Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game 165gr Nosler Accubond

I have only shot one animal with them and I'm impressed and not impressed with them.
I shot a 177LB black bear behind the right shoulder hit a rib and had a good size entrance hole. Over bait and 25yds from the barrel. The bear only went maybe 20yds and piled up.
Now the impressed part was that it went thru the rib, hit one lung, into the other shoulder, down the leg bone about a good 6" and exited the other side of the leg. I thought it was neat that it held together to do all that. I usually only shotgun and bow hunt so this is new territory for me.
Now the not so impressed part. After the initial entrance wound that hit the rib and made a good size hole it only seemed to pencil thru everything else. The lung had a couple of slices in it. after the lung you could see what looked like the bullet just penciled thru between the other side of the ribs, hit the other shoulder and down and out the other leg but only a pencil size wound.
Is this normal for an accubond?
What I was excepting was the accubond to expand it energy into the chest cavity and kinda mush the insides of the bear. The bullet did do its job. Im just curious as to what others have noticed how the bullet has worked and if it did any other destruction of internals or is most of the initial energy when it hits the animal is dispersed on the skin.

My wife also shot a bear and she was using barnes TTX and she had to show off and hit it in the head. Straight thru from right to left side.

Good grief...

lunchbox,

That's what "controlled expanding" big game bullets do. They usually "mushroom" completely by the time the bullet penetrates its own length, then make a smaller wound channel after the initial expansion, both because the initial expansion is over, and the bullet slows down considerably. There are exceptions, but that's the way they basically work.

If you want even-diameter wound channels then you should stick to shotgun slugs and arrowheads. But if you judge rifle bullets by how quickly animals die, rather than the wound channel, you might learn something.

Sorry Brad Im not up to speed like you are. That is why I was asking the question if I was expecting more than I should or not. But hey Ill ask what I don't know and you should just not comment if you're not going to say anything helpful.

Mule Deer,

Thank you. That is why I was asking is to learn. I have never heard it put that way but it makes sense. The bear did die pretty quick tho.

.308W velocity?

Sorry it was out of a 30-06. And it was a Nosler factory load.

Sounds exactly like what I have witnessed from .308 and .30/06 Accubond hits on bears over bait.
Want bigger internal destruction? Go Ballistic Tip, or push that velocity up with a WM or WSM. Or both.
But that is not necessary at all.

Two holes are something I like.

lunchbox

Just posting for my signature line. I have felt foolish many times, but have learned........................not always how not to be foolish.

I got 2 holes on this bear. Luckily it didn't go to far because there was not blood to be found except where it expired at. Another guy at the camp used the same ammo and his wound channel looked about the same as mine.

So another dead critter at the end of a short blood trail?

Yep. Neither one of the bears had a blood trail. His died just a little over 30yds from the bait.

Can anyone tell the difference between Accubonds and Ballistic tips. I’ve shot many pigs and deer with both. I can’t tell any difference, but I’m shooting 120lb deer, 200lb and smaller pigs, and a couple 200lb Aoudads. I’ve used both in 25-06, 257 up to 300 Weatherby’s, but mostly 7 mags. There is probably a difference with heavier animals. They are both fine bullets. Is there a bad bullet anymore? Manufacturers have been perfecting their products for many years.

I’ve never bear hunted but a lot of my friends do. They tell me blood trails are rare due to the amount of fat the bear carries. The fat plugs the hole, so to speak, keeping blood trails sparse.

Sounds like the AB performed well.





P

I only used an Accubond once from my .308 and had the same experience that you did. The deer was broadside at about 40 yards and I double lunged it. First blood that I could find was at about 20 yards and sparse for the 90 or so that the deer ran. There was about a 3" hole in the deer's side and then I said to myself, wait a minute, that was the near side entrance wound. It was the first time that I ever found the entrance wound larger than the exit wound and I didn't like it. I'd been use to shooting those 180 grain round nose Remington Core-Lokts and they expanded quickly enough with all that lead exposed and being 180 grains kept on going getting larger out the exit side. Regrettably Remington stopped offering them for my .300 Savage, but they sure worked out of the .308's and '06's in our deer camp.

Shot several deer with the 308 165 Accubond. I shoot high shoulder, and all that were hit high shoulder expired where they stood. The only deer I shot behind the shoulder ran about 40-50yards with no blood trail. The Accubond penciled through. I have yet to get a pass through on high shoulder. They all have seemed to deposit all there energy in the shoulder/chest cavity. Just soup on the inside.

Just my experience.

Dead bear = bullet done good. Bear I want to drop ASAP as I can't track them por nada unless they are leaking buckets. Anything that drops within sight is muey bueno.

After 8 years of using Accubonds in 284 & 308 calibers I have learned:

Entrance wounds are typically larger than exit wounds.
They don’t always exit when you think they should.
The animal always falls dead on the ground in short order.
They do retain about 60% of their original weight.
Never been any reason to doubt them.