Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Nosler Accubonds

I've used them on 3 critters. The .308 / 165 was a head shot .. not much to learn from that. Lights out .. duh. The .257 / 110 out of the Roberts was a disaster x 2. 2 shots, 2 deer in 2 minutes. Both broadside, neither exited, both blew up on the way through the lungs and peppered the inside of the off-side shoulder with tiny fragments that poked through the rib cage wall and stopped under the off-side shoulder blade. Identical performance and the worst I've had from any bullet in a couple decades.

I don't think those bullets were old enough to have been from the time of those "residual memories" but I don't know that for sure. A friend of mine hand loads commercially and says his customers shooting the various .25 calibers had similar results at that same time. Others using other Accubonds at the same time had no issues. It was something specific to the .257 110 grain.

I don't know if it is solved or not. Don't care. I only used them because I couldn't get 120 grain partitions at the time and I've since stocked up on those. That's how I solved it for me.

Tom

I find it amusing that so many claiming a huge exit wound rate have significant numbers of retained weights on bullets "caught" while ignoring the obvious bloodshot meat and such.

Rave on...

About a dozen kills with either a 180gr in the-06 or a 140gr in a .260. Never recovered one. Their performance was very similar to a Nosler Partition.

Art,

I tend to rely on the hunting notes I've been keeping for several now when any questions of bullet performance come up, partly because have found that memories of individual instances tend to distort long-term statistics.

Have been using X-Bullets since around 2000, before the TSX appeared, because about that time Barnes had pretty much solved the accuracy problems of early X's--though not the fouling problems. (Throughout the 1990's both my wife and I used Fail Safes when desiring deep-penetetrating, petal-type performance, because they shot more accurately than X-Bullets.) We started using TSX's the first year they appeared, and in fact Eileen was the first person to provide Coni Brooks with a field report on a bull elk. We both mostly switched to Tipped TSX's when they appeared a few years later.

Have been using AccuBonds since they appeared as well, which was around the same time as TSX's, but have also witnessed a bunch of TSX's and AB's used by other hunters. By "witnessed" I was standing, sitting or lying next to those hunters when they shot the animal.

The biggest single test was during a month-long meat-cull in South Africa in 2007, when both the TSX and the AccuBond were still hot new bullets, so the American hunters who took part used more TSX's and AB's than other bullets. A total of 185 animals were taken, ranging in size up to 1500+ pounds. But that was just one instance that provided a lot of info on the performance of both bullets--and yes, a number of both were recovered.

As a result of that month, and a bunch of other experiences with both bullets right up to the present, I believe the percentage of recovered Barnes X's and AccuBonds recorded in my notes might be fairly valid. They show a recovery rate of 18.7% for Barnes X's of all types, and 20% for AccuBonds. With either bullet, I would say it would be accurate to claim the "vast majority" exited.

Now, I should also comment that in general the X's used were probably smaller for the size of game. Plenty of both in calibers above .30 were used, but at the smaller end no AccuBonds below 6.5mm were used, while plenty of .25 caliber X's were. A couple of Tipped TSX's that were recovered were 100-grain .25's from Eileen's .257 Roberts--from angling shots on consecutive animals, a cow elk and a doe pronghorn. But overall the numbers of both bullets provide a pretty good comparison.

Facts obviously confuse some people.

Oh, I see how it works now. If you have a good experience, you can put up photos, set off fireworks, and bring in a marching band. But, if I have a bad experience, I'm a simperer and a whimperer.
The OP asked for objective experience with the AB's and I posted exactly what my experiences have been, both from some years ago when it was speculated that the AB's had a defect, and from a few months ago when one blew up entering a ribcage. If The bad experiences aren't allowed to be told, what's the point of the OP even asking?

Now you can cry about that all you want to. I'm leaving for a few days to go fishing.

The only Accubonds I've used were the 260 gr version, from my 375 H&H. Shot three black bears with it, from a bit over 300 yards, down to 15 feet or so. The short range kill was while tracking a bear wounded by another hunter. It had gone into the thick brush. My shot came at very close range, and the bullet above was recovered from the off-side hide, hanging backwards in the skin, with the tail of the bullet poking through. This is the only one I recovered, the others passed through, killing quickly.

The accuracy of these Accubonds impressed me, I was seeing 3/4" to 1" groups at 100 yards from the Ruger Number One rifle. Accuracy and excellent performance on game.

I was pleased to see one guide on my grizzly hunt was using 260 gr Accubonds from his 375 H&H as well.

I know that the OP asked about 7mm Accubonds, but the 260 gr .375" is the only Accubond I've used. Thought I'd toss in my experience for consideration.

Regards, Guy

Those numbers are so wildly different from my direct experience I am forced to wonder how none have ever exited. The hunters I know that have used Accubonds have mostly quit them due to excessive meat loss, failure to exit, and the occasional weird tumbling, failure to track straight issue.

It is easy to remember how many exited when the answer is none. It is plenty easy to remember how many Xs exited when they can be easily counted on a hand or two..

No claim to extensive experience but on four elk (two bulls and two cows) at ranges of ~100 to ranged 300-340 all exited for me fired from a 7MM STW with muzzle velos of right around 3,300. I have shot numerous Kansas deer at 75-300 as well with all exiting. I would never have any doubts that they will get the job done and like mentioned before I don't see any more drastic damage than with most bullets fired at fairly high velocities. YMMV

We've had a good showing for the Accubond in elk camp for many years. Mostly 180's for the '06, 300WM and 300WSM. But I hasten to add a couple youngsters did very well with Ruger boat paddle .270's and 150gr Power Points. Sometimes we over analyze this stuff.

That's a consideration I hadn't thought of before.

Thanks for that.

Art,

Do you tent to shoulder shoot? Break a critter down?

Thanks

Yes, with Barnes I shoot for shoulders. For non-monos I do not look for shoulders but will shoot for the offside shoulder if it presents itself.

There's a question that's never been posted before.

Why do you need a tent to shoot 'em in the shoulder?

Rave on indeed. Blood shot meat is rarely discussed on this forum with the same fervor of other subjects. Accubond kills were my first exposure to it. That little anomaly will surely teach you bullet placement in a hurry if you intend to eat.

Meanwhile, we keep chasing the elusive “perfect bullet” all the while ignoring performance of unspectacular bullets that have worked for decades. I doubt many have killed, or will kill as many elk with an Accubond that I have seen killed with a 30-06 and a Hornady 165 grain spire point bullet...

They've worked EXACTLY like Partitions for me the last ten years or so. They penetrate real well and will expand at distance. We have run quite a few into elk and deer and have had 0 issues with them. The 160 Accubond from a fast 7mm is a deadly combo and probably my favorite fall back bullet to be quite honest.

I've heard about them blowing up and even some penciling through and believe it, just haven't seen it personally yet. They've done much to well for myself and my hunting partners to think they are doing poorly.

If killing was the only requirement few bullets would actually fail. That fact allows many to opine on short data. Start including extra criteria and cup and core bullets of old start losing their luster. That Hornady SP has ruined a lot of caribou and moose meat for me.

Accubonds have become the go to bullet, in our family, for the last 10-12 years. In my 7mm, I've run 140's at 3300 fps for whitetail. These are longer shots, in hay fields and clear cuts. It shoots like a laser and stones deer. I usually heart/lung them or head shoot the does, inside of 200 yards. These are meat hunts for the freezer, so I avoid the front shoulders.

Our 300 winchesters shoot 200 gr a/b's. A great all around cartridge for "open" shots, here in Idaho. Last year, my dedicated long range rifle (browning xbolt/hells canyon, with a nxs nightforce), took antelope, elk, multiple deer, and a WSMR oryx bull (the wife's). The only recovered bullets came from the oryx, 3 of them, at 528 yards. They were perfect mushrooms, and weighed 156, 146, and 125 grains. 78-62% retained weight.

Out of our 338 rum rifles, we shoot 225s and 250s. My WSMR oryx bull, a few years ago, was shot with a 225 going 3050 fps, at 67 yards. Broadside, dead center in the front leg (their vitals sit a little further forward, than our "native" animals). I remember thinking "this is gonna test this bullet, for sure!". The bull died with the one shot, and the recovered bullet weighed 143 grains (63+%), again the perfect mushroom shape.....after breaking down both sides of the front end. I couldn't believe how well it held together, AND that bull stopped it! My dad used the 250's, on plains game, in Zimbabwe. He killed a sable, 2 kudu, and an impala.....with 5 shots. All animals fell within sight....no bullets recovered.

While these may not be the exact caliber/weight the OP was asking about, AND the 338's may have a thicker jacket (I don't know for sure?).......it shows how consistent they are. Near or far, they work....if you are concerned about meat loss, keep the bullets in the ribs (or head). Otherwise, bust the front shoulders......I'd rather lose some shoulder meat, than risk losing the whole animal, or having it run off, down a deep canyon!

Unless they change them, they will be our "standard" thin skinned bullet, from now on.

Andy3