ACCUBOND PROBLEMS
- Thread starter 300rem7
- Start date
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
Please find attached three more photos, these of two of the actual Accubonds that we recovered from our deer.
Bullet on left (with two pieces of schrapnel) is the one that struck the young mule deer with a THS that destroyed the pelvis but failed to go much further, resulting in a wounded deer that was killed with a knife. If I remember correctly, recovered weight was about 52%.
Bullet on right was the one that struck the larger doe in the shoulder with a facing shot that killed the deer but had shallow penetration. I think recovered weight was about 57% (check my earlier posts for correct %).
What concerns me, is the amount of lead (hence low weight retention) that was cast off the bullet and the fact that one actually lost pieces of jacket found in the meat-bone mush. If you look closely, you will see that much of what remains is only jacket and it is peeled way back.
Bullet on left (with two pieces of schrapnel) is the one that struck the young mule deer with a THS that destroyed the pelvis but failed to go much further, resulting in a wounded deer that was killed with a knife. If I remember correctly, recovered weight was about 52%.
Bullet on right was the one that struck the larger doe in the shoulder with a facing shot that killed the deer but had shallow penetration. I think recovered weight was about 57% (check my earlier posts for correct %).
What concerns me, is the amount of lead (hence low weight retention) that was cast off the bullet and the fact that one actually lost pieces of jacket found in the meat-bone mush. If you look closely, you will see that much of what remains is only jacket and it is peeled way back.
Canadian-
Could you give me the lot number on that box of ammo? It will be under the flap on the inside. The one on the right does not concearn me looks pretty good other than 8-9% less weight retention than normal. The one on the left peeled back a bit further than normal. But I can get a box with that lot# and do some tests. I can tell that they hit a lot of bone.
Thanks
Could you give me the lot number on that box of ammo? It will be under the flap on the inside. The one on the right does not concearn me looks pretty good other than 8-9% less weight retention than normal. The one on the left peeled back a bit further than normal. But I can get a box with that lot# and do some tests. I can tell that they hit a lot of bone.
Thanks
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
Hi Nosler,
That would be great. It was probably difficult for you to understand our concerns until you actually saw the bullets in the photo. I am glad that the one on the left is not what you would usually expect from the AccuBond.
Maybe there was some sort of defect or QC issue with our particular 180gr. Winchester AccuBond lot.
I would just mail you the remaining 2 boxes of ammo;however, shipping from Canada into the U.S. would pose a big problem. Unfortunately, I will no longer use the Winchester ammo left-over for hunting as I am concerned about performance.
Please feel free to let me know if this ammo lot might not be up to your standards. I will feel better about purchasing your products in the future knowing that potential QC issues have been addressed.
Big Thanks!
P.S. The lot number that I found on the inner box flap is 3VF32.
That would be great. It was probably difficult for you to understand our concerns until you actually saw the bullets in the photo. I am glad that the one on the left is not what you would usually expect from the AccuBond.
Maybe there was some sort of defect or QC issue with our particular 180gr. Winchester AccuBond lot.
I would just mail you the remaining 2 boxes of ammo;however, shipping from Canada into the U.S. would pose a big problem. Unfortunately, I will no longer use the Winchester ammo left-over for hunting as I am concerned about performance.
Please feel free to let me know if this ammo lot might not be up to your standards. I will feel better about purchasing your products in the future knowing that potential QC issues have been addressed.
Big Thanks!
P.S. The lot number that I found on the inner box flap is 3VF32.
bowhuntrrl
Beginner
- Nov 1, 2004
- 30
- 0
CanadianLefty":1hc84qj7 said:
Canadian Lefty,
Your thread on Accurate Reloading has actually disproved your claim of poor performance with Accubonds.Everyone there has presented evidence of multiple kills and passthroughs along with good weight retention . The following is a quote that you made "The Federal load looked a little better but had shot a small doe in the shoulder (smaller bones), instead of a buck or large doe with more bone mass. Weight retention, without checking my original post, was 66%. IMHO, the Federal Acubond bullet also failed to penetrate adequately. ". From your above statement, you achieved exactly what they claimed for weight retention. What part of this don't you understand?? I tried to explain to you over there that polymer tipped bullets are for rapid expansion, which they apparently did. They also achieved 66% weight retention(by your own claims). The only place there was a problem was with poor shot placement all around.Why can't you accept that fact and move on??? You're beating a dead horse with your claims of bullet failure. The real problem was shot placement choices with a bullet designed to expand rapidly. If you want to do "Texas Heart Shots" and break shoulders, maybe you should try some Partitions.
CanadianLefty
Beginner
- Oct 28, 2004
- 17
- 0
bowhuntrrl, if you read my original post, you will note that while the Federal load achieved a 66% weight retention, given the small 70 pound deer and light bone, we expected greater penetration. Here is the quote on the AR original post given the Federal 180gr. AccuBond
The major concern is not necessarily with the small 70 pound doe (even though we would have expected more penetration), the real issues we had were with the large doe and the buck.
Yes, Nosler Partitions might have been a better choice given the shots we took, but the shot placements need no justification whatsoever. I am not beating the horse to death, I am finished now that I have posted the pics and will only respond to help clarify any further questions.
Happy hunting,
CL
The major concern is not necessarily with the small 70 pound doe (even though we would have expected more penetration), the real issues we had were with the large doe and the buck.
Yes, Nosler Partitions might have been a better choice given the shots we took, but the shot placements need no justification whatsoever. I am not beating the horse to death, I am finished now that I have posted the pics and will only respond to help clarify any further questions.
Happy hunting,
CL
In August, I took a 100 Lb Blacktail Forked Horn in Northern CA using my Model 700, 7mm Remington Magnum, loaded with RL-22 and a 140 grain AccuBond. As someone who has taken numerous deer with the ballistic tip, I will say I was very pleased in the performance I had with the AccuBond. Boilerroom shot, and the exit was about 2 1/2 to 3 inches across, where as a ballistic tip exit would be more like 4-5 inches across the exit wound. I am very pleased with the AccuBond. They are extreamly accurate, and appear much tougher than the ballistic tip. I always assumed they probably arent quite as tough as a Partition, but very close..........I'll be buying many, many more for "years to come",
THANK YOU NOSLER for a great bullet!
THANK YOU NOSLER for a great bullet!
I think Nosler needs to hear it. After seeing and talking to several hunters who are using the AB. I think there to soft and give up to much wieght. I just saw two bullets from a friend back from elk hunting. He was using a 338 RUM and 225 AB's 3,100 fps muzzle velocity. He shot an elk at 80 yards he hit the elk twice
in the ribs, the elk ran another 40 yards before it was hit with a 3rd shot from another rifle that killed it. He recovered both AB's ( I like to see complete penetration) and both weighed
125 grains. Lots of meat damage and no doubt the elk would have died from both shots.
I say this as a die hard Nosler fan. I think your ABs are to soft for elk.
The ABs are a step up over the BT's and make a great deer bullet. But as for now I'm going to stick with Partitions for elk.
I would like to see the AB's hold at least a 80% wieght retention for greater penetration.
in the ribs, the elk ran another 40 yards before it was hit with a 3rd shot from another rifle that killed it. He recovered both AB's ( I like to see complete penetration) and both weighed
125 grains. Lots of meat damage and no doubt the elk would have died from both shots.
I say this as a die hard Nosler fan. I think your ABs are to soft for elk.
The ABs are a step up over the BT's and make a great deer bullet. But as for now I'm going to stick with Partitions for elk.
I would like to see the AB's hold at least a 80% wieght retention for greater penetration.
"Where in the body was it shot?"
Both shots center punched the chest lung area. The bullets hit ribs and flattend out stopping on just the outward/opposite rib cage. Both recoverd with not much shank left. One of the entrance holes was the size of a softball. He is going to post some picks of the bullets.
I'll get them to you.
I hope you know that I'm a total Nosler fan and am only posting on what I
have been seeing or percieving. Subjective at best I know, but there is a perciption that is gaining some momentum. I think worth your attention.
Both shots center punched the chest lung area. The bullets hit ribs and flattend out stopping on just the outward/opposite rib cage. Both recoverd with not much shank left. One of the entrance holes was the size of a softball. He is going to post some picks of the bullets.
I'll get them to you.
I hope you know that I'm a total Nosler fan and am only posting on what I
have been seeing or percieving. Subjective at best I know, but there is a perciption that is gaining some momentum. I think worth your attention.
A
Anonymous
Guest
This is the bull SU35 was writting about. The shot was about 80 yards away from a .338 Ultra shooting 225g Accubonds with a muzzle velocity of 3000fps. The first impact was to the ribs and traveled diagnolly to the offside shoulder and coming to a rest up against the ribs just on the off side. The bullet impact was amazing, there was a HUGE blood spray coming out and the bull left a 40 yard long two feet wide blood trail. Retained weight is about 125g's, most likely in the 110 area if I were to clean off the gunk.
WHELENATOR
Beginner
- Nov 4, 2004
- 80
- 1
I've been reading this thread since it started and frankly, I cannot seem to find fault with either the bullet's performance, or the fact that it achieved full penetration of this animal even if the bullet rested under the offside skin. Those bullets in the above pics look fine and very reminiscent of many 300 Win Mag 180 GR Ballistic Tips from many other deer killed previously.At that distance/speed combo, it would be very difficult for MANY bullets to retain half to 60% of it's original weight. And of all the elk I have heard of being hit with a fast magnum, they don't just fall over. From what I understand, and I will admit I have never hunted elk, they seem to get a set of legs and run like hell. Anything short of a grenade launcher won't knock them right off their feet. Just my thoughts, but I feel the Accubonds are a great bullet, but nothing is perfect. They don't make that bullet yet. My feeling is that you should pick a shot as best as possible with respect to the distance/and size of the game, and press on.
Whelenator, I think your right in what you say. But we strive for perfection! :grin: :wink: The AccuBond performed, but for my taste and needs I still like the Partition for elk as I have taken that same shot as above and get complete penetration with a whole lot of inside tissue damage. I'll be using the 250 Partition next year and thats not a bad thing.
WHELENATOR
Beginner
- Nov 4, 2004
- 80
- 1
I realize the need for perfection. I nearly went crazy the ast 3 weeks tring to find the right combo for my 7 mag with 140 Accubonds. It shot fantastic with 160 AB's and I COULD use those, but dangit, I want to use the 140's for deer. I just don't need that 160. So, I feel your pain. Good luck. That 250 will kill anything standing in any section of the globe.
duckriverdave
Beginner
- Dec 4, 2004
- 1
- 0
Personally, I am impressed with the AccuBond. I harvested a doe this week with my 270 win. that was loaded with 59 grains of 4831 and a 140 grain AccuBond.
The deer was 240 yards according to the range finder. She dropped immediately with a 2" exit wound.
This is my first full season to reload and it is really satisfying to bring home the venison with one of your own reloads. I think I will get some more of those death dealing missiles. :grin:
drd
The deer was 240 yards according to the range finder. She dropped immediately with a 2" exit wound.
This is my first full season to reload and it is really satisfying to bring home the venison with one of your own reloads. I think I will get some more of those death dealing missiles. :grin:
drd
- Nov 4, 2004
- 24,386
- 6,730
su35":11sp4x2k said:
su35,
Nice Bull!
I shoot a M700LSS in 338RUM. I have taken 1 elk and 2 Mule Deer with the 210 gr PT, 1 shot kills with complete penetration. I have also taken 1 WT Deer with the 250 gr PT, a very spectatular kill. I wanted to see how the heavy bullet would perform on smaller game. I had a 1" exit hole without excessive meat damage. (90.0 grs RL25 and Fed GM215M primer. Best 4 shot group is .490" @ 100 yds.) This will be my Moose load.
Have you used the 250 gr PT in your 338RUM for Elk or any other game?
WHat is your load?
Regards,
JD338
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,072
- 2,590
Could all of this have just been a "BAD LOT" issue? Must have been because every report I have seen or received on the AB's has been glowing.
dsnook
Beginner
- Jan 20, 2005
- 49
- 0
Hi guys,
Wow! This thread is amazing! I think something that some of you are failing to see is that elk absorbed every bit of energy those two shot had! That is damned close to 7000 ftlbs of energy. Elk are extremely tough critters, and any bullet that goes through them is tough. To expect them to just fall down because you made what you thought is a good shot, is, well, expecting too much. I know, I've watched the shows and seen them fall over, but I've shot a lot of deer with 160gr bullets out of a couple of 7mm Rem mags, and some of em gave up, and some of em didn't.
I'll be trying some of the .338 ABs in my .338-06 next fall, and while I do expect to harvest some game with it, I won't be a bit concerned if the critters don't just lay down at the shot.
Besides, how ya gonna learn to track, if every thing just falls where ya shoot it.
D
Wow! This thread is amazing! I think something that some of you are failing to see is that elk absorbed every bit of energy those two shot had! That is damned close to 7000 ftlbs of energy. Elk are extremely tough critters, and any bullet that goes through them is tough. To expect them to just fall down because you made what you thought is a good shot, is, well, expecting too much. I know, I've watched the shows and seen them fall over, but I've shot a lot of deer with 160gr bullets out of a couple of 7mm Rem mags, and some of em gave up, and some of em didn't.
I'll be trying some of the .338 ABs in my .338-06 next fall, and while I do expect to harvest some game with it, I won't be a bit concerned if the critters don't just lay down at the shot.
Besides, how ya gonna learn to track, if every thing just falls where ya shoot it.
D
