meat. Lead bullets can usually shoot faster and are smaller for the same weight bullet. Most reports tell of the Barnes performing well and holding together at high and moderate velocities. My experience with the TTSX in the 300 win at close range confirm this. Devastating, pass through one shoulder and the spine, no fragments on two moose.

    I had some fouling problems with them in a 300 RUM. My next 300 RUM did not like them at all so I switched to the nosler e-tip bullets. They have a larger bearing surface for better or worse and are a similar gilded metal to the GMX. This makes them "harder" but I don't know if this makes them more brittle or tougher. 6 shots through 2 critters convinced me they are plenty tough to 300 yards, and are goodly accurate too. I posted pictures of the recovered bullets a month or so ago. The Nosler and Barnes bullets are 4 peddles, I wonder if a 6 peddle bullet would be too brittle and lose some of it's flowers when smashing through big bones. I think tougher is better for the big critters up here. I don't plan to test the GMX bullets on my worked over 300 RUM that will be here in few months. I would like to use a copper bullet maybe the Barnes MRX if need be. Next would be the swift or nosler partition type bullets for toughness. I really do hate the thought of lead in my organic game meat and the RUM can grenade a bullet for sure.

  18. #18
    Member marshall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,814

    Default

    Daved,

    I saw your recovered bullets, they were all that a hunter could ask for. The penatration was deep and the mushroom/expansion was picture perfect with more than twice the bullet diameter and 100% weight retention.

  19. #19

    Default

    No one mentioned "hot-rodding" or overloading. Just getting the true capable performance from a rifle. Otherwise, I agree, why not just get a bigger gun.... but on the same hand some of you guys sound ike maybe you want a gun two times too big to only load up to partial capacity. Older manuals are hotter and I use them but I do not go over their max, so lets not change the post into some yahoo overloading. Additionally, grab some independent load manuals off the shelf at your local store and ask yourself why the best most accurate loads tested with an asterick are are up to 5 grains more than new way of testing max????? Are you purposely shooting less than the best performance??? 55 saves lives, but I'll bet you are still a good and safe driver at 65MPH.

    Cannot agree with the past lack of testing by powder manufacturers to come up with max loads. I've talked with two seperate manufacturing reps and the watering down is strictly liability. I've been given some double top secret real max loads.
    Several of us have used my late 70s early 80s manuals to the max loads and nobody ever blew up a gun and I can only remember seeing pressure signs at max one time on one case.
    Several of you have PM me about my "poor man" Africa hunt. Give me a day or so and I'll get the no joke / hidden figures cost posted. Also, I working on how to get three shots with Barnes video clips up for viewing.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    257

    Default

    A few thoughts on the GMX vs the TTSX. I've not shot the Hornady's but I've shot lots of Barnes Xs into animals. After looking at expanded bullets of both manufacturers I'm gonna make the assumption because the Hornady's appear to expand to a wider frontal diameter than the Barnes they won't penetrate as deep all else being equal. Now whether or not that makes a legitimate difference on game remains to be seen. If the Hornady's do in fact expand to a wider frontal diameter, they should also make a slightly larger wound channel than the Barnes. Regardless, I'm happy with the Barnes as I'll gladly give up a little expansion for more penetration.

    Lastly, all this talk of horribly fouled barrels is puzzling to me. I practice throughout the summer and always clean all the copper out of my barrel with Wipe Out after each range session. Just before the start of hunting season, I fire a fouling shot and fire a three shot group to verify my zero. If it's all good I go hunting. While hunting, I might shoot a couple rounds at an animal. So where is the fouling problem contributing to poor accuracy? Now, if I didn't clean the copper out of my barrel after each range session during the summer I suspect I might have accuracy problems due to fouling but I suspect I would have the same problem with cup and core bullets too.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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
  •