Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Severe Interbond testing

A complete translation would be appreciated.

JJHACK, Was that a washington state hog???

Are you sure that is a core lock ultra in the pic, it sure looks like a regular corelock to me. Also, we can analyize these bullets to death, but one should be reminded of the vast number of deer taken with the Hornady interlock, or the Core lock bullets. We just have way too much time on our hands.....LOL.

Also, I wonder when Hornady will release some 6 mm and 25 cal interbonds?

That Wild hog was shot in Tennessee in Monroe county. It was a big hog even for the locals who had hunted their whole lives there.
I was asked to do a presentation to a hunting club on air travel with firearms and international travel for hunting. I do these presentatins frequently for clubs. Anyway the club offered me a weekend of hunting on the property they own and lease. I wandered off the first day and saw a few pigs but they were too far or too small. The rest of the guys when off on ATV's with dogs. I did not want the hunt with dogs. I felt a little rude at the momment being in their "place" and not joining in with the hunt the way they do it. The care taker who was an older fella suggested to me that I head up the ridge and eventually I would come to a flat which had a pond. He claimed there were frequently hogs there but that he had not been up there in years. He also mentioned that the ATV's cannot get up that hill ao the hogs like it there.

Sounded good to me so Off I went and spent the morning and afternoon there. The pond was low and there hog sign thick. Now and then I could hear dogs barking and ATVs racing. I sat against a tree glad I chose this plan. Some hogs eventually trotted by but had no interest in the water. none were big and there were babies in the mix. They went further up the ridge and I could see them rooting and hear them in the blanket of dry leaves. While pre-occupied with these hogs I see out the corner of my eye another couple hogs trailing up the first group. The last hog had visible teeth and was 2 times the size of the others. I looked at him through the scope of the 30/06 and made a squeek sound with my lips. He stopped dead, for a split second and then trotted away. He was quartering away with no other options and was quickly shot. At that instant he reared up on his hind legs and ran forward about 20 yards or so(hard to measure) on his back legs! He dropped to all four feet and I gave him another. Then he fell dead where you see him pictured.

It was only after I cleaned the skull and removed the teeth that I decided to see just how big he was. I'm an official scorrer for SCI so I got out my most recent copy of the records and checked the measurement against the ones entered. It was good enoough for #19 in the USA and the biggest ever entered from Tennessee. He kinda looked big but I had no idea he was that big!

It's the first animal I have ever entered into a record book in my whole career. Unfortunately I cannot get the music from deliverence out of my head now.

JJ,

Can u share the load you're using? Reading this post has me curious now! You've got me wanting to try this Interbond in my '06 M77/MkII...

PS: Any reports yet from the field on the new .458" 500gr Interbond? It just came out in the past 8 months or so, curious how it compares to the earlier Interlock version.

I am curious. How would you rate the Nosler Accubonds in comparrison to Hornadies?

If this has been discussed before you can feel free to direct me to a previous thread. I admit I don't get around here very much. I am currently loading the Noslers in my 7 Mag but if the Hornadies can offer equal performance for a few pennies less, I'll give them a try.

In tests published in Shooting Times and American Rifleman the 30 caliber 165 grain Hornady Interbond penetrated almost as well and retained more percentage and absolute weight than the 30 caliber 180 grain Nosler Accubond. One can infer from those data that in equal caliber and weight the Interbond will penetrate deeper and retain more weight than the Accubond. I believe the Interbond has an edge over the Accubond for those reasons and because it is less expensive. However, I have heard many people say they could not get the same accuracy with the Interbond than with the Accubond. But at the same time, I and many others have achieved accurate loads with the Interbond. I highly recommend the .284" 154 grain Hornady Interbond for your 7mm. On sale right now at MidwayUSA for 27 cents a piece.

Do you have a link to those articles or are they only in the magazines?

Those results surprise me. And I have always been skeptical of the 150 gr bullet in the 7 Mag for elk. Don't know why but I always felt more comfortable with the 160 gr. I may buy a box anyways and see what I can do with them. I've been loading RL22 with good results but it doesn't feed very well through the press so I am thinking about working up some loads with Ramshot Magnum or Winchester WMR (?). It will be the perfect opprotunity to load a batch with the Hornadys and see how they do over the chrono and on paper. Thanks for the info.

JJHack:

Great story. I was unlucky with interbond accuracy. 3 shots = 2 out of the 3 touching and a third 4 inches away. What's worse is that sometimes the flier is high, sometimes low, occasionally to the left. No rhyme or reason as to which (1st, 2nd, or 3rd) is the flier.

Load is Lapua Brass, 45 grains Varget, 165 gr Interbond, Fed 210MM primer in a 308 win.

If you have good success with a certain powder, please fill us in.

BMT

The articles are only in the magazines as far as I know. I can find out the issues later and post them.

A .284" 154 grain bullet (.273) has the same sectional density as a .308" 180 grain bullet (.271) and weighs only 3.75% less than a 160 grain bullet. The .284" 154 grain Hornady Interbond out of your 7mm Rem Mag should be just fine for elk if you do your part.

Food for thought. Thank you.

BTW, would you have any suggestions for loads and an estimation for the velocity I could expect? I would think somewhere around 3100 fps would not be out of the question in a 24 inch barrel, but I have very little experience with this bullet weight. Thanks again.

Jackfish, that sectional density number( with soft point bullets) will not make up for the lower bullet weight where penetration and killing power are concerned. It's an interesting number to use on paper but has no possible direct relationship to penetration with soft point bullets.

I use IMR 4831 and 4350 in my 30/06. Not the smoothest loading powder in a powder drop but it is consistant and clean burning. I do not over load my 30/06, its under 60 grains and gets about 2900fps /165gr bullets.

I have a 23" PacNor bench rest barrel which does not foul as easily as the factory barrel. As a matter of fact I can actually shoot X bullets with this barrel and not worry about fouling any more then I do with a jacketed bullet. The factory barrel could not use X bullets for the massive fouling it would build up. The problem for me now with the 30/06 and the X bullets is the powder capacity of the shells when using the longer X bullets and extruded powder.

I suppose I could tinker with that a bit and manage a good comprimise. But Why? The interbonds do exactly what I need and they are the least expensive premium bullet made. It is just lucky I suppose that for once the lest expensive product is the best one for my gun!

JJHACK wrote:

"Jackfish, that sectional density number( with soft point bullets) will not make up for the lower bullet weight where penetration and killing power are concerned. It's an interesting number to use on paper but has no possible direct relationship to penetration with soft point bullets"

JJ, I disagree. From what you are saying, a 165gr 30cal will outpenetrate a 154gr 7mm of similar construction because it is heavier? Not in my experience. In fact, the best performance I've seen in bullets has been the 154gr Interbond from my 280AI @ 3018fps. Bullet construction plays an important role in penetration, and a 180gr 30cal Federal Hi-Shok will NOT outpenetrate a 180gr 30 Cal partition. Similiarily, SD DOES play an important role, as 150gr Ballitic Tips from my 280AI far surpass the penetration and performance I've seen from 150gr slugs from my 30-06. I think Jackfish had a good point, the 154 Interbond is plenty for elk.

280_ACKLEY

Well well we have a good start to some engineering here don't we!

SD is calculated by the measurments of a perfect bullet. However once a soft point bullet impacts flesh it will instantly change the SD calculation. The further it mushrooms the greater the changes. At some point in this mushroom the mass of the projectile is all that remains and that nearly always goes to the bigger mass.

If there is some way unknown to me on how to calculate a means of measuring the SD of a variable mushrooming projectile then we would be able to better determine this. Unfortunately once a bullet impacts flesh the mushroom is never consistant. I think we all agree that impact velocity, angle, weather, skin thickness, type of species, bones, etc etc. all have a significant effect on the way a bullet begins and continues to mushroom. Even various bullet construction is critical to get any degree of accuracy to a calculation.

The SD would be of some value on a solid, FMJ or some manufactured monolithic projectiles. Unfortunately the specifics used in the formulas to determine SD are only functional before impact. Quite a paradox! Folks often depend on this calculation to weigh various choices for penetration, yet penetration is what renders the calculations accuracy as worthless!

In the end, a solid non mushrooming bullet can be calculated with some consistancy for penetration based on SD.

A soft point with a infinitely changeable shape upon impact cannot.

BC takes into account the shape of the ideal and its calculation does involve the bullet's SD as well. SD takes into account the bullet's weight and diameter, and both these are finite. Once the bullet starts to penetrate, the bullet's frontal diameter may be unpredictable and it may lose mass, but in bullet's of similar construction, sectional density can still be valid. Because bullets of a fixed bore diameter and construction must grow in length if they grow in mass, and because a bullet's sectional density it directly proportional to both its mass and diameter, longer and heavier for caliber projectiles will tend to have higher sectional densities. In bullets of similar construction impacting a similar target at proportionally similar velocities, and everything else being equal, expansion should be controlled to preserve a similar amount of the shank. This section will still be longer on the heavier bullet, so even after and during expansion, the longer bullet with its higher SD will still be longer, which at least in theory should help in straight line penetration. This means that in similar construction a 150 gr .284 cal should be expected to penetrate farther than a 150 gr .30 caliber projectile and a 160 gr .284 cal projectile should be expected to penetrate farther than the 150 gr projectiles. This is why I probably will end up sticking with the 160 gr Accubonds in the long run.

While as an engineer I can appreciate your conclusions based on ballistic theory, the fact of the matter is that in the field results don't always follow the math. Based on hunting literally around the workd with the 7mm Rem Mag my experience is that despite the scientific theory the UNscientific truth is that the 140 partition "kills better" than the 160, and both better the 175. Point being, it took a hell of a pile of critters to reach that conclusion and I don't personally know anyone with that kind of experience yet with the accubond so I can't at all fault your idea to start with the 160, but don't be afraid to try the 140 just because the book shows it as inferior in the alphabet soup game...

First post on this site.
In regards to my expiereance with the Interbond. They shoot great with almost every powder I have tried in my 7mm ultra mag custom rifle and my freinds off the shelf rem 700 in 7mm ultra.
As for on game performance. I havent had the pleasure of harvesting anything with them yet, but my friend shot a fair sized northern whitetail with his at 60 yards using one of my handloads. The load was slightly above max according to the Hornady manual and we where using the 139 gr bullet. The bullet broke both shoulders and was recover on the far side just under the hide. It retained just over a 110 grains if I remember correctly. Not bad for a impact velocity of over 3500fps.

I dont mean to rain on anybodys parade, but Muledeer, (a highly respected gunwriter), says the bonded bullets musroom too much and dont penatrate. I used to be a beliver in bonded bullets, but muledeer set my as straight. In fact, I recently sold the last of my interbonds on ebay at one hell of a loss!!!

for more insight on why you should only use partition bullets, see what muledeer has to say: https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads...0&fpart=all


-ratboy-

There is not one best bullet for all species and all conditions, or styles of hunting. Everything is a comprimise of some sort. Having seen well in excess of 1000's of big game shot in NA and Africa the resolution of bonded bullets when compared to the X bullet becomes difinitive. The X bullet will kill game like a bolt of lightening from heaven at times, maybe many times, but there are an equal amount of times or greater when the animal is hit and you cannot tell if it was a hit or a miss. Upon arrival to the site you see a speck of blood, and when the animal is found you have two bore diameter holes, I have never figured out how a well expanded bullet makes a bore diameter exit?

With Partitions this is also the case. They make a bore diameter or maybe a slightly greater then bore diameter hole. The weight loss of partitions is always significant by design. I love partitions and have used them for 20 years. However the bonded bullets offer everything a partition does with the weight retention. The exit wounds from the Interbond bullets are very large and decisive. Impacts from interbonds, and Swift Aframes into big game show a much higher staggering effect upon impact.

The hunters I have had use Failsafe and X bullets have taken game cleanly the majority of the time. However the one continued trait they have is very little impact reaction. Much like shooting a solid. More times then I can count I have seen animals run upon being hit and the hunter asks did I miss him? I could hear the bullet impact the animal but there was no visual staggering or hunch up. They just bolt away. That is very rare with a bonded core type bullet.

Exits are close to 100% on most game with monolithic bullets. Especially broadside hits. Exits with Interbonds are probably in the 75% range broadside. With Aframes they are about 50% as that mushroom is so huge and with the rounded edges it hits the skin like a fast ball going into a catchers mitt. The partition design of this bullet is the reason for the mushroom to stop at maximum diameter. This huge mushroom has a near immediate effect on big game when hit. I have often joked to my hunters that I think the impact of the skin slapping back is what killed the animal not the penetration! I gotta believe that the skin on the exit side has pulled away a significant distance to stop the bullet. When the hide is peeled away you can generally see about a 15" circle of trauma on the meat under the skin where it had been pulled away from the bullet.

Partitions are the paradox of "premium bullets" they are nearly always close to bore diameter to get the additional exit hole for blood trails. On braodside they perform just about right with the massive expansion and additional trauma of the soft tip. Then the only remaining portion provides significant additional penetration due to the much smaller diameter. This bullet kills like magic on broadside shots when the gun, bullet weight, and range are matched just right to the species. The partitons do well on quartering and bad angles when the bullets are heavy for caliber. They always work better then the standard jacketed factory bullets. I also like the way the sharp spinning edges cut the vitals to bits. However they do fall short when compared to the interbond, or in general bonded core technology.

Since the introduction of bonded bullets I have seen both used in Africa and Alaska for many years now. It certainly took some time to sort through the results, but now after many years and all the game shot it's clear that the visual impact is much better with bonded style bullets, and the distance travelled on average is much less.

I owned a 375JDJ for a very long time and killed a lot of game in Africa and Alaska with it using 260 partitions. That was the best bullet possible for that guns performance range. I own a 458 Lott and shoot 450X bullets as they provide me with the best over all performance I need in those situations where the Lott sees action. I load 270 and 300 grain Swift Aframes in my 375HH exclusive because they have just crumpled everything hit with it including several cape buffalo, giraffe, and hippo. I use the interbonds in my 30/06 which is my bread and butter hunting rifle. I have never lost an animal or had difficulty locating one with them. The 30/06 and 375HH are also loaner rifles in Africa for my clients who also shoot dozens of big game each year with them using these loads. Over the years hundreds of big game have been killed with these alone not to mention the experiences to compare them to with hunters who bring their own guns and loads.

As you can see I'm not stubbornly addicted to one kind of bullet but use different bullets in different guns for the type of hunting(or backup) and the species involved. I really feel the bonded technology is the leading performance bullet available today. The monolithic "expanding solids" such as the Fail safe and X bullets are a very close second place. (They are first in my 458 for the duty needed) The Partition is still the base line of projectiles by which all others are judged. Your bullets are hopefully either equal to, or better then a Partition, or they are just non-bonded simple factory projectiles.

Son, if you're gonna start off around here by callling people out, you probably ought to get your facts straight.

First, MD DID NOT say that bonded over-expand or under-penetrate. He, correctly, pointed out the differences between the manner in which partitioned bullets perform and the way that bonded-core style bullets perform. His point was that partition-style bullets are designed to expand in the front half AND penetrate fully through the target animal, leaving an exit wound of a bit more than bore diameter. Bondeds, on the other hand, expand to a greater diameter, exiting less often, resulting in a reduced bloodtrail, but greater shock. If you go back and re-read the thread, maybe you'll catch this point, too.

Second, MD asked you to relate some of your experiences with Smithrite bullets. He (and I'm sure a few others) is interested learning more about this brand of bullets that some of us have little or no experience with. So, please, do tell.

Finally, and this is a personal note, having folks like JJHack and MD around here "chatting" with the rest of us hunters is a pleasure and a learning experience. They've been there, done that, in more places than most of us will ever get to, and they're happy to share their experiences and advice. If you can't or don't want to learn from guys like this, then maybe you would be happier elsewhere.