old_school_guy
Beginner
- Jan 8, 2017
- 30
- 0

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
mjcmichigan":3nxbztd8 said:For me, AccuBond likes lots of jump.
Loaded my 300 WM at Saami OAL and bang, nice tight group.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had same problem with my Weatherby 270 Win using 140 grain Accubonds and 150 grain AccuBond Long Range. I couldn't get them to group. However, The 140 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips shot great as well as Hornady 145 ELD-X.old_school_guy":1925ftro said:View attachment 1I loaded 6 test rounds for my Remington 700 in .280 Rem caliber, 22" barrel. Brass is once fired Remington, bullets are 140 gr AccuBond, primers CCI 200, powder IMR 4350. Bullets seated .030" off lands. I loaded 2 at 53.0 grs, 2 at 53.5 grs and 2 at 54.0 grs. Distance was 100 yards and shooting was done from a nice bench, on sand bags like I have done for 40 years. The results were absolutely shocking to me. I have never had any of my hand loads group that bad. Distance between the 2 holes from 53.0 grs was 2.375", between the 53.5 grs was 1.75" and distance between the 54.0 grs was 3". I thought something had happened to the rifle. I fired a 3 shot group with factory Remington 140 gr Accutip bullets and could cover the group with a quarter. Now I have been loading Ballistic Tips for years in several different rifles and they always grouped great. I worked up a load for my Remington 700 Sendero 7mm Mag last year with the 160 gr Accubonds and it was a tack driver. Have any of you ever had a rifle "hate" AccuBond bullets? Seeing how bad they shot, would it even be worth the time to try different seating depths, powders, primers, etc? Or is it that obvious this 700 just don't like Accubonds? Please look at the two pictures. Any opinions or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.