Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Ask John Barsness Questions About "BONDED BULLETS"

Hi Folks:

John Barsness's latest exclusive column, "BONDED BULLETS," is on its way to your Inbox. If you haven't received this or previous versions, simply send your email address to rickbin24hourcampfire.com, and request to be on board for future monthly columns.

Here are links to a few select previous columns:

"The Vagaries of Rifle Troubleshooting"

"Scope Height"

"Computer Ballistic Programs"

"Reloading Data"

"Triggers"

"Older Hunters, Smaller Rifles"

"Hunting Scope Magnification"

Don't forget to check out John's (and Eileen's ) other stuff at http://www.riflesandrecipes.com.

Many thanks, as usual, John!

Thanks for the excellent article on "Bonded Bullets". Your usual insite is very much appreciated. From what you have written and your analysis I'm thinkin I should save my money and stay with C&C bullets.

I had a longer question, but it really comes down to this:
1. Would you prefer to load / hunt elk and moose with cup and core bullets (i.e. Nosler Ballistic Tips)?
2. Would you prefer to load / hunt elk and moose with bonded bullets (i.e. Nosler Accubonds)?
3. Do you not trust bonded bullets any more than cup and core bullets, so stick with solids or Partition type bullets?

Of course, this assumes you use Nosler bullets, both are readily available, etc. etc. I also believe that all above types of bullets have, and will, continue to kill elk and moose.

Thanks John. Excellent article, as always.

joel,

To a certain extent the answer would depend on the bullet. Some of the Ballistic Tips are tougher than others, and so are some of the AccuBonds. Any of the "hunting" Ballistic Tips will kill elk neatly if put in the ribs, but the The 120 and 150 7mms, 180 .30's and 200 .338 Ballistic Tips are all a little stouter than average. Same deal with AccuBonds. The lighter, smaller-diameter models are designed more for deer than bigger game, while the larger ones will retain more weight. That said, the smallest AB I've used on elk-sized game is the 140-grain .270, and it worked fine.

In general I have grown very fond of bonded bullets for game larger than deer over the past few years, since they seem to kill quicker than monolithic bullets, either due to losing some weight or opening wider.

But I still use plenty of Partitions too; this year I took 13 big game animals (about average for me) and used Partitions on six of them, though four of the six were from one rifle (9.3x62) on a hunt in Africa. That's actually a higher percentage of Partitions than in most years anymore; I try to use a wide variety of bullets to see how they act on game.

I realize this is all kind of confusing, but there really is a lot of overlap in the performance of various types of bullets. There is no set performance level from any certain type of bullet. For instance, even Sierra GameKings vary quite a bit in the way they act on game, depending on weight, caliber and cartridge. The bigger GK's are designed considerably tougher than the lighter ones, as with many other bullets.

I think the author simply missed the main point of bonded bullets. It's not they are designed to be super bullets designed for super penetration and extreme weight retention. The point of bonding is simply to prevent cup and core separation which can be a problem with non-bonded lead core bullets. They do that VERY well as per their design. They're not designed to be monolith like.

Non-bonded I have recovered, this first one just last week;




Bonded

No, I didn't miss the main point of bonded bullets.

Instead, MOST HUNTERS think that bonding a bullet turns it into some sort of super-penetrating bullet. That's why I wrote the article, to explain why that isn't so.

I just looked at it again, and not a single word about cup and core separation. Are YOU sure you're not just as confused as MOST of the other hunters.

From the article:



Color emphasis added.

Thanks for the article John--it was a good one.

I appreciated the continuum of expected expansion between various brands. I'll never get to shoot all of them extensively, but I can pick what I want based on your testing.

Hows come I never get these articles? I always have to wait for someone to post a link.

The article seems to be aimed at hunters who want bullets that provide good penetration along with reliable expansion. Those attributes are often quantified as weight retention expressed as a percentage of the bullet's original weight and expansion expressed as a multiple of the bullet's caliber. These metrics in turn depend on the impact velocity and the medium through which the bullet passes.

Within the structural limits of a given bullet, the lower the impact velocity the less penetration and expansion, and the higher the velocity the more penetration and expansion. Assuming the target is a game animal the possibility of hitting bone before vitals has to be taken into account. Not knowing the range to the game animal in advance means the impact velocity can't be tightly specified, only assumed to be within some bounds.

The question then becomes one of engineering. What type of bullet construction offers good weight retention and expansion over the widest velocity range while dealing with the possibility of hitting bone before vitals? While under no illusions of magic bullets, many believe that bonded bullets best meet that criteria. A case can be made that partitioned bullets meet the criteria even better, but it's also the case that the further the center of mass is towards the back of a bullet the easier a bullet can be upset and deflected by bone.

I like the Tipped Trophy Bonded bullet. Note the lead core is toward the tip of the bullet, which moves the center of mass forward and helps resist upset during penetration. If not for bonding it's easy to see that weight retention would be less.



Shooting times has an article titled Predictability Is A Premium that covering a wide range of bullet types.

The tipped Trophy Bonded look awesome to me--probably about the ideal all-around design--but until they offer them to handloaders they aren't going to gain the kind of reputation that would sell more of them even in factory loads.

The following Tipped Trophy Bonded bullets were available from Federal last year, but have since been taken off the market.

Catalog number, Diameter, Grains
PB277TT1, 0.277, 130
PB277TT2, 0.277, 150
PB284TT1, 0.284, 160
PB284TT2, 0.284, 140
PB308TT1, 0.308, 180
PB308TT2, 0.308, 165
PB338TT1, 0.338, 200

Seems there's more profit is selling premium ammunition than in selling premium bullets to handloaders. Another bonded, core forward, tipped bullet is the Swift Scirocco II, and these bullets are available to handloaders.

Make sure Rick has your email to get these e-articles.
Here's the intro:
BONDED BULLETS
by John Barsness

MANY HUNTERS FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT "bonding" transforms an ordinary bullet into a Super-Bullet, able to penetrate tall buildings in a single bound. Some of these hunters also apparently believe there's a Bonded Board of Standards, which meets regularly (perhaps in Kansas City) to ensure that every bonded bullet acts exactly like its magical counterparts produced elsewhere. Or at least that's the conclusion that I've come to after years of hearing about what bonded bullets should and should not do from various wishful thinkers.

Hope it's OK to post that here.

I've gotten previous columns but for some reason didn't get this one. I've sent an e-mail to Rick asking it be sent again and am patiently waiting...

It seems virtually impossible to pick the perfect bonded bullet for any application. Accuracy, penetration, hunting cover,game animal, particular rifle characteristics, local regulations and availability all play a role.

Even though I've hunted and reloaded for years, the current crop of bullets is bewildering and I go back and forth on my choice of one 9.3mm bullet to take on an African plains game hunt.

The real truth is probably any contemporary bullet will dothe job.

If this is indeed their strategy I believe it is seriously flawed, and here's why:
For the most part those who buy factory ammunition do not handload. Conversely, for the most part those who handload do not buy factory ammunition. Offering bullets to handloaders would not negatively impact ammunition sales but would increase overall revenue. My one assumption is that the bullet plant has sufficient capacity to handle factory ammunition as well as bullet production. Revenue would increase and marginal costs would decrease.

I would just like to get the article. Each time an article comes out I e-mail Rick and ask for a copy and wait........Is there an easier way? Is it a secret? I am registered both here and Rifle Looney Newsletter. Am I just doing something wrong? Any help would be great.

Whether your assumption is true or false Federal did offer these bullets as components in 2010, but no longer does so. Maybe demand was so low that sales didn't cover the cost of offering these bullets, in which case it's still true that there's more profit is selling premium ammunition than in selling premium bullets to handloaders.

I sometimes find the e-mail in my Spam box as it does look like Spam to the filter software.

"Within the structural limits of a given bullet, the lower the impact velocity the less penetration and expansion, and the higher the velocity the more penetration and expansion"

Less velocity = Less Penetration. Really?

Tundragriz fell off his soap box

In your search for a one liner response you missed the point and fail to recognize the engineering difficulty of maximizing the velocity range over which a bullet reliably expands.

John,

Nice article but I am dissapointed that they closed the Bonding Board in Kansas City.

They were also the people that certified the stuff that keeps fillings from falling out of teeth.

I bet George Soros was behind this.

I bet George Soros is behind everything....

I have been testing bullets for years and I am aware of the challenges that bullet designers face, I have just never heard anyone state that lower velocity means less penetration? I have seen th
e exact opposite. I am curious.

I have been testing bullets for years and I am aware of the challenges that bullet designers face, I have just never heard anyone state that lower velocity means less penetration? I have seen th
e exact opposite. I am curious.

So for velocity's within the structural limits of a given bullet (AKA the bullet is not going so fast as to explode or so slow as to not expand at all) you're claiming a lower velocity results in greater penetration through a given medium. Is that right? I just want to make sure I understand your claim.

Less velocity creates less expansion. Less expansion creates less frontal area which creates less drag which results in more penetration. Look at the pictures of bullet expansion at different speeds on the new Nosler bullet boxes. Easy to visualize the different penetration.

Slow lead bullets the buffalo hunters used would penetrate several feet in a buffalo. At the Battle of Adobe Walls, indians were killed by Sharps bullets that were fired through huge stacks of buffalo hides many feet thick that the attacking indians were using for cover.

I once had a 150 gr deer bullet from a .308 Win blow up completely on a deer's rib at less than ten yards. My .38 pistol would have been more effective on that shot at that range. The same deer bullet would probably have 'over penetrated' the same deer at 500 yards. A .22 LR bullet that doesn't deform will penetrate over 12 inches of lengthwise jackrabbit. In general, higher velocity means less penetration. To expect a bullet to expand the same at differing velocities is not usually going to happen.

I tend to agree that lower velocities can cause a given bullet to penetrate deeper, not higher velocities. That's because a given bullet may well expand wider when impacted at a higher velocity or even come apart.
But I've seen exceptions of this too. The Nosler Partition, for instance, tends to penetrate very deeply if the impact velocity is so high it's petals are folded back against the shank or sheared off altogether.
So, it depends on the bullet.
I'm not a big fan of most bonded bullets because I favor penetration over wide expansion. But, even here, there are exceptions. For the first time in many years I just bought three boxes of factory premium ammo for hunting. That's because I've got a raging case of the hots for the Federal Tipped Throphy Bonded bullet. E

I think it was Gary Schiuchetti (sp?) that showed the partition had similar penetration at high and low impact velocities. IIRC the early barnes bullet performed similarly.

The basic rule is that the more a bullet tends to expand consistently to a certain shape, the more it penetrates at higher impact velocities. I've found this to be generally true of Barnes X's, Nosler Partitions and E-tips, Trophy Bondeds, North Forks, etc.

When a bullet tends to expand more widely at higher impact velocities, the less it will penetrate. This category would include Hornady Interbonds, Norma Oryxes, Speer DeepCurls, Remington Core-Lokt Ultras, Swift Sciroccos, Woodleigh Weldcores--and even, to a certain extent, Swift A-Frames, because the rear end also tends to expand at high impact velocities. Also inclused would be cup-and-core bullets.

These "rules" aren't hard and fast, because other factors affect penetration. But in general the area of the frontal mushroom affects penetration more than weight retention, as well as impact velocity.

I understand what you are saying, that penetration is less when velocity is high enough to cause the bullet to come apart or explode. However, that's clearly not what I was talking about being that I prefaced my sentence with �Within the structural limits of a given bullet�

Look at the examples of the Swift Scirocco II bullets in the lower right of this image.



Given the design of the Scirocco II you can see that it's well expanded at 2100 fps and yet holds together (high weight retention) to +3200 fps. You can bet the same weight and caliber Scirocco II bullet fired at 3200 fps penetrates further than when it's fired at 2100 fps into the same medium as the frontal area is nearly the same within this velocity range. That's the hallmark of a well designed bullet like the Scirocco II, a bullet that I doubt could be produced without bonding the lead core to the copper jacket.

Just for fun, here is one test from Richard Mann's websight of a test he did in wet newspaper. I'm not saying it proves anything, but notice how little difference there is in penetration between the .308 Win at a much higher speed than the 30-30.


LOAD




PENETRATION

EXPANSION



.264 Win. Mag. 130 gr. Swift Scirocco II, 1810 fps

22.00 +

0.37



.308 Win. 165 gr. Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, 2700 fps

14.25

0.65



.30 Rem. AR, Barnes 110 gr. TAC-X, 2880 fps

14

0.55



.243 Winchester, Barnes 85 gr. Tipped Triple Shock, 2900 fps

11

0.47



.30-30 Win., 170 gr. Nosler Partition, 2165 fps

10.25

0.63

I am trying to find some data using the same bullet at different speeds, which will be more useful.

Thanks, MD. That clarifies the issue nicely. E

Concerning the Tipped Trophy Bonded, it has been my experience that handloaders (and their stories/reports) are the ones who generate demand for boutique bullets among non-handloaders.

When the handloaders generate a "buzz" for a bullet, all the factory ammo users want in on the action. Selling to both fraternities gains exposure in two different markets at once.

I don't think pure factory users ever generate enough "buzz" to make handloaders try factory ammo (E. excepted in this case).

If the TTB is soft up front with ready expansion, it really does seem like about the best of all designs to me, but I'll probably never find out with the price they ask for factory ammo.

I've used the Tipped Trophy Bonded some, including taking my biggest elk with it, and have mentioned it here and there in various articles. So have some other gun writers.

But the bullet has run into other problems, though it works great. First, there are some gun writers and hunters out there convinced that only the ORIGINAL Trophy Bonded was any good--which has not been my experience, by a long shot. Second, the nickel plating makes some flat-earth type reloaders suspicious. Third, the component bullets were expensive and not easily available--and competed directly with some already well-established brands, such as the Barnes Tipped TSX and at least a couple of Nosler bullets. Fourth, they may have even suffered because some other hunters firmly believe that bullet quality is directly related to price--and there are some even more expensive "boutique" bullets out there.

All of which shows that it's difficult to wedge a new product into an already crowded market, especially in a slow economy.

Are they soft enough up front to get FULL expansion down to 2000fps?

The other thing, or things, about the Trophy Bonded bullets/ammo is their popularity with the LEO and military tactical sorts.
Some time back, an extensive search was launched for a load that LEO/military snipers could use that would stay on course when passing through things like angled window glass. Conventional match ammo, whose bullets had alot of their weight in the rear of the bullet will not stay on course when passing through such barriers. But the Throphy Bonded ammo was found to stay on course when such things were encountered. To my knowledge, it's the only bullet design that does. For that reason, they are carried by such people for such jobs.
The latest ammo, is alot more accurate based on my limited testing.
As a hunter, anything that will help me make a proper hit on an animal is worth having. I've had a few shots go bad because of branches, or twigs that I wasn't aware of. This bullet may not work perfectly if this happens, but it's apparently has at least some ability to do better. E

Can I kindly request someone post the article so it can be read. I requested a link on 11-07-11 at 11:03 AM and I still can't seem to get the article. I would love to read it.

I would also like the CF to figure a way this doesn't happen each time there is a great article.

Happy Holidays

You can find them all here:
Newsletters

This penetration/velocity/expansion thing is kinda hard to pin down sometimes

I think what JB says is correct in general.But i thnk it is hard to generalize about bonded bullet performance today because they come in such a wide variety of construction types,materials(pure copper vs guilding metal jackets;pure lead cores vs antimony),different bonding techniques,the absence or presence of mechanical devises to limit expansion (partitions like the Aframe, or solid rear sections like the TTBC or Northfork),and jacket thickness.

All these factors can add up in any one design to affect expansion at different velocities,and penetration.Add the variables like impact velocities,and the medium contacted(ribs/lungs vs shoulders, etc.)and you wind up with so many variables it becomes pretty hard to draw concrete conslusions about any one design until you see them work over a wide range of animals and conditions.

I am a fan of bonded bullets but a lot of my experiences are limited to the old original,the Bitterroot,which I have used a pretty fair amount since the 80's,and in a few different cartridges.Prior to that time, I read of their use by guys like John Wooters and Bob Hagel,and some others,who created a stir and led to many designs we have today.For example, it was Jack Carter's inability to get Bill Steigers to mass manufacture the Bitterroot, that led to Carter's development of the original TBBC. I know this because years back I would speak with Steigers on the phone 2-4 times a week, for years.Also,floating around somewhere,there is an article by the designer of the Northfork,indicating that he was trying to emulate the Bitterroot performance with the NF;same/same with Lee Reid and the Swift Aframe.These bullets behave much the same way with a few minor differences.

I have freinds who have used the bullet as well,so some of this is anectdotal.

The BBC was made of very heavy pure cooper jackets, as much as .060 jacket thickness;and pure lead cores,bonded by a technique that was then proprietary.They were essentially a cup/core design,with no mechanical devise to stop expansion other than the thick heavy jackets and the bonding..

They were very "tough",and Steigers recommended not only minimum velocities for thier use, but minimum twist rates as well.His expansion tests indicated that a faster twist,coupled with higher impact velocties, resulted in more dramatic expansion,especially at distance.

They have always been dramatic killers due to early and wide expansion.They will never fragment,and the expamded wings will not shear even under extreme stress ( have seen one wing come off but the bullet tumbled,having defleced on a branch before impact).Generally penetrate as far as needed,frequently farther,and at close range,will almost always be stopped against hide on the far side, but will reliably smash both shoulders on about anything.

Thi wide,rapid expansion has given me a lot of DRT's even with pure lung hits. I recall one black bear of about 300 pounds that I killed with the 280 and 140 BBC,where I hit nothing but ribs and lungs at about 90 yards. It collapsed immediately and never got to its feet....this is not easy to do with a bear. I have seen them hit likewise with other bullets and run like a scalded cat.Expansion was about 60 caliber, and retained weight about 138 gr.

One large mule deer was hit quartering on at the point of the shoulder,distance about 70 yards to a 140 gr driven over 3250 from a 7RM;he collapsed to the shot....the bullet was recovered clear back in the opposite ham,again expanded to about 60 caliber,and retaining about 95% weight.

Velocity makes a difference; I have noticed that the 130 gr from a 270 Win at 3100,will exit lung hits or shoulder hits on large deer out around the 300 yard mark,due to reduced expnasion and lower velocity....yet a 140 7mm at the same distances,and MV @ 3250-3300 will still be recovered against that rubbery off side hide.The extra velocity causingwider expansion, even at distance.

It is apparent that destruction is just greater at the higher velocities...have had the 165 30 cal driven 3250 from a 300 Win Mag turn the chest cavity of a bull elk to soup and break the offside shoulder,then exit at about 225 yards.

These and other observations are why I gently argue sometimes with folks who advocate very thin jacketed bullets as being the more rapid killers of deer sized game.This has not been my exoerience, entirely...I know that theory "works", but also know that the very rapid exansion of a quality bonded bullet,and high velocity will also destroy a lot of internal tissue,and still have enough mustard to handle bone the other side of the wound channel....what happens after that really doesn't matter.

If I had to count on a bullet to "dump" a big mule deer or whitetail(or elk),on his nose at tough angles from 350-400 yards or so, on in,I would rather run a Bitterroot or Swift Aframe at magnum velocities than a more fragile bullet,or anything else for that matter.


Just my cents on the matter....this bonded bullet stuffcould take up a book!

Bob,

As I attempted to point out in the article but perhaps didn't quite make clear is that there's something of a continuum in bonded performance--in particular among the thicker-jacketed models. The basic principle is that the less lead inside the jacket, the deeper the penetration, due to a smaller mushroom.

The very first Trophy Bonded bullets opened up quite widely, like the Bitterroots. But as they've gone through a couple of generations of modification by Federal, they've been modified to leave a small mushroom, partly by modifying the jacket but also partly by reducing the amount of lead in the front of the jacket.

To tell the truth, I wasn't all that crazy about the originals, at least in the typical calibers used in North America. They tended to open fairly widely, but with a rounded mushroom that didn't do as much internal damage as the wide, winged mushroom of the Bitterroot or Norma Oryx. The solid copper shank also tended to foul the bore, like the original X-Bullet, and accuracy could be iffy, depending on the rifle.

Federal's first modification changed the frontal jacket gemetry to result in a flatter mushroom, which seemed to kill better, in my experience anyway. They also used gilding metal instead of pure copper for the jacket, which (again in my experience) helped. But some people didn't like this bullet as much, in particular some African hunters who used larger caliber TB's. They found the wings of the mushroom sometimes broke off, for one thing.

The Tipped Trophy Bonded has solved the solid-shank problems, and also seems to have a little less lead, increasing penetration--which seems to be the 21st-century criteria for premium bullets.

The North Fork may have been originally designed as another semi-copy of the Trophy Bonded, but it works more like a Barnes TSX, due to the tiny amount of lead in the tip. Norh Forks penetrate deeper than any other bonded bullet I've used, due to their relatively narrow mushroom.

I still don't understand why they don't make a monometal purposely designed to open really wide with slicing petals that don't fall off. That would be an easy route to Bitteroot performance, it seems.


Does the Hornady Interbond come anywhere close to Bitterroot performance? It seems like it should from its design parameters.

The Nosler E Tip opens pretty wide at high velocities anyway.

Been thinking a bit about the Hornady Interbonds myself in the 264 WM, the Swift Scirocco has been really good in it and will be hard to beat though. In 35 and 375 calibers the Nosler Accubond has really impressed, wish I had the time and money to test all the different bullets but that's the great thing about a forum like this.

I enjoyed the first part of this article but was unable to open the rest when I clicked on the link. I also found it in my junk mail for the other person looking where the articles go. But I do enjoy your articles and the little I read I aggree with.

Corey

This BEST verbalizes my experiences and OBSERVATIONS per velocity/penetration. As John says 'general rules' can have exceptions BUT we must operate in general rules UNLESS we always pay premium prices.

THANKS J B & BobNH

Hi John,

I enjoyed your article. Thanks. One question ~ Why don't we see relief grooves in the E-Tip and Scirocco?

Jeff

The Scirocco isn't a solid-shank bullet.

Nosler found the E-Tip didn't need them, because it's made of the same gilding metal (copper/zinc alloy) as the Ballistic Tip. Essentially, it's a Ballistic Tip without any lead.

I live a simple life. I shoot Partitions in all my big game rifles. Never saw the need to try anything else.

If only Partitions were available and no other bullet, I don't think it would really bother me. I've only killed a couple animals with the 150 .30 persuasion but couldn't have asked for more. This year's deer ran maybe 30 yards...no problem since it bled so much.

I could go to the 180 for elk/moose/bear, but loaded up some 168 Barnes TSX for that possibility. Don't know if would really matter between those two selections.

All this talk about bonded bullets is making my head spin. I have been very impressed with my standard 180 grain Remington core-lokts out of the ol '06. If The bullet hits heavy bone, part of it might break off, but the rest will still keep on going. This way I still get the initial shock of good expansion, but also get deep penetration. Kind of like a partition, only less than half the price. I have shot through mule deer lengthwise with em, and through elk severely quartering away. I have also had many fast kills with broadside animals. I don't think I would have gotten as good of results with any bonded bullet. I may have recovered some pretty bullets, had I been using bonded bullets, but I like animals that bleed from two holes better than pretty souvenirs.

Yeah, the 180 Core-Lokt is a great bullet in the .30-06. In fact I believe it was designed for the '06. Hard to beat it for general big game hunting!

Safaris are expensive, as is wounded and lost game. Premium ammunition, by comparison, is relatively cheap.

For anything larger than impala/deer, my recommendation is a well constructed bonded bullet. Woodleighs, Swift A-Frames and Trophy Bonded softs have worked well for me. The Barnes TSX has performed admirably for me on smaller animals (i.e, impalas) and was also quite impressive on the big ones, (i.e., buffalo). I consider it a good all around bullet and it shoots accurately in my rifles. Please see the caveat regarding cats below.

Cats are a different story. The good old Core-Lokt or Federal Hot-Cor soft points have a fine reputation on cats, as does the Woodleigh. Too tough a bullet on a cat hunt is not a good thing. Ask me. I recently shot one with an A-Frame from a .416 and the result was an exciting followup in the dark. The exit wound was singularly unimpressive. Perhaps the NP at reasonable velocity may be a good choice for cats. Dunno. I never tried it and don't personally know anyone who has.

Too much velocity and a non-bonded bullet is not a good thing. IMHO, a NP out of a 7mm mag is a recipe for wounded and lost animals in many cases, especially on african game. The closer you are, the worse off you are when using this combo. Yeah, I know. A 160 NP out of your buddy's 7mm mag turned an elk into jello and fire danced around the entry wound for 10 minutes. Try that same combo on a zebra or wildebeest and let us know how it worked for you. The NP was ground breaking when it was introduced 60 odd years ago. You can do much better now, as bullet science has progressed a lot in the last 20 years.

I do not like plastic tips on hunting bullets. I have seen them fall off when the round was removed from the box. My friend lost an animal when the tip fell off a bullet, got stuck in the action and tied up the bolt.

I also recommend heavy for caliber bullets, especially under bushveldt conditions and at bushveldt distances. My preference in the .300 Win mag is, for instance, the 200 grain Swift A-Frame as loaded by Remington.

If you are hunting the "little five"' shoot them with solids. If you are hunting elephant or rhino (or following up a buff), IMHO, shoot Barnes monolithic solids. They have worked well for me. I have had Federal Sledgehammers bend and deform badly. My second choice for a solid (especially in older doubles) is the Woodleigh.

Just my observations. YMMV.

Not knocking your experience, which is much more extensive than mine, but I always thought the Partition was "THE" all-around brilliant design. In terms of the .30-06 class of cartridges for North American hunting, anyway. In the book "One Man, One Rifle, One Land", the author describes taking all NA big game species with an old .30-06, using 150, 165, 180, and 200 grain Partitions. Again, all this TSX/copper/monometal talk got me interested in the TSX as a "super design" but I still like the NP for what I have used it for. Do you think it would be doable to take a bison or big bear or something equally huge with the 168 TSX in the '06? Or would the 180 or 200 better fit the bill, if it will open reliably?

LightsOutSix:

I really can't comment about bears as I have never hunted them. I gained my experience in Africa, not North America. That said, I'm a big fan of the .30/06 and it will perform well (given good bullet placement) on 90% of African game with well constructed bonded or monometal bullets.

However, If I ever do have the opportunity to hunt the big bears, I think I would bring at least a .375, as they are considered dangerous game. A bison is a large animal, about the size of an eland, I would imagine, with heavy, tough bones. A large eland weighs a little more than a cape buff. My recommendation for eland is a .375 as a minimum. You might consider buying a .375 for your bison and bear hunting.

As to penetration, one would have to test the Nosler and TSX in some sort of consistent media in order to determine that. Sectional density is an important factor to consider as well. If you were bound and determined to use an '06 on bison, the 200 grain TSX loaded to about 2,600 would likely penetrate better than any other bullet that comes to mind. They are supposed to expand at impact velocities >1,900 fps.

A hunter who's battery consists of a .30/06 and a .375 H&H and can shoot well with them is, IMHO, ready for any game that walks the face of the earth.

Good hunting!

Phil Shoemaker, the well-known Alaskan brown bear hunting guide, has done extensive penetration testing, sometimes on beached whales. He's found that the 220-grain Partition penetrates deeper than any other expanding bullet he's used, and Phil has used cartridges up to the .505 Gibbs, and most of the premium bullets made in the U.S.

My personal experience, both with various kinds of "media" and on 100's of animals in North America, Europe and Africa, is that the Nosler Partition is one of the deepest penetrating bullets made. It typically penetrates more than several other bullets that cost more, and more reliably as well.

Especially deep-penetrating are the heavier, larger caliber Partitions from 9.3mm up, which are designed to retain around 85% of their weight, rather than the 65-70% of sub-.30 caliber bullets. The medium sizes (such as the 225 .338) are in between, designed to retain around 75% of their weight.

This year I took about half my big game with Nosler Partitions. The list included animals as mundane as whitetails and as exotic as Nyasa wildebeest and Cape buffalo. The obsolete old Nosler Partition worked perfectly every time.

In fact I've used just about every expanding bullet made in North America, Europe and Africa, and have yet to find one more suitable for all-around use on a variety of big game than today's Nosler Partitions. In addition to working great when they hit animals, today's Partitions are also very accurate.

I have not been to Africa but a couple of friends have shot and killed a considerable number of animals, on cull hunts over there, including zebra and wildebeest with a 7 Rem Mag and 175 Nosler Partitions.They said that combo knocked the snot out of all those animals and others up to eland in size,so this comment caught my eye.

Is there something about wildebeest and zebra that makes them tougher than bull elk,and immune to Nosler Partitions and 7 mags?

Yeah, that particular paragraph got my attention as well.

Unlike the WinchesterModel70, I have considerable experience both in Africa AND North America. As far as I can see there is no difference between shooting elk (generally considered the toughest North American hoofed game) and such medium-sized African "super-tough" animals as zebra, wildebeest and gemsbok.

All will fall nicely when hit in the right place with Nosler Partitions from cartridhes such as the .270, 7x57, 7mm Remington Magnum, .30-06, etc. All will run a long way when poorly hit even with "new and improved" super-bullets from cartridges from the .300 magnums up.

Is there something about wildebeest and zebra that makes them tougher than bull elk,and immune to Nosler Partitions and 7 mags? [/quote]

Hearts of steel and lungs of kevlar.

When you get to Africa, try that combo out and let us know how it works for you. It's your safari. You pay your money and you take your chance.

The part of the NP that penetrates is the metal cased wadcutter that's left after the front portion comes apart. It acts like a small solid, where a TSX or A-Frame keeps chugging along with a larger than caliber mushroom at the front end. Essentially, an A-Frame is a partition with the front portion of the bullet jacket bonded to the core so it doesn't come apart.

African animals have a deserved reputation for being tougher than North American game. Go on safari and judge for yourself.

Yes,bullet placement is the #1 component of a quick, clean kill, PROVIDING the bullet does it's job. Since you are (at least in your own mind) an expert in all matters relating to rifles, hunting, ammunition and optics, by all means continue to pontificate so the rest of us mere mortals can sit and listen in awe.

Now that you've demonstrated what a douche bag you are, I can't wait for your next pronouncement.

Wow.

WinchesterModel70,

Naw, I'm not an expert in all things related to shooting and hunting, but I am continually learning, thanks to shooting animals with a wide variety of bullets.

I've used Nosler Partitions since the mid-1970's, back when they still had relief grooves and the jackets were turned, not extruded. I've shot over 100 big game animals personally with them, and seen at least that many more killed with Partitions by friends and family.

But they're not the only bullets I use, since part of my job is to test a wide variety of bullets both in various kinds of media and on game. In fact for most of the last decade I rarely used Partitions because there were so many new bullets introduced. I've been shooting Barnes X's of every generation since the late 80's, and have thoroughly tested just about every other "premium" bullet, including all the versions of Trophy Bondeds from Jack Carter's originals to the latest Tipped model; all the Swift bullets (including both the original Scirocco and SII); North Forks; Hornady Interbonds, GMX's and DGX's; Speer Grand Slams and DeepCurls; Remington Core-Lokt Ultras, etc. etc.

I also know the other Nosler bullets quite well, whether Ballistic Tips, AccuBonds or E-Tips. In fact I tested some prototype E-Tips on an African cull hunt in 2007, where almost 200 animals were taken over a month of shooting by me and my companions. I've also gone to New Zealand to thoroughly test Berger VLD's on a bunch feral goats and other game including red stags. Oh, and I also have shot several semi-loads of big game with "ordinary" bullets from Hornady, Remington, Sierra, Speer and Winchester. I always autopsy the animals myself, or watch it done when that isn't possible, as it sometimes isn't in Africa, to find out exactly how the bullets worked.

This year I used more Nosler Partitions than in any other year for the past decade, because I'd learned how those other bullets work--and didn't find any of them killed any better than the right Partition put in the right place. But even while using several Partitions from 6.5mm to .416, I also shot big game with Hornady Interbonds, Federal Fusions, Barnes TTSX's, Nosler Ballistic Tips, and Sierra ProHunters.

Over the years I've seen some very weird field results with some of the bullets you apparently regard as infallible, including repeated instances that would have to be considered total failures, but have yet to see that happen with hundreds of Nosler Partitions. I've also run into a bunch of hunters like you, who "know" all sorts of stuff without actually doing a lot of comparison testing. If you had, you might know as much as you think you do.

I shot an eland one day with a .300 Win. Mag and a 150 ( yes...150...) grain NPT....

He seemed to die pretty dead....


Just sayin'.......

I may not have the experience as JB here but this post is "good to go" in my eyes....dead on!

Thanks for the bullet lesson ......I will keep it all in mind...

I have flung a Partition or two over the last 40+ years,in calibers from .25 to.375, in the direction of North American BG animals from Alaskan Brown bear down to coyotes,and am well familiar with the "wadcutter" effect....also the broken bones and deep, straight line penetration (farthest I've seen was from a 200 gr 30 cal Partition that went from just forward of the right ham of a large bull elk to the off side shoulder, breaking it and exiting).And as yet can't recover any 160 7mm's fired into shoulders of bull elk. Or could possibly relate similar experiences using them both out to longish ranges here,as well.

This performance may not be Africa worthy, I dunno.....I guess a mature bull elk sorta pales in the toughness department compared to African plains game....

If you could relate your own experience with the 7mm Magnum and Partitions, shooting African game with them,demonstrating the inadequacies, it would be helpful.Might save me some money when I get over there.....How many animals have you lost over there with a 7 mag and Nosler Partitions?

I could repeat the same experiences (maybe just as much)on the same type North American game with the Bitterroot Bonded Core in calibers from 270 to 375,of which the Aframe is a "copycat"....having lots of BBC's, I have had no need for an Aframe, which is a great bullet, but have not gotten around to my stash, beause anything the Aframe will do, so will the Bitterroot, and maybe "better", but who knows?I think Lee Reid had the BBC in mind when he worked out the Aframe.You may or may not know this... Figure I will stick to the original until I run out.....

Another aside, but a Barnes X, TSX, or TTSX will also shear off those frontal petals under the stress of high velocity impact, giving the same "wadcutter" effect as a Partition.....but of course you knew this, too.

As to the toughness of African game,as noted I have no basis for comparison other than anecdotal;but based on the opinions of some pretty worthy gents who have(I will bet)a lot more combined experience than you on both North American, and African game(and a lot of it with Partitions and 7 mags) in such flimsy performers as the 7 mag,270,and 280 on stuff up to eland, I'd be inclined to swing in their direction and not concern myself with the "toughness" issue... These guys all disagree with you, including one well respected and experienced writer who you managed to insult with your own pontification; one reason I am having a hard time taking seriously anything you say....

If, as you say, African animals have a "well deserved reputation" for being tougher than North American game, pound for pound, I wonder how you know this if you have not shot much North American game.Is it because someone told you or have you seen it for yourself by shooting and hunting here in North America as well? Just curious....

Otherwise, thanks for all the wisdom.

The BS floweth over. Please continue to spew, I am all ears wanting to hear more about this "armour plated African game

Can't wait

One of the interesting things about the myth of all African game being so much tougher than North American big game is that it's almost always heard from people without wide experience in North America, or even any experience--including a bunch of African PH's.

In fact I was taken to task by a well-known PH just last year, when I published an aritcle about the African toughness myth. This guy confronted me about the relative toughness of elk and blue wildebeest--but of course he'd never even seen an elk, much less seen an elk shot.

In contrast, I have killed all the supposedly super-tough plains game animals--zebra, wildebeest and gemsbok--as has my wife. I've also seen a bunch more taken by friends. Oddly, some of the quickest kills were made by Nosler Partitions put in the right place, even by such puny cartridges as the .270, 7x57 and .308--while some of the real rodeos were caused by super-bullets put in the wrong place with much bigger rounds.

In particular I remember a gemsbok one of my companions hit in the diaphragm on a broadside shot from a .375 H&H with a 270-grain Barnes TSX. The gemsbok went over two miles, and took several other "raking" shots from the .375 and the PH's .300 Winchester Magnum before succumbing.

If the same bullet had landed in the same place on a bull elk, the elk might never have been recovered, because of instead of running off over relatively level, semi-open thornveld, the elk would probably have gone over at least one mountain ridge, and maybe two or three.

Running off after hits around the edges is pretty much the definition of "tough." Elk are just as tough as any of the vaunted African plains game--but none of them are all that tough if hit right by a good bullet, even one of those antiquated Nosler Partitions.

Exactly, I could not agree more

Good point(s) MD. While I don't try to take out both shoulders on a broadside shot, if I can hit one of them on an animal that's facing me or angling away, I've found that helps too.
I've seen deer class stuff go down pretty reliably with a lung shot that hits the rear lobes, but the bigger, tougher stuff does seem to have an amazing ability to go long distances in really mean country with such a hit. Even watched a Pronghorn hit through the rear lobes of the lungs try to get up a minute or two after going right down. It really pays to both shoot carefully and to make sure he's down for keeps. E

John,

Quit making sense and using personal experience in a logical way to back your opinions.

Greg,

Thanks!

It's always kind of odd to read really firm opinions based on limited experience and theory....

I like to refer to such as, "long on theory-short on substance"

A good friend of mine sometimes calls them "aggressive ignorance."

"Taking a firm stand with both feet planted in mid-air."

Has this work been published? I am a big fan of the 220gr Partition out of my .300 Win Mag.

As I recall Phil published the info in one of the Wolfe magazines.

Two writers, actually. In one of his books, Boddington also mentioned that he didn't think African game was any tougher than an elk.

Not being a hunter I have no first hand experience but from my readings I would say at least three writers, since Jack O'Connor specifically said he didn't see any difference in his experience, and I believe Finn Aagaard said much the same thing, IIRC, which makes four writers.

Hey, what the heck...I'll give it a whack.

Since we are talking anecdotal I will share a few I was graced to hear.

Anecdote One: "Many African animals have a hump. Shooting one of those animals at "the Equator" will result in a high lung shot. Hitting them slightly above the Equator will miss the lungs. In either case, the animal will produce a poor blood trail and take a long-to-very long time to die."

Anecdote Two: "Many African animals are herd animals. They will run with the herd until they fall over. Not like a White tail deer which might scurry off 75 yards and bed down. The herd they run with will churn up the trail and make even a generous blood trail an iffy thing"

Anecdote Three: "You pull the trigger and the tracker finds one molecule of hemoglobin, and you punch the tag and pay the freight."

I don't have the checkbook to hunt Africa. But if I did I would invest at least a couple of hours in learning where the heart/lungs were on any species I was likely to encounter.

As a side note....I just finished a magazine article in one of my son's magazines. The 'hunter' was shooting at dark blobs in the brush (at the advice of his PH). The PH said, "The Cape Buffalo is facing left" and the "hunter" shot sort of into the left side of the center of mass. A two day tracking job resulted. Several more shots were launched into dark blobs in the brush. Crap! That is only slightly less reprehensible than "sound shots" into the brush over here. No wonder African game is hard to kill with firearm short of a Browning Machine Gun in .50 BMG.

Shaking my head in wonder.

Rick,

Put me on the list. My e-mail address is tturpincox.net. I'd like to get a copy of John's "bonded bullets" piece. I'm hesitant to wade in before reading it.

Thanks. Good seeing you again in Vegas.

Tom

Tom,

I'll send it myself.

I missed seeing you in Vegas--but didn't miss Vegas! Hope you are doing well.

John,

Got it, many thanks. Now I have to digest it. Yep, I knew you weren't going to be at SHOT. I'm not exactly sure why I went? I did see Rick several times though, along with the usual assortment of colleagues. We missed you, but I think you were the smart one.

All is well here.

TT

Thanks John.

Pleasure seeing you too, Tom, as usual. I hope you didn't catch the bug! I'm still not myself.

Tom,

Would be very interested in your take on the article.

We have to get together somewhere where 50,000 people around the world aren't spreading germs--and where Scotch whisky prevents infection!

Big tough animal, little .260.

John,

I agree that a meeting place somewhat less congested than Las Vegas, NV would be far preferable.I particularly like your "preventative" from disease. Now I know why I never get sick! And Rick, I didn't catch anything in Vegas, and John just explained why.

To the saga of bonded core bullets and my experience with them. I first became acquainted with them in about 1974 or so. I was in Alaska at the time, with the military. A friend that I met there introduced me to Bill Steigers Bitterroot bullets. Mountain View Sports Center, a sporting goods store I frequented often, had a small stock of them for sale. As I recall now, twenty bullets cost around ten bucks. I bought a few and tried them. I found them to be superior in every way to the bullets that I had been using, mainly cup and core bullets. Until I found the Bitteroot, the Nosler Partition was the best bullet on the market that I had found. I've been using mostly bonded core bullets ever since then for my hunting. When the Barns X bullets came out, I tried them. Their performance in most rifles was very good, but not as spectacularly deadly as bonded core bullets. That changed a bit when Barnes came out with the TSX bullets. In my experience, TSX bullets performed considerably better than the original X bullets. I've used quite a few of them on game and they kill well. I've experienced very few "bang-flops" with them though. Still, I've not lost an animal that was shot with a TSX, nor have I had much of a tracking job. I've used several Swift A-Frame bullets with complete satisfaction. I have not tried any Scirocco or Scirocco II bullets on game. I've found them very accurate in my rifles at the range. I shot one animal with a Nosler Accubond, and didn't like them at all. I was using a 140 grain 7mm bullet in a 7mm Dakota rifle. That bullet performed about like a hand grenade. I shot a B&C pronghorn with it and the results were devastating. I even had to get another cape to get it mounted (from a frontal chest shot).

In fairness, it was from a very early lot of bullets, and I was driving it pretty fast out of the 7 Dakota chambering. It is my understanding that the bullet has been improved since it first came out, but I've not tried it again on game. Most likely, had I used it in a 7x57, or even 280, it would have done well. However, with all the excellent bullets available, I've not gone back and tried them again.

I've used Hornady Interbond bullets on a few game animals, mostly Coues deer and pronghorns, and they have performed very well. I used Norma Oryx bullets (180 grain 30-06) on a trip to Namibia, and they performed very much like a Bitterroot, that is to say exceedingly well. On a trip to Tanzania, I chose to use Barnes TSX bullets (165 grain 30-06) on a EA impala, Grant's gazelle, and a zebra. They did the job very nicely.

All in all, I find nothing to argue about in your piece. I agree that simply bonding the core to the jacket will not turn a poor bullet into a super one. I do think that it will turn a poor bullet into a better one though. As someone has already written, it will keep the core from separating from the jacket, at a minimum.

I have accumulated pretty much a lifetime supply of the original Bitterroot bullets, although I don't use them very often anymore. There are so many good bullets available to us today, I don't have to dig into my stash. I'll probably leave them to my kids.

TT

Tom,

Thanks for your experiences. I'm gonna send you a private message about something pertinent.

I have taken many animals in Africa and north America and toughness is something I have heard for years but it is really just what a person has seen personally. For me the caribou and moose are not tough, bull elk are a different story. Black bear are not overly tough but griz and brownies seem to take more lead. In Africa the animal that sticks out as tougher than elk or any other animal is cape buffalo. I have personally shot quite a few pushing 20 with a number of different calibers and they are tough with any gun. Yes I have had some just go down after short run but many last Long enough to kill you even hit right through the heart. The worst performing bullet I have seen on buffalo is the 300 grain nosler partition 3 total failures but I have not seen this with plains game with 7 mm's or any of the normal rifles. I have not ever seen a TSX fail on anything and have shot jackal's that literally exploded, I have also shot leopards with them and they were devastating. The one thing I have noticed is reaction when an animal is hit with TBBC and north forks and swifts, it seems to rock them more than the TSX and I am saying I don't know why but it is noticeable. I have seen the VLD's slam some animals and some acted untouched until they died but they were dead. My conclusion is it is a strange argument because everyone has seen all fail in their minds but it is strange they always have pictures recovered from dead animals. The buffalo I saw had to shot and killed with another bullet and after examination found they may have lived from their wounds long enough to hurt a lot of people.that is the only animal other than elephant I would not shoot with a partition otherwise I am confident in using them on anything else if that's what I had but given a choice I will take a TSX or north fork as my first choice.

I could use a few more Bitterroots in 338 and 375! I recently went back through a bunch of correspondence with Bill and re-read the bullet test for the 375 H&H that Andy Tillman finished in 1982, very good stuff.

If you're Bike Trials taking an extended trip by rail Bike Trial Seller special meals they have available Bike Store for people with Diabetes Bike Shop pass before continuing on

Why is this individual still on this forum??? Most message boards would have banned this user in a heartbeat.

Great post and interesting read.... Reading what Tom had to say about BBC's years back, here and there,used in his 270,confirmed what I had seen with them as well. I accumulated a lifetime supply also and continue to use them.

Read Mule Deer's article on "bonded bullets" out of my old issue of Handloader (or was it Rifle) again last night. Bob, you are downright famous!!!

Geezus.....LOL!

That weren't me....!