Greetings- I recently purchased a Remington Sendero in 7mm Remington magnum and worked up a reasonably accurate load using Reloader 22 and the Nosler 140 gr Ballistic Tip (three shots around an inch at 200 yards).
I am, however, considering switching to the Accubond version to gain a bit more bullet integrity ( read as terminal performance) on our whitetails.
I am wondering (for those of you who have tried both) if the Accubonds are living up the the same accuracy potential as the Ballistic Tips? I would be using the 140 gr again.

Thanks, and good shooting!

Super Bon Bon

I've shot the 160 Accu a fair bit in my 7 Mashburn Super and it has all the acuracy of the BT. I've also shot the Accu's in (340,270,338/300WSM,375 Wby).

All of them shoot quite well.

Good luck and get after it

MD

The 140 Accubond is very accurate in my 7mm WSM M70. This rifle is very accurate with every bullet that I have tried in it. Loads seem interchangeable with the 140 Ballistic Tip.

The MV was 3215 fps instrumental in hot weather the other day.

I am going with the 140 Accubond this year.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
Loads seem interchangeable with the 140 Ballistic Tip.

You're right about that, if you ask Nosler about accubond loads they tell you to go with whatever the book says for the ballistic tip. Best group I got in my 7mmRM with 140 accubonds was .208 at 100yds with 67.5grs of RL22 though this load was a tad hot for my tastes (its the max in noslers manual).

I have a 700 in 7RM that doesn't shoot them as accurately as the NBTs, It will shoot the NBTs around 1/2" but the ABs go about 3/4". Not bad by any means but, they definitely haven't shot the same for me. The 140 ABs are about the same length as the 150 NBTs, alittle bit longer than the 140 NBTs I believe. You may have great luck w/ em' but, I tried the 140 ABs in two rifles and they didn't fair too well. I would like to try the 160s as they are longer and have a better BC.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I'm thinking about using the 200 grain accubond in 300 H&H. Will probably start with good ol' H-4831, but am open to suggestions.

I frankly have had very mixed results with the Nosler Accubonds in regard to accuracy. I have tried them now in at least a dozen rifles in chamberings ranging from .257 Wby Mag to .338 Remington Ultra Mag.

In the majority of the guns I tried them in the accuracy was pretty sorry. In my own 300 Wby Mag the accuracy was fair, but not nearly as good as the Nosler Partition. In my new 7-08 Remington the accuracy was good, about an inch.
However, this gun shot the best groups with Ballistic Tips using Varget while the Accubonds did best with H 4350.

In .338 caliber I had very dismal results in a couple of .338 Win Mags and .340 Wby Mags. However, a .338 RUM shot VERY small groups with the 225 grain Accubond.

You just have to try them to see. I am serious, I have had everything from 3 inch groups to 0.35 inch groups at 100 yards using the Accubonds.

We did get to try the Accubonds on some wild hogs this week. A 110 Accubond in a .257 Wby Mag and a 140 Accubond in a 7-08 both performed quite well.

I find it so amazing that 2 shooters can have such vasting different experiences...I guess that is part of what makes shooting so fun.

MD

For what its worth, I just got back from the range after trying 4 different premium bonded factory loads. My rifle is an older M77 7mag, and I was using 160 grain loads. The worst groups were from the WInchester Supreme's with accubonds (I was suprised). The best group , 3/8" was from using the Remington Ultra bonded.
This is bad news as I really wanted the accubonds to show some potential!

The accuracy potentail of the Accubonds is the same as that of the Ballistic Tips -- at least that's the case in the 7mm 140s and the .30 caliber 150s. In fact, the same recipes I use for the Ballistic Tips turned out to be the primo loads for the Accubonds -- and, to my delight, the POIs remained virtually identical.

Like Bobby, the point of impact, i.e. the trajectory, didn't change in my Mtn LSS 7mm-08 when I wemt from the 140 BT's to the 140 Accubonds, but my groups did tighten up a bit.

BT's grouped right at MOA, Accubonds at .75" at 100 Yds.

NOTE: Both of these were handloads.

firstshot
---------------------------
Make your first shot count.

Similar experience to the 2 immediately above with the 7mm 140 gn in my WSM .

I have had good luck with the 160 grain accubonds in a 7X57, A 7mm Mag and a 7mm STW...tj3006

quote:

Originally posted by First Shot:
Like Bobby, the point of impact, i.e. the trajectory, didn't change in my Mtn LSS 7mm-08 when I wemt from the 140 BT's to the 140 Accubonds, but my groups did tighten up a bit.

BT's grouped right at MOA, Accubonds at .75" at 100 Yds.

NOTE: Both of these were handloads.

firstshot
---------------------------
Make your first shot count.

The BCs on the 140 accubond and BT are exactly the same btw.

I have shot them both in my 7RUM and the 140 accubond showed nearly the same accuracy as the BT. I did however have to try a couple of powders to get the best results with the accubond and the first load I tried with the BT's yielded half inch groups at 100 yards. The best group with BT's was .410 and with accubonds was .472 like I said nearly Identical accuracy wise just had to put out more effort with the accubond.