I have hunted a lot of different animals in my life but none have the skin thickness and rubber like body structure that the wild hogs do. At least not until you get into the bigger thick skinned African game. I was invited to hunt at a mountain lodge in Tennesse last week for hogs. I was fortunate enough to shoot two of them and I was using the 30/06 with the standard 165 grain Hornady Interbond that I have written about here in the past. They match so well with my rifle and have such massive penetration that I have really come to like them. This is also due to the perfect and consistant accuracy they give me from my rifle.



Back to the Issue! I hunted quite a while before finding a hog I wanted and then I had a 75 yard running shot on him. He was steeply quartering away and I had to sink one of the 165's into his hind quarter or just in front of it. I recovered the bullet in his neck meat.



That pig was given a second shot because when I hit him with the first one he actually ran on his back hoofs for about 20 yards. When he dropped back down to all four and remained upright I put another one in him. At that Distance and running you just never know how the shot was delivered and I was not about to take a chance.



The first hog I shot was at 157 yards laser ranged and shot again slightly quartering away. There were several hogs together and I did not want to kill one and hit another with the exit. As it turned out that bullet was in the 1.25" thick hide on the exit side after breaking the bones on the exit side front leg. Here are a few photo's, I did not weigh the billets yet but from looking at them I would guess they are near 90% or greater weight retention. Just look at the one bullet which almost turned completely inside out. It had the perfect long penetration from hind quarter to the neck meat.



I don't think you can get better then this,.......you can only equal it.

Thats a mean looking hog! Can't ask for more than what the interbonds did. I would like to ask that they'd start making them in .243 and .25 caliber though.

Thanks for the report....perfect timing. A bunch of us boneheads have been discussing the relative merits of bullets (again) and the IB/AB were among the debated items. That's sure a testimonial for the IB.

Personally, I'm planning my North America "go to" rifle to start building this spring. It'll be a 30-06 equivelant but in a short action. I am considering a number of bullets in the 165-180 range for the primary load. Given the short magazine, I'd like to have the chamber cut to best accomodate the "chosen" bullet.

I was considering the A-Frame until recent posts cast doubt on that one. This looks like a good candidate and it probably shares the ogive profile of other Hornies which are my runaway fave of the standard bullets.

BTW.......why did'ja shoot such a little piggy?? planning on making bacon bits??....... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

JimF

I'm sold as well. .284" 154 grain Hornady Interbond at 2950 fps. 100 yard quartering away shot.

Excellent info JJ,
as usual, you keep the good stuff coming.

I have purchased a box of 100 for my Ulimate All-around too.

Just when I ask the question about penetration on another thread...here comes some more good information!

It certainly appears as though there is no lack in penetration with the Interbonds.

JJ, based upon your experience so far, it seems as though you would you rate the terminal performance of the Interbonds equal to the A-frames ( "I don't think you can get better then this,.......you can only equal it." ).

On top of this there is the added benefit of a very good BC and a plastic tip to initiate quick expansion at longer ranges.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

All these good reports of Interbonds are starting to work on me. What am I supposed to do? I have hundreds of rounds loaded with Interlocks and Partitions in various cartridges! Not enough game to shoot! Not enough empty brass! Not enough time for the range! Where were Hornady Interbonds a couple years ago when I was working up "perfect" loads for a number of rifles?

DOES ANYONE FEEL MY PAIN? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I have room in RSA this year for a couple people and I can apply the depost towards your hunt from the people who cancelled. You can use lots of ammo there and start fresh when you get home.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to the topic, regarding the Swift A Frames and Interbonds. I have some rather strong feelings on this and have enormous experience with the Aframes in several calibers. I have shot at least 100 big animals myself with the 30/06 using the 165 grain Swift Aframes.

I think they are a near perfect bullet in almost every possible way in a rifle that shoots them over 3000fps MV.

I think they would still be the best choice today if the interbond was not here.

I think the Interbond being softer and without the "A" frame or partition is easier to expand for rifles under 3000fps or should we just say "standard cartridges" not magnums.

I think the interbonds at 34 bucks a 100 make it much more affordable to shoot them at al game rather then just the biggest trophy type of game. This is compared to 50 bucks for 50 Aframes. The interbonds are also boneded throughout the jacket. The Aframes are only bonded in the front half, the back half is simply pressed in like a Nosler. I have never seen, nor had one come apart myself but this is the biggest single complaint I have read about A frames.

I like the plastic tip and think it lets them ride in the magazine and deal with recoil much better and also the feeding into the magazine is unmatched. I have never been a fan of hunting with boat tails do to the tendency of curving inside game and not following a straight path. This has not been my experience with the Interbonds. I think that huge mushroom must allow them to drive straight through. I have had them travel 100% true to the course everytime a check a bullet path looking to recover the bullets.

So far with these Bullets there has been just over 20 medium to large game taken with my 30/06 in Africa, 3 black bears, a mountian lion, a 361 point Bull elk, and three wild boar. 30 big animals total in about 14 months.

I have recoverd only 6 bullets out of those 30 animals. the other 24 have exited. I think that is darn good especially from the "old and boring" 30/06 shooting puny 165 grain bullets at a pathetic slow 2900fps!

JJ,

I see your pig hunt was successful. Congrats!

I have found the place in Iowa that you mentioned to me and am trying to investigate. They aren't the best at returning calls.

Which place in TN did you go to? Was it a decent fair chase hunt?

Again, congrats on a fine hog!

Bill

Westman, Email on it's way



Here is the recovered bullet from the Big Bull Elk I shot in October with the interbond.







Here is another Angle of the bullet showing the remaining shank.

Would you mind posting the name, address, etc. of the Tennessee outfit you hunted with along with a comment as to recommendation ?

Rolly, Email sent

Now your really making it bad for me--by offering a good solution to my dilemma. I am moose hunting this fall so I will have to pass on the generous offer, however I have looked at some of your RSA propositions and find them very attractive.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Though my experience is more limited then yours, I find myself drawing the same relative conclusions regarding bullet performance, based upon what I have observed in the field and from a number of dedicated hunters I associate with. If there is any downside to the Interbond it may that they are a bit more finicky (according to some reports) regarding accuracy than the standard Interlock.

I am feeling compelled to give them a whirl.

I weighed all three of the bullets I recoverd from the hogs this morning. The one that is nearly inside out was 146 grains, the next was 150 grains and the worst of the three which broke the bones of the front leg at 70 yards was 135 grains. I'm sure that one was the most stressful. Imagine if it were not bonded how much would be remaining and what if any penetration would have been achieved after it went to pieces.

I recently loaded a batch of these and a friend shot some in his rifle. He claimed that they did not group very well. I have heard this from others also. Maybe these bullets will have the haunting troubles of the X bullet which don't shoot well in many guns? Although the fellow shooting them has a very old Mauser conversion 30/06 with an ancient weaver scope and the stamped metal rings. His kit may not be worthy of judging accuracy with these loads?

Another friend I hunt with frequently shoots them from his 300 Weatherby. He claims sub inch groups with them and has killed plenty of bigger animals up to elk size. He also shoots longer ranges then I would normally shoot. We were talking about this yesterday and he said that he is going to move up to the 180 for the weatherby to see if they will shoot flatter with the additional weight. I think the 165's will shoot flatest of all .308 diameter bullets but he's going to give it a try and see. Probably not enough trajectory difference to worry about on bigger game.

Excellent post JJ and a fine example of why I swear by bonded core bullets when I go with jacketed rounds. They hold together under the most extreme conditions and give fantastic performance. Woodleigh Weldcore, Trophy Bonded, etc are utterly reliable even on the toughest critters... Now if we can just get Nosler to give us bonded core bullets in 450gr and 500gr .458" flat point Partition!

How much did those Hogs weigh in at?

Those 2 photo's are of the same boar. The smaller one is not pictured. The smaller one I shot we weighed on a Cabelas brand hanging scale. It was 175 pounds dressed. The bigger one would not register as the scale was only good to 300 pounds and it was pegged. Therefore I know it was over 300 pounds or very close. Depending upon the accuracy of the Cabelas scale! It was also "empty" when we weighed it, dressed in the field before taking it to the skinning area.

JJ, thanks for the great post. I was confused when many guys disliked this bullet. But now I am confident in these bullets. BTW, you mentioned they cost 34$ per 100. Why do you buy them this expensive. Midsouth and some others have them at 25-27$ per 100. Just an opinion.

Davaa
Mongolia

I finally have the teeth out and was able to get an official score. They are 7.25" long, each and both are 2.5" in circ. that makes them 9.75" per side or 19.5" total score. That is good enough for number 16 in SCI North America wild boar. It will be tied with 4 others that also have the same score. It's a long way from Number one though. That is a whooping 27" hog from Califorina.

THAT is one dandy hog!!!

Congrats...

That is an awesome hog!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'd like to thank you for posting the "testing" and pictures; being a "Hornady fan" I'm glad to have this information, it does look like they have "a winner" with the interbond!

Congrats on a real trophy!!!

The diameters of those expanded bullets are quite large and I like that. The Partitions do not retain that large a diameter at all.

Of course this is not all there is to it.

Based on those pictures I am going to load up some Interbonds and see how they shoot. Thanks for the consise report.

Bullet test.


Here is a test of premium bullets done in 2003. www.jegeren.net/tester_kuler.htm



I hope you understand the results even if it is in norwegian. Inntrenging means penetration.

The bullets where shot into wet telephone books, with two dry books in the front. A really hard test.Range 15m in "typical" 308win and 300win. mag speed.



The table "N&#65533;r ekspansjon stopper" means :When expansion stops. As you can see from the result a Scirocco expands much easier than a Speer Trophy Bonded.



A guess you have heard about most of these bullets except for Tonheim PBP wich is a local (the only!)norwegian bullet manufacturer. A very precise bullet.



I have a few comments to the results. Only one bullet fail; the Remington Core-Lokt Ultra.And i have seen other failures of this bullet in other norwegian tests. Perhaps not a real premium bullet with controlled expansion?



Lapua Naturalis is now a bit softer.Rhino Solid Shank; I think you can get this bullet i different versions.Also softer bullets.

Norma Oryx got a bit low result for retained weight, some years ago 90%+ was the usual result, perhaps they are a bit softer now?

Sako Super Hammehead has been improved over the last years and these results are now in the same class as Nosler Accubond.



Except for Core Lokt Ultra, no really surprises. And i have to say i'am impressed with the result of the cheapest one ; Interbond!



If someone want to understand the commets in the test i can translate. Points are given for 308win speed.Posts: 162 | Location: Norway | Registered: 28 July 2002

CDH
one of us
Posted Oct 5, 2:27 AM
Interesting! I wasn't able to figure out all the comments (+ and -) for each bullet. Please translate...Posts: 472 | Location: South Texas, U. S. A. | Registered: 22 January 2004

Pepper
one of us
Posted Oct 5, 8:25 PM
thanks for the info. very enlightening test.Posts: 51 | Location: Utah | Registered: 29 September 2004

RSY
one of us

Posted Oct 5, 10:04 PM
Man, that Remington CL Ultra looks awful! What a joke.



On a positive note, I really wish I could get my hands on some of those Norma CDPs here in the States.

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.

Not to slight Muledeer, but based on what I have seen with the Interbonds they perform very well. I would take them over a partition any day

The point MD made is the partitions are better than bonded:
"What might be called "standard" bonded bullets, made with just a one-piece jacket bonded to a long core, are numerous: Scirocco, Kodiak, Interbond, Accubond, Ultra Core-Lokt, Norma Oryx, Bitterroot Bonded Core. They all tend to retain a good percentage of weight, but none of them will penetrate as deeply as an X, Fail Safe, or Trophy Bonded of the same diameter and weight, because they open wider. For that matter, none will consistently penetrate as deeply as a Nosler Partition of the same weight and diameter.

Which one you choose all depends on penetration versus expansion. Price to a certain extent has nothing to do with it. I know because I've shot most of these into game, and all of them into test media."

As for you vanimrod, I did'nt call anyone out. I just pointed out that I used to use bonded bullets and muley set my as back on the right track. Now if thats not learning something from the great folks at this forum, I dont know what is. The only person who called anyone out was Mr. GREGSNYDER.

Now, for some strange reason, several people around here are unusually curious about my experiences with a certain brand of bullet. I, however have refrained from commenting on my expierences with any other bullet than the partition because I dont want the readers to form a predjudice opinoin of a bullet because I happen to think there great. I will say, however, that I used to have great plenty bonded hunting bullets and thought that most of them performed in a way that was satisfactory. I think JJhack had a great post and some good commentary. I was just pointing out that muledeer went to great lengths to prove that retained weight dont mean much and bonded really arent that much better.

Nice hog JJ, is it a Russian?

Mousegun,

Let's back up and try this again. Your quote of MD proves my point, and his, that partitions and bonded perform differently, and that difference can be better or worse, in either direction, depending upon your choice of game and load. Want more expansion? Fine, take the bondeds. Need more penetration (sorry, I tried to find a way to phrase that without a double entrendre')? If so, take the partition. No one bullet does everything better than any other. Every bullet, as MD stated, and as a couple of hundred years worth of field testing has proven, is a compromise.

It is understandable how a person could read a paragraph or two of MD's posts, or anyone else's for that matter, and come away with a founded, but mistaken understanding of the real crux of the answer. Context is everything, and taken in context, MDs response does not say that one bullet is "better" than another, just that each type performs differently and that each one is better than the other in a certain performance category. But, both are still compromises on the whole, with the choice remaining with the shooter as to which performance category is more important and, thus, which bullet is "better" suited for their chosen pursuit.

Mr. MG, you best learn a little better respect for your betters. You have been bellyaching about a point that you have been proven WRONG a dozen times over. These guys have been pulling more big game out of the woods than you'll ever see in your little lifetime. Your not fit to tie the boots of the likes of VAnimrod or MD. Why, I bet they could kill deer with just harsh language better than you could with a bullet.

So sit back and take a listen from them. You might learn a thing or two.

For me, this site provides access to the experiences of others and, collectively, that helps me separate the wheat from the chaff. MD was describing differences. I didn't find any disrespect toward other bullets.

Why would you "laser" a shot less than 200 yards? No offense intended just curious.

JJ,

It's been a while!!!

I know you have been keeping data on penetration, and recovered diameters from live critters.

Quite possibly I might have a project proposition for you that might be fun and entertaining at the same time.

I'll holler at you off the boards.

Pat

are the hornady interbond and the SST the same bullet? thanks....bearit......

Actually no, the SST is an "interlock"(a good design, but NOT bonded), the interbond is a "bonded core bullet", which should stand up to bone much better, as well a penetrate better , since it will retain much more weight, and as JJHack found , it does this and then some! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Just wanted to send a short note to JJHACK that is long on thanks for starting a great thread filled with expertise and common sense!

Thanks,

Steve

Twenty five years ago I read a story about Joyce Hornady
being on a hunt with a gun scribe who indicated his
Hornady bullet had failed because it never exited the
very dead animal.

Mr. Hornady's answer was that the animal was dead wasn't it"?
The bullet was recovered inside the animal with a shed core.

Joyce Hornady believed that expending ALL the bullet
energy inside the animal was more important than an
exit wound and blood trail. His goal was a dead animal
on the spot....His belief was that if you had to trail the
animal....the bullet did not do its' job? (Assuming a good shot)

I won't take a stance here, because that would only restart
the debate about bullet performance, and whether or not
the bullet should exit.

There is also much debate over whether it is better to
have more velocity or more bullet weight and diameter.
The velocity boys use matematics and the weight boys
point to momentum to prove their points. (Mathimatics
would indicate that a sewing needle fired at over 10,000fps
will kill and elephant)

I've opted for a center of the road approach. Medium weight
bullets for the caliber and safe but non-maximum velocities. I
do agree with one point Mr. Hornady made: With a dead
animal that dropped in its' tracks, the bullet did indeed do
its' job whether it exited or not! It killed the animal! Isn't
that the purpose of a bullet?

JJ, thanks for the "empirical" evidence. Ballistic theory is
just that....theory!

I've got some 400 grainers to try out in my Rigby. Suppose they're tough enough for Kudu/Eland/Gemsbok?