# Nosler AccuBond Field Report



## NHS (Sep 7, 2007)

I was able to shoot a cow elk yesterday and recover the bullet. This is the second elk I have shot with this load. Both were quick kills. I was unable to recover the bullet from last year's elk. Overall, I am pleased with this bullet.










The bullet started out at 165 gr. The recovered bullet weighed in at 128 gr, for about a 78% weight retention.

I shot it from a 30-06 at about 2850 fps muzzle velocity. The elk was at 116 yards. The bullet held together well. It seems to be a solidly bonded bullet. They are very accurate in my rifle. 2 kills in 2 years. I'm a fan.


----------



## highcountryfever (Aug 24, 2009)

I also shot my elk this year with this bullet. I was using the 180 gr. I wish I could have recovered my bullet. Mine was shot at 20 yards with my 300 WSM. We (Dad, Uncle, Cousins) have had really good success with this bullet.


----------



## ultramagfan2000 (Nov 27, 2009)

Thanks for posting this. I have been thinking about trying 180 gr accubonds out of my 300 RUM. I currently shoot 180 gr hornady interbonds that claim 90% weight retention. The best weight retention so far was 59% or 106 grains shot into wet news paper at 500 yards. Yes it was a big box at 500 yds and the only way I could think of to get the velocity to drop a little without having to go home and work up a new load at minimum that day.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I have used the 160 AB out of my 7MM Dakota on 8 animals ranging from a small blacktail at 19 yards to a good sized cow elk at 506 yards. All were one shot kills and I've yet to get a bullet back do to pass through. I love these bullets.-------SS


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Cool stuff *NHS*, others. I have reloaded some, 7mm and .30 calibers, but haven't killed anything with them yet.


----------



## fire4j15 (Nov 13, 2010)

I shoot a .300 ackley with a 180gr accubond going 3210 fps. I've killed 3 deer and only one had passed completely through. The other two were recovered on the far side ribs. Both fragmented badly. Though they were Excellent one shot kills. One at 122 yards had only 52% weight retention. The other shot at 309 yards had 59% retention. Seems like the reports I hear and my own findings suggest anything over 3100 fps and the accubonds really start shedding there weight. Great accuracy is why I still use them. But for elk I'm going to the Barnes TTSX.


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

The AccuBonds are supposed to perform just like a Partition as far as opening and weight retention according to Nosler. Obviously high impact velocity can be a factor and you might have to use a tougher bullet like the TSX.

The Hornady Interbonds seem to be a bit more fragile, or thinner jacketed than AccuBonds.


----------



## Bo0YaA (Sep 29, 2008)

Ok so we established the TSX works well with higher velocities, are there any others in the 150-165gr that should be mentioned. Im trying to stay on the lighter side but am pushing my 150gr around 3300fps or more. So far everthing Ive tried is fragmenting on impact.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

IMHO, shedding half their weight is a good thing. I want all the energy transfered to the animal. If the bullet exits - then there was wasted energy.

Everything that I've killed with AB's and PT's have required zero tracking. DRT
Everything that I've killed with X's and TSX's have required at least some tracking and I was thankful for the exit wounds to provide better blood trails.
Just my experiences, I now exclusivly shoot AB's and PT's for big game.


Booya, I truely believe you should stay away from the 150's in your 300 mag.
180's seem to wok much better, I've got alot of friends that use 200's also with amazing results!

And be careful with impact velocities with the TSX. I've seen the petals shear off, I've seen them not open up at all, and I've seen them bend and travel in all sorts of odd directions.


----------



## Bo0YaA (Sep 29, 2008)

Well I keep hearing that but I guess for some reason my brain cant grasp the idea of using 180 for deer lol stupid I know but I was actually thinking of using a 130gr before I noticed the damage my 150's were doing and did some reading.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

I have buckets of 180gr accubonds if you want to try some, along with some rl22 and imr4350


----------



## Bo0YaA (Sep 29, 2008)

I think I might take you up on the offer. I use IMR4350 for my 150's the RL 22 Ive read is the preferred powder for the 180 load but have never tried it. Pm me your number and I may give ya a shout once I free up some brass.


----------



## sigboy66 (Nov 8, 2010)

Try the 200 grain accubond with 73.0 Grains of RL22 in a winchester 300 mag case with a federal large magnum rifle primer. The 200 grain bullet has a really high BC, flies like a match bullet, and kills like the partition. I have seen this load take a moose at 325 yards, a mule deer at 427 yards, a 300 pound pig and a sheep within 100 yards all hit with this load. All were 1 shot stops, all did not go more than spitting distance before they dropped dead on the spot.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

i have been shooting the 200gr/30cal accubonds for a few years now (matter of fact, the exact load is mentioned above) and have been nothing but pleased with them. sub moa accy. i tried the 180gr MRX's but they just dont group well in my rig. i like the concept behind them if they'd shoot better.

anyway the most recent recovery was from a cow elk 3/4 quartering away at 318 yds, bullet entered just in front of the diaphragm and lodged in the offside shoulder. recovered weight: 145gr








...pretty lil shroom eh?

the cow i shot this year was 110yds 100% broadside. i elected to take a high shoulder shot in the hopes of recovering a slug after pounding bone, but blew it clean through. now she wasnt a tank of a cow, so consider that when contemplating if this bullet will blow a big stinkey down, but with the results i have witnessed so far... 
...my Late Pavant Bull is in trouble! 8) :EAT:


----------



## jungle (May 10, 2008)

chet said:


> IMHO, shedding half their weight is a good thing. I want all the energy transfered to the animal. If the bullet exits - then there was wasted energy.
> 
> ......


I used to think there was some merit in not having a bullet pass through until I saw some lab data.

The reality is that there is no relevant, wasted energy to speak of when a bullet exits. This is a myth thrust upon us by marketers selling weak bullets. Ive seen studies where exited bullets only have 20 or 30 foot pounds left after exiting ballistic gel from large caliber rifles with heavy bullets at close range. And that is about a 98 to 99% dump of energy in the animal WITH an exit wound. I doubt the animal that died noticed that last 1 to 2% of energy. Is an animal going to die any quicker from 1030 foot-lbs vs 1000 foot-lbs or 2030 ft-lbs vs 2000 ft-lbs? Its silly.

On the contrary, if the bullet does not exit, it just means it had insufficient energy to create a maximum wound channel through and through. And next time there is a bad shot angle on game, whether planned or not, better have a bullet that "wants" to exit or it may not reach the vitals. Because you would have an animal that is wounded with the bullet still inside. Great. So much for that last whopping 1% of energy *WASTED inside the animal. *

Related to this issue is the other non-sensical myth perpetrated upon us, "kinetic energy." Kinetic Energy is equal to 1/2 the mass of the bullet times the velocity-squared. Why are we discrediting 1/2 the mass of a thumping 30 caliber bullet? And why are we squaring the velocity of a whiz-bang cartridge like the 22-250 with a 50 grain pill? Does not make sense does it?

There is a technical answer and the practical answer. The technical answer is that the kinetic energy is just the calculus integral of momentum. Just like the area of a circle is the calculus integral of the circumference of the circle. What the hell does integration and derivatives have to do with cartridge-on-game ability? Not a **** thing. Leave momentum alone.

So why'd they do it? The numbers look really cool in the brochure because you are squaring the really really big, cool velocity numbers. The momentum numbers, without all those digits, are just not as exciting.

Better to look at momentum, which is akin to a fair handshake between mass and velocity (Mass X Velocity), and when you do, you will see its far better for the bullets leave an exit wound.

Energy is about penetration. Insufficient energy = insufficient wound channel. What creates so called "shock value?" Its the wound channel.

_"Shock value"....hmmm this one looks suspicious too! _


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

jungle said:


> chet said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO, shedding half their weight is a good thing. I want all the energy transfered to the animal. If the bullet exits - then there was wasted energy.
> ...


Exactly!


----------



## TLB (Jul 13, 2008)

The bullets mentioned I think very highly of, but there is a lot of talk about the Berger VLD. What are the opinions of these bullets for hunting. The long range hunting crowd is using these, even though I DO NOT advocate the ranges some of these fellows are shooting at (but thats another topic altogether).


----------



## jungle (May 10, 2008)

TLB said:


> The bullets mentioned I think very highly of, but there is a lot of talk about the Berger VLD. What are the opinions of these bullets for hunting. The long range hunting crowd is using these, even though I DO NOT advocate the ranges some of these fellows are shooting at (but thats another topic altogether).


I tried some Hunting VLDS in 243 but my shots were all over the place. I have heard they real sensitive to seating depth; but I abandoned the attempt as I only had a few bullets anyway. Many more sessions with those kinds of groups and I will be in group therapy! :O•-:

With the ranges they are shooting at, they must be dynamite though with a little work. I read something strange on their website, I believe it was the website, where they explain their bullets are designed to penetrate for a while; and then expand....hmmm.

Sounds like a bunker buster or something.


----------



## ntrl_brn_rebel (Sep 7, 2007)

The VLD's in my first had experience (three deer, antelope and an elk) since I switched from Accubonds have been outstanding........

They are not what I would call a meat/kill shot photo bullet though as they make a heck of a mess. The vld's also shoot better than any bullet I have ever tried out of three guns my wife and I shoot regularly, blew my accubonds out of the water in regards to accuracy........They like to be seated very long though.....Not to mention probably the best BC in the business....... 

I love them, and this is coming from a guy that absolutely LOVED the accubonds, the only reason I tried them is I witnessed the accuracy out of a few guns my buddies shoot.


----------

