Bonded Partitions?

[gwindrider1]

First, let me say that I have shot your products exclusively in my rifles of various calibers all my adult life. I have never had a dissapointing result with a Partition bullet. However, I would like to see the Partition bullets in medium bore, and up, receive a bonded front core.

Are there any thoughts within your company of doing this. Possibly something along the lines of an African/Alaskan line of Partitions.

Also, with the current enthusiam for large bore rifles, are you considering expanding the Partition line to include larger calibers? Wish you would!

Thanks, George

 

[GeorgeS]

First, let me say that I have shot your products exclusively in my rifles of various calibers all my adult life. I have never had a dissapointing result with a Partition bullet. However, I would like to see the Partition bullets in medium bore, and up, receive a bonded front core.

Thanks, George

George,

Believe it or not, Nosler can't fill EVERY bullet niche. :wink:

Check out the Swift A-Frame; they are bonded core, partioned bullets. I've been using them in North America and Africa for 13 years, with perfect results; 95% or more weight retention.

George

 

[HunterJim]

My opinion is the unbonded Nosler Partition might be a better choice in a hunting bullet.

The Swift is bonded core version of the NP if you will, and they retain over 90% of their weight. They also usually have an expanded shape that is a nice, smooth ball. The only one I have not recovered went through a leopard (which is a pretty small animal).

I have shot both into big animals in Africa.

My NPs on the other hand usually end up with a rougher expanded front half, and I think also do more tissue damage. I also usually do not recover them on side to side shots.

The more I use the NPs, the more I appreciate their design.

So I recommend you try George's suggestion and shoot some Swift's. You may find as I did that bonding the front core on a Partition design is not necessarily a better killing bullet.

jim

 

[NOSLER]

Bonding the PT would create a few things.

1. It would be an expensive bullet.
2. It would destroy the reasoning behind the PT. The front core does all the tissue damage.
3. The diameter of the bullet may be larger than expected. = less penetration.

 

[NOSLER]

Bonding the PT would create a few things.

1. It would be an expensive bullet.
2. It would destroy the reasoning behind the PT. The front core does all the tissue damage.
3. The diameter of the bullet may be larger than expected. = less penetration.

 

[Greg Nolan]

I've been using Swift A-Frames for a long time in my .338 Win. They are a bonded Partition. They expand well and penetrate deep. As Nosler said they are expensive to shoot and I have discovered, to my surprise, that like the Barnes-X and Triple Shock they sometimes over penetrate. Now I know there are two schools of thought on that . Some would say two holes are better than one but I like all the shock power I can get. A-Frames aren't as accurate and they have a reletively low B/C. I'm changing over to accubonds because I've had an elk run off after a side shot just a shade too far back. I believe there is a place for tough bullets on tough game like Big bears and African game. A killing shot or a Texas heart shot will make em shine as will a through both shoulder shot on a bull elk. Otherwise all that weight in one piece will move a lot of air around past your target uselessley. Please don't change the Partition and thank you for the AccuBond!! :grin:

 

[NOSLER]

You are welcome.