Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Accubond - never again

There are times when the shoulder is your best or only option. Use a bullet capable of doing the job when needed. The AB isn't it.

Sorry I just dont buy into that. I dont have a recovered Accubond yet because the 2 whitetails I've shot with my .280 Rem.have been complete pass-thrus and both DRT.

As a sidebar to the original post every head of game I've ever field dressed and cut up in 30 years of hunting has had plenty of bloodshot lost meat if shot in the shoulder.
That applies to moose,elk and deer and bullets from every maker.

Bone fragments cause at least as much damage as the original projectile.

Just my .02 cents for what its worth.

A Shoulder Blast is never going to fair well if it's lack of meat loss your after!!

Just my humble opinion.

Rob

DRT is great and a shoulder shot will do it but, if it's done, don't complain about spilled milk.

Again, just my opinion.

Rob

180 grain out of a Winchester 670, 338 federal, Shilen 24" tube, clover leafs three shots. This gun might shoot better but the first load he tried shoots like this so he loaded up a bunch and started shooting. I will ask him the recipe, he found it an a magazine article.

Wow, that sounds reasonable - the same weight bullet recoils more - I'm glad we have applied logic here....

When did DRT get so darned important? Can't anyone stand for an animal to go 100 yds any more? I understand if you're in the mountains and hunting goats or sheep on cliffs, or elk next to a canyon rim, but seriously, DRT has become more talked about than almost anything else these days. I for one plan on shooting my next deer at 100 yds or less with a boolit I cast myself from either a .357 Max pistol/carbine set up or a cast boolit from my .30-06. I doubt I'll get DRT performance, but I know I'll get through and through penetration and I'll eat right up to the hole.
Selmer
PS - Yes, this is in fairly predictable situations. If I were to book a hunt and put thousands of dollars in it, I would be toting the .30-06 stoked with 165 gr. Partitions.

Now that's funny. Using the words REASONABLE and LOGIC in a discussion about bullet selection. Apologize Selmer!

Now you're talking. I have a hard time using the AB on elk in .257, as well.
I shot 3 different bullets into milk jugs at 655 yards, a 100gr sierra, 110gr AB and 100gr TSX. All fired from a 25-06. The sierra and TSX blew the jugs and kept going. I found the AB inside the jug, fully expanded...hmmm

I've put TSX's from 7mm and .243 through deers' shoulders and could always eat right up to the hole.

Here's synopsis of this discussion so far. Many have seen bad performance from AB's. A few have had good performance. The experiences are enough to say that there's reason to question the overall performance of AB's. Very few will question the performance of Partitions, X bullets, and some others. I've personally had equal or better performance with standard Speer Hotcore spitzers. So, why use a bullet that's consistantly drawn criticism for bad performance? They're a little cheaper than other premium bullets, to be sure, but questionable performance is a good reason to spend a bit more.

Rock Chuck,

I had no intention of turning this discussion nasty. I was just stating a fact.

Maybe did I assume that anybody who is on the Campfire much would know that AccuBonds are designed to lose some weight, just like Partitions. This is why they make such a big hole--and tend to kill more quickly than bullets that retain more weight and don't make such a big hole. So essentially you were complaining about the bullet doing exactly what it was designed to do.

One thing that's become apparent to me in my years on the Campfire is that many hunters do not really understand how expanding bullets do their work, and too often judge them on things that are kind of irrelevant, especially whether or not they exit, or how much weight they retain. And when we talk about how GREAT a certain bullet is, it's often on those terms.

At the opposite end of the spectrum was a guy who chose 140 .270 Fail Safes when they first appeared for a Dall sheep hunt, because he'd read how GREAT they were. Then he complained after the hunt because his ram went 100 yards after being lung-shot with this great bullet. The problem was that he was expecting a super-penetrating bullet to make a huge hole and drop the ram right there. That's not the way things work.

Personally (and you can call me old-fashioned) I tend to judge bullets on how well they kill game, not how much weight they retained, or whether they go on out the other side, or what the bullet looks like after expansion. But it seems to me the bottom line is consistent, clean kills. And, as others have stated here, I have generally found that ANY expanding bullet will cause cnsiderable damage when put into a shoulder. I have even seen whole quarters pretty much ruined by X-bullets, especially if driven very fast.

The AccuBond, like the Partition, is designed to lose some weight and hence kill quicker. Both are also designed to retain most of the shank and so penetrate reasonably well. That's why both are a good choice as an all-around big game bullet. If you put either in meat they will make a big hole in the meat, but they will also make a big hole in vitals. That is what they were designed to do. If that's not what you're looking for, fine, use a TSX or an E-Tip--though they are no guarantee against shot-up meat. Not much is, except an arrow. But it isn't logical to complain about an AccuBond performing exactly as it was designed to do.

eastplace,

The partition in 200-grain Nosler Partitions is placed further forward than in the 180--and the 180's is placed further forward than in the 165, and the 165's further forward than in the 150. Thus the heavier Partitions will retain more shank and penetrate deeper than lighter ones. This is generally true of Partitions in any caliber.

In the really big Nosler Partitions from 9.3mm up, the partition is placed so far forward that they normally average about 90% weight retention. This is because such bullets are usually used on much bigger game. Yet because they start out fatter in the first place they usually kill smaller game very well, because they open up so easily. I have had great results on deer-sized game with both the 286 9.3 and 300 .375, for instance.

I read an article the other day in which a .277 Accubond didn't give desired results on a big animal. Believe it or not, the author actually admitted that it was his fault for picking that bullet over something known to be tougher!

Get a bigger gun and shoot solids.
BBJ

Or get closer and shoot cast boolits at 2000 fps or less. They did the job for centuries, and still will.
Selmer

tirty-tirty

woofer

Or........

Just pick the appropriate bullet for what you are shooting and how you intend to shoot it. (grin)

I hunted most of last year with Ballistic Tips, which I like for whitetails, but I knew better than to shoot one up the chute. I was hoping to hit one lengthwise with a light/fast TSX, but of course that buck stood perfectly broadside.

Can't think of a time when I pulled the trigger that I wanted the animal to go someplace else and die.

Seems like many brag about bang flops and drt's. With the exception of brain and spine, those kind of kills usually require busting stuff up. Meat is stuff.

Bottom line for me over the years continues to point to monolithic expanders as the best compromise. I'm not thrilled on going lighter though, IE I'll use a 168 as the lightest in a 30 cal mag.

The partitions proved some depth of penetration lacking for me, in 180s on nilgai, out of a 300 mag. I should have gone to 200s...

But I went to X bullets and I can say this, if you need to dump them right now break some bone, and you can trim around the wound, something I never did with cup and core very much. I will admit I've never pushed an X over about 3500 fps, yet very little damage so far.

Compared to standard and even the partition, I just plain see dead animals everytime I shoot and much less wasted meat, regardless of the impact area. I got to one point where we needed to go out and dump some does and leave real quick so we road around, and I didn't have the best of shots, most facing me, and very little damage meat wise, compared to the waste I'd have seen with other bullets.

Yep its your choice as mentioned, and I'd never be surprised at tossing some meat with a non monolithic type bullet. ITs why its monolithics for me, even for deer. They don't break the bank and they work fine in every situation. Thats win win to me period. There is no downside that I can see so far.

Of course I don't require DRT, yet I can get it if I need it to happen. But I am like a few others, I don't like the waste of meat if I can avoid it.

I do not buy into a few lead frags in meat hurting me though....And I'm much rather bite into a lead pellet in my duck rather than a steel one... but I digress

Do accubonds work? Sure, but I consider them the cup and core that they are, nothing else, and expect that damage as a result. Its much like JB said, the folks that like to see a huge hole, lots of blood and guts, and a DRT kill and are happy, were generally VERY unhappy when they tried X types.
Personally I don't generally see what the big deal is about DRT... there are very few instances where its a must have IMHO.

Jeff

Plenty of folks that shoot deer broadside complain about X Bullets! Accubonds are designed to retain about 65% of their mass. The front acts like a Ballistic Tip and blows up quickly, the bonded thick jacketed rear remains for deep penetration!

Clearly you need to consider shot placement before you pull the trigger.

The Accubond is more or less a compromise between a BT and a solid copper bullet. IMO, it is a good all around choice, you don't like the BT part so don't use it.....but I bet that when you shoot a deer broadside with a Barnes X bullet and only hit lungs that you will complain that it ran 150 yards!

edge.