Let the Accubond dominate the 30 Caliber hunting class

[bullet]

I was motivated by the comments concerning which AccuBond bullets to add so I started this thread believing that the AccuBond is the all around hunting bullet. It sheds enough to do tissue damage yet strong enough to hold together for deep penetration while exiting most of the time if the right bullet weight for the game shot is chosen to match the cartridge used, along with a great BC. What more could one ask for in a bullet to do pretty much everything in the field???

So, how about in 308 caliber adding the 168gr,190gr, 210gr, 220gr. Let the AccuBond dominate the 308 class of cartridges and with these added weights there would be no 30 caliber cartridge that would not be able to find a bullet to suit any work that is needed to be done on game. It would allow the hunter to have a great bullet that could be used on thin skin game as well as heavier game and even dangerous game.

It would also allow the hunter to match the cartridge used to the bullet while optimizing the best velocity and weight for the cartridge, giving the hunter more versatility. By completing the 30 bullet weights using the above mention weights for the AccuBond, would also allow greater versatility for reloaders to find a weight that works best, whether they have to drop down a step or go up one. This would ensure the continued use of an AccuBond bullet instead of running to another make of bullet. Face it, 30 caliber rifles dominate the market and for a good reason. Please, I urge you to make the 308 class of cartridges complete, leaving little excuse not to use the AccuBond for any and all game with the 30 caliber cartridges a hard argument to make.

Personally, I would only use them if this was the case. The perfect all around bullet for the perfect all around 30 caliber cartridges.

 

[FOTIS]

I think we got it all covered Mike with the current selections, but OK... :wink:

 

[bullet]

I think we got it all covered Mike with the current selections, but OK... :wink:

:grin: :grin: :mrgreen:

 

[Murphdog]

Ok I will bite, whereas I like Accubonds a lot and they are my bullet of choice for the 7mm 08. I am not going to conceed Partitions to Accubonds when it comes to the 30-06 (or the 300 mags)when hunting the tough stuff. Deer or Praire Goats in areas without griz I am with you, in fact I may go to the 165 grain Accubonds instead of the Ballistic Tips for long range application when I am after the aforementioned or have time to switch out rounds for distant elk. But for my go to round when it comes elk or packing in griz country I literally trust my life to partitions (the only bear repellant I will ever pack). The only short fall that I have ever found is at point blank where the penatration is lacking, then again the moose only went less than 50 yards and laid down so lack of penatration might not have been that big of a deal after all.

 

[bullet]

Ok I will bite, whereas I like Accubonds a lot and they are my bullet of choice for the 7mm 08. I am not going to conceed Partitions to Accubonds when it comes to the 30-06 (or the 300 mags)when hunting the tough stuff. Deer or Praire Goats in areas without griz I am with you, in fact I may go to the 165 grain Accubonds instead of the Ballistic Tips for long range application when I am after the aforementioned or have time to switch out rounds for distant elk. But for my go to round when it comes elk or packing in griz country I literally trust my life to partitions (the only bear repellant I will ever pack). The only short fall that I have ever found is at point blank where the penatration is lacking, then again the moose only went less than 50 yards and laid down so lack of penatration might not have been that big of a deal after all.

First, I have always used the Partition but if I had a 210gr or 220gr AccuBond to drive out of my 300 Win Mag I would not hesitate using the AccuBond on big stuff. I have killed dangerous game with the 220gr Sierra Round nose and it was deadly and I believe the bonded AccuBond at that weight would do very well and preform even better. All I was saying was if the AccuBond was offered in more weights it would be more than acceptable for many applications. I have used successfully the 165gr Sierra HPBT (although it is their toughest bullet and you can call them and check that out) to kill elk and had exits, being one shot kills and it is not a bonded bullet. I still stand with the concept of making the AccuBond in 30 caliber cover all the weights so as to match it with different velocity cartridges in 30 caliber. Of course I know I am dreaming that Nosler would do it but I was just dreaming, that's all.

 

[R Flowers]

Your post just clearly demonstrates that as hunters these days we have way too much time on our hands to dream up stuff.

Do you really think there is a reason to make a 168 grain .308 diameter AccuBond when we already have a 165 grain? What the hell good would a 190 grain AccuBond do when we have a 180 grain?

I just do not get it. There are plenty of AccuBond choices as it is. And who cares? None of them are as good a bullet as the tried and true 180 grain Partition in .308 caliber.

Everyone is on this AccuBond kick. It is good marketing and is making Nosler a ton of money. But I am just not impressed.
I have had one hell of a time getting Accubonds to shoot as well as Partitions on average. I have not seen all that many animals shot with Accubonds but I have seen some serious problems with that bullet. In most cases when I have looked at carcasses of animals shot with Accubonds I see lots of blood shot meat, LOTS! I have a friend in New Mexico who shot a cow elk in New Mexico with a 180 grain AccuBond from a 300 WSM and he lost most of the meat from that animal on the side the bullet entered on. I mean, come on, he was shooting a cow elk for the meat and lost most of it because it was blood shot.

I am just not that impressed with Accubonds, but if they are what you want to shoot I think there are PLENTY of choices already.

 

[bullet]

Your post just clearly demonstrates that as hunters these days we have way too much time on our hands to dream up stuff.

Do you really think there is a reason to make a 168 grain .308 diameter AccuBond when we already have a 165 grain? What the hell good would a 190 grain AccuBond do when we have a 180 grain?

I just do not get it. There are plenty of AccuBond choices as it is. And who cares? None of them are as good a bullet as the tried and true 180 grain Partition in .308 caliber.

Everyone is on this AccuBond kick. It is good marketing and is making Nosler a ton of money. But I am just not impressed.
I have had one hell of a time getting Accubonds to shoot as well as Partitions on average. I have not seen all that many animals shot with Accubonds but I have seen some serious problems with that bullet. In most cases when I have looked at carcasses of animals shot with Accubonds I see lots of blood shot meat, LOTS! I have a friend in New Mexico who shot a cow elk in New Mexico with a 180 grain AccuBond from a 300 WSM and he lost most of the meat from that animal on the side the bullet entered on. I mean, come on, he was shooting a cow elk for the meat and lost most of it because it was blood shot.

I am just not that impressed with Accubonds, but if they are what you want to shoot I think there are PLENTY of choices already.

You have a right to your opinion but don't respond to one of my post or any other members post on this forum using cuss words. Are you that limited in vocabulary that you have to use four letter words to express yourself???? So you are not impressed, well I am certainly not impressed with your approach and if you had a point I could careless now!!! :roll: :roll:

 

[nomosendero]

It is amazing how different people get different results with a given bullet. I know they don't group in some rifles (true of about any bullet), but my 270 will shoot better with a 140gr. Acc. than anything I have tried. And a funny thing, with alot of Deer & Antelope taken with my 270 & one Cow Elk with my 300WM at 160 yds, bloodshot meat has been a non-issue. I have only been able to recover 1 bullet & it looked just like the Patition in retained wt. & expansion & the kill results look like Partition results as well.

Just my limited experience.

 

[bullet]

Yes, it is strange due to chamber and barrel how one rifle will like a certain type bullet and another one won't. I had very good results in a Ruger Mk II 300Win mag that love 165gr and 180gr Accubonds and both bullets work very well on game. Hit a big buck with a 165gr AccuBond at an angle of about 45 degrees about 4" behind his right shoulder and the bullet crossed over to left side and went up the neck all the way to with in an inch of the left ear and it was text book prefect in mushroom shape and weight retention. My, point was that sometimes it is not the bullet design that a rifle does not like but the weight of the bullet. I know it is not marketable but if there were more weights to play with, one might just find an AccuBond that would work in their rifle.

 

[3006savage]

I would like to see a 168 grain AccuBond since it would have a .490 BC compared to the .475 for the 165 grain AccuBond. That will shoot as flat as the 165 with less wind drift and higher KE downrange.

I would also like to see a heavier AccuBond designed that still manages to stabilize in a 1/10 twist barrel at 06 and up velocities. I would think 220 grain with something like a .65 or better BC would be popular with the long range crowd. Those guys go thru a lot of bullets.

 

[JD338]

So, how about in 308 caliber adding the 168gr,190gr, 210gr, 220gr. Let the AccuBond dominate the 308 class of cartridges and with these added weights there would be no 30 caliber cartridge that would not be able to find a bullet to suit any work that is needed to be done on game. It would allow the hunter to have a great bullet that could be used on thin skin game as well as heavier game and even dangerous game.

Mike

The heavy weights would be very long and would require faster twist rates to stabilize. Due to manufacturing capacity constraints, 168 gr, 190 gr would be tough since Nosler already offers the AB in 165 gr, 180 gr and 200 gr weights.

JD338

 

[R Flowers]

to bullet:

First, get over it!

Second, don't worry I will never respond to one of your petty little posts again!

 

[SJB358]

That 140gr AccuBond is some accurate in my 270WSM in the Winchester Supreme line of ammo. It took an elk, muley and some WT's for me, without too much drama on the elk. It is hard to find too many holes in the AccuBond line. A 6mm, 22 cal and a 200gr 358 would be pretty nice. I do find it hard to mess with much outside of PT's though. Although, penny for penny the AccuBond is a bargain. I think the 30's are pretty well covered, hopefully they will fan out and show some love for the 35's! Scotty

 

[DrMike]

Hopefully they will fan out and show some love for the 35's!

+1

 

[bullet]

Scotty, Dr. Mike, we have been asking for a 200gr AccuBond in 35 caliber for a couple of years now. Sure would be nice to have one to use in my 358Win Hawkeye..

 

[Guy Miner]

I'm thinking Nosler has the .30 cal pretty well covered with 150, 165, 180 & 200 gr Accubonds... I'd hunt mule deer with any of them, and elk with all but the 150's, .30-06 or .300 mag of whichever brand.

 

[Guest]

Good thing we all have multiple choices to choose from when developing hand loads or we would all be in trouble. Having issues with Accubonds or any other brand /type of bullet is not a new problem for anyone. I had all kinds of issues developing loads for my 300 Ultra Mag using Barnes Bullets 5-years ago, constantly messing with the seating depth to establish groups, changing powders, charges etc. I spent a lot of money and range time in the process.Just because one gentleman in this post had an issue so what, Dude move on man. Does Barnes make a good Bullet? Yes, I killed my share of Game with it, but in my case I just happen to be intrigued with the AccuBond, loaded it up and in no time had what I believe will bring the Hammer Down on Deerand Elk. Something I also was disappointed with was the loss of Velocity with Barnes Bullets and fliers. Actually switching to Accubonds I gained alot more velocity with tighter groups.

Just my opinion and experience.

Don

 

[bullet]

I'm thinking Nosler has the .30 cal pretty well covered with 150, 165, 180 & 200 gr Accubonds... I'd hunt mule deer with any of them, and elk with all but the 150's, .30-06 or .300 mag of whichever brand.

Yes, I will admit that POP, Guy and the rest of you guys are right that the .30 caliber is covered. After thinking about it, it was kind of dumb to add all of those weights.

 

[bullet]

So, how about in 308 caliber adding the 168gr,190gr, 210gr, 220gr. Let the AccuBond dominate the 308 class of cartridges and with these added weights there would be no 30 caliber cartridge that would not be able to find a bullet to suit any work that is needed to be done on game. It would allow the hunter to have a great bullet that could be used on thin skin game as well as heavier game and even dangerous game.

Mike

The heavy weights would be very long and would require faster twist rates to stabilize. Due to manufacturing capacity constraints, 168 gr, 190 gr would be tough since Nosler already offers the AB in 165 gr, 180 gr and 200 gr weights.

JD338

Yes, after thinking about it JD, it would require faster twist and longer magazines for anything over 200grs. I had and over worked imagination and responded with this thread emotionally instead of thinking. I do that sometimes and you would think with the years of experience in 30 caliber cartridges, reloading as well as field experience I would have not engaged with this train of thinking (lack of thinking). POP summed it up really quick on this thread when he simply said, " think we got it all covered Mike with the current selections, :wink: "

 

[Murphdog]

Yes I would also love to see a 200 or 210 grain AB in .35 for my Win 88 in 358 win. That would be a wonderful combination.