http://www.accuratereloading.com/ubbthr ... 21&fpart=1
I found this on shortmags.org and was wondering what Nolers evaluation would determine.
I found this on shortmags.org and was wondering what Nolers evaluation would determine.
ACCUBOND PROBLEMS
- Thread starter 300rem7
- Start date
longwinters
Handloader
- Oct 10, 2004
- 1,476
- 1
I have not hunted with them yet, but the AccuBond shoots great! I have always been a fan of the front shoulder shot, and every deer I have taken this shot on has dropped on the spot. But never, with a variety of other bullets, have I got an exit hole when I hit the shoulder (quartering towards). However none of these shots were taken with Partitions or any bonded bullets. They were all with the run of the mill bullets like core-loks etc... I guess I better try them this year and see (especially since I just ordered 3 boxes of them).
Long
Long
I don't know about problems with them.
I have shot them for the last 4 years. No problems ever.
I shot one season with a 300 RUM and the 200grain AB, at 3100 FPS. I took everything from a 40lb whitetail doe, a russian bore (By the way it went through 3 hogs on that trip), and a 600lb Nilgai.
Been on numerous hunts with writers and friends, and never had a problem. I also just got back from a hunt where we shot the new 25-110 and 30-150 AB. Never got a bullet back.
A lot of peoples concearn is that it doesn't retain 100%. It wasn't designed for that.
There are a bunch of questions we have from that link you posted. But the only complaint we get at the factory is our choice of weights offered :grin:
I have shot them for the last 4 years. No problems ever.
I shot one season with a 300 RUM and the 200grain AB, at 3100 FPS. I took everything from a 40lb whitetail doe, a russian bore (By the way it went through 3 hogs on that trip), and a 600lb Nilgai.
Been on numerous hunts with writers and friends, and never had a problem. I also just got back from a hunt where we shot the new 25-110 and 30-150 AB. Never got a bullet back.
A lot of peoples concearn is that it doesn't retain 100%. It wasn't designed for that.
There are a bunch of questions we have from that link you posted. But the only complaint we get at the factory is our choice of weights offered :grin:
- Thread starter
- #4
QuietHunter
Beginner
- Oct 14, 2004
- 28
- 0
I loaded the 140 AccuBond for my nephews .270 last year. He killed a cow elk with one shot through the lungs (bullet not recovered) and another with an angled shot that hit a rib going in and lodged on the offside shoulder. I have not weighed the recovered bullet, but it appears as a perfect mushroom.
It is hard to say how other bullets would have done in the same situation, but I believe the Accubonds performed as designed. He will be using the same load this year.
It is hard to say how other bullets would have done in the same situation, but I believe the Accubonds performed as designed. He will be using the same load this year.
I have shot the AccuBond in several of my rifles, and have found it to be very accurate, for the most part. I have also shot two head of game this fall with the .284 - 140AB from a 280 Remington at 3050 FPS. One was a medium sized Black Bear, shot at about 150 yards, broadside through the lungs. Instant death for the Bruin, and no bullet recovery, since it passed through. The second was a bit different, on a muley buck. He was angled away quite steeply, so I placed the shot into the last rib area on the facing side. I recovered the bullet from under the hide on the opposite shoulder. It had broken the bone on that shoulder. Deer went perhaps 15 yards. I was pleased with the results. The shot was just about 200 yards, and the recovered bullet weighs 112.5 grains. I will report back as more game is taken with this bullet. So far, no problems. I am a tough critic on bullet performance, since I have used the Partition with such great success for 40+ years. Regards, Eagleye.
[/img]
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
I will get digital pics of the .30 cal, 180gr. Accubonds that we used on an Alberta deer hunt this weekend.
I will have someone who knows how to post them do so for me.
I love the accuracy that we all obtained, but was disappointed with the on-game performance (see my post at Accuratereloading.com) given angled shots.
While I would like to be a happy Nosler customer, I haven't had a good first experience (aside from outstanding accuracy with Accubonds at the range) hunting with them.
While there are lots of variables involved, my suggestion is to increase the jacket thickness on the Accubonds to ensure deper penetration on angled shots. For others hunting big deer or elk, use the 200gr. Accubonds for slightly deeper penetration and higher weight retention.
Bottom line is as was explained: The 180gr Accubonds penetrated poorly and resulted with two bullets shedding more than 40% of their weight- you will see from the photos what I mean. I am not the only one with this feedback- there are others on AR and other forums posting similar comments.
Nosler, btw, what variables were left unsaid? I recounted our experiences in great detail. If there is anything that I might be able to add that would better help you in determining the cause of the problems with the Accubonds, I would be more than willing to try and help.
Cheers,
CL
I will have someone who knows how to post them do so for me.
I love the accuracy that we all obtained, but was disappointed with the on-game performance (see my post at Accuratereloading.com) given angled shots.
While I would like to be a happy Nosler customer, I haven't had a good first experience (aside from outstanding accuracy with Accubonds at the range) hunting with them.
While there are lots of variables involved, my suggestion is to increase the jacket thickness on the Accubonds to ensure deper penetration on angled shots. For others hunting big deer or elk, use the 200gr. Accubonds for slightly deeper penetration and higher weight retention.
Bottom line is as was explained: The 180gr Accubonds penetrated poorly and resulted with two bullets shedding more than 40% of their weight- you will see from the photos what I mean. I am not the only one with this feedback- there are others on AR and other forums posting similar comments.
Nosler, btw, what variables were left unsaid? I recounted our experiences in great detail. If there is anything that I might be able to add that would better help you in determining the cause of the problems with the Accubonds, I would be more than willing to try and help.
Cheers,
CL
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
Nosler, you claim that the Accubonds were designed for any shot angle at any velocity. Your advertising further claims 60-70% weight retention.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOSLER
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 158 Location: BEND, OR
Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:28 pm Post subject: AccuBond PROBLEMS------------------------------------------------------------
AccuBond and Partition's are designed for any shot angle, any velocity.
The low end for the AccuBond is like the BT, but for high end, no worries.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our results were very different. I would love it to be another way, but three game animals tell a different tale. Weight loss was over 40% in two cases and penetration on all three shots was not good at all coming from a premium bullet.
While accuracy is great, the Accubonds still need testing in my opinion and will probably need a stronger, thicker jacket and or a tougher bonded core to assist in greater penetration.
I have no doubts that they would work on broadside, behind the shoulder shots, but as you know, animals do not always give you those opportunities. Angled shots should be a major consideration.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOSLER
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 158 Location: BEND, OR
Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:28 pm Post subject: AccuBond PROBLEMS------------------------------------------------------------
AccuBond and Partition's are designed for any shot angle, any velocity.
The low end for the AccuBond is like the BT, but for high end, no worries.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our results were very different. I would love it to be another way, but three game animals tell a different tale. Weight loss was over 40% in two cases and penetration on all three shots was not good at all coming from a premium bullet.
While accuracy is great, the Accubonds still need testing in my opinion and will probably need a stronger, thicker jacket and or a tougher bonded core to assist in greater penetration.
I have no doubts that they would work on broadside, behind the shoulder shots, but as you know, animals do not always give you those opportunities. Angled shots should be a major consideration.
Here are a few shots we just took. This was out of Winchester Supreme Ammunition, right off the shelf. All point blank shots, into test media.
http://www.noslerammunition.com/270win140ab.jpg
http://www.noslerammunition.com/300wsm180.jpg
http://www.noslerammunition.com/270win140ab.jpg
http://www.noslerammunition.com/300wsm180.jpg
This past Monday I shot a Mulie at about 200 yds using a .300 WSM. The bullet entered the shoulder and exited behind the ribs. This was an angled shot and the bullet was not recovered. Penetration was not a problem here.... Upon opening him up, there were a bunch of organs that were just mush. I don't see a problem with penetration with this bullet and have no complaints other than it needs to be in a 130 grain 6.5 mm to compete with the TSX. I have a .260 Rem that could be used for more than deer or antelope with that offering.
I will be using the AccuBond in my WSM for an Oryx hunt in Dec. I really think the 180's are a little much for deer but I wanted to experiment with this load in preparation for the Oryx.
I will be using the AccuBond in my WSM for an Oryx hunt in Dec. I really think the 180's are a little much for deer but I wanted to experiment with this load in preparation for the Oryx.
Several years ago I decided that there was no point in using any other bullet than the Partition. I put one end to end in a wart hog and end to end in a Kudu. Both lost the front half of the bullet but the shot in the Kudu passed through the hip on it's way to the area under the right shoulder blade. The wart hog was shot in the thoracic inlet and the bullet removed the bottom of his heart, destroyed his liver and ended up in his pelvis. My PH looked at the recovered bullets and was very favorably impressed. These were the only bullets recovered. All others exited. We were shooting Impala for leopard bait and never recoverd a bullet. Several went end to end. I guess if I was varmint shooting I'd use something else but why fool with a good thing in deer sized game and above.
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
IMHO, 9.5 inches of penetration at a given a muzzle velocity (about same as impact velocity at point blank) of 3037fps is nothing to be proud of! Our tests on Alberta deer support your poor results.
That would mean that anyone using your 180gr. bullets and hunting with a 300 Win. Mag (about 3100fps); 300 Weatherby (about 3250fps); 300 Dakota (about 3175fps); 300 RUM (about 3350fps) can only expect 9.5 inches of penetration out at 50 to about 200 yards given your impact velocity of about 3037fps!!
Bottom line may be to use Accubonds only for those rare occassions where you have a perfect broadside shot behind the shoulder where you know that the bullet will have to travel less than 9.5 inches to reach the vitals. Very impractical and useless in my opinion.
Hornady has done some testing with their Interbond compared to the Swift Scirocco and they both averaged about 19” of penetration at 100 yards (starting with 3000fps at muzzle), double what your test results show- and using only 150 gr. Bullets which have a lower Sectional Density (thus less penetrating capability) than your 180gr. Accubonds!!!
http://www.hornady.com/media/InterBond_Bullets.pdf (in their pdf catalog).
Like I stated before, increase your jacket thickness and give us a bullet we can use. If you cut corners to keep costs down you end up with the AccuBond failing as you have just proven yourself!
That would mean that anyone using your 180gr. bullets and hunting with a 300 Win. Mag (about 3100fps); 300 Weatherby (about 3250fps); 300 Dakota (about 3175fps); 300 RUM (about 3350fps) can only expect 9.5 inches of penetration out at 50 to about 200 yards given your impact velocity of about 3037fps!!
Bottom line may be to use Accubonds only for those rare occassions where you have a perfect broadside shot behind the shoulder where you know that the bullet will have to travel less than 9.5 inches to reach the vitals. Very impractical and useless in my opinion.
Hornady has done some testing with their Interbond compared to the Swift Scirocco and they both averaged about 19” of penetration at 100 yards (starting with 3000fps at muzzle), double what your test results show- and using only 150 gr. Bullets which have a lower Sectional Density (thus less penetrating capability) than your 180gr. Accubonds!!!
http://www.hornady.com/media/InterBond_Bullets.pdf (in their pdf catalog).
Like I stated before, increase your jacket thickness and give us a bullet we can use. If you cut corners to keep costs down you end up with the AccuBond failing as you have just proven yourself!
Sorry forgot to mention we don't use jello for test media like the Hornady or Swift comparisons. We use animal glue which is a tough meat like substance.
In comparison in the jello, I know I should call it geliten. The 165gr Interbond traveled 10", while the 180gr Scirocco went 14", the 180gr AccuBond went 17".
Those other two bullets are pure copper. They rip upon themselves and create a flying buffalo quarter.
In comparison in the jello, I know I should call it geliten. The 165gr Interbond traveled 10", while the 180gr Scirocco went 14", the 180gr AccuBond went 17".
Those other two bullets are pure copper. They rip upon themselves and create a flying buffalo quarter.
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
Just for the record, I never stated that the Interbonds were so great.
What I would like to point out again is that the 180gr. AccuBond, based on our group of deer shot and the Nosler animal glue tests definitely needs improvement.
In fact, I love the 180gr. AccuBond for its accuracy, now, if only it would be made with slightly thicker walls so that it can penetrate better! Heck, I will be the first person to admit that I would pay much more for a better, stronger AccuBond. However, the 180gr. AccuBond as it is now, is a "wait and see, don't use" proposition.
If you do plan on making a revised version, let us know! Until then, I will pass on it.
Thanks
P.S. Nosler, should you want to see the pics of our two Accubonds, they will be posted on AR on Sunday evening or Monday. I would be happy to post them here, once the links are up and running.
What I would like to point out again is that the 180gr. AccuBond, based on our group of deer shot and the Nosler animal glue tests definitely needs improvement.
In fact, I love the 180gr. AccuBond for its accuracy, now, if only it would be made with slightly thicker walls so that it can penetrate better! Heck, I will be the first person to admit that I would pay much more for a better, stronger AccuBond. However, the 180gr. AccuBond as it is now, is a "wait and see, don't use" proposition.
If you do plan on making a revised version, let us know! Until then, I will pass on it.
Thanks
P.S. Nosler, should you want to see the pics of our two Accubonds, they will be posted on AR on Sunday evening or Monday. I would be happy to post them here, once the links are up and running.
- Thread starter
- #19
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,047
- 669
I think I remember from the AR post that your guys shot selections where pretty low percentage shots. "texas heart shot" up the pooper, and several hard angle shots. If you would have picked your shots a little better I think bullet performance would have been just fine. Just because you have a 300 mag doesn't mean you don't have to pick your shots.
