It would seem the only negative reports pertain to the .338 cal 225 grs AB - in most cases shot out of a .338 Win Mag. Could it be that this particular AB had a problem?? (As improbable as it may seem)

- mike

No Jorge I did not read them, but I will. Probably should have done that before running my mouth. I had never used AB's before but they were well under an inch at 100 which is why I decided to take them. I had some 300 grn SAF's but wanted to flatten things out a bit. They sure did a number on the game I shot.
I did not mean to pop off too soon.

Funny you should ask. I just got home from the taxidermists. I brought back with me the bullet that went through both shoulders of my big black bear in Alberta. The bullet was recovered on the far side skin, perfect mushroom but no chance to weigh it yet. .338, 225 AB/Winchester factory ammo. 12 yards. Dropped the big boar (500+ pounds) right there. I'm booked for next year and will be shooting the same gun, same ammo.

Dropped 2 bears with this bullet in 4 seconds. Works for me.

Everything I've ever shot with the 200 AB from my 300 UM has dropped too. All pass throughs. I'll continue to use it.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
The ABs in question were out of a 338 at around 2800 fps.

Given the good results others have had with Accubonds in other calibers, is it possible that the ones made in .338 were defective, especialy in earlier runs?

Lloyd, et al: A "bad box" of ammo is certainly within the realm of probability, but given the fact there were MANY testimonials of bad performance I think one should take heed.

Doc: I think the fact that there were many incidents of documented poor performance and just as many of good performance such as your experiences, but there are just to many "buts" for me to give the AB a pass in the consistency test that's all.

No way I'd consider using them but that's just my opinion based on what I was able to gather from the facts posted. jorge

What I don't understand is why some people are bashing the Accubonds and they've never used one.

Todate I've shot well over 200 of them. I've taken 4 deer, 1 bobcat and 1 antelope with the 140gr at 2990fps out of my 270win without any problems. But I'm hearing some people on the south bitch diet who hasn't even pulled the trigger on one.

I never owned a Yugo either but I think I'm on pretty safe ground bashing those also even though I never drove one.
Same goes for bullets or anything else. If enough CREDIBLE people tell me that based on their experiences that "dog don't hunt," well, I "ain't hunting with it." I think the likes of JohnS and Allen Day are enough for *me*, you can make your own choices and you obviosuly have and that's fine too! jorge

Mule Deer and Terry Blauwkamp are pretty "CREDIBLE" people. Reading between the lines I take it you feel that neither I nor my experience with accubonds are "CREDIBLE". Which is fine you can choose to believe who or what ever you want, it still dosen't change the fact that I do have actual experience with this bullet and you DON'T. What I find disturbing is that on this board and 24 hour you dogmatically bash this product witout any experience in the use of this bullet. That I don't understand.

.I never said you weren't credible Mark, not at all , same goes for Terry ( whom I know personally). But what you are obviosuly failing to grasp is the concept of CONSISTENCY. Even though your experiences with the AB are great as well as Terry's, the fact that Allen's wasn't flies in the face of the very description of consistent. If you are content with that kind of reliability, FINE. I'm not. What can't you understand about that? I thought the "Yugo analogy" illustrated the concept perfectly, apparently I'm mistaken. It's not hard. jorge

Well, don't get me wrong. I've had some shady experiences with the 140 and 200.

I will not use the 140 again on deer from my 270. I had a nice mulie dead to rights at 45 yards, dropped him. When my brother and I went to recover him, he jumped up and ran off like we spooked him from his bed. Never got him.

On one batch of 200 grain bullets that I load for the 300 RUM, 2 of the tips fell off for no reason. I sent the other box back from the same lot and Nosler sent me some partitions per my request.

But, since I already have the rest of the 2 boxes of factory 338wm on hand, I'll use them.

Tip or no tip, the 200 from my 300RUM has not failed me on deer or antelope...just too much bullet, so I'll continue to use those till they're gone. Not sure I'll buy anymore.

I guess we'll just have to disagree on the Accubonds and that I still don't understand your dog in this fight.

BTW I do agree with you that there is better bullets for african large game, such as the swift. I'd be happy to hunt pretty much anything with a swift, just wish they wasn't $40+ a box.

Roger we agree to diasgree on consistency. As far as my dog in this fight, my "money" is a better term as in I'm not wasting my money on a bullet that for every good review it gets, there is an equally opposite bad review on it. And wasn't african game what started this whole discussion? jorge

I was talking to a good friend on this subject over coffee this morning. Seems he, also, had a bad experience with the .284" 140 gr. Accubond from his 7mm SAUM. Seems he got about the same results as I did with the same bullet from my STW.......except he got more bone than I did. The bullet penetrated a whitetail's humerus on the off side. The exit hole was not discernably larger than the entrance. With snow on the ground, there was a faint mist of blood where the deer was standing but NO blood trail. The deer was recovered 90 or 100 yards away. Luckily there was snow.

Mark65x55-
You've taken four deer...I've taken three mule deer with them, which makes our experience on deer pretty equal in their use. I've probably went through 10 boxes of them in various calibers, bench shooting and practice sessions. You've had four good results on deer and I've had three poor ones. Our bullets didn't come out of the same boxes, nor were they all the same diameters. When two people get totally opposite results on a like number of similar sized animals there is something wrong with the product...it isn't consistent. And regardless of what brand or style it is, that isn't good because it makes us wonder if the next one we fire at a game animal will perform properly...or not. If I were sitting on the sidelines, reading all of the comments generated by these bullets and trying to decide whether or not to try them I know I wouldn't bother, not with the mixed results they have generated thus far.

I plan to do some more testing in couple of weeks on caribou, 165gr Accubonds out of a 300wsm. I'll let you know how they work.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:


I will not use the 140 again on deer from my 270. I had a nice mulie dead to rights at 45 yards, dropped him. When my brother and I went to recover him, he jumped up and ran off like we spooked him from his bed. Never got him.

If the deer was never recovered, then it is impossible to say what kind, if any, bullet failure was involved. The shooter could have simply muffed the shot, or an unseen piece of vegatation could have deflected the bullet so that it just nicked the backbone, dropping the animal momentarily.

Presuming bullet failure on an unrecovered animal is an unsupportable conclusion.

Accubonds may indeed be trash, but this incident is hardly useful evidence of such a hypothesis.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:


I will not use the 140 again on deer from my 270. I had a nice mulie dead to rights at 45 yards, dropped him. When my brother and I went to recover him, he jumped up and ran off like we spooked him from his bed. Never got him.

If the deer was never recovered, then it is impossible to say what kind, if any, bullet failure was involved. The shooter could have simply muffed the shot, or an unseen piece of vegatation could have deflected the bullet so that it just nicked the backbone, dropping the animal momentarily.

Presuming bullet failure on an unrecovered animal is an unsupportable conclusion.

Accubonds may indeed be trash, but this incident is hardly useful evidence of such a hypothesis.

Thanks for your input but my shot placement was perfect. I absolutely and totally 100% DISAGREE with just about everything you said. That experience alone is all the evidence I need. I've killed a LOT of deer at 50 yards and under with a 270 and this was the first one I didn't recover. 45 yards with a Leupold 4.5 x14 set at 4.5 is PLENTY of mag at that distance. I've been shooting that setup for over 10 years. There wasn't a thing in the way. You may find it "hardly useful evidence" if you want but I'd say it's just like the bigfoot thread. Seeing is believing. And I never said the bullet was trash. I said I'd continue their use, just not the 140/270.

I was there, you weren't. I know what I saw and can draw any conclusion I want, and I did. Presuming bullet failure on an unrecovered animal is exactly that, BULLET FAILURE! The bullet absolutely failed, 100%, otherwise I'd have had mulie straps that night.

THIS shooter didn't muff a thing, so don't place my post under the microscope and raise the 'human error' flag, couldn't have been a bullet failure, no not at all, the animal wasn't recovered. What part of 'dropped him' and 'he ran off' don't you get? If that isn't a definition of a failure, what the hell is??? It's automatically human error now? BS. Quite frankly I don't appreciate the implication that I screwed up a chip shot, cause that just didn't happen. Furthermore, if I dump an animal with a lung shot, and 4 minutes later it gets up and runs then the bullet failed. There's 2 sides to this whole bullet failure thing, and my conclusion is pretty simple. Hit deer in lungs, deer runs off more than a mile=BULLET FAILURE.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
...or an unseen piece of vegatation could have deflected the bullet so that it just nicked the backbone, dropping the animal momentarily.

You know, I honestly and truly think that about 99% of the time I'm a pretty fair and pleasant guy on these forums, but are you serious? I know quite a bit about the spine, and you don't just 'nick' a vertebrae with a bullet at over 2000fps and cause only temporary shock or paralysis. If you nick any portion of the bone, it will percuss the disc, or exiting nerve roots/dorsal ganglia, etc. Plus the bones are vascular. You hit one with a bullet or even fragment with enough velocity, and it will cause venous bleed. A fractured vertebrae is extraordinarily painful. Causing a lot more than a 'momentary' drop of an animal. Sorry, there's just too much neurovasculature there to do something that temporary.

YOUR statement is " hardly useful evidence of such a hypothesis."

Thanks anyway, but you are wrong. It's called deductive reasoning and logic, based on what is known about this whole hunting thing. The bullet FAILED, end of story...not a hypothesis.

I'm not taking sides either way in the arguement here but just today a buddy was at the house with a story and a bullet that may somehow relate....
While muzzleloader hunting with an inline and 50cal barnes sabots he took a downwards shot under his tree stand at a 160 class buck trying to drill between the shoulder blades. At the shot the deer went flat and was kicking. He didn't even reload his muzzleloader and started down out of the tree at which time the deer started moving it's head up and by the time he got back into his stand and reloaded the deer had gotten up jumped a fence and ran off........
During rifle season he ended up seeing the very same deer and shot it. While skinning the deer he found the almost perfectly expanded X-bullet inside the back sourrounded by fatty tissue. Almost perfectly expanded in that two of the petals were bent almost straight back where they had shot a time off! No BS I really saw the bullet today, I'll try and get a picture of the shot-off antler tine when it comes back from the taxidermist. Aparently shooting through the tine slowed the bullet down enough to knock the deer silly but not kill it.
I guess the moral of the story is that strange things can and do happen occasionally. And sometimes the most important thing to know is what you don't know..............DJ

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
While skinning the deer he found the almost perfectly expanded X-bullet inside the back sourrounded by fatty tissue.

Inside the back where? That bullet FAILED too.

Doc, my buddy post one here every once in a while under the name "whiteeyetatoo". He could probably give a more accurate description of exactly where in relation to the spine he found the bullet. I'll see if I can get him to chime in.
I think there would have been a dead deer on the first shot if the antler hadn't been in the way, so I'm not so sure I would say that the bullet "failed", as much as my friends marksmanship (and failure to reload).
but again I'll try to get Whiteeye to retell the story firsthand, I just brought it up because it was so fresh on my mind reading this post and seeing the bullet today.................DJ

Hey Doc, Let me encourage you to go back "two" posts and EDIT it slightly. I don't really think you are in the same group as "Sledder".
-----

I've stayed out of the Bullet discussion because I've never shot an Accubond. I have shot more regular old Standard Grade Bullets than most folks on this Board will ever see, a lot of Premium Grade Bullets, and have never had what many folks refer to as a Bullet Failure - on-game.

I have used Bullets too heavy for the Game and distance the shot was taken, which resulted in being able to hone my tracking skills. Likewise, I have used Bullets too light for the Game and distance the shot was taken, which also resulted in my being able to hone my tracking skills.
---

Not saying people don't have Bullets act strangely. One of the guys who posts from over in England related the complete Failure of a Nosler Partition on this Board one time, on a tiny Roe Deer. He said the first shot left a "superficial wound", which makes no sense at all, but I believe him. I have no idea at all what caused that end result. He still uses Nosler Partitions and I do too when appropriate.

The one thing that people seem to be missing is that all Bullets are "Man Made". Occasionally something goofy will happen, things just don't go correctly, and it will slip right on out the door to the customer.

The Accubond design seems to be a good one. Same as the Hornady Interbond. And both appear to be just a bit better than the good old Speer Hot-Cor, which will kill ANY Deer in existance.
---

But, as has happened to me, you can go too far in either direction on the Bullet Designs - too tough(little to no expansion) or too soft(too much expansion) for the Game and the distance. And sometimes strange results just happen with the best possible bullet for the situation.

If you don't like a particular Bullet, don't use it. Way too many good Bullets are available for anyone not to be able to have one perform any way they want.

But, there are no Perfect Bullets in existance for ALL situations. If any of you think so, you still have a bit more first-hand, On-Game Performance to observe.

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
I guess the moral of the story is that strange things can and do happen occasionally. And sometimes the most important thing to know is what you don't know..............DJ

Good one DJ!

I agree with Stonecreek on his posts about a bullet coming close to an animals spine. I also like Accubonds.

Almost anything can happen when a bullet hits. Thats why I made the case for "A Large Humane Wound".

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Doc, Let me encourage you to go back "two" posts and EDIT it slightly. I don't really think you are in the same group as "Sledder".

Who is sledder? Yes, I was pretty pissed off last night after reading the post, but I get really quite tired of those who always jump on the "oh, he lost a deer, it has to be shooter error first, then something else" wagon. I'm not saying you can't 'sting' an animal with a shot but I had all the time in the world and I touched off the shot as I always do, relaxed, on exhale, no problem. Post was edited. I still completely disagree with StoneCreek. Had I killed only 30-40 deer in my career, maybe I'd be more receptive to that post, but not in this case. I've just had too much experience with deer and a 270. The bullet failed. Or bigfoot ran off with the deer.

DJ, I'm very interested in reading more from your friend about shot placement and exactly where the bullet was located.

So who is sledder again?

Doc:

I presume to make no judgement of your experience or shooting ability. But the lack of the actual target (deer, in this case) on which to examine the wound prevents even the most experienced person from drawing a conclusion about the bullet's performance.

For example, assuming that your shot was as true as you believe, did the undesirable result come from the bullet "exploding on contact" and failing to penetrate? Or was it the opposite: complete failure to expand and resulting lack of trauma allowing the deer to recover its feet and flee a sufficient distance as to be unrecoverable? While either type of "failure" would be plausible, it is impossible to know which it is (although prejudice may convice you that it is one or the other.)

I have never used an Accubond on game, and have no opinion on them.

I have used a number of Partitions and have, as do most users, a high regard for them. However, I did once experience inappropriate performance with one, and on a modest-sized whitetail. It was hit on the point of the shoulder (quartering more-or less toward the shooter). Upon the shot, a gaping wound appeared that was clearly visible through the scope. From the deer's reaction, the wound was neither deep nor mortal, and after a running chase and four more shots (three that missed), the last lucky shot caught it in the neck and it was recovered. Inspection of the initial wound showed it to be superficial, and for whatever reason, the normally dependable Nosler Partition failed to act as expected and did not penetrate.

Now, in this instance the deer was recovered and the type of failure documented. In my experience this was approximately a 1-in-100 failure (99 being approximately the number of appropriate performances I've had from NP's). Had the deer gone unrecovered and had I had no other experiences with the Partition, would it have been reasonable of me to conclude that Partitions are unreliable? Hardly, I think, based on this one experience. Wouldn't you agree?

Again, I make no case in favor of Accubonds, nor do I question your shooting. I simply point out that you've jumped to a conclusion that is unsupportable by the evidence you have to offer. However, if, based on whatever scant evidence you have, you choose not to use Accubonds in the future, then more power to you. Many shooters seem to make their choices based on even less.

Sorry if my original post hit a nerve, but everything I said in it was logical and defensable. It was not meant to offend, merely to point out the problem with attempting to draw a conclusion from inconclusive evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Doc, Let me encourage you to go back "two" posts and EDIT it slightly. I don't really think you are in the same group as "Sledder".

Who is sledder? Yes, I was pretty pissed off last night after reading the post, but I get really quite tired of those who always jump on the "oh, he lost a deer, it has to be shooter error first, then something else" wagon. I'm not saying you can't 'sting' an animal with a shot but I had all the time in the world and I touched off the shot as I always do, relaxed, on exhale, no problem. Post was edited. I still completely disagree with StoneCreek. Had I killed only 30-40 deer in my career, maybe I'd be more receptive to that post, but not in this case. I've just had too much experience with deer and a 270. The bullet failed. Or bigfoot ran off with the deer.

DJ, I'm very interested in reading more from your friend about shot placement and exactly where the bullet was located.

So who is sledder again?

Typical sledder

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/...=375109315#375109315

quote:

While either type of "failure" would be plausible, it is impossible to know which it is (although prejudice may convice you that it is one or the other.)

What difference does it make what 'type' of failure it is? I could care less. The fact that if failed is conclusive enough. I already stated that I'd continue to use ABs in other calibers.

quote:

...everything I said in it was logical and defensable. .

So is everything I said.

quote:

... merely to point out the problem with attempting to draw a conclusion from inconclusive evidence.

I didn't attempt to draw a conclusion from inconclusive evidence. I drew a conclusion from a nonrecovered deer (conclusive evidence) that was hit in the lungs by a bullet that failed. After years of hunting, and quite a number of deer under my belt with very similar kill shots, I don't have to question anything. Pretty black and white. You can still call it a lack of evidence, distortion of the truth, whatever. By my definition, the bullet didn't do it's job. So lets just end this and agree to have our own manners of deciding what is evidence and what is not.

Hey Doc, Thanks for the Edit. Just wasn't you.

Sledder is under the mistaken impression that Foul Language is the sign of a man. And seems to include it as often as possible. He may actually have some firearms knowledge worth sharing, but it normally just isn't worth wading through his immature vocabulary to see.

Best of luck with the Tripple Shocks and the other Accubonds.

That kind of reminds me of a guy that went by RMK, from Wyoming...a former cop. I saw quite a few of his posts when I first joined and he was quite the potty mouth.

I'm not much for that crap either unless something REALLY gets under my skin...my wife will tell you, it takes a lot to get me in a bad mood. Then, I vent, I get over it, and then feel bad.

I remember some of the posts by RMK and they did destroy threads. Nothing useful was included after the Threads fell into that mess.

I guess I might be the "only" person on the Board that NEVER gets in a Bad Mood. Naw, it happens to nearly everyone(except Bartche aka Roger).

Some of the very best information changes hands when people disagree. Generally the folks have a strong opinion based on their own first-hand experience and have difficulty understanding how anyone else could draw a different conclusion.

And there are always a "few" people trying to make themselves appear to be something they really aren't. Generally easy to see through them, even for the Beginners.

Had an old boss tell me one time, "The moment they make you mad, you are close to loosing the argument. Just keep stating proveable Facts and eventually both sides come to a point of agreement." That was based on both sides having the proper education and experience for the issue at hand.

For example, I could "tell you" how to doctor and it would be a real short time before everyone saw through that fiasco.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
While skinning the deer he found the almost perfectly expanded X-bullet inside the back sourrounded by fatty tissue.

Inside the back where? That bullet FAILED too.

One inch to the right of his spine, between the shoulder blades, about 1 inch under the skin, after one month, the fat had totally engulfed the bullet and the skin healed over. This buck displayed a dead right there position as the smoke cleared, I was stunned when he raised his head got up and lumbered off before I could reload my Encore. The only time in my life that I didn't have my preloads ready. Still another lessone to e learned after 27 years of deer hunting. Oh well, he is dead and on my wall. Two whacks with the 140 TSX out of the STW did him in. Same stand too, he just wouldn't leave me alone.

The previous day I whacked a 350 pound porker at 80 yards behind the shoulder and got good penetration, not to mention dropping him like a rock.

Wow, this thread has gotten alot of response.

The sales success is a great example of advertising by Nosler. There are many bullets better, but we hear so much about the AB's. I think I read something about the AB designed to shed metal for a smaller frontal area to insure penetration.... If so, it failed. Published penetration tests show the IB's outpenetrating and outretaining with large frontal areas The IB's cost less and on average shoot within .25MOA (never noticable in a hunting situation) of the AB. My hunting partner hit an Elk in the ham with his 06 @ 80yrds, bullet recovered in front of offside ribs under hide, 89% retention after passing through 30" of Elk at up close velocity, plenty of penetration, alot less $ than AB's. Can't figure out why Hornady did not do more to advertise their IB.....

Deke.

Here's a test where the accubond only retained about 13% of original wt.......ha ha..

http://longrangehunting.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat...2&an=0&page=0#120702

I, like Terry, had great performance out of a 180gr AB in 300 Win Mag in Africa. I only recovered one from a Sable and it was absolutely perfect mushroom under the hide on the off shoulder.

I have had good luck with 160 Accubonds in 7mm Ultra when used on Mule Deer. However you might go over to 24 hour campfire and see what Allen Day experienced with them on a recent safari. 225gr .338 and not good.

Well, I have watched this thread for quite a while now, and it has at times peaked my interest. However, until now I haven't really wanted to put the time and effort into posting my feelings on the Accubonds, but I believe I will do so now.

We (myself, family and good friends) have a had a fair amount of experience with the Nosler Accubonds...all in the .308 caliber guise. Let me relate some of the experiences:

4x4 Mule Deer - Hit in the neck, complete penetration as expected with the exit being about the size of a quarter - .300 Winchester Magnum, 200 grain Bullet. Muzzle Velocity of ~3,000 fps - 100 yard shot.

5x5 Bull Elk - Hit in the shoulder, penetration in to the vitals. Same bullet as above, 30 yard shot. Recovered bullet -


Cow elk - Going away, hit in the spine. Bullet took out 12 - 16" off spine before veering off into muscle. Same bullet as above. Shot was about 150 yards. Recovered Bullet-



5x5 Bull Elk - Killed by brother in law. Shot with a 180 grain Accubond out of a .300 RUM. Bull was 70 yards. First shot hit in the spine and was recovered. Retained weight was 51%. Two more follow up shots passed through.

Cow Elk - Killed by same brother in law and same load. Shot at 450-500 yards. Complete pass through.

Cow Elk - Killed by another brother in law. 200 grain Accubond. Shot at 50 yards. Complete pass through.

Good friend and family. They shoot a .300 H&H Magnum with 180 grain Accubonds. In the past two years they have harvested 6 elk, including a 405 7/8's bull. Nothing has gone anywhere. They are extremely discriminating about the taking of game, and they trust them whole heartedly.

That is quite a few animals, mostly elk that have dropped to these bullets without a dissatisfying experience.

Your mileage may vary, but we are definitely in the Accubonds corner.

I will have a nephew shooting the .277 caliber 140 grain version this fall, and I am working a load up with the .257 Caliber 110 grainer in my .257 Roy.

quote:

Originally posted by mark65x55:


BTW I do agree with you that there is better bullets for african large game, such as the swift. I'd be happy to hunt pretty much anything with a swift, just wish they wasn't $40+ a box.

And did not the BC of a brick!

I apologize for my post above. I jumped in and responded in a hurry without realizing that Allen's experience had already been related and discused. Anyway, there are too many satisfied users to discount. I believe everyone. Maybe the problem is quality control by Nosler. Maybe Allen got a bad lot of bullets. I like Accubonds but will at least do some testing before I rely on them in the future. Especially the 225gr .338s.

I have read every post and read many other forums on bullet performance. I am no expert nor claim to be an expert. I have not seen it all and probably never will.

However, I have come to the following conclusions. I have killed many animals in North America. I have not been to Africa and probably never go ($$$). You cannot compare how a bullet performs one time against someone elses expirence without first looking at all the factors, such as hair, bone, muscle mass, fat thickness and density, angle, velocity etc. etc. etc.

I have jumped to conclusions when I see what is perceived as a bullet failure. But when I stepped back and looked at the whole picture it was obvious there were other factors. Why did the Scirrocco blow up on the shoulder of that deer. When I stepped back and looked at it, I realized it hit a branch just prior to impact. It also does not help that the impact speed was probably 2800+ fps.

Again, I am no expert, but my opinion is that bullets such as accubonds, scirrocco, and others were not designed to strike something at such a high speed and perform as advertised everytime. It simply is not possible.

I will continue to choose a bullet that has a decent track record and if it fails, I will not ponder on it, I will simply rack another round and fire again.

Humans are not perfect and nor will the things we make be perfect. Thats my nickel worth anyway.

JBD:

I'm taking 160's in my 7mm Ultramag this fall to Wyoming Muledeer hunting. I would like to hear more about your load and the game you killed with it.

Thanks!!

110grn Accubond over H4831 from a Tikka T3 in 25-06.
Poked it in the side, clipped the shoulder (dangit), seperated the heart from the lungs (lucky (not that I can't shoot true but, this was perfect)), out the other side with about a 1 1/2 to 2" hole.
Wasn't gonna look for the bullet since I didn't have a metal detector!