(Not quite sure which AR subforum to put this in, so let me post it here.)

There are a number of bonded-core bullets available to handloaders these days:

Nosler Accubond
Hornady Interbond
Norma Oryx
Swift Scirocco and A-Frame
Federal Trophy Bonded Bearclaw, Bonded Tip, and Fusion
Woodleigh Weldcore
Remington Core-Lokt Ultra
RWS Evolution

and possibly others I've missed here.

Many years ago, I hunted with what was probably the first bonded-core bullet, the Bitterroot Bonded bullet. I used 250-gr. Bitterroots in my Schultz & Larsen .358 Norma Magnum on several northern British Columbia moose hunts. Bill Steigers actually soldered the jacket to the core with his Bitterroots. Today's bonded bullets are made by several less hands-on procedures involving molecular bonding, electro-chemical methods, and other proprietary processes that are pretty much kept under wraps.

It's been opined that bonded bullets tend to be slightly less accurate than regular jacketed lead bullets because of the additional steps necessary to accomplish the bonding. I don't know whether this is generally true, but, if so, it might be seen as a small price to pay for their improved performance on game. The Bitterroots I loaded were certainly accurate enough for my purposes.

So what has everyone's experience been with bonded bullets? Have you found them to be less accurate than non-bonded bullets? How have they performed on game? One question would be: Are they too stout to expand adequately for smaller big-game species--pronghorn and smaller deer like the Coues whitetails and coastal blacktails?

My only bonded core experience is with Nosler Accubonds. There are several that I've used which are caliber/weight mates for the similar unbonded Ballistic Tip, which is on average a very accurate bullet in most guns. I've used the .30/150 grain and .30/180 grain mates fairly extensively. They seem to load identically and shoot (accurately) in an identical manner. In other words, I've found them completely interchangeable ballistically.

I've also found that the Accubond, though not so frangible as the Ballistic Tip, still provides ample expansion on lighter game like Texas whitetails, of which I've taken a number using the Accubond, mostly the .30/150 from a .30-06. I used a .30/165 Accubond in a .308 at about 2750 fps to take a mule deer at 175 yards a few years ago. In a post-mortem of the one-shot kill the bullet showed ample expansion -- and the solid base design assures adequate penetration.

I do understand that some other bonded bullets show very slow expansion and perhaps "pencil through" lighter game. However, this is probably more a result of the core alloy and/or jacket thickness than of the bonding process.

The 110 gr. AccuBond is the only bullet I use on Pronghorn. In the .257 Roberts I load it to a MV of 3000 fps (24" barrel). It is plenty accurate out past 300 yards and devastating on Pronghorn.

I've only used A-Frames in Africa and the PH on my next Buff hunt says he gets a warm glow when a hunter shows up with A-Frames.

A few years ago almost all my hunting was with Hornady Interbonds, all 30 cal, bullets in 150gn, 165gn and 180gn. Shot most in a 30.06 and some in 300 Win Mag. Most game was taken with the 180gn and a few with 165 and 150gn. I thought they were great. Good kills and any recovered bullets had opened and expanded well with good weight retention. I can't remember the longest distance I shot game but would guess around 300 yds. I went away from them only because in one of the shortage years I couldn't get any and ended up switching to Barnes TTSX which were available, easy to work up good handloads with and I thought killed game as well if not better. There is really no reason I wouldn't use bonded bullets again and I think them better than C&C but these days I like the idea of killing game with non-toxic bullets and the TTSX shoot really well for me so I'm kinda stuck on them currently.

I have had extremely good luck with the 200grTrophy Bonded Vear Claw in my 300 Win. I have taken 22 African species with this rifle and almost all were pass throughs. The few I recovered were fully mushroomed and about 90% weight retention.

Most bonded core and partition bullets work as advertised..I like the Accubond best, but the rest are just fine, and Ive never had accuracy problems with them, most of my guns shoot them within an inch...

AS to results on deer size game up to elk size they work to suit me..

Are they needed, probably on elk size game and up and on DG..On deer and antelope Id just as soon use Sierra, Speer, cup and core bullets, the best is probably the Hornady Interlock..

All that said, shot placement still rules with any bullet..

I remember the days when bullet failure was common, but mostly ended up with a dead animal, but there were those moments of long tracking jobs and those that couldn't track or shoot, it showed up a lot with them..

When Barnes Bullets just started out and before they invented/popularized the lathe-turned monometal bullets they are now famous for, they made core-bonded bullets, often in surprisingly heavy weights for caliber. I tried a packet of 250grain round-noses in my .30-06. As expected with such long bullets, stability was a little bit marginal (especially since my rifle had a short 18.5" barrel and thus I wasn't getting a whole lot of velocity out of them), but I got them shooting good enough for my usage (at the time I was walking-and-stalking Impala in the Lowveld bush, so all shots were sub-200 yards).

Penetration was excellent and weight retention was over 98% in all recovered bullets, but they expanded well too. When those become unobtainable, somebody local made a similar bullet which I also tried. Results were not quite as good but not that far off the mark.

For the last 15-20 years, I have been using Rhino Solid-shanks. This is a hybrid bullet, think lathe-turned hollow-point with the hollow filled with lead.

These are not quite as accurate as the best cup-and-core bullets, but quite good enough to get 1/2" groups in loads a rifle likes, and they drop animals on the spot like nothing else I have ever tried.

I only use bonded bullets in the 7mm-08. I use Barnes TTSXs for 30 and 338 caliber. I have taken 3 caribou with the 140 grain .284 Nosler Accubond. First caribou broadside at 214 yards, second caribou broadside at 225 yards and the third caribou last December broadside at roughly 80 yards. All three showed maximum expansion and complete penetration. None of the bullets were recovered.

When working up a load with this bullet, I also did load development with the 139 grain Hornady Interbond. I had a more difficult time finding a good seating depth for the Interbond. So, I weighed 10 Interbonds and 10 accubonds to see how consistently they weighed. The 10 Interbonds had a weight variation of 1.4 grains (138.2-139.6). The 10 Accubonds had a weight variation of .4 grains. (140.1-140.5)
So, I concluded the Accubonds were more precisely manufactured. So, I completed my load development with them.

I arrived at the following average group sizes using Norma brass, Fed 210M primers and the top three powders firing an average of five three shot groups were:

RL16 2891 fps group size .90
IMR 4350 2738 fps group size .97
H414 ???? fps group size 1.03 (I didn't chronograph final loads because RL16 shot so well)

I then noticed Sierra had introduced their new tipped "Gamechanger" bullet. I also noticed Sierra stated their advertised accuracy standards for production runs of these bullets to be a maximum of 1.25 inches at 200 yards. It got me to thinking, I wonder what Nosler's accuracy standards are for their Accubonds? So, I emailed Nosler and asked them what their accuracy standards were for the 140 grain .284 Accubond as opposed to Sierra's accuracy standard. Here is their response from their original email back to me.

"Hi Stacy,

Thank you for reaching out to Nosler with your inquiry below. We hold our 7mm-140gr AccuBonds to a sub-inch, 5-shot group in our Ballistics Lab so they’re designed to be accurate as well.

Keep up the good work and we hope this answers your question."

So, there you have Nosler's accuracy standard (bonded bullet) vs Sierra's Gamechanger accuracy standard (non bonded bullet). I am happy with the Accubond performance. So, I am sticking with it for use in my 7mm-08. Hope this info helps.

I've shot lots of game with the Accubond and some with the Interbond. Both work very well on deer, elk, bear size game and they all seem to shoot well.

Generally speaking, If I can get a Ballistic Tip to shoot well, I can get an Accubond to do the same.

I've also had great luck with TTSX and Hammer Hunters (both mono metal).

Best,
Zeke

I think it depends on the individual bullet.

I’ve had very good experiences with the Swift A Frame, the Trophy Bonded bear claw, and decent experience with the regular Accubond.

The exception was a factory loaded 142 grain .26 Nosler Accubond long range.

3 shots into a pronghorn. It was still alive, but immobile when I walked up to it. The bullets basically exploded under the skin, ruining a bunch of meat and while the animal was recovered without fuss, and was sick, it wasn’t the performance I was looking for.

Admittedly, rather short range shooting of something that overbore does stress the bullet a lot.

All I found of the bullets were sandlike pieces of jacket material.

The reason I termed the regular Accubond decent was it gave 60 or so % weight retention. The rest were 80+%.

quote:

Originally posted by South Pender:
(Not quite sure which AR subforum to put this in, so let me post it here.)



It's been opined that bonded bullets tend to be slightly less accurate than regular jacketed lead bullets because of the additional steps necessary to accomplish the bonding. I don't know whether this is generally true, but, if so, it might be seen as a small price to pay for their improved performance on game. The Bitterroots I loaded were certainly accurate enough for my purposes.

The Corbin version is simply to add a drop of bonding fluid into the jacket. Then after the core is seated the jacket and core are heated. The rest of the process is essentially the same. There is really nothing there that should have an ill effect on accuracy. That is more dependent on the thickness of the jacket, the concentricity of the jacket, the consistency of the core weight and the quality of the swaging machinery.

A lot of the great quality of bullets available today are directly related to CNC machinery making high precision manufacturing tools, and bonded bullets are no exception.

196gr Norma Oryx in 8x57IS and 300gr Swift A-frame in 375HH are simply accurate and effective.

Jiri

I use 140gr Hornady interlock SP exclusively in my 270's and I have only recovered a couple bullets over the years and they were about 130 to 135grs. And preformed as they should. I shot a cow elk about 15yrs ago with the same bullet and had no complaints . She only made about 10 steps

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:The Corbin version is simply to add a drop of bonding fluid into the jacket. Then after the core is seated the jacket and core are heated. The rest of the process is essentially the same. There is really nothing there that should have an ill effect on accuracy. That is more dependent on the thickness of the jacket, the concentricity of the jacket, the consistency of the core weight and the quality of the swaging machinery.

A lot of the great quality of bullets available today are directly related to CNC machinery making high precision manufacturing tools, and bonded bullets are no exception.

I was able to get some bonded-core 130- and 150-grain .277 Woodleigh bullets recently. They are labeled "Weldcore" and appear to be nice bullets with good BCs. I was curious about how Woodleigh bonds the jacket and core and found the following on their website:

"The process involves fluxing the inside of the bullet jacket, then melting the core material. The lead solders to the jacket as with conventional lead/tin solder. Temperature control is critical for a good bond and to not over soften the jacket."

I have wondered what bonding processes Nosler, Hornady, Swift, Federal, and Norma use. If anyone knows, I'd be very interested in learning about it.

There maybe a cold chemical bonding process, where the core is inserted and bonds to the jacket without heat as it is finally formed.

I imagine cheaper bonded bullets will have the core wrapped in double sided tape, inserted and bonded to the jacket during final forming

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:
There maybe a cold chemical bonding process, where the core is inserted and bonds to the jacket without heat as it is finally formed.

Yes, maybe. I'd be interested in learning about this kind of process.

The day of inaccurate bullets is long past, it was common in my younger days, but the companies got a wake up call its gotten better on a regular bases for the last century or there abouts..

The accubond is nothing more than the super accurate Balistic tip with a dab of stick'um and they are as accurate as a Barlistic tip and as well in regards to performance as the Partition or any other bullet..

Accuracy today is primarily not the bullet anymore its the shooter and the individual barrel..

The days of bullet failure are long past, but the subject and comments remain for whatever reason..thats my story and Im sticking to it..I was there when it all happened.

I just returned from a black bear hunt in British Columbia, I used my Remington Sportsman 78 re barrelled by Shilen in 1986 to .338-06, I used a 185 grain "bonded core" bullet over a charge of RL-15, velocity was avg 2735 fps. It was incredibly accurate, well under 1/2' at 100 yards. I normally use Barnes TSX in this rifle but wanted to try these bullets. First morning, I shot a bear behind the right shoulder at around 120 yards, he ran 40-50 yards into the bush and tried to climb a tree, made it about 20 feet up and fell. We walked in and the bear came for the guide (wrong side of the tree for me) and the guide shot it, knocking it down. Turns out the guide shot thru the meat on the head and stunned the bear, as I approached it woke up and went for the guide again, I shot it three times at 10-15 feet, went down for good. All four of my bullets were recovered, the recovered bullets weighed 178.1 gr, 150.0 gr, 145.4 gr and 82.0 gr. Obviously they did their job, but I believe a Barnes 185 gr TSX would've put the bear down in its tracks. I'll save the "bonded core" bullets for pigs and such, but this lot is incredibly accurate.

AS to the early Barnes bullets I was not aware they were ever "bonded core" and I still have some that are locked by jacket thickness like sierra, speer and even hornady to a different process called the interlock which is more of a partition bullet...Correct me Im wrong...

Over this side of the pond, bonded and partition bullets have always commanded a premium price. Nowadays we are switching across to lead free and monolithics are the same if not a bit cheaper and give you both excellent penetration and a good wound channel with much less meat damage.

We have bonded core, cup and core, Monolithics and partitions, and we get them all mixed up on these threads..
oh yes and lets not forget the forerunners of them all that being the "Interlocks" like Rem corelokts and Hornady Intl..which in my mind are middle of the road, and damn good bullets..

Week before last my youngest son took two large red hinds at about 160m with my 7mm WSM using Federal factory ammo with 140gr Trophy Bonded Tip bullets (actual chrono MV 3230fps). Both animals were DRT, one a spine shot, the other a shoulder shot with the bullet recovered under the skin on far side (images below).

My son usually uses a 7mm-08 with 140gr SST ammo and has taken red deer and tahr with it but was impressed with the knock down power of the WSM.

Should have added the recovered 140gr TBT bullet weighed 113gr, that's 81% weight retention.