Originally Posted by rost495
Originally Posted by Jeff_O
Originally Posted by Sitka deer
The Accubombs were recovered well before the offside on broadside shots on smallish deer at extended range.

Considering the fact I saw 4 Accubombs in a row fail to penetrate from three different rifles leaves me with zero faith in them for penetrating. They would be fine for deer bullets, but I would not use them for anything of size or heft...



You are wrong, Art.

Three elk seen killed with 225 AB's from a .338... All exited. Elk went down fast.

Two elk I killed with the 8mm 200. One exit, the other hit the elbow joint first, went diagonal through the chest, made it to opposite side under the hide.

A buck with a .30 180. First year the Accubond came out. Quartering-on shot. Smashed shoulder bone, diagonal through the deer, exited WAY back on the opposite flank.

A buck with the 8mm 200. Close range, magnum rifle, pretty much worst possible scenario for a bullet. The bullet smashed the hip joint, went the entire length of the deer, ended up under his chin. 70% weight retained, perfect mushroom.

Yeah, they don't penetrate. wink

If a bullet is to be judged by it's failures, there's been plenty of failed TSX's to look at in the last couple years. Did you miss that?


Jeff what you miss here is Arts location, its a bit more serious up there. And just about anyone that gives this a thought will agree that an accubond won't penetrate as far as a better bullet will. Not that its an issue on a moose or elk so to speak but in bear country I'd be a fool to rely on a mag full of accubonds.

Now if you know you wont' run into anything else dangerous and can afford to pass risky shots, then the shell game is changed again.


Oh hell yeah. Agreed. But that's not what Art said. And what he actually SAID is so contrary to my and many many others' experience that my post was necessary for balance if nothing else.


The CENTER will hold.

Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two

FÜCK PUTIN!