I finally got a chance to do some loading and shooting and have found my new �do everything load� for my 300 RUM. I know some out there are looking for results/experience with these components, so here you go:

The Rifle:



My rifle isn�t some big heavy bench gun or expensive custom gun. It�s just your average run-of-the-mill A-Bolt Composite Stalker. It has the factory original (pencil thin) 26� barrel with well over 1,000 rounds through it. About � of those were from when it was a 300 Win Mag before I had it rechambered to RUM. The only accuracy mods I�ve done to it are a Moyer�s trigger, and relieving some more material from the barrel channel of the much-too-flexible composite stock to make sure the free-floated barrel stays free-floated (it must have been something to do with the increase in recoil of the RUM, but right after I got it rechambered it wouldn�t shoot worth a damn�-the barrel contacting the stock was the problem). The scope is a Leopold 3.5-10X50mm with Stoney Point Target Knobs.

The Load:

200 Accubond , 95 grains of Retumbo, brand new completely un-prepped Remington cases, Federal 215 primers loaded to 3.60� OAL, 3177 fps.

I started out with H870 because I had a bunch I wanted to shoot up and I thought I could get some good velocities. I was easily able to beat the above velocity with it. I didn�t get a pressure sign (in my rifle the first sign is an ejector mark) until a round clocked 3311. Backing off quite a bit still put me at 3246, but the load just wouldn�t shoot. I think it�s because I was in too big a hurry to pack all that powder in the case properly so I was compressing it so much the seating depth varied widely. Anyway, it wouldn�t shoot and H870 is dead. Enough about that.

96 grains of Retumbo yielded 3208 and no pressure signs. I didn�t clock 97 grains but I�d expect it would have gone around 3240. I got a slight ejector mark with that one. Extraction was unchanged�still a finger-tip affair.

So I backed off to 95 grains. What this powder lacked in velocity, it made up for with consistency. Three randomly picked rounds went 3171, 3183 and 3179. I know it�s only three rounds but I�ve never had an extreme spread of 12 and a standard deviation of 5 before even with only three rounds. This is with �as thrown� powder charges, no less. I knew right there this load would be more accurate.

Disclaimer: I feel this load is safe in my rifle but if you try it in yours you will die, guaranteed. Don�t try it. You will die!!!

OK, now that that�s out of the way, I can tell you that my rifle has a rather sloppy chamber and with rounds seated to 3.60� to fit in the magazine it basically has a free-bore as well. So you really might run into pressure signs before I did. This is backed up by Brent Moffit�s data�at 90 grains he was at 3082 fps while I was only at 2977 fps. At 92 grains I was still only at 3062 fps. So really, work your way up to this slowly guys�especially given the tales of Retumbo acting completely differently for different people. Be safe.

The Bullet:

I now realize I forgot to take a pic of the bullets before firing. Oops. Sorry. You all know what they look like anyway.

I have been waiting for a very long time for somebody to make a heavy, high BC 30 bullet with reliable terminal performance. I was actually close to setting myself up to swage my own bullets so I could make what I want. Well, Nosler came through. It seems so far they did it well enough I might not have to get into the swaging business. Don�t get me wrong, there is nothing �earth-shattering� about the terminal performance of these bullets. Some bullets will do some things better. Other bullets will do other things better. But this bullet lived up to my expectations (as far as I could test it). It seems like a very good all around bullet for my purposes.

I apologize for my lack of photography skills and/or equipment. Damn I need a digital camera! Anyway, these pics were the best I could do. I hope they�re good enough for you guys:







The bullets from left to right are the 180 Scirocco, 180 XLC, and 200 AccuBond. The bullet of each type on the left is a simulation of a long range impact with minimal resistance. Each on the right is a simulation of a normal range (like 250 yard) impact.

The �long range� Scrirocco retained 88.7%, the �normal range� retained 78.2%. Great weight retention but they didn�t penetrate very far�as one would expect with them opened to such a huge diameter.

Both XLC�s retained 99%, of course. The �normal range� XLC is what I�m used to seeing from my tests and the reason I used X bullets exclusively for so long. Absolutely perfect! It�s the �long range� one that�s disturbing. It hardly opened up. The wound channel was tiny. As you can see the shank is slightly bent. This is the only bullet that didn�t penetrate straight. About � of the way in it took a 45 degree turn to the left. I could attempt to explain why with some Euler column buckling equations but I won�t. I�ll just show you what happened.

The AccuBonds retained 76% and 64%.

They don�t look all that impressive. Much the same as a Partition doesn�t look all that impressive compared with some of the �pretty� mushrooms some of the custom bonded bullets give. But Partitions always get the job done. If this bullet mimics their performance, I�ll be more than happy.

In an impact where the XLC hardly opens up and doesn�t penetrate straight, these open up just fine and go straight. In an impact where the Scirocco is nearly turned inside-out, these hold together and penetrate farther. A pretty good compromise between the two.

Here�s a bunch of them recovered from 2900 to 3300+ fps:







As you can see, they don�t look that much different. As the velocity increased, they simply got a little bit shorter and shed a bit more of their weight. Their frontal diameters remained virtually constant. At the front of the mushroom they were all right around .48�. On some of the lower velocity impacts the overall diameter was a bit more because the nose jacket hadn�t broken off or folded tightly against the shank yet. This didn�t seem to affect penetration much though. I think the area right at the front of the bullet is probably the determining factor there. But the higher velocity bullets did penetrate slightly more�the opposite of how the X and Sciroccos did. Although I would guess an impact that simulated a hard hit at close range might have increased the penetration of the XLC over the �normal range� test had some of the petals come off. I would also guess such an impact with the Scirocco would make it look like you�ve seen in other tests here�totally inside-out, without very good penetration. But that�s just my conjecture....

Like I said before, each bullet does different things better. For the all around performer, I think the Accubond will suit me well.

It will open up easily at extreme ranges with minimal resistance. The Scirocco is probably even better in this respect. A shot on a deer at long range clean through the lungs? I�d guess a Scirocco will do more damage and kill more quickly. That�s a good bullet for this application. I�m not so sure the XLC is. Both the other bullets are making huge wound channels before the XLC is even opened up. I don�t feel it would be a good choice for this situation.

Elk in the ass at 20 yards? That�s what X bullets are made for. They are they obvious choice (in my test at least, I�d expect the Failsafe to be similar). Extreme penetration. The AccuBond isn�t going to do quite as well in this situation but it will beat the pants off the Scirocco�or any other �standard� bullet for that matter I�m convinced. While it won�t be an X bullet, it should get the job done. It isn�t going to flatten out like a pancake, it isn�t going to come apart, it�s simply going to expand to about 1.5 times its diameter, hold about 2/3 of its weight and keep going�much like the Nosler Partitions I used for so long.

So, it looks--at least to me from my testing--like this bullet will be a good terminal performer in about any situation in which I could put it. Maybe not the best for that particular situation, but it should get the job done.

Here's a pic of them all lined up:



Of course none of this means a damn thing if you don�t hit where you�re aiming.

[ 08-19-2003, 12:44: Message edited by: Jon A ]

Accuracy:

Well, how�s this?



That group measures 2 ��. It was shot in variable 5-15 MPH (my estimate) crosswinds�at 400 yards. I had 7 clicks to the left dialed in. I was leaning over the hood of my Trailblazer on a couple sandbags�not exactly the "ideal" bench rest set-up. But it was good enough to tell me how accurate this load is. That�s actually the first and only group I shot from 400 with that load that wasn�t from field positions. I like to �quit while I�m ahead.�

This group really made my day. I had spent most of the day getting the crap beaten out of me by the rifle while shooting shotgun patterns with the H870 load. This group told me that I had found my load, it validated the rifle�s accuracy and my shooting ability and it was a good note to end on for the day. I had one big bloody (literally) smile on my face after shooting it. Just imagine if there had been no wind and I had been shooting off a real bench?

Also, it wasn�t just the group size�it was also the fact that it was perfectly dead centered that made me feel so good. Ever since I�ve become a �scope clicker� that�s begun to mean more and more to me. Most of the good groups you see (that people brag about and show pictures of here) are a couple inches high and an inch or two to the left or the right. So you can cover the group with a quarter. Big deal. Could you actually hit a quarter? Most will say �sure, I just need to adjust the scope or my aim.� So why don�t you? That shows great precision, and poor accuracy. It shows you might have the potential for good accuracy but too many people never find out. You might be able to hit the quarter at 100 or 200 yards if you adjusted the scope.... What about farther? �Well, I�d hold over the amount it says on this trajectory chart, since I can shoot a �� group at 100 that means I�ll shoot 2� at 400 and I�ll be dead on....�

Whatever. Show it to me. Ballistic Coefficients are meaningless you say? You can shoot �� groups at 100 with your semi-spitzers? It�s the �� group at 100 that�s meaningless. A rifle only capable of 5 MOA groups is more than accurate enough to kill a deer or an elk at 100 yard. But you think that accuracy means you�re capable of similar results where it really matters. But you haven�t actually tried. Try it. Show me. Shoot a � MOA group at 400 yards in the real world where there is at least a little bit of wind. When you can�t hit a damn thing in the wind at that range you�ll realize how meaningless your 100 yard group is.

Of course if you never take a shot at game at over 250 yards or so, it really is meaningless. So just ignore the above. However, many who say things like the above will not pass on a 400 yd shot at the trophy elk of a lifetime. I don�t think that�s right.

Sorry for the rant.

But that�s another reason I�ve been waiting for a bullet like this. People who say BC�s don�t matter don�t have a clue about ballistics and/or have no experience shooting at long range when there�s a wind. There, I said it. Prove me wrong!

When I made that gong over a decade ago and measured out the ranges, it was a serious eye-opener for me. I would shoot �� groups with my 7-08 at 100 yards at the O�Connor prescribed 3� high and thought I was ready to nail anything short of 500 yards. Shooting at that thing was sobering. My �� groups at 100 didn�t magically turn into 2� groups at 400. My computer generated trajectory chart was off. And the damn wind! How can one hit anything with this wind!?!

I mean it. Those of you who thing BC�s �don�t matter� or are �overrated,� start turning your tiny 100 yd groups with your fancy expensive low BC bullets into decent groups out where accuracy matters�on a windy day. Or your super high velocity light bullet loads. Yeah, they�re flat shooting. But can you really hit anything with them out where that trajectory matters?

I really do mean this as a challenge as I�m trying to encourage people to actually practice at the ranges at which they�d attempt a shot on game. If your �one hole group� becomes some on and some off the target at 400 yards; well, aren�t you glad you found that out at the range instead of by wounding an animal?

Here�s a 5 �� group shot in close to the same conditions as above. From 700 yards. I had 12 clicks of windage dialed in.



Yup, it�s a bit low. I was going off the computer printout for the faster H870 load. Glad I wasn�t shooting round noses!

Don�t get me wrong, I�m not a �Long Range Hunter.� But I do have great respect for those who are and have learned much from them. No, I�m just a regular hunter who wants to have the skills and the tools to make a longer than average shot should the conditions call for it. As you can see, I don�t take making that choice lightly. I want every advantage I can get. I want the confidence of knowing I�ve made that exact same shot in practice many times before.

I�ve never shot at a game animal anywhere near 700 yards away. But after being able to �whack the gong� over and over again from that range, how do you think my accuracy is at 400 yds? That�s right�it�s a chipshot. You see, most people practice at closer ranges than they will shoot on game. I submit to you, that�s backward. Practice and become proficient at ranges farther than you plan to shoot while hunting. It makes so much sense. Why don�t more people do it?

Sorry for writing such a book. I know many out there are interested in results with the AccuBonds, especially in the 300 RUM and Retumbo is a natural powder of choice. I wanted to give everybody my results in as great a detailed form as I could.

Also, I know many must have wondered why in the hell I�ve been so excited about this bullet since it came out. And why I actually like getting the crap beaten out of me by my 300 RUM. Hopefully I explained why I feel the way I do and why I like the things I like well enough for most to understand.

Of course I know many will never understand! That's OK. I don't mind.

[ 08-19-2003, 13:20: Message edited by: Jon A ]

One last thing I forgot to mention:

For years I used the X Bullet because I was in love with its terminal performance. But I could never get them shooting any better than 1 1/4 MOA from my rifle. If I'm actually going to shoot at a game animal farther than 300 yds, that matters to me. Partitions have only shot a little better from this rifle. I've had better luck with them in other rifles, however.

That's another reason I have been looking for a bullet like this--once you taste the accuracy of a Matchking, you don't want to go back. You want to use a bullet that will at least come close.

The AccuBond does that in my rifle.

[ 08-19-2003, 13:19: Message edited by: Jon A ]

Jon,
An excellent, thorough and accurate post on the realities of long range shooting and the responsibilities of those who wish to attempt it. Amen on the wind, it's much trickier than trajectory. I'm sure that elk will be taken cleanly if you need to stretch past 300 yards.

Jon, thanks so much for posting these results. I am totally in agreement with you. I practice out to 500 yards with my big game rifles and out to 800 yards with my long range varmint rifle. Once I get my 300 Winchester Magnum back I will be trying the Nosler 200 Accubond. From your tests it truly does look like just the bullet I have been looking for. The Nosler 160 Accubond is shooting extremely well in my 7mm Rem Mag. I consistently get sub 0.75 MOA groups out to 400 yards (often they have been under 0.5 MOA). Rufous.

Jon, nice work! i am loving those accubonds out of my custom 7mm stw. i believe i have found the perfect bullet for what i hunt. we will see come fall. awesome bc, great penetration, and excellent weight retention. thanks for all of the time you put into that post. i enjoyed it!

Jon A... what did you fire them into and how did you prepare the medium? Also... penetration of the bullets, in aprox percent if you dont have exact numbers.

Good work John---you deserve the reward you got!! CONGRATS!! Don Kraky

Jon, that is a heck of a write up. You definitely have covered your bases on this topic.

Your brother Dave sent me the link and I recognized it as coming from AR. I spend most my time in the Africa/Big Game Hunting Forums. Funny to "know" someone else on this board.

Brad

Thanks guys. I'm glad you all liked it.

That's funny, Brad. So you're the guy who goes to Africa all the time he was telling me about.

Smallfry, the penetration tests were into wood (dry cottonwood). It isn't quite as hard on bullets as water or solid flesh. This has worked well over the years since you can fire a round at full muzzle velocity into it and the resulting bullet looks much like one recovered from game at 2-300 yds. I only got accurate measurements on the "long range" simulation--16", 18" and 20" were the results for the Scirocco, AccuBond and XBT, respectively.

Nice Jon! Thanks for all the info, I jumped into a load of 90gr Retumbo seated to fit the mag and were quite a bit deeper than it was on the pressure testing I'd done with it before. It was 3.835", .015" into the lands at 62,500 kpsi and it went 3080 fps. The load fell to 3045 fps and I didn't check the pressure that time but suspect it's at about 60 kpsi now.

The load grouped under an inch, even while making minute scope adjustments to zero it up perfectly at 100yds. I'm guessing it would have held .7 MOA had I not been cranking the dials and just let all 7 or 8 fly.

Any way, killed a fork horn bull yesterday with the bullet. I killed him at 180, 189 yds, I forget now but, the bullet didn't exit after breaking the off side shoulder, still going to see what I can find in the shoulder when we cut it up. I didn't have time in the field, rain was moving in fast and I was by myself... There's more to the story; I fired twice but, he wasn't bothered by the first shot and stuch his nose into the cows ass in front of him so I let him have another pill. This time he spun around and smashed the ground at the same time... hard.

The shots were taken off hand and hit somewhere about 8" apart on the horizontal. The one hole in the hide and ribs appeared to be STOPPED by the rib it hit ?????? it didn't enter the chest cavity but might have turned ??????, again the rain coming fast, didn't have time to investigate but I will probably later today. Gotta get to the bottom of this mystery.

That load looks like a dandy in your rifle, thanks for turning me onto it. I hoped a reduced load of what you found to work might work in mine also, preliminary testing looks good. I limited my range because I didn't have time to make a known drop chart, just used Exbal on the Palm with the Nosler BC of .588, figured that would keep me on a Moose to 500 and maybe a bit more.

Yeah, I'm the one! You need to talk to him and the two of you join me, JD and a few others in Africa next June. What could be better than further field test on African game to see how the bullets hold up!

Brad

Congrats on the bull, Brent! So, one round penetrated the chest, broke the offside shoulder but didn't exit. Hmmm. Forgive my lack of Alaskan moose knowledge, but how big are those things at that age? Any live-weight guesses? Anyway, definately post a pic of that bullet when you find it.

I also hope you figure out what happened with the first shot. That doesn't sound very good.

I'd love to, Brad. But time and money won't allow a trip to Africa that soon. One of these days though....

I recovered 6 7mm 160 Accubonds yesterday that I fired from my 7mm Rem Mag into a cardboard box filled with dry newspaper. Do you think that is a more severe medium than the dry cottonwood?Probably would be similar. I shot 2 at 250 yards, 2 at 400 yards and 2 at 500 yards. Velocity at 250 would be 2740 fps; at 400 it would be 2500 fps and at 500 it would be 2340 fps. They were all fired from the prone position using my Kramer snipepod. The 2 at 250 were 1.15" apart. The 2 at 400 were 2.64" apart and the 2 at 500 were 5.8" apart. The bullets looked very much like the ones you recovered. Held together very well, significant expantion but with the expanded nose folded back over the heel without too large a diameter like the Swift Sciroccos tend to have. Retained weight ranged from 96 to 98 grains for an average of 60.6%. They look very much like a partition would look. I think they will be an awesome big game bullet. Rufous.

[ 08-23-2003, 08:43: Message edited by: rufous ]

Dry newspaper is a tougher test than the cottonwood. Even tougher than that is dry magazines, neatly and tightly stacked. That has been my "torture test" of bullets in the past. Even a Partition will look like it had a bad day when shot into that at the muzzle. Most standard bullets will completely come appart. I haven't done that test with these bullets yet but I plan to.

Nice post Jon. I will have to work up a long range load and test my skills on your gong. Maybe we could get Dave and Snakelover in on a friendly match.

Jon,

I recovered "the" bullet, there was only one hit, and it must have been the second shot. More later, the wife's waiting on me to go finish cuttin the meat up. I snapped a pic for ya. The bullet looked perfect, as I should have expected I guess!

More on the other hole later...

That's good to hear, Brent. I don't think I've ever told anybody before that I was glad they missed, but your description of the first bullet did worry me.

Brent,

Congrats on the moose! I'm still out looking for one myself. Hoping to make it four years in a row now. Came close the other night, but the little guy grew one point too many on his right antler.

Looks like the Butte area in your pictures.

Jon,

I was all wet!!! Thank God. To show you how observant I was as I hustled to get the thing out of there, I hit the bull in the shoulder on the way "in" not on the off side. I did find the bullet in the off side shoulder, but it just missed the bone on the other side and was barely under the edge of the meat on the "outside" of it. Still haven't checked its retained weight, forgot it at my dads place. I'll get a pic and weight for ya today. The other supposed bullet hole turned out to be a blown artery that left a hole and big blood shot pocket around it... not a bullet hole. There "must" have been "no" hole in the hide as I had been sure I looked for one. Assumptions sure do make an ass of ones self don't they! If there was a hole in the hide, must have been from my knife I suppose. Kinda hard to go back and look at some thing afterwards... You can see in the pix the hole where the artery burst there at the tip of the knife, this was after the skinned over part of the meat and blood pocket had been skinned away tho. Quite a difference in it and the hole through the first rib there! BTW, the bullet busted through ribs on both sides too. It actually snapped the rib in half about 6" above the entrance point before it blew through the rib too. I wish I'd taken a pic of the shoulder bones missing too, but the camera batteries died on me. This is a good bullet, short range or long, no doubt in my mind.

Glad the mystery's clear now. Must have pulled the first shot low I'm guessing, the other shot hit 6-8" left of my POA so, I better check the offhand skills at the range today. The gun was sighted in from the Harris bipod, but I doubt POI would have been that different with an offhand shot... we'll see. The bbl is freefloated....

bearstalker,

That is up near Friday creek past the Butte area. Good luck on continuing the success, I had 5 or 6 in a row up till last year when I got skunked. I almost got skunked the year before that too, two days left and I finally got the drop on one. I was begining to wonder. Man, I put some time in the field the last couple years after them. I tried to keep that out of my head this year.

Sidebyside, that would be fun. Too bad we're all on opposite sides of the country.

Thanks for the info, Brent. I'm glad you got the first shot figured out.

I took some more pics for those who like them:



That's pretty self-explanitory.





By popular demand I've included a 240 SMK in the lineup that I tested earlier in the same medium. It retained 41% of its weight counting the jacket and core together (they were found in one piece but the core is free to fall out). All of them I recovered looked pretty much the same--expanded down all the way to their bases. I also tested the 180 XBT and Scirocco at the same time. While the MK may not be as photogenic, its penetration equaled the XBT, was better than the Scirocco--and the wound channel was huge, easily the biggest of the three.

Here's pix of the bullet recovered from the Moose. It weighed 133gr and held up wonderfully.







Jon,

sorry, almost forgot. I'd guess the whole Moose weighed in somewhere abouts 600-700 lbs and meat alone was 250 lbs, just a guess at this point. Hide, head, guts and legs from the knee down must be pushing 250# on even a small one like this. I'm guessing I had near 450-500 lbs of bone and meat in the wheeler, and alot of that was just backbone, ribs and big leg bones.

I had one freakin bungie cord and one tow strap on me to tie on all you see in the wheeler, so I left the two hind quarters and lower back together and the just took the legs off the front half so stuff wasn't sliding out of my box. What a bitch loading them by myself, must have taken me a half an hour to get them two halves in that box. If it wasn't for that black tote box I had there with me to work them up onto first, then into the wheeler's box, I'd never have gotten 'em up there. Somehow I managed to get all my gear and meat strapped on... barely.

Brent,

Thanks for sharing your experiences and photos with us! Once again, congrats on the moose. I'm glad to see someone has got some field experience with the Accubond. Looks like it equals that of the Partition. Would you use your current setup (rifle and load) for both species of bear?

Bearstalker,

Thanks. I wouldn't think twice, either bear would be a hurtin unit, even in heavy bone by the looks of this bullet. However, if I was going "after" a big browny, I'd take the big Ruger 416wby, that's why I got the big bore. More of a sledge hammer than any thirty just by design...

I like the Accubond's high BC, and it's accuracy is as good as I've got damn near in this rifle with the first load.

Nice pics, Brent. Thanks for posting them. Yup, it looks just like it "should."

Great info...Thanx

Hey guys, thanx for these wonderfull posts. I've been considering the 225gr Accubond in my 338 Win Mag for elk this winter but was unsure how they would hold up. You guys have answered this for me. Now I need to get working on a load and go poke one in a cow elk.

Has anyone done a comparison ( long range performance and penetration) with the 200 gr Nosler Partition? I shoot the Partition in my 300 H&H and I'd be interested to see which one has better penetration. jorge

Any other on game experiences?

Has anyone noticed higher pressure with these bullet compared say ....to partitions?

[ 11-24-2003, 19:11: Message edited by: POP ]

Jon, an interesting comparison. I was just wondering though, if the 200 grain accubond didn't peel back as far as the scirocco because it has an extra 20 grains of length, and because it is travelling a little slower and not due to it being constructed any tougher than the scirocco? It would be interesting to repeat the test with the 180 grain accubonds when they come out and see if they peel back as far.