Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Accubond performance question

Then you completely misunderstood the premise of my original post, which was stated more than once, for clarity sake.

Nevertheless it isn't worth arguing about really.

That may be. This original quote is what I've been talking about the entire time. Regardless of what a bullet is designed to do, field performance is the where the rubber meets the road, and is what we should be comparing. In the field, TTSX performance is very similar to PT performance, not that it matters.

I like the 110 grain .257" and 130 grain .264" ABs. The heaviest whitetail that I've ever shot fell over dead in its tracks after being hit with a 110 grain AB from a 25 WSSM, so I might be a little biased.

I'm planning to shoot my 6.5 Creedmoor deer with the 100 grain Partition, 123 grain AMax, and/or 129 grain SST.

The theorhetical performance is like a Partition. Field performance is another matter. Never seen Partition'ed animals run like Barnes shot ones.

You've got that backwards.

Which Barnes bullets have led to your animals running off for a wild goose chase? Just in case you're going to say some version of X/TSX, I specifically mentioned the TTSX in that quote.

TTSX as wells as the TSX

The only ABs I've been less that thrilled about were the 110gr .257 version. I shot them at 3,00-3,100fps for a few seasons and caught quite a few bullets in 100-150lb deer. The recovered bullets retained a decent bit of weight, but I'm guessing the lack of overall mass and maybe too much frontal area hindered penetration a bit too much for my liking. I ran into the same issue when I shot 95gr NBTs in the .243win. Partitions and E-tips in the 6mm and .25cal stuff have fared much better when seeking a more reliable exit would around heavy cover.

Interesting. Well I guess we all have different experiences, which is why we come to different conclusions. From what I've seen, which includes a considerable number of critters shot with the PT and even more with the TTSX, on-game performance appears to be very similar. But comparisons between the two bullets aside, they've both performed admirably IME, with no rodeos that weren't the fault of the shooter. No bullet is impervious to "failure", though. Arguing about the terminal performance of the PT, AB, and TTSX is like arguing about Ferrari, Porsche, and Lamborghini. If one of those is your biggest worry, then you're in pretty high cotton.

It's funny you mention that. I've seen the same sorts of things with the 110AB. From leaving cavernous wound channels in deer, to being stopped dead in a single milk jug of water shot at 550 yards from a .25-06 (bullet found in the jug, fully expanded), they seem do a lot of damage and not penetrate as much as other AB bullets.

Yeah I guess so!

I still use them in some of my hunting rifles. But I've come to expect a longer tracking job.

I remember having issues with broken off tips, and tips falling out in some of the early Accubonds. I wondered what difference this would make on expansion.

My on game experiences have all been good.
These include the 140/7mm from the 7/08, 160/7mm from 7 RM, 180/308 from 7.82 Warbird, and 200/308 from 30/338 Lapua AI.
Ranges from feet to 855 yrds.
Animals including antelope, blacktail deer, mule deer, cougar, black bear, bighorn sheep, Roosevelt elk, and Rocky Mountain elk.

It has been some time since I used an Accubond 160 in 7mm RM around 3000 FPS for elk and deer but I wasn't impressed by either the accuracy in my rifle or performance on game.

Compared to the Nosler ballistic tips they seemed not very effective on elk close up and deer at 2-400 yards. The 150 grain TTSX on the other hand shoots great and kills like magic breaking bones like they were twigs. I'm a big fan of the Barnes.

For the past 10 years or so I have primarily shot partitions in my hunting rifles with a few Accubonds sprinkled in. But during that same time I have loaded 140 Accubonds in a 270 win and 270 bee for my hunting partner and watched him take deer, elk, and antelope from spitting distance to 630 yards with zero problems.

I have used 180s in the 30/06 and 225s out of a 35 Whelen with no problems. In fact I will be shooting 140 Accubonds this fall out of my Kimber since they are shooting so well.

I shot a big bodied Colorado mulie buck with a 140 TTSX launched at 3250 from a 280AI. Hit him 3 times from just over 400 yards, twice mid body angled forward as he was quartering away heading into the oak brush. No blood on the ground and jumped him up twice before I could finish the deal. What does that tell me? Nothing. Sample of one and some deer are simply more determined and tougher than others.

However, I haven't had a critter hit forward of center with a Partition go more than a couple steps before giving it up. And the Accubonds I have used and watched used mirror my experience with Partitions. I would use them with complete confidence.

orwapitihunter,

The early AccuBonds that lost tips were also defective in other ways, including not being bonded correctly.

They were traced to one guy on the assembly line who decided to speed up the process, which apparently he though would impress higher-ups. This was a year or so after AB's were introduced, and they'd become so popular, so quickly that demand was sky-high. Nosler caught the problem fairly quickly, but some did make it out of the factory.

I never did run into any, and the AccuBonds I've seen used in calibers from 6.5 to .375 on various kinds of big game in North America and Africa have all worked as advertised--very similarly to Partitions.

I had a couple of boxes that shed some tips among the first that I tried: 130-grain .270s and 260-grain .375s. Haven't had any trouble since. As far as I can tell, mine have worked just like partitions, as well, on pronghorns, deer, elk and African plains game.

I guess that depends on what game you're after, if you're breaking bones or chest shooting.

There are studies showing that WT's travel farther shot with premium bullets than softer C&C's.



DF

Those would not be my studies..

My experience with AB's and Barnes is rather thin other than watching other people use both ,since I have had Bitterroots and Partitions for decades now and consider either of the others more of a horizontal move than any kind of a step up for most stuff....so why bother?

I have certainly not been plagued with chest hit animals going anywhere meaningful when chest hit with a Partition nor a BBC ( one of which sheds weight while penetrating deeply and the other which sheds nothing at all but plows large wound channels in front of a big mushroom...both every effective IME).

Guess I would agree with what Jordan says above.


Here's one that made it all of maybe 15-20 yards and collapsed (saw it happen) from a frontal off hand chest hit at maybe 50 yards with a 130 NPT,quartering on...soft tissue all the way. Right along with a large exit with the blood trail everyone wants but not needed.

Not bad for a piss ant 270-130 that's not supposed to do that stuff.






Another one from last year killed as he crossed a swale on a trot ,with a shoulder shot and the same 270-130 NPT load off hand again at about 80 yards.....another exit and down so fast I lost it in recoil. Exit and no recovery.

I get these results uniformly,and from both bullets so have seen no need to change a thing on BG up to Alaskan Browns in size.

Nice thing has always been...if using the same rifle and going from (say) deer to elk or moose I just used the same load. I don't believe in "deer bullets".

Bob,

You sure have a nice series of dead critters to comprise a pretty good study...

The South Carolina study is the one I'm referencing. This was over a number of years at a hunting club, an assortment of shooters, rounds, distances, points of impact, angles of presentation, etc. In that scenario, on WT's the soft C&C bullets dropped them faster than the premiums.

I know you're a good shot and that's the BIG bottom line in your case...

Partitions, generally considered premium, are soft on the front like a C&C, NAB's performing along those lines. The mono's, to me, aren't the best for chest shooting WT's unless you're smoking'em out the barrel. They are great for crunching bones and killing hogs.

In my 26 Nosler, pushing the 120 gr. TTSX/E-Tip at 3,450 fps, it doesn't seem to matter whether I'm chest shooting or busting bones, tissue damage looks about the same as 140 gr. NPT's/NAB's at 3,200 fps out of the same gun.

The Carolina study was with more conventional rounds. To me, balancing bullet type/construction with the game being hunted and velocity is what keeps it interesting.

DF

DF you know I agree and am just spoofing.....

I been known to miss.....

DF,

Actually, the front core of Nosler Partitions is made of a lead alloy somewhat SOFTER than used in any cup-and-core big game bullet I know of.