I have a dilemma. I've sworn off ever using the accubond again but now I'm thinking I should re-consider. I've personally shot 2 mule deer does and a whitetail buck with my 300WSM and 180 NAB @ 2880 fps. I failed to recover all three even though they had to be hit through the chest broadside. All, less than 100 yards. The buck left a small blood trail for 20 yards or so then disappeared. The does left nothing, they all just disappeared. Anybody have this experience? I feel like the bullet isn't even opening up if it passes through the chest. Now i have a 6.5 creedmoor that I want a good accurate bullet for. It likes the 130 accubonds, but? Do I want to try hunting with that load? Can I expect anything different?

With the experience I have had with Accubonds, I would use them and look for a different reason than bullet performance for unsatisfactory results...

I will not use ABs for the opposite reason... I have never seen a pass-through, even with big ones...

I doubt any deer, up to moose, hit in the middle-chest area would long survive a 180 NAB...

I've killed near 100 big game animals with a .284/160AB combo, including near 40 in Africa. Results have been stellar when I've done my part.

I had two 140 7mm Accubonds fail to exit a mule deer last year. Broadside behind shoulder and neck. Neither exited.

Shots were 550 yards from a .280 Ackley...

I do have one success story with the accubond. I shot at a doe one evening a few years ago and she didn't react. Then the group of 10 or so does started to get nervous and move around some. I was like "huh", so I picked out another doe and shot...guess what I found on my way to retrieve the second doe? The first one!! They were both hit clean through the lungs. My buddy watched the whole thing and we both thought I missed the first time. Wasting your "A" tag on a doe sucks, let me tell ya! Again, this was right around 100 yards with the same rifle/load. Both bullets exited.

I've had one 140 gr fail to exit on a really large mule deer. I couldn't call it a failure because it started at 3200 fps,slammed into and shattered the on side knuckle joint and traveled to the last ribs on the opposite side....full expanded, weighed 59 gr.

Chest was destroyed. That's not a failure in my book.

I have seen the 130 6.5 used in a Creedmoor ( Watched everything from impact to deers reaction) and seen a big Kansas buck that was killed with one. I plan to load that bullet in my Creedmoor based on what I have seen.


140 AB previously mentioned, on the left:

I only use the AB in my 6.5 Swede at about 2800 fps on antelope. I have never got a pass thru, but with antelope, you usual don't have big problem finding them after they go down.

Might be the combination nd the 300WSM ,but I'd think that 180 AB would have stay together a bit better.

I have two daughters that killed moose with 7mm-08's and 140 grain Accubonds. One at 20 yards and the other at nearly 300. The close one went about 20 feet and the bullet passed thru. The far one went about 75 yards and the bullet was recovered from under the hide on the far side.
That said, we use Partitions for deer. Sometimes with Partitions there isn't much of an exit wound, the entire expanded portion can shed leaving only the rear, un-expanded portion to exit. However, I've never had one get very far after having been shot by one.

Wasn't there some problem with the early production Accubonds coming apart more so, than the newer ones.

I had some older Accubonds come apart in 2007 on antelope. Another lot worked just fine in 2009. They all died, so it really doesn't matter to me.

saddlesore,

The very earliest AccuBonds weren't the problem bullets. Instead the early ones became so popular, so quickly that after a year or so, one guy on the production line decided he could speed up the process at his station. This resulted in bullets that disintegrated soon after impact. The problem was quickly pinpointed and corrected.

As a more general comment, according to my hunting notes I've now seen 33 big game animals taken with AccuBonds, of eight North American species ranging from pronghorns to elk in size, and 10 African species from springbok (about like pronghorn) to eland. The cartridges included the .264 Winchester, .270 WSM, 7mm Dakota, .308 Winchester, .300 WSM, .300 Winchester Magnum, .338 Federal, .338 Winchester Magnum, 9.3x62, 9.3 B-S and .375 H&H.

In total nine bullets failed to exit:

140 .270 shot into a bull caribou frontally by a friend, found in the spine at the rear of the ribcage. Don't know weight retained.

160 7mm shot through the shoulders of a black wildebeest by a friend. Recovered under hide of far side retaining 65%.

160 7mm shot into chest of bull gemsbok by a friend. Recovered under hide on far side retaining 67%.

150 .30 shot frontally into the chest of a bull caribou by me. Penetrated into intestines and never found.

180 .30 shot into chest of bull eland broadside by a friend. Recovered under hide of far side. Don't know weight retained.

225 .338 shot quarter into blue wildebeest, through shoulder. Recovered under hide at rear of ribs on far side, retaining 77%.

250 9.3 shot frontally into bull gemsbok by me. Penetrated into intestines and never found.

250 9.3 shot into right rear of a grizzly's ribcage by me. Recovered under the skin of the neck on the opposite side, retaining 81%.

260 .375 shot broadside into zebra stallion. Recovered under hide on the outside of far shoulder, retaining 78%.

Thanks MD, my memory isn't the best. Only remembered a problem .I think I have the bad ones so to speak

160 AB, 7mm Rem Mag, 3030fps @ muzzle. Impacts from approximately 80-140 yds. All shot through front shoulder.

[img:left][/img]

The Creed and the 130 Accubond:


And if you're looking for something a wee more slippery at distance, give the 140 Accubonds a whirl - I'm betting they'll perk for you as well.

There isn't a bullet I'd rather use than the Accubond. (I shoot the 130's in my Creed as well)

^^^ Shot some deer with those 130 gr AB's in the Creedmoor's twin the 260 Rem and agree it is hard to beat. I would hunt moose with that combo as well and be happy.

Have used the Accubond on game in the 30-06 (180 gr), 35 Whelen (200 and 225 gr) and 375 Ruger (260 gr) as well and they are my favourite's especially in the Whelen.

I have used them on a grizzly and black bear myself (225's in a 338-06), the 140 gr on a scimitar oryx via 7x57 and my youngest son, age 14 at the time, 160's via 7x57 on the full range of African plains game and all was fine. That said, I have dumped them and will continue with the Barnes TSX. The TSX's shoot very well rather easily, generally first load put together and I am done, and they just work, at times in chitty situations that I have not offered the AB. So, for me, the TSX is what I have settled on.

IMHO the 140 Accubond and 270 Winchester(w/H4831SC) is tough to beat for a sub 500 yard deer hunting rifle.




HuntNref, where at in MT?

I could not agree more Sam.

In situations where meat is to be eaten I will almost never use anything but a monometal... the difference in wasted meat is large...

Any bullet will kill deer fine.

I'm in Forsyth

Some people seem to be disturbed by the fact that ABs might not exit the animal. The reason is the outstanding expansion of the bullet, which leads to a devastating wound channel.

The only one that I have ever used, failed to exit an antelope at 300 yards. The 140-grainer was launched at 3160 fps from a 7 mag. The shot was right behind the front leg. The bullet came to rest, perfectly mushroomed, under the hide on the opposite side after passing through the elbow.

I will take that performance any day.

I think they have a velocity "window" and that's the reason the guys using 140's in a 7/08 (say) talk of increased penetration and quite a few exits, while the guys using the same 140's might see more recovered bullets, and more weight loss when starting them at 3100-3200 fps. Couple that with faster rotational velocity and the stage is set to tear them up more.

The 7 mag shooters seem to do well with the 160's and that's a better match to the cartridge.

I'm not bothered by whether the bullet exits or not; so long as it has the ability to penetrate to the off side hide and break bone before it reaches that point; the damage is done. But I note in passing my buddy is building a small collection of 200 gr AB's from a 300 Weatherby at 3050 fps or so,recovered from dead elk. I have assured him from experience that if they were 200 gr Nosler Partitions he would never have recovered them with those same shots.

SKane has it right. The 130AB is tough to beat in the short action 6.5 stuff. I've only had one deer fail to leave a good blood trail after getting an exit, but that's happened to me before with even larger rounds. I never found penetration lacking, even on hogs. It's been a pretty dang reliable performer for me in the 260 at 2,800-2,850fps.

You may have gotten a bad lot of bullets.

I've had terrific luck with Accubonds. They are my go-to, do-all bullet. I've probably shot 20 head of big game with them, from antelope to elk.

However a few years ago I put a 140/270 Win through a whitetail does ribs. She ran a long way before dying. Luckily I had some snow for the tracking job. Even with the snow it probably took me 45 minutes to sort the tracks out from all the other deer in the area.

When I gutted her out, there was very little damage. A fairly clean, caliber-sized hole through the lungs with a blackish discoloration around it was about all the damage that occurred.

Basically, it looked like the bullet didn't expand. It was a 40 yard shot, so velocity wasn't the problem.

This is certainly not a knock on Nosler Accubonds, because as I said, they are my go-to. But I relegated that box of ammo for sight-in and I'll use another for hunting next time.

One of the few times I will disagree with BobinNH.....I really want a pass thru because there are never any guarantees of a DRT event. In the cases where the (deer) run a bit before giving up the game, I want two holes to leak a generous blood trail.

Killing deer is one thing.....finding it is another and I gave up on ballistic tips years ago for that reason.

To date my preference is a Hornady interlock for deer and smaller size critters and A-Frames for larger size critters. I have no real complaints with accubonds.....just a preference for other bullets.

I would prefer not to use the Accubonds. I've killed 3 deer with them so far.

The first doesn't mean much, a 165 grain from a .308 through the head at 35-40 yards.

The other two were 110 grain ABs from a .257 Roberts. Behind the shoulder, both came apart, neither exited. Deer died. I lost 3 of 4 shoulders to bloodshot, somewhere between goo and merely slime.

I'm a serious .257 fan, this is my 5th, love the little gun, but if I can't get better performance and adequate accuracy from another bullet I'll sell it and find something that shoots bullet other than accubonds. If I was "stuck", couldn't afford to trade it for something else, I'd use it, just go back to 100% head shots, but I can, so .. I can.

Tom

I'm having a lot of trouble believing that 180 grain Accubonds aren't opening up on deer. I've used them in the WSM, considerably more in the Win Mag and through an odd twist of fate more in the RUM than the others. Expansion has been violent on small animals, and I never had any trouble with one grizzly and some Asiatic water buffalo on the high end.

Both my wound channels were very poor...

You'd think the 280AI would give them enough velocity to expand good at 550-odd yards....but I guess they can be pretty tough at that distance. There's that velocity window again.

I really think that's the reason we get people posting so many different results; starting and impact velocities are all over the map and no two shots are the same.



Vapodog: Maybe I am spoiled. I have had so many fast kills from bullets that both stayed inside (and exited) that I don't give it much thought.

The buck hit with the 140 AB( pictured above )was the heaviest mule deer I ever killed; he staggered 20-30 ft, blowing blood out his mouth the whole way.

The other two bullets are 140 Bitterroots from a 280 and a 7 RM at 3100-3200 fps,and killed black bear and mule deer. Death was instantaneous in both cases. Without a doubt the BBC is the fastest killing bullet I have ever used within 300-350 yards or so.

Just a small sampling.

These threads really make me wonder...how many have actually shot AB's enough to know.

I've been shooting them pretty much exclusively for the last 5 seasons in both the 7RM (160's) and 7-08 (140's).

I've personally shot 14 elk with them, seen another 8 or so shot with them. Probably a similar number of deer and pronghorn as well.

I've recovered 5-6 and have shot elk with them between 25-629 (one at 601 with 7RM and one at 629 with the 7-08).

Here's the first elk. a 5 point, I killed with the 7RM and 160's at 25 yards broadside:

Exit:



Shot this bull at 345 yards in Montana the same year, exit on the front of the shoulder:



Cow elk same year at 200ish yards, exit side:



Shot this guy bedded at 150ish yards, actually recovered the bullet on this one after breaking the off-shoulder:



Bullet right under the hide in the center of the of-shoulder:

Buzz I think your experiences square with what everyone has been saying.

140's work good from standard velocity cartridges and 160's work well from the 7mm magnums.

Some with the 7-08 and 140's:

My brother killed this bull at 470 yards with my 7-08 and 140's...caught the bullet just in front of the off-side shoulder (you can see the entrance about middle of rib cage):



Recovered bullet:



Wife shot this bull at 202 yards, exit tight behind shoulder:



Shot these 2 elk in about 30 seconds, both at 170 or so yards, both exited:

(cont)

cow from above:

Entrance side:



Exit:



Montana bull 70 yards hard quartering toward, busted the near shoulder exited behind off shoulder:



wifes bull from last fall, shot it bedded at 100 yards, broke off-side shoulder, recovered the bullet:

There it is!

I used to be hard on the ABs and really relied on Partitions after the first couple ABs I recovered looked about like the 140 Bob recovered. Then as time went on I found more and more ABs, but they have all been on the far side hide or inside a broken leg bone on elk. Kinda gave up worrying about if the PT or AB is better. They act and look the same in animals for the most part. I usually just let the gun decide which it's going to shoot.

I will say the 7mm 160 AB is a hellacious bullet. It is a stinger out of a fast 7.. It's incredible in the Mashburn.

cow with 7-08 at 629, shot behind shoulder exited in front of off-shoulder:



Cow from a couple years ago, shot at 135 yards and broke both shoulders and exited, something I have done only a couple times (breaking both shoulders):



I have nothing bad to say about the accubonds, they have worked on a chitload of elk for us, from a lot of angles, breaking shoulders, not breaking shoulders, from 25-629 yards.

IMO, that's performing very well over a pretty broad set of conditions.

Better bullets out there???

I don't know.

Ive been using Nosler Accubonds since they came out. I can't say how many game animals I have taken with tem but it is a significant # in the US, Canada, and Africa. I've recovered some, most I have not. All have done exactly what they were designed to do when I did my part. I'll keep using them and they will keep on working.

BTW i have recoverd Barnes TSX, Northfork CPS, Partitions, Ballistic tips, Hornady, and a slew others. All those did their job too.

Mating the right bullet, the right weight, the proper velocity, and adequate caliber for the intended game and then putting the bullet in the right spot seems to work consistently well.

From your 7mm?

This is kind of like the 270/280 topics. Both bullet choices would have still created the same amount of expired Elk, right?

AB's work great. Go to the nosler forum and look under bullet tests.

Yeah the only thing I can think is he got a bad lot of bullets

No doubt they did.....

Just pointing out what i see as the differences between the bullets. That would be a slightly smaller expanded frontal area for the Partition and weight for weight slightly more penetration.

You gotta work hard to keep a 200 gr 30 caliber Partition in an elk in any but the very longest angles. Since penetration with an expanding bullet is the first reason I reach for a 200 gr 30 caliber bullet, I'd use the Partition and have.

The 140 AB pictured above was sort of banged up from that shot and looks nothing like Butch's recovered 140's because his were started some 400 fps slower from a 7/08 and had much less rotational velocity too. Likely impact velocity was a lot less too....which goes to show what we all should know about impact velocity. The higher the velocity the more violent the expansion. You can't expect a bullet to behave exactly the same way given those differences in velocity. Anyway that 140 AB has 59 gr of bullet left.It still killed good because it chewed up plenty of vital tissue on the way.

I'd use the 140 AB again in a 7mm that liked it. I have a bunch.

The other two are Bitterroots, one from a 280 at 3080, the other a 7 RM at 3200+. Both shots at less than 100 yards, a lung hit on a 300# bear and DRT first shot, the other on a big muley, similar to the 140 AB,and DRT as rifle recoiled. Both weigh about 138-139 gr, expanded to over .65 caliber.

No blood trails. Lots of use of BBC's over the years have shown similar results. Which is why I say for me they have generally been the fastest killers; Partitions a close second. ...on anything. Maybe not the best choice for 1000 yard shots but I don't do that . Outside my skill sets

I have used ABs in a variety of rifles and cartridges, ranging from a .257 AI up to a .375 H&H. I have used them to take coyotes, pronghorns, Coues whitetails, desert mule deer, elk, impala, kudu, waterbuck, oryx, and eland. I have never lost an animal. Other than a couple of big bull elk that stood around long enough for me to shoot again, I have not shot an animal a second time. There has never been a need for blood trails, as most animals died pretty much where they stood or they went down within sight or ear shot.

Until I got up to critters weighing more than 350 lbs or so, I never recovered a bullet. On the bigger stuff, I have probably recovered about half of them. Retained weights in the ones that I have recovered probably would average around 55-60 percent. As others have mentioned, it is usually quick and easy to find a load that will shoot MOA or less.

I still experiment with other bullets, but I seldom shoot anything but ABs at game these days. YMMV.

mudhen,

If you weight the larger recovered AccuBonds in your collection, above .30 caliber, you'll probably find they retain considerably more than 60% of their weight. This is because Nosler assumes the larger-caliber, heavier AB's will be used on heavier game, so designs them to retain more weight. In a previous post on this thread, I listed the AB's that I've seen stay inside animals over the years: Those over .30 caliber averaged 79%.

Nosler has long done the same thing with Partitions, which is why I'm always amused when somebody states Partitions retain 60 or 65% of their weight. The over-.30 Partitions I've recovered from various large animals have retained from 74% to 95% of their weight, averaging around 85%.

John,

You may well be right--I haven't actually weighed any since my last trip to Namibia, nine years ago. I was going mostly on memory--and these days, mine sure ain't what it used to be!

I shot one whitetail buck at ~ 150 yards from a 270 when they first came out. He dropped out of site when I shot. I went over to retieve him, but he wasn't their. No blood in the snow and tracks mingled in with all the other deer tracks. I looked til dark, but never found him. I got to think I missed, but the deer did fall.

I haven't shot anything with them since, but not because that soured me on them just that I have plenty others to us up.

How do you know that the velocity was 400 fps less? Less rotational velocity? Sounds like a bunch of BS to me.

Or...do you believe that the 7/08 is only capable of 2800 fps with a 140?

Funny stuff.

Did you look at the exit wound on that bull I shot at 25 yards with my 7RM and 160 AB? If your "theory" holds any water, it should have had a basketball sized exit, or at least displayed the "violent expansion "theory". Impact velocity was likely over 2900 FPS. Didn't look too "violent" to me.

I've never seen violent expansion with an AB, and I've never seen a lack of expansion either.

IMO/E, there isn't enough difference, performance wise, between a partition and an AB to even discuss. I shot partitions for close to 30 years, in a wide variety of rifles. They work great too, but no better than an AB.

Butch if you think I was being critical I wasn't. I was looking at the bullet you shot at (what?) 629 yards from a 7/08.

Yeah I think a 7/08 is capable of 2800 fps with a 140, no more than 2900 at sane pressures. That's based on having had 8-10 of them.



What was your starting velocity? Your impact velocity? I was comparing it to mine at 3200 fps + from a 7 Rem mag and impacting at 175 yards. There's a picture of the bullet posted above. That's all that's left....59 grains and it was ground to a pulp. Facts whether you like them or not.

It's also a fact that the rotational velocity will be higher starting the bullet at 3200+ than at 3100, 2900, 2800, or whatever velocity you are starting them at,assuming the twist is the same..What twist is your 7/08?

If you think that rotational velocity has no effect on bullet expansion guess again.

I would also venture a guess that your impact velocity at 629 yards was a LOT less than mine. So, what you think is BS I have no idea......Geezus.

Yes, I think that expansion is more violent at close range than long range....that doesn't mean that it isn't "controlled" as in your 160 7RM load, or like my Bitterroots shown above.

They call bullets like Bitterroots, partitions, and AB's "controlled expansion bullets" for a reason. Surely you know that.

Yes I saw the exit from the 160....big friggin deal...I've seen it 100 times from 160 Nosler Partitions. Violent expansion does not mean "disintegration"...

Everyone ( I thought) knows that bullets expand more violently at high velocity than low velocity.

Again I have no idea what you think was BS about what I posted, unless your reading comprehension is lacking somehow.

shot this pig at 75 or so yards with a 180ab at about 3200ft ps out of my 300 win mag, hit in the front left shoulder almost straight on and it exited the ham.

BobinNH,

No, you weren't looking at the bullet I shot the cow with at 629...the bullet exited. About a 50 cent piece sized exit.

According to the "experts" it shouldn't have exited, and shouldn't have expanded, depending on the expert.

Also, my wife's 7-08 with 43.0 grains of varget and 140 AB's gets 2930 FPS. My 7/08 with the same recipe gets 2870 or so.

Even though, according to you, I'm not sane, I'm getting 2940ish with RL 19 and 140 AB's. Havent seen pressure signs yet, and it shoots like total chit:



I have not seen the extremes that many have...of course I haven't shot but maybe 40 or 50 big-game animals with them...maybe the next 50 I'll see something different.

Again you're assuming I'm being critical and I wasn't.

30 fps one way or another is nothing to get excited about. You can get that much variation switching lots of powder, so 2930 fps doesn't bring me down with a case of the hives. And "no" I don't think you're insane. I think the 7/08 is a good capable cartridge but velocity is limited by its capacity. Nothing new there and you are hardly the first one to work up loads for on.

Who said your 140 wouldn't exit at long range? That just illustrates my point...lower velocity,less "violent" expansion, deeper penetration. Everyone knows that too. Again, compare it to mine at 3200 fps + See a difference?

The 160 from the 7 mag at close range illustrates the opposite. No doubt it expanded "violently", but because of its tough construction, it did not "disintegrate", and exited. Makes perfect sense. Seen it many times with Partitions in different calibers.

Point is it isn't 3200-3300 fps, the velocity that bullet achieves in a 7 mag. there's a clear difference in the way the bullets behaved and velocity is the reason. That's all I was trying to illustrate. Sorry you took offense.

Glad you've killed so many with the AB.I'm way over that number with the Partition but don't really care for box scores...the AB came along too late to peak my interest very much. But I'll give them a run here and there.

I'm almost loath to get into a AB thread, but I've had nothing but positive results over the years and animals I shot with them. Somewhere in the low to mid-20's, mostly deer and elk using a 270 Win and 140 AB's at 3040.

Nothing went wonky in the slightest way. Just dead animals that died like it was planned. Oh, sometimes a dying dash here or there, but blood trails were always there and led to something dead. Pretty much the same results I had when using Partitions for 2 decades.

I'm pretty sure I've found all that stayed inside an animal and that has been about 25% staying inside.

Lonny,

Like you, I used the partitions for a couple decades. The the Barnes came out and they were outrageously accurate in the 7mm Weatherby and okay in my 7mm wildcats. Last year I loaded some 140s in my son-in-law's 6.5RUMLN at 3,420 and this year will be using them in my 6.5SLR at 3,160 feet per second.

Duplicating partition performance with a higher B.C. definitely tickles me.

Nah...

Last week I put a 225 gr 35 cal Accubond through a 200 lb black bear. The hole through the bear was about 1.5" in diameter. The exit hole was the size of e tennis ball. The 225 gr .35 cal Accubond is a good bullet out of a .35 Whelen.

No Barnes bullet made will duplicate nosler partition performance. They are different animals. The partition is obviously designed to shed some of it's frontal weight, while the Barnes X, TSX, TTSX are designed to shed virtually nothing.

BobinNH,

I used partitions for 25 years as well and killed a pile of animals with them.

I cant see any significant difference between performance with an AB and a partition...including penetration.

Caught about the same percentage of partitions as AB's in animals.

I still haven't seen any violent expansion from an AB, even though I was really concerned about from reading the BS, lies. and half truths on the internet. As luck would have it, the first elk I killed with one was the bull at 25 yards...thought it was going to be a disaster. I guess it was violent enough to almost ruin 4 oz of top quality elk rib meat.

That's not entirely accurate- the TTSX definitely seems to shed its petals much more readily than previous iterations, IME.

Correct, have seen the 130 gr TSX do the same at 264 Win Mag speeds. It probably helps them kill better with a bit more damage just like John Nosler discovered years ago with his Partition.

So how many TSX/TTSX will consistently retain "only" 60-75% of their weight as the partition does? Seem that everyone at the 'fire who uses them sings their praises as retaining 90-95

Every bullet manufacturer, and the majority of hunters compare their bullet of choice to the grand old partition.

I guess my experience is the exception to your rule.

I shot this mule deer at 25 yards on a hard quartering away angle. Entry was on the rib cage and oblong shaped. There was no exit. Upon autopsy, the front of the chest under the neck on the inside looked like it was shot with a load of skeet choked #8's

Complete disintegration of a 180 grain Accubond at 3200 fps

Like most things regarding bullet performance, likely there are no absolutes.

I watched my pard Big Al jump this big muley buck and bust him at a whopping 30 yds with his 7STW/140AB. Guessing the impact velocity was 3250' at least. Bullet entered back hip and was found underneath hide in front of opposite shoulder. 60% weight retention.

[img:left][/img]

[img:left][/img]

Buzz you're hung up on my use of the word " violent"...let me substitute by saying that expansion is more complete,more extensive, the jacket and core is more subject to the stresses of high velocity and high impact speed into something tough than if it were going slower.Bullets traveling fast also create more extensive wound channels than those that have slowed down at distance.

I tried to sum all that up by using the term "violent" expansion. In my language expansion means "expansion"...it does not mean "disintegration". Not if the bullet is designed to penetrate at close range. An AB has been built that way. But I think the 140's are a bit too light to withstand close range impact from a a 7 mag cartridge.

I think the 160 is a better choice in the magnum cases.

Your 160 from your 7 mag did what it was supposed to at close distances. I already said that in case you missed it.

You and i feel pretty much the same way about the Partition and AB. There isn't enough difference between them to persuade me to change. I have other bonded bullets I've been using for 30 years so have no need for the AB.

I've killed a handful of bull moose over the years with 180 gr and 200 gr Accubonds from a 300 RUM and 7.82 Warbird zipping along at 3300 and 3300 fps, not one bull needed a second shot and all were dumpded within feet of where they got plugged,

2012 I rebarreled the 300 RUM with an upgrade to the slam da hamma down 338 EDGE, could not get the Berger 300 gr OTM to shoot and tried the 300 gr Accubond got .625" 3 shot groups at 2900 + - fps and went with it, figuring a new barrel will season up after a hundred shots or so and yep, when I could do it, it was shooting 3/8" groups at 100 yards with two holes hugging hard and a third snuggled up close , passed up a number of good bulls lookin fer the "one", never found him and near the end of my hunt jumped a 53.5" raghorn bull on my atv trail and shot 'im at 35 yards, slammed him to the ground and no recovered bullet, not much meat damage just mush inside with some ribs wiped out on the offside,

next season 2013 blasted a couple black bears in the spring with the same load, one at 450 yards and again a pass through (see pics) bear ran maybe 50 yards and gave up the ghost, bullet holes in hide on entry and exit were nearly indistinguishable but again, mush innards and blasted ribs....... the other bear got whacked at 350 yards and no bullet recovered, he was up an avalanche slide and just tumbled all the way down, dead by the time he stopped, made for an easy recovery, no climbing ! same results as the other blackie...

that September I called a nice bull in to 100 yards and poked him in the ribs, same deal.... no recovered bullet but mushy lungs and missing a patch of ribs on the offside but exit hole through hide same size as entrance hole (see pics)

2014 and 2015 moose died from a reaction to lead and copper found in Berger's 300 gr Elite Hunter bullets, but that's another story.......

a few weeks ago I used up the remaining few rounds of that load I found in my truck and blasted some 1 us gallon water jugs at 50 yards... one round blew past 5 jugs and exited to the side and not recovered, the second slug blew through 5 jugs and was recovered in the 6th.... see pics for results, not too bad of a mouse trap and it don't need fixin' other than a long range version......

]photobucket[/url]


]photobucket[/url]

]photobucket[/url]


]photobucket[/url]

]photobucket[/url]

Cool pictures Swamplord.

It's funny when folks say the ABs or even a Partition has disintegrated. I've "thought" I've seen it a few times until I really dug into guts or started butchering quarters. The bullets I thought disappeared were buried in a bone or muscle but since there was so little energy left, it's seems like they left very little trace of there path.

Not saying it doesn't happen, because they are man made things, but I've yet to see an AB explode or a Partition "blow to pieces". Both of them are very good BG bullets.

Rick,

Did you shoot any other animals with that batch of 180 AB's?

IME so far, at impact vel's that would shear the front end off of a PT, TTSX's usually lose one or more petals, leaving them with 75-95% weight retention.

The only difference I'm seeing is the difference in the capability of hunters to use a great bullet at a reasonable Velocity. All the information is out there. The Indian is by large the quickest way to f:ck it all up.


Shod

Sorry Jordan, but everyone knows a partition is designed to shed 35-40% of it's weight at a wide range of impact velocities, and as MD pointed out lately, the bigger .30's retain a bit more. Everyone also knows that a TSX and TTSX are neither one designed to shed that much weight, which was the intent of my original post.

I'm not sure where you're going with that first part of your statement. My point is that TTSX bullets act a lot like PT's- more-so than previous versions like the X and TSX. And that is a report of my experiences, not what the bullets are theoretically "designed" to do. What they actually do. The TSX would sometimes shed petals if it impacted at very high velocity, but the TTSX loses petals much more readily. I'm also curious where your intel came from regarding how much weight the TTSX is "designed" to shed? AFAIK, Barnes hasn't published anything differentiating the expected retained weight of the various versions of their bullets.

Jordan, a ttsx shedding petals isn't the same thing as a partition shedding lead. For starters the the frontal area of the resulting bullet is much smaller in the case of the ttsx.

For illustration-

These petals were recovered from 2 different shots, a bull moose at 170 yards, and a WT buck at about 130 yards. The bullets were both 140gr TTSX from a 7WSM started at 3312 fps. Both bullets exited, but I found these petals in the carcasses. The pair of petals on the right are attached, and weigh 23.3 grains. These came from the moose. The group of 3 petals on the left came from the WT buck, and weigh 24.2 grains. That means that the bullets retained at most, assuming there were no other fragments that went undetected, 82.7 and 83.3% of their weight, respectively. I've seen X/TSX/TTSX bullets lose all 4 petals and end up weighing right around 75% of original weight.

So the bullet hits at high IV, loses some of it's forward mass due to fragmentation, a solid wadcutter shank continues to penetrate and eventually exits the animal. That sounds a lot like PT performance to me. Except with no lead. That ain't a bad place to be.

You're right. I prefer the petals as larger secondary projectiles. Additionally, the lack of lead fragments in the meat may not be a big deal, but it doesn't hurt. I can't say that the frontal area of the TTSX wadcutter is always smaller than that of a PT, IME. It depends.

IMHO the 140 Accubond should work on 99.8% of the shots you might ever have to make on a deer.


Quartering away at half speed, 350 yards.

That's a heck of a spray, Sam!

Jordan, I saw the buck fall but did a little recon just to see what happened. Buck made it about 70 yards from the spray before going down.


Hit in rear ribcage, exited the brisket area.

So you're going to tell us the TSX/TTSX is designed to shed 35% of it's weight, at a wide range of impact velocities, like the partition does?

That bottom photo is very cool.

Nope. Maybe read my responses again. Never did I say that they are identical bullets, just that the TTSX acts more like a PT than previous generations of Barnes bullets.

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.

Thanks, John.

Good stuff.

DF

Not an Accubond but a plain 130 Nos ballistic tip out of a plain .270 Win at 335 yards. Exit side shown here. Buck made 2 hops and went tits up.

.30-06, 150g AB, exit side, 2010. Nephew's antelope, ~200 yards


.30-06, 150g AB, my 2010 cow, ~282 yards. No exit on a neck shot, suspect the bullet stayed in the vertebra.


.338WM, 225g AB, exit side. 2011. ~262 yards


.338WM, 225g AB, exit side, 2013, 487 yards


.280 Rem, 140g AB, entrance side, 2011, ~200 yards


.30-06, 150g AB, exit side, 2014, ~50 yards

I've shot probably 10 critters with accubonds...mainly .257" 110s and .338" 225s. Critters include elk, mule deer and antelope, plus some random coyotes and such.
My experience with accubonds is that they work great when put behind the shoulder...at any normal velocity. My one constant with these bullets is that if you put one through the shoulder, a mess is created.


These lung shots had great results...little damaged meat and a very dead animal.





Here is a very dead animal with a very messy set of shoulders


Can't totally blame this mess on the bullet...bone shards and that nasty, gritty bone marrow being blown into the shoulder meat is NASTY.


Good bullet overall, but I have moved on to other things.

Bone fragments can definitely wreak some havoc. I wonder if that same shot had been made with a Barnes bullet or a hard cast bullet if the damage from the bone would have been as great though? I.E., if a hard monolithic bullet would be less explosive on impact and pierce the bone more directly.

Maybe. My one monolithic kill was a whitetail buck out of the relatively slow 6.5x55. Not a fair comparison as I spined him and put another through his shoulder (accidentally...I was aiming for his neck) as he was thrashing around. There was quite a bit of bloodshotness on the finisher....but not as much as the above elk.

I shot 10 plains game with 180 gr. Accubonds in my .300 Win Mag this year. I'll be switching back to the TTSX because too many stopped in the animal for my taste.

There is no "explosive" effect in a bullet, but I understand the point being made...

Mono bullets do not make nearly the mess of a lead-core bullet and can be intentionally driven through a shoulder without making the mess a lead-core bullet can just passing near a shoulder.

Massive meat damage is the primary reason I left lead-core bullets for monos, almost exclusively.

Posted a link to the wrong picture. Here is the correct one.

.30-06, 150g AB, exit side, 2014, ~50 yards

The Accubonds I have tried are 160 gr. 7MM bullets and then only on deer at short ranges under 150 yards. Three I think and in comparison to the number of deer an hogs I have taken with the 150 gr. Ballistic Tips a small number. I recovered none of the three Accubonds, exit holes were within reason but I can say the same of the 150 gr. Ballistic Tips. Both bullets are very accurate, I would use either for any deer hunting I might do but for all else I am going to use a Partition generally the 160. Until I ran out of them I used the 140 gr. Partition on feral hogs almost exclusively shot from my 7x57 then started using the 150 gr. BT's. I never actually stopped one of the 140's but I did capture a few of the Ballistic Tips in larger feral hogs. I guess I should limber up the 280 AI and test the 160 gr. Accubonds on some hogs alternating with the same weight Partitions and see if any real differences show up.

Sitka deer



You may be correct about "in the bullet" but definitely wrong if you meant in the animal. I shot a smallish doe with a .300 Win pushing a 162 or 168, I don't remember. The near side scapula went about forty feet high and the whole chest cavity was the exit wound. At the place where the exit side skin used to be was a hole about 5-6" across.

Palidun,



Please do it.

I have seen lots of cases of extreme destruction caused by bullets... still does not mean there is any such thing as "Explosive Effect" in bullets.

I always shoot them dead square in the shoulders. I have never had to look for one. I know I'm going to catch flak for saying that, but wading around in cactus and rattlesnakes aint fun. When you go with a guide, that is the first thing he will tell you. There's not much meat on a deer shoulder. They bone it out to make hamburger anyway. They are dead before they hit the ground.

Not from me....


Bullets that handle those shot s are a good idea.

As someone who hunts the brush country, you'll never hear flak from me for shoulder shooting. All it takes is to see a 6' rattler to make one see the light.

Amen

I never saw the sense in looking for something if you don't have to....rattlers or not.

Cripes doesn't everyone see the value in killing something fast?

The only Accubond load I have in the house is 338 cal and 300 grains, it leaves at 3000 fps, I've never found a fired bullet either, but have always found the game, admittedly, I haven't used it on elk, moose, big bear or any other heavy game, but would have absolutely no concern in doing so.

From zero to 1000, that sombitch hits HARD!

I, also, am a firm believer in drt. There is not much meat on the front shoulders of a deer/antelope anyway and it is well worth not having to trail them.

I killed a deer just yesterday doing some depredation work. I shot her on the point of the shoulder and angled back through the lungs, exiting behind the shoulder on the other side. I only lost one shoulder in the end and it was well worth it to not have to track her into the swamp.

One things' for certain, there's a lot less meat on the front shoulders than the rear shoulders.

I still just don't see what some people have against lung shots...unless our definitions of "lung shots" differ. I always aim tight behind the shoulder (assuming a perfectly broadside shot) and almost always produce a kill with a 0 to 30ish yard death run. I've seen that happen plenty of times with shoulders taken out too. Critters almost always shovel plow forward 10 or so yards when punched through the shoulders IME...so the DRT situation is actually more common on a tight behind the shoulder shot than a center punched shoulder shot, for me at least.

When you all say "lung shot" are you referring to a shot several inches behind the shoulder?

Nor me.

Me either, drill them in the shoulders.

True. Poor word choice.

That's OK! Many have discussed the front shoulders of big game animals, and probably even squirrels and rabbits, inculding editors of well-known national hunting magazines.... :-)

Amen....my first choice every time if possible.

You bet JG, I'll gladly donate a handful of fajita meat for a quick death and no to very little tracking.

It depends on the bullet as to whether the shoulder shot is ethical or not, IMO. A shoulder or shoulders deliberately shot with a C&C bullet proves you have no regard for a big game animal.

A monolithic will do far less meat damage and produce the same immediate drop when shot right through the shoulders...

Not knowing the difference is telling...

Well, It is nice to know that after all of these years, I just found out that I have no regard for big game animals. How does a quick death show lack of regard?

That is stupid statement.

I agree that is a stupid statement...much too broad. There are lots of different sizes of big game animals. And there are lots of different CnC bullets.

It took me 20+ years to recover a 7mm Speer 160g Grand Slam, a quality C&C bullet but C&C nevertheless. They kept going through the deer and elk. (And a few coyotes, prairie dogs and antelope.)

When I did finally recover one it had destroyed both shoulder joints of a 5x5 bull, putting him straight down on the ground.

Those old style grand slams are bad ass.

I got about 130 or so of the .308 200 grainers left for my .300 H&H.

They'll straight up knock a bull's dick in the dirt.

The meat loss due to a C&C through the shoulder is ridiculous compared to a monolithic. I doubt you have seen the difference if you do not understand what I stated.

There is no doubt many C&C bullets will go completely though both shoulders and kill quickly and humanely... the meat wasted in the process is so much more than a monolithic there is no comparison.

If you have not seen it you may want to consider rethinking my "stupid statement."

I used Speer bullets for decades and have put a lot of meat on the ground with them. They do terrible things to meat when placed through the shoulders.

I dang near lost an entire mature buck shot with a TSX. Very small exit hole. Zero blood trail. He made a 90 degree turn after entering the brush. Stumbled across him about a hour later just by luck. He had gone about 200 yards. Very little meat damage. Almost a lot of meat loss. But I guess I had high regard for the animal because I used a mono...

We understand perfectly well what you stated. You essentially say that we have no regard for an animal, if we shoot bullets that destroy some meat. I still say that was a stupid statement, unless you have a better explanation of what you meant.

I have shot elk and deer through the shoulders many times. On an elk, you will lose some, but rarely all of it unless you are shooting a speed demon. On deer, it is irrelevant, as there is a small amount of meat on the front shoulders anyway. I rarely lose both shoulders, even on a deer. I will take a quick kill and no blood trailing over saving a dinky bit of meat any day.

Monos are fine, but I get along real well with Accubonds, Partitions and Interlocks and until I am forced to do it, I will probably not shoot monos.

Again I will remind readers of a I shot a muledeer with a Nosler 7mm partition 175 at a range of about 100 yards. Muzzle velocity was 3,150 feet per second. The bullet took out the arteries above the heart and both lungs. The deer ran about 100 yards angleing away to the right, then turned left and angled away for at least another 200 yards before piling up. Fortunately I was hunting the sage so was able to watch the whole time. If this had been in the timber, I'm sure I would have lost it.

When you shoot a tenacious buck it doesn't make any difference what it is hit with.

Very true, but shot through the shoulders with that bullet and tracking job would have been non-existant.

There you go! You do not shoot with monos and still want to shoot through the shoulders with bullets which WILL destroy a large quantity of meat.

If you had shot monos you would have seen the difference. I stand by my contention that deliberate shots through the shoulders with C&C bullets is at best disrespectful...

One of the first things I noticed when I switched from C&C bullets to Nosler Partitions is that I had less meat chewed up with just about any hit, and smaller exits.

They certainly killed as well and as quickly and maybe better with hits that needed more penetration.

I am not surprised that the Barnes boys are noticing the same sort of things and maybe to a greater degree.

It is a huge difference, almost always.

I try to shoot everything in the shoulders, too brushy around here to track critters, I love c&c boolits...

And I'm sure the deer feels really bad about being disrespected.

If it floats your boat you get to live with it. If you ever develop ANY class you will feel bad about it... the deer always loses.

You do what works for you. The rest of us slob hunters will get by.

If you respect the animal so much why do you kill it?! They're food on the hoof, for goodness sake.

Food on the hoof? So you shoot said food right through the food?

You cannot be serious? Call me anything you wish but I am not so goofy as to miss the miss...

Slob works for me... describing you...

A) likes to do things that make him feel good, but that in reality have no impact

B) likes to think he is superior to others

C) wants to impose his "morals" on others


Are you a Democrat??

It is an absolutely "huge" difference. It has to be at least a pound or two of meat or so on a deer. Good grief!

Yes. I am serious. After I kill an animal I take it to the processor. After ageing for a couple weeks they are reduced to steaks and roasts....you know....food.

Having seen easily a hundred pounds of meat ruined on a single moose more than once, a bison once, and lots of shoulders that amounted to a Hell of a lot more than a pound or two on a deer... I stand by my statement, absolutely.

Just because you fail to see the obvious does not mean it is not there.

If you have issues with someone on an internet site creating that feeling in you, I suggest you find a mirror.

I have not imposed anything on anyone. I have simply given my opinion. You are free to keep your head planted or look around.

You obviously are as good at noting bullet performance differences as you are at political insight...

I have seen the work of dozens of ordinary cup and cores, as well as an equal number of better bullets used on moose over a few decades. Never have I seen anything close to a hundred pounds of meat ruined by any of them. That said, while mono-copper/bronze tend, on average by long stretch, to ruin a lot less meat than most others, it has also been the mono-coppers which have made some of the biggest wastes of good meat. And, while bullet placement matters more than anything when it comes to ruined meat - and that applies to breaking big bones perhaps more than anything else- a monolithic bullet vs heavy bone is nowhere near as destructive as a cup and core often is.

But I tend to think meat damage is also related to two significant if secondary factors, those being very high-speed impacts, and prolonged time between initial contact with the animal and the termination of circulation (which is related to where the bullet(s) were placed).

I've used the TTSX and selected CnC bullets (read not varmint bullets) on the animals that I hunt. I know what works, and what doesn't.

I can't speak to bison or moose or conditions where you hunt.

And you can't extrapolate your experience on selected animals in your flora, to reach a conclusion about what is best in other conditions and on other animals. Moreover, it is quite presumptive to use those same data to condemn others's ethics.

You can stand by whatever you like. But it is without credibility outside your narrow little world.

In 2014 I misjudged the wind and lost my first big game animal. From the initial heavy, dark blood trail the bullet hit the liver and blood chest high on the brush on both sides of the trail showed the bullet exited. The cow went over a ridge, across a valley and over an even higher ridge before we lost the trail.

Wish I had hit it in the shoulder instead. A little lost meat is nothing compared to losing the entire animal.

I happen to hunt all sorts of critters, including deer... and have seen huge meat loss on deer and it averages well north of two or three pounds. I doubt your hunting World is even close to as wide as mine, but no need to disabuse you of your fantasies...

Yes, I know, you've made it quite clear... You have broader experience, higher moral character, better ethics, higher IQ, and probably a longer...

Have a nice life.

Klik,

I suspect you may be right right about the time between the bullet hitting and "the termination of circulation."

A couple of years ago my wife shot a medium-large mule deer buck standing broadside right behind the shoulder, with a 100-grain TTSX started at 3150 fps from a .257 Roberts. The range was slightly under 100 yards, as later determined by laser rangefinder. The buck started walking off, and when it stopped after maybe 40-50 yards Eileen shot again--but just as the buck collapsed, so the bullet went over the buck's back.

The first bullet had been perfectly placed behind the shoulder, centering both lungs. Yet there was more meat damage than I've ever seen from a monolithic that didn't hit anything except a rib, and we've shot a bunch of monolithic bullets into various animals over the years.

Odd things happen... my moose last year was fighting with another bull at less than 30 yards (maybe 25?) and I hit a little brush on the way in. The 168TSX from a 30-06 entered sideways in three pieces that traveled all the way through, exiting in three pieces just slightly above the spine through the top of the shoulders. Meat loss was excessive, but I would still prefer the circumstances over having done the same with a lead core bullet.

It's an Alaska thing. Some of our members from the north are a wee bit rough around the edges. You're not the only one to notice...