does anyone else have issues with accubonds?

[tahunua001]

hello all. I've heard lots of good things about nosler accubonds so the whole family has been experimenting with them this year for their hunting loads.

in my older brothers 7mm rem mag, 180(I think)gr accubonds have nearly double the group size as SSTs of equal weight.

in my brother in law's 25-06, 110gr accubonds disintegrate leaving just a small piece of jagged jacket behind, tried multiple tests, one of which resulted in me being hit by jacket fragments ricocheting(I guess I should consider myself lucky it didn't hold together).

and lastly I just killed my first black bear with my 6.5x50m using 140gr accubonds at 100 yards. the bullet hit a rib and then split in half, one half traveling straight down the body cavity tearing up intestines and tenderloins, the other taking out the liver and heart.

now I can maybe understand the 25-06 and 7mm as those are very high velocity impacts but at 100 yards my accubonds are barely traveling the minimum 1800FPS minimum recommended by nosler for proper expansion. is it just me or are accubonds overpriced pieces of junk?

[Jimro]

Ok,

Your older brothers 7mm Rem Mag is its own beast, it may prefer SSTs to Accubonds, or your brother didn't find a combo that worked for his rifle. There is nothing wrong with SSTs as a hunting bullet, and I'm surprised that someone would give up a working combo to develop another load just because.

110 Gr bullets out of a 25-06 would surprise me if they didn't disintegrate on impact at normal 25-06 velocities. I would recommend a different bullet for 25-06, although at 257 Rob velocities the accubond should do very well.

As far as your experience on black bear, you have first hand experience how difficult it is to design a bullet that has both good expansion, penetration, and weight retention.

All in all I don't think they are "junk" I think you have one good data point on your 6.5x50 that you should keep in the back of your head. In the end, the animal you shot is dead even if performance wasn't what you really were looking for. BTW that "two fragment" wound channel is pretty normal when a bullet hits solid bone, the front fragment going off at a steep angle and the rear fragment going relatively straight.

Good luck hunting.

Jimro

[math teacher]

My buddies and I have killed 19 moose and numerous deer with the 160 grain 7mm Accubond from 7mm Rem Mags. It has given us excellent accuracy and performance. In our experience 175 grain bullets (not 180 grain) do not group as well and different bullets of that weight may group as much as three inches apart at a hundred yards.

[ligonierbill]

+1 on 160 Accubonds in 7 Rem Mag. Haven't tried the 175s. Also, good shooting with 130s in 6.5x55 and 200s in .338 Win Mag. For some reason, my 7 Mag 700 BDL does not like SSTs. Go figure. Terminal performance depends on a lot of factors, and the forums are full of stories of bullet "failure" for just about any bullet you pick. Also stories of the "wrong" bullets (e.g. target rounds) doing well. I focus on accuracy and take "enough gun" to give myself some margin. FWIW, my two elk were shot with good 'ole cup-and-core bullets, one at 400 and one at 20. Recovered neither bullet; recovered both elk right where they stood.

[AllenJ]

Tahunua001, yours is the very first bad review I've ever read about Nosler Accubonds. It makes me a little nervous as I am very excited to try out the new Accubond Long Range, if I can ever find any

[Boomer58cal]

I've tested both SST's and Accu'bond in my 6.5 Jap, 30-30, 308, 7mm mag and 30-06. Accuracy on both has always been superb, but SST's are definitely a sturdier bullet. As for your brothers accuracy... every bullet is different. You can't just swap bullets without working up a new load. In my experience you'll get a hair more velocity out of the Accu-bonds than the SST, but you'll get better accuracy with the SST's with loads on the hotter side. If you work up a load specifically for your rifle you'll get superb accuracy from either bullet.

I use 139g sst's in my 7mm mag at 3210 fps and they stay together unless they hit a bone.
The 140g Accu-bond's come apart even shooting water jugs.


Boomer

[tahunua001]

the accuracy with my 6.5 is actually quite superb, the only person with accuracy qualms is the guy with the 7mm. my problem with the 6.5 was when it hit it split in two and both halves took off in opposite 90 degree angles from impact.

[huntinaz]

Even the toughest bullets will come apart with enough impact velocity. Fast bullet hitting a bone just right, anything can happen. A ballistic tip or cup and core may have exploded and left very little penetration. Even a partition may have sheared the tip and the sent the bottm half the other direction. If you want maximum weight retention, I think a Barnes TSX or similar monolithic (E-Tip, GMX) is probably the way to go.

As someone mentioned, I think you have a good data point but would not necessarily gie up on the accubond just yet. You have a dead bear, after all.

Also, I've read that a skinny boat tail design is inherently "weaker" than a fatter, flat base design. I don't know the physics of that, it's just what I've read on the internets, but I've seen it used to explain why .243" bullets seem to be more frangible than others. If it's true, it could be a factor.

now I can maybe understand the 25-06 and 7mm as those are very high velocity impacts but at 100 yards my accubonds are barely traveling the minimum 1800FPS minimum recommended by nosler for proper expansion.

Do you know the muzzle velocity of your accubonds? Looking a Hodgdon website, mimimun loading of a 140gr Partition are moving about 2200fps... with a B.C. of .509, I don't think they've lost much at 100 yards?

[tahunua001]

my muzzle velocity is 2225fps(being conservative) with 140gr ABs, with the same 509 BC the hornady ballistics calculator puts it at just over 2000 fps at 100 yards.

[603Country]

It's interesting that Boomer says that the SST holds together better than the Accubond. I shoot Ballistic Tips almost exclusively, and have done so for decades, but I do have one rifle that we shoot SST's in. Seems to me that the SST is no tougher than the BT, and the Accubond is supposed to be a good bit tougher than the BT. Therefore, the Accubond should be tougher than the SST. I haven't used any Accubonds, so I have no personal experience with their use.

[Mike / Tx]

With the Accubonds like most other similar type bullets the sectional density plays a big role in the end performance in most cases. Between myself, and my good friend and hunting bud, we have shot just about everything available over the past 20 something years. We have shot them fast, slow and all points in between. Used them on deer, hogs, coyotes, and what ever other critters that needed to be dispatched.

Most of what I have used with the Accubonds has been in the 110gr out of a 25-06. I will be the first to admit they will dump a deer on it's nose, when they are trucking along around 3150 from the muzzle. That said they will also blow to bits on up close shots, and loose a lot of their expansion on a long shot. There is a very fine window of velocity and range whee they work like they are supposed to similar to the heavier weights in other calibers.

I have some in .270 and .308 both sitting on the shelf along side several hundred SST's in various weights and calibers. I have found the SST to also be a very frangible bullet depending on the weight and caliber. Loading the 130gr in a .270 and bumping the velocity up in the 2950+ feet per second range, they are great on deer and hogs out to 350'ish yards or even a bit further. Drop the range down to 100yds or less and you asking for a lost shoulder, or half a bloodshot critter. Same results from Ballistic Tips as well. Keep the velocity down into the low to mid 2800fps range out of the muzzle and they work great with quick kills and not much more meat loss than with any other cup and core type bullet.

The main thing to remember when using most any of the plastic tip bullets is the tips are there for a couple of reasons. One they keep from buggering up the tips in a magazine, two they add to the BC of the bullet they are used on and finally they promote expansion being driven back into the jacket upon impact. Most if not all of them are designed with somewhat of a hollow cavity just in behind them which allows the tip to recess back into it which starts to fracture the nose of the jacket. This is where velocity will and usually does bite you in the rear.

As for accuracy, I have shot some of the best groups from most of my rifles using these type bullets, but you have to keep the length and weight within reason for the caliber your using. If you want better performance form these type bullets try using the heavier for caliber ones, and load for accuracy first and foremost. Just remember, once they get there the expansion will take car of it's self as long as your hitting what your aiming at and the remaining velocity is above 1800'ish feet per second.

[Paul B.]

Last January I shared a guide with a gentleman from Texas while doing a cull hunt fo cow elk in New Mexico. I was shoting a .35 Whelen and the 225 gr. Barnes TSX bullet and my partner was shooting the 160 gr. Accubonds at 3000 FPS from his 7MM Rem. Mag. He got his elk at a laser measured 317 yards and when we wee at the butcher's, the two bullets he shot were recovered against the hide of his animal. Frankly, they looked just like Nosler Partitions that had shed the front portion up to the partition. Te first shot tore up the liver incapacitating the animal an a second shot finished the job. Both bullets weighed very close to each other but I forget what he said the weight was.
I bought some 165 and 180 gr. 30 caliber Accubonds to try in my 30-06 and .300 Win. Mag. for my elk hunt next year. I also bought some 225 gr. Accubonds for my Whelen. So far, I've only done some preliminary work with the 165 gr. Accubonds in a 30-06 but the results are marginal at best. Gonna play with seating depth and see how that turns out.
In case anyone asks, yes, I got my elk too.
Paul B.