Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Partition Vs Accbond Toughness, Exspansion

Of those two bullets, how woud you say either would perform when they hit a large joint? Or which would win if you maybe had to put it through the front of a pissed off moose or bear in an unideal fashion? Alternately, which would you say is the more devastating and exspansive on a regular double lung, through the ribs shot on any common North American game animal?

For the critters mentioned, just pick the one that shoots best and go kill sh_t!

The Nosler Partition wins in each the scenarios you mentioned. But you didn't mention accuracy or shooting at long range.

For a double lung shot I'd prefer the Partition. That bullet is designed for the front to blow off and the part behind the partition will continue to penetrate. I suspect the Partition would survive the joint because of the partition protecting the rear half of the bullet.

I have no experience with bear or moose so I won't give any opinion.

They will both do about the same in my experience. The Partitions will expand a little less and penetrate further. The Accubond will usually have wider expanded frontal area and get caught in the hide on the off side on elk or big deer. I can't tell the difference on elk using similar Bullets.

Can't vouch for either's effectiveness on charging critters,, but on non-charging elk I've seen a lot of Partitions and a some Accubonds. Partitions still seem to be among the straightest tracking of any bullet I've observed.

25+ years ago I shot the south end of a northbound bull at 250+ yds and is the heaviest elk I've ever killed. I was aiming for the bunghole but missed, hitting him in the ball and socket--the heaviest bone on an elk. I found what was left of the Partition just touching the brisket. I really doubt an Accubond would have successfully made that journey through the bull.

Casey

I've used them both to kill brown bear, moose and caribou and I do not believe that there is much to choose between them. Availability and the particular application would tip me towards one or the other, not their general terminal performance.

Partition if it shoots well in your rifle. Either bullet will get the job done.

In practice I find the Partitions and Accubonds to act and kill about the same, but if you feel a little more secure with the mechanical lock of the Partition you wouldn't be the only one.

After I shot one of my largest water buffalo and a scrub-bull with a 180 grain Accubond and a 300 RUM I quite worrying about them. Shot what will likely be my last grizzly with the same combination, without a bit of worry; and actually walked away from a perfectly good .375 to do it. I doubt if a bear can die any faster then that one did.

Agree with the others. Performance is similar but if penetration and an exit are a concern I would go with the partition. I think weight retention is similar and the difference is the shape of the would channel with the Accubond creating a wide area of damage but maybe not as deep penetration. The partition after it loses the front lead if this happens makes a longer narrower wound channel. I have not shot enough game with the Accubond to draw any meaningful conclusions yet. I have shot maybe a dozen deer sized animals plus a few hogs and javelina with the Accubond but many more with the Partition. But for smaller calibers like 6mm & .257 I am sticking with the Partitions The others it will be whichever shoots best or whats on the bench at the time I am loading. Some rifles that shoot them the same I will mix them in the magazine with no concerns at all which is on top. The Partition and Accubond don't always shoot the same especially at longer ranges but the Ballistic tip will almost always be a match with the Accubond and make for less expensive practice shooting or a light game heavy game combo without changing sight settings.

I shot a bull elk at 400 yards this year with 257R and Accubonds. All pass through lung shots. He stumbled 20 yards.

My family has managed to stop a few Accubonds in deer on broadside or slightly angling shots. Not so with Partitions. That being said, the Accubonds have done a fine job, they are just a bit more likely to have a wider mushroom and hang in the hide every now and then.

The AccuBonds are designed for the front end to blow off, just like Partitions, and to retain about the same amount of weight. In my experience with various AB's (which includes the majority of 'em), they're also designed like the larger-caliber, heavier Partitions, which have the partition moved forward so they'll retain at least 75% of their weight, and usually retain more. The few bigger Accubonds I've seen recovered have retained more weight than the smaller models. A good example would be the 250-grain 9.3 I shot into an Alaskan grizzly at about 50 yards as it angled away. The bullet entered the middle of the right ribs, and was found under the skin on the left side of the neck, retaining 81% of its weight.

Like others, I have found AB's open into a wider mushroom than Partitions, so are caught under the far hide more often. But that's after they make the necessary hole in stuff along the way.

I have wondered this. So far just loaded partions, cause that is what I loaded first. Got some AB on the shelf. You might think since AB came later, they are more advanced. Dunno.

Likely not the sample size that Mule Deer has talked about, but my AB vs Partition killing as covered 150 or so animals like antelope, deer, aoudad, and a small sample (40) of plains game in Africa. I have recovered more AB's than partitions, I'm sure for the same reasons mentioned, but haven't noticed any real difference in killing power. They are both very deadly and reliable IME, whether traveling through bone or not, and at most every conceivable angle.

Just as a data point of marginal relevance, I shot a buck deer through that same hip joint at close range... 8mm 200-gn @ 2900 MV, 30 yards away maybe... anyway it demolished that hip joint (and half the ham), went the length of the deer, ended up under the hide in his throats area. Perfect mushroom and 70% retention.

If I REALLY wanted to go full-retard on penetration I'd be running mono's. Having seen what I've seen I see no point; Accubonds/Partitions are some penetrating fools.

Can't speak for moose or bear, but I can speak of how a 160g AB works on African game. 7mm Rem Magnificent, +3000fps. All shot intentionally through shoulder at ranges of 100-150 yds.

Clearly, those bullets failed JG.






Side note: the "TSX wars" really died down when I took the several-year break from the Fire... it's nice.

Yep. I learned recently right here on these forums that any bullet you can catch is a POS failure, even when it's shooter error into a buffalo.

This 140 AB failed miserably as well, out of a 7mm STW, 3375fps @ muzzle, at a whopping 30 yds into a big mule deer. Entered back right ham, found underneath skin of front left shoulder