|
|
|
Discussion Forums
Forum Index
> Precision long range hunting and shooting
> 155 vs 168 TMK
155 vs 168 TMK
@ 02:12 pm (GMT) |
Scott TrowbridgeDoes anyone have any first hand experience comparing the 155 TMK vs the 168 TMK in terminal performance? I would assume they are similar, but it is better to ask.Are both the 155 and 168 TMK tangent ogive like the SMK's? I have heard some of the TMK's are more secant-ish but don't have them in hand to tell. Are there any other mid weight 30 cal bullets that kill as well or better in the 308W? Scenar? ELD-M/X? Thanks! |
Replies
@ 07:49 am (GMT) |
Nathan FosterRe: 155 vs 168 TMKHi Scott, The 155gr TMK is fast expanding. It is fine for Roe and similar but can be problematic on larger animals. It never ceases to amaze me that the small shift up to the 168gr weight can make such a difference but it does. The slight increase in weight along with reduced impact velocities helps to bring about a better balance regarding wounding versus penetration.Regarding the shape, yes its a Hybrid of sorts and not always easy to work with in high velocity cartridges (magnums etc) but is generally excellent to work with in the .308 Win. As per usual, I suggest seating to SAAMI OAL, if accuracy is poor, try a shorter rather than longer OAL. Applies to the .308 only. |
|
@ 10:29 am (GMT) |
Scott TrowbridgeRe: 155 vs 168 TMKThank you!!! That is exactly what I was hoping to find out.Are there any other bullets in the 168gr range you prefer over the TMK for ease of tuning and consistency on game? |
@ 01:31 am (GMT) |
Mike RRe: 155 vs 168 TMKI’m not saying TMK aren’t any good because I’ve never used them, I’m still using factory HORNADY TAP 168gr A-max and just got some more 2 weeks ago Yesssss.They’ve been pretty impressive out of a 20inch barreled 308 so much so I haven’t bothered to reload for 308..... Have bought a box of 168gr ELD-M projectiles when they first came out to try but haven’t got around to trying them as there’s no need yet. In the 90’s I ran 150’s in my 308’s and they were ok really, the 168’s seem to do a better job over a broader range to be sure.I think Nathan’s given a good guide for you he’s spent lots and lots of time looking at these things if you want more information maybe buy his book on the subject |
@ 06:19 pm (GMT) |
James AireyRe: 155 vs 168 TMKHi Scott.I cannot comment on the 155s. However the 168s I feel I can. I've shot around 10 or so deer with them. Shoulder, rear lung and One of which was a big 12 point red stag at 170 ish y. I've shot deer at 70y and I've shot them at close to 300y. I haven't had the chance to stretch the legs yet but when I do I'll be eager to see how they work. If you hit bone. Its palm sized. Irrelevant of if it's the entry or exit wound. If you go behind the shoulder for a rear lung shot. Golf ball sized entry wound and fist sized exit wound. Usually in most instances with the bullet resting on the existing side but under the skin. I run the 160gr TMK out of my 7mm08 model 7 and my model 700 284. 2430fps and 2830fps. Both have given very similar performance. I am yet to have anything take a step. Hence why I run them out of all my rifles including my dirty old 308 seated to 2.850 COAL. I'm running them at 2680fps from a 20"barrel with 44.5gr 2208. I hope this info is useful for ya |
Please wait
ABOUT USWe are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.
|
KNOWLEDGEBASE |
KNOWLEDGEBASE |