Nosler Accubond - or similiar bullets

[Jerry D]

Hey guys, I'm looking at changing my load for my .308 from standard soft points to a more premium bullet as I want better accuracy and long range performance.

Currently I am looking at the nosler accubond for long range hunting up to a max of about 400 yard shots.

I want a bullet that is good for deer, meaning it must expand pretty fast yet not blow up on bone, it must be able to punch through bone. I wouldn't mind if it was good enough for moose or perhaps they require an entirely different bullet of their own?

Current contenders are (I want them to be 160-170 grain range, not really 150 or 180...)
-Nosler Partition
-Nosler Accubond
-Nosler "hunting" ballistic tip - it came out in 2008 and has a thicker jacket compared to the original ballistic tips
-Seirra game king
-Swift Scirocco II
-Hornady SST
-Hornady Interbond

Right now I am leaning towards the accubond with the partition in a close second - advice and perhaps choices I've missed would be appreciated.

Thank you

 

[snuffy]

I've been shooting/loading the Hornady interbond since it came out. Rifle used in these tests was my 300 WSM Browning A-bolt. It has been a very accurate bullet, and the terminal performance has been great. I did some expansion tests in water filled milk jugs back in 2002. Then again in '03 with the nosler accu-bond. Here's a couple of pics of those tests;

As to the results, well here goes. I got to test 5 different bullets. 1. the 180 Hornady interbond. 2. the 180 Nozler accu-bond. 3.The 180 Hornady SST. 4.The 180 Remington core-loct round nose. 5. The 190 sierra match king.

Here’s the 3 Nozler accu-bonds



retained weight, 119.1, 121.7, 121.9 Expansion .875, .645, .665. Percentage of weight retention is around 67% The .875 is the one on the left with a piece of jacket sticking out, otherwise it would be like the other 2. Now for where a person has to choose one over the other,(AB over IB). All 3 AB’s went through 3 jugs and into the fourth. The interbond was found in the third jug, just like the 165’s I tested last summer.



Here’s the only interbond I could capture. Problems with the stand caused one other one to be lost in the grass. Retained weight 140.1, expansion .715, weight retention, 77%. Like I said it and the lost one only penetrated 3 jugs.



I had a partial box of 25 year old Rem core-locts sitting around. I thought, ”I wonder how the dark ages technology compares with today’s newest?” Well it fits between the interbond and accubond. Ret. Weight. 131.0 expansion .625, 72% retention. Also the prettiest most uniform mushroom of all.

No pics for the MK! Couldn’t find enough of 2 bullets to weigh or take pics of. Total disintegration! Same for the SST. Blown to pieces, just shards of lead and copper jacket in the last,(third), jug.

All loads were 68.5 grains of R-19, except the MK was 66.0 R-19. Velocities were between 3000 and 3050 fps @ 15 feet/muzzle.

Oh here’s the set-up;



This WAS a 10 X 2 , 6 feet long. The legs were nailed, screwed and gorilla glued to the notched ends of the board. All I have left are the legs! The board was cracked and nearly broken in half right under where the first jug was sitting. I screwed and gorilla glued 1 X 4 pine under the board to keep it from splitting lengthwise. Oh well, next time I may just make it out of steel!

 

[snuffy]

Here's the load work-up for the above expansion tests. I saved both these write ups to microsoft word for when a question like yours comes up.

I’ve been testing expansion of the 165 30 cal. Hornady interbond since last summer. I wasn’t interested in the Nozler accu-bond, because it was a 200 grainer. I posted those tests on various websites. Now with the advent of both bullets in 180 grain weights, I can do side-by-side tests.

I finally had time and good weather at the same time today. The range road was open as well, so off I went to shoot some groups for load workup on the 180 accubond Nosler and 180 interbond Hornady. This was in my Browning 300 WSM, 23 inch BBL.

The powder I chose is Alliant reloader-19. I looked in the sierra manual for their 180 grainers, their top load is 70.5 grains. So I started at 68.5, went up 1.0 gr. At a time to 70.5. Mainly I wanted to test for pressure and see if any would group under an inch. AFTER loading this test run of 3 each, I looked at Speer and Hornady’s data. They’re extremely conservative, their top load is 68.5 R-19! So I loaded 2 each at 67.0 and 2 at 68.0.

Now for the pleasant surprise!
Accubond interbond
67.0 2952 av 2973 av
68.0 3006 av 3044 av
68.5 3026 av 3059 av
69.5 3080 av 3103 av


I got chicken, did not fire the 70.5 loads. Hornady and Speer were telling me I was well over max. The appearance of the fired shells, no hard sticky bolt lift and steady climb of velocities said I was still safe. (These were brand new Norma cases.) Upon measuring the expansion ring I know I could-should have fired the 70.5 loads. I hate skatin on thin ice.

Here’s the best group, it was 68.5 R-19. win large rifle primers, new Norma brass. It measures .900.



These velocities are well above what they were supposed to be. I’m at a loss to explain how I got over 3100 fps with the 69.5 load with the Horn IB. The 69.5 load shot a 1.7 inch group. I will pick the 68.5 load for expansion testing at least for the IB

The accu bonds didn’t shoot much for groups, the best was at 69.5, 1.770. I will probably use that load for expansion testing as it’s real close to the same velocity as the 68.5 load for the IB.

Looks like a good start, I should be ready to do some expansion testing next week, weather permitting. I’m also going to include some .308 loads for both the AB and IB, to research lower velocities. If I have time and jugs, I’m also going to try some 139 gr IB’s in my sons 7-08.

 

[Jerry D]

wow, thanks a lot, those accubond bullets look pretty good.

I'm very surprised the hornady sst's blew up...

The interbonds are nice too, they penetrate a little less - but one can argue that they'll dump all their energy on target instead of wizz right through, or perhaps they expand faster causing them to lose energy at faster rate causing more damage as they pass through vitals...

I like the core lokt in there as an example because it can be a good reference as its the "traditional" deer bullet. It was between the accu and interbond - so it must have penetrated into the 3rd? perhaps 4th water jug?

Seems that the accubond then perhaps is a good choice.

One question, how well do you think tests like these do to stimulate hitting bone? Would it be safe to say the one that penetrated the most jugs will break bone the best?

 

[snuffy]

Jerry, you interpreted those results exactly like I did. The nosler accu-bond will always present a smaller frontal expansion AND penetrate deeper, while loosing more weight. The interbond will always "pancake" more, penetrate less, and retain more weight. Here's a couple pics from the first test I did with the 165 interbonds;







As for bone penetration, I would probably go with the accu-bond. It's getting a reputation for being a tougher bullet to defeat with big bones. Also there's been stories about the IB blowing up on bone or other objects. I say objects, because this year I centered a poplar sapling about 1.5 inches through with a 180 interbond out of my 300 WSM. It completely disintegrated, the deer being shot at, got away scot free. (He was running through a pulp plantation with a brushy edge).

One question, how well do you think tests like these do to stimulate hitting bone? Would it be safe to say the one that penetrated the most jugs will break bone the best?

Yes I think the same way. As for the core-loct, IIRC it also stopped in the third jug. My dad hunted with that 180 core-loct for years in his springfield '06. He wouldn't hear of using any of the newer, supposedly better, bullets. A lot of deer fell to that combo.

 

[huntershooter]

Well done Snuff.
I use "Accubonds" in 25-06, 7mm WSM and STW and .308.
As accurate as "Ballistic Tip", great sectional density/ballistic coefficient.

 

[Cypress]

Over the last several years I have been testing the bonded bullets on hogs. I've seen great results with Accubonds and Scirroco II's. Haven't finished with the Interbonds yet but I expect the same. Accubonds have retained approximately 70% and often not exited.(I shoot into the shoulder so heavy bone is usually hit) Scirroco's have retained up to 95% and always exit on broadside shots. The one I found went in through a ham smashing the bone and was found in the lungs. These have all been 130 grain .270 loads and have expanded extremely well with no seperation.

 

[snuffy]

If this thread does nothing more than bring out experiences like those of Cypress, it was worth my effort to post my findings, if not the actual tests themselves. Interesting to hear that even an accu-bond will not fully penetrate a hog. They must be some big pigs!

One of the biggest controversies in the hunting community concerns energy transfer, or dump, inside a body. The two schools of thought run that a perfect bullet will expand to 1.5 it's original diameter, retain more than half it's weight and remain inside the body, thus dumping all it's ft. lbs. of energy.

The other school of thought says it should expand enough to dump MOST of it's energy in the body, but still exit to give a double blood trail.

People that hunt on small tracks of land with neighbors that don't allow you to track an animal on their land, want bang flop performance. If you hunt on public land, in big parks, then a tracking job can easily be performed, IF you know how?

 

[moosehunt]

Not much can be added to what Snuffy (Haw! That's my dogs name) said. I'll add that I have been very pleased with Accubond performance, and that from an avid Barnes X (and derivatives) user.