Barnes TMZ
 

did some tests yesterday on the range with the 250 gr.barnes tmz ,also sold by KNIGHT PBT with a blue sabot .used 2 T7 PELLETS and fired into a plastic pail filled with wet newspaper at 100 yds. the bullets opened up like a flower and should be very good for deer [good blood trail] ..i know they cost more than the S/W or the SST but for a hunting situation money spent onbullets is not an issue ...


url=http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.php?i=269&u=10060487][/url]

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

Cool test! The Barnes is good for any animalIMO. But I do understand some peoples stance on the price. Some folks just want dead animals on the ground and they don't care how they get there. And more often than not they want to accomplish that taskwhile spending as little as humanly possible.The primary reasonsI prefer Barnes over other bullets is their ability to expand, full weight retention from not fragmenting, and the fact that I don't have to worry about the possibility of feeding my family meat with lead fragments in it. AndI've downed game with them and they performed as advertised. That's just me and I have absolutely nothing against anyone else using whatever they feel works for them.

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

That kind of controlled expansion does not come cheap in many cases. I personally like the Barnes MZ Expanders in 300 grain. Why I do not know. They just shoot well for me. The funny thing is, I never even had a chance to shoot an animal with them, all the times I have hunted with them. That all copper jacket is really a well tested field projectile. That kind of expansion means dead animals in my book.

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

Thats exactly why I shoot a Barnes while hunting. I use the 300 MZ Expanders.

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

heinz57:Impressive pics... thanks for sharing. Looks like Barnes' tipped bullets expand just like their hollow points.

I've had good results with250 MZ Expanders. Have never recovered one ... and that's one of the reasons I use them!

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

Yeah, apparently the tip is suppose to aid in expansion and also give the bullet better aerodynamics. I don't know if the expansion part is true but if they perform like they did in the picture above, they're good in my book.

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

I sent a question in to Barnes about the minimium velocity needed to ensure expansion in their MZ bullets (I thought thetipped bullets would need to be driven much faster to expandas well as the HP's). For minimums theysaid:

1050 FPS for the 250 Expander
1000 FPS for the 300 Expander
1100 FPS for the 300 TMZ/T-EZ

Very similar. I think that's very low for a bullet...and real good !

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

Beautiful, check out all the product reviews of the TMZ on Cabelas:

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0037633216146a&type=product&cm Cat=SEARCH_all&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&Ntk=Products&QueryText=Barnes +MZ&sort=all&Go.y=16&_D%3AhasJS=+& N=0&Nty=1&hasJS=true&Go.x=19&_DARG S=%2Fcabelas%2Fen%2Fcommon%2Fsearch%2Fsearch-box.jsp.form23&_dyncharset=ISO-8859-1

or this if you can't click above

http://tinyurl.com/dddnul

and you will find out the deal. Be especially careful of things like this:


Shoulder shots are better with pointy bullets if you don't want to track. 150 yards with a good blood trail is not a problem for most of us, but a problem for some. Great out west and large corn and bean field bullet.
Chap




Think about not hitting a ribs but going between the ribs on broadside shot, or clipping the cartlidge of a rib, how much expansionwith this bullet going thru the"lungs". Dead deer of couse, but I claim, that 150 yards is what you can expect on avarage with how most hunting coming for CF hunt i.e. bow shots on deer behind the shoulder. Just be aware of what your bullet is designed for and it is designed for distance and "controlled expansion", not expansion like an Barnes MZ, which I believe is the better bullet for < 170 shooting. If ya gotta shoot 200 or 250 these will get you there, most of us need to only shoot 100 or 150 at the MAX. Just my opinion.


If your going to shoot 2 pellets, your not a 200 or 250 yard type guy, your a 100 yard shooter in my mind, therefore the Barnes MZ is a better bullet for your type of shooting. It will open quickly on entrance into the chest cavity (even between ribs) and offer great DRT performance, huge wound channel, excellent penetration and expansion. If your a 3 pellet person, and was only shooting 2 pellets to see what expasnion would be like at 150 yards with bullet slow down, they by all means use the TMZ.
Chap

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

You may want to switch to Blackhorn 209 powder also, since it shoots well long and is VERY VERY consistent, most folks using chrony get only a 10 fps variable between shots with this powder, which is quite remarkable. Also no swabbing and no crud ring. 777 makes huge crud ring in my Omega and Knight and I have to swab between shots to get good bullet seatiing and good accuracy.




The 200+ yards shots is significant, especially with a BDC scope, then ya got something if your trying to shoot long. Chap

RE: Barnes TMZ
 

I guess I am a bit of a hypocrit. I give the guys **** for shooting the expensive Barnes bullets in their centerfire rifles because of the expense. And then I shoot them in my MZ. So I guess I am guilty of being a bit 2-faced about my bullets. However I have sworn myself off the expensive bullets from now on.

I have shot them because they shoot very well, however I have never noticed them being any more reliable on deer than a straight cast bullet. And my cast bullets are a lot cheaper.

Since(IMO) an MZ is limited to 200 yard shooting I can not justify spending that much for maybe a inch or so better accuracy at 200 yards. So I have went back to shooting cast bullets only, and I am glad I did. Also my cast bullets load a lot easier than the Barnes bullets, or at least that has been my experience.

I have only shot a couple of elk with an MZ. However they were shot with bullets that I cast. And there is no way any other bullet could have done a better job on the elk than those bullets did. However that is with limited experience. Tom.