Ok, plenty of controversy surrounding the Accubond's. How about the Interbond? I'm primarily interested in the 180 gr 30 cal.

I have not used the 180 but the 165 gave me good results. I get groups right at 1" or slighlty less in my 300 WM.

I have shot two elk with this bullet. One at 33 yards, the other at 125. I got complete pentration with both (a double lung shot and one at the base of the neck angling back towards the shoulder). My exit holes were 2.25" average with good energy transfer. One dropped on the spot the other ran about 20 yards. The bullet worked well for deer as well, but seemed like it was a little too tough for smaller game. I prefer the SST for deer.

Well, that sounds dang good. Any shot even partially in an elk's neck is hard on a bullet. I've had 180 NP's fail to exit on two neck shot bulls!

i shot an elk in mongolia in the base of the neck from my 06 with a 180 N.P took the spine out completley and the bullet was under the skin
on the opposite side
last year i shot a number of pigs with the 180 gn partition and a good number did not exit and these were not large pigs which suprised me a bit
the interbonds are not as tough as the accubonds and if you hit some really tough bone they will completley fold back on them selves
regards daniel

quote:

the interbonds are not as tough as the accubonds and if you hit some really tough bone they will completley fold back on them selves

Daniel, have you personally seen this?

Thanks,

Brad

don't know if he has but I have, also had problems with the Interbond holding together...it killed everything I've shot them into dead enough for sure. But I've shot them into elk and moosein 180gr only to find bits and pieces of cooper/lead in the wound channel

Cats, that's not very encouraging. Did the bullets exit or was the shrapnel you describe what was left of a non-exiting bullet?

Thanks.

I've read two different tests in hunting magazines that showed that the Interbond had a higher retained weight after high velocity impacts with test media. The latest was the August issue of Petersen's Hunting.

My own epxerience reflects this. I have not shot an interbond into the shoulder of an elk, but I have shot through the spine at the base of the neck and some shoulder tissue on the far side. I still got an exit wound at 3200 fps (33yards). How much more can you ask for? Just out of curiosity what cartridge will you be using.

As a side note I think a lot of people confuse the regular interlock, the SST interlock, and the Interbond when having these discussions. They are not even close to the same.

Elkhunter, some posting on this forum believe one needs armor-piercing uranium-depleted ammo fired from 20mm canons to kill elk. All other bullets (especially Hornady SSTs, interbonds, etc) bounce off, after causing no more than a rather large unsightly bruise. And, there's no arguing about it - its's absolute truth.

I can personally attest to the worthyness of the old interlocks on game. I haven't tried the interbonds but it's hard to believe they're anything but fully acceptable for elk.

I think they will work great as long as you are not shooting them from a super dooper ultra howitzer. better penetration seems to come with slower velocities anyways. should be great out of an 06 or 308

Let me correct myself before someone jumps on me. When I said the Interbond retained more weight than other bullets in the test I was comparing it to the Accubond. I dont' think there's enough difference in those bullets to matter. Obviously the Barnes bullets, Swifts A frame and a few of the other expensive super bullets retained more weight than the Hornady. I do think the Hornady is the best bang for your buck in bonded bullets. It is also has a good BC and expands enough to give a large wound channel. If you want super penetration buy the Barnes Tripple Shock or see if you can obtain some depleted uranium.

The new uranium-depleted hide-bound piercing bullets from Barnoid Bullets kill with great penetration, but if that doesn't work, the residual radiation effect is extra deadly. Accuracy is not that important, because all you must do is hit near the animal - that is, within 15 ft. Sometimes the shock wave of a near miss is more than adequate to down the animal. When the latter occurs there's very little meat damage - hence sparing all that rare, important, and delectable inter-rib meat to be cooked on your birthday.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
The new uranium-depleted hide-bound piercing bullets from Barnoid Bullets kill with great penetration, but if that doesn't work, the residual radiation effect is extra deadly. Accuracy is not that important, because all you must do is hit near the animal - that is, within 15 ft. Sometimes the shock wave of a near miss is more than adequate to down the animal. When the latter occurs there's very little meat damage - hence sparing all that rare, important, and delectable inter-rib meat to be cooked on your birthday.

These threads have started to crack me up rather than frustrate me.

Ackley, let me ask you something, since I'm one of the premium bullet advocates you're taking a swing at with this anemic post of yours.

Why do you thing premium bullets were invented to begin with?

AD

I have had only one experience with the Interbond a 139 gr 7mm RM at 3250 and was not happy with the results.

Rob, care to expand on that experience?

Thanks.

I have also had a few bad experiences with "normal" bullets shooting elk. They were all light for caliber bullets at high velocity and short range (150 grain .308"). Anywhere above 3000 fps I would shoot a "premium" bullet of some sort.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
The new uranium-depleted hide-bound piercing bullets from Barnoid Bullets kill with great penetration, but if that doesn't work, the residual radiation effect is extra deadly. Accuracy is not that important, because all you must do is hit near the animal - that is, within 15 ft. Sometimes the shock wave of a near miss is more than adequate to down the animal. When the latter occurs there's very little meat damage - hence sparing all that rare, important, and delectable inter-rib meat to be cooked on your birthday.

“Why do you thing[k] premium bullets were invented to begin with?â€

Let me begin the response, by asking a question.

Why do we need all the different hunting calibers/cartridges? Do we really need a 300Win Mag, 308 Norma Mag, 30-338 Mag, 300 Weatherby Mag, 300 ICL Grizzly, 300 Imperial Mag (Canadian), 300 RUM, 30-378 Mag, 300 Pagasus, 300 Phoenix …..yada, yada, yada. It goes on almost forever, and this is just a fraction of the 30 caliber group. And, we have all of this redundancy, when the 30-06 (even the 308) would do just fine – our ancestors didn’t even need the ’06.

How can the be? Much of this must be marketing by companies, who’ve sold nearly all the 30-06’s they’re going to sell – much SEXIER to buy a 300 Rem. ULTRA Mag. Everyone must have the latest-and-greatest ULTRA caliber. Now, the old silvertips have lost their appeal, but the NEW FAILSAFE bullets – Wow!! How can I fail with this bullet? – I can’t, because they’re FAILSAFE!

I can just see the typical hunter thinking, “When that bull got away lost fall, it must have been due to bullet failure, in spite of the fact that I hit the critter high in the neck above the spinal canal (actually I’m not sure where I hit it; he was running through the timber).†Now with FAILSAFE bullets this will never happen!

You hear more about bullet failures from traditional bullets, because they’re more abundant and have been used longer – that is, they have much longer track record than the newer designs. With time, the failures with the premium bullets will begin to appear – largely because of poor shot placement or failure to open up.

I admit though, it’s true that proper bullet choice for the situation is critical. For example, to shoot through the cow and kill the bull on the other side, I’d better use a Barnes solid copper bullet – I’ll need near 100% weight retention and deep, deep penetration to kill the bull after the bullet has passed through the cow. To use a traditional designed bullet would be foolhardy – the odds of complete penetration are much less. Heaven forbid that I might shoot the bull first and drop a string of cows on the opposite side (you’ve likely noticed that bulls like to hang around cows).

AD, bottom line, we could go on-and-on about this. I think the premium bullets (although they work) are unnecessary for successful and humane hunting. Silvertips and the like have worked fine for decades and will continue to work. I see no need to pay more than necessary to accomplish a task.

Why buy a $50 bottle of wine, when a $10 bottle tastes just as good. Indeed, save your expensive empty wine bottles and poor into them an inexpensive wine and watch how much more people enjoy the “expensive†wine. I’ve done this - it works!! The cache of that expensive label has a magical effect on the taste buds - just like the cache of FAILSAFE!

P.S. I refuse to discuss the whiney hunter who quickly kills and collects his game and then becomes disappointed by the appearance of the retreived projectile and claims "bullet failure." How dead is dead? Are their degrees of being dead?

Ackley, a lot of partial truth's and exageration's on your part to be sure ... not all hunting situation's are created equal, nor are all shots on all bulls. For me it's a false economy to not be willing to spend a little more for a better (yes, some things are better) bullet for genuine trophy hunting of big animal's.

Your wine analogy is fellacious as well... not all expensive wine is "good" nor is all inexpensive wine "bad." BUT, I've NEVER, EVER had a stunningly superior bottle of wine that cost $10. Good, yes. Very Good, yes... not superior. Some things cost more for a reason and you could never fool my palette with your stunt.

Well said Brad. Based on my own tests (sorry AIU) in wetpack, the HIB really expands & penetration is greatly reduced. In heavy for caliber carts. I would still use it but in a light for caliber, I would want something a bit more. They really flatten @ high impact vel. (above 2800fps).
BTW AIU, who shoots @ bulls in the middle of a herd of cows?

Brad, does that make you a "wine snob?"

friar

I agree with Fred. The 180 grain IB in .308" should expand well but still pentrate due to lower impact velocities (around 3000 fps max for most magnum 30's) and pentrate well. I wouldn't use the 150 grain at high velocity. If you have a standard 300 Win (or smaller) it should work well. If you have a 300 Ultra or similar you might want a tougher bullet.

Montana is "known" for its great wine country - where "wine expert" = "wine corner-sewer." Brad, I didn't use the word "superior" in my paragraph on wine - just expensive and inexpensive. By the way, "fellacious" is spelled fallacious. Better luck next time. LOL

Friar, not "snob", just a wine "realist"... as with bullets

Ackley, so you know all about me, huh? As an aside, people who correct other's spelling on these formus are known, in the Latin, as assholes.

quote:

Why buy a $50 bottle of wine, when a $10 bottle tastes just as good.

Cause it usually doesn't, even to a novice.

quote:

For me it's a false economy to not be willing to spend a little more for a better (yes, some things are better) bullet for genuine trophy hunting of big animal's.

Then why did you start this thread? Why not just go buy some Northforks or A-frames and be done with it? They are spendy, therefore they must be superior. Could it be perhaps that not all bullets that are reasonably priced fall into the worthless category?

quote:

Ackley, so you know all about me, huh? As an aside, people who correct other's spelling on these formus [bad spelling again Brad] are known, in the Latin, as assholes.

Brad, I admit I don't know much about you (I don't want to know much), but I do know you're a self-proclaimed wine "corner-sewer" (snob) and that you can't spell. You did spell asshole correctly (you're improving), although it's not Latin. Finally, why did you start this thread, if you'd already made up your mind?

P.S. You also get pissed easy - give serious consideration to anger management. LOL

Western, if you actually go back and read the thread and initial post you'll see I started the thread to hear about the Interbond's from those with actual experience with them. Ackley apparently has no reading comprehension as he's contributed nothing but spew arrogance while proving his ignorance.

Western, as to you... where does your supposition "I've made up my mind" fit in with a thread I started about Interbonds which most consider a premium bullet. I'd suggest you need to read the thread before commenting.

Brad I used the 180 interbond in a 300 Wby last fall on a large Montana mule deer. The deer was quartering away at 150 yds and the bullet entered near the back of the rib cage. damaged 3 ribs on the way in,made jelly out of the lungs, went through the front shoulder blade and was found against the hide on the off side of the neck. He piled up right there. The recovered bullet weighed just under 120 grs as found.This bullet also shoots very nice groups in my rifle. Certainly acceptable performance on deer and elk.

AI, that stuff about Barnoid Bullets is some seriously funny stuff, but I'll bet if you tried to market them on e-bay you would get a bunch of people trying to buy them.

Why does everyone talk about weight retention as if more is always better, instead of there being some optimum. You would think the folks at Nosler would know something about this, and here's what I found in the FAQ section of their website.

<< What are the pros and cons of weight retention?

As a bullet expands through an animal, the small pieces of lead and copper it loses come off at right angles to the bullet's path. This is caused by the centrifugal force of the bullet's rotation. These small pieces become secondary projectiles creating a larger trauma cavity which induces more bleeding.

An expanding bullet of high weight retention will generally have a large picture book mushroom. This large mushroom retards the bullets ability to penetrate and does not create as large a trauma cavity. Conversely, a bullet which expands too quickly or loses too much weight will not get to the vitals.

At Nosler, we feel a bullet needs both qualities. A nose which expands quickly for light bodied game or long range low velocity impacts. A partition or thicker rear jacket for weight retention, and a smaller mushroom for deep penetration. >>

Snowman, that's exactly the sort of info I was looking for on this thread... thanks!

Gee, Brad, don't go away mad.

I gotta love this, someone actually complaining about the properties of a great bullet(barnes) whats next? complaining about bang/flops? or a good blood trail?

Somebody obviously has an axe to grind, ahem , must be a ballistic tip user Dont worry Brad when someone hijacks a thread they are usually either extremely jaded or sexually frustrated or both!

Ackley, that has to be about the most sophmoric set of explainations I've ever heard. You think premium bullets are just some marketing ploy, and that actual structural considerations have no bearing on performance???

Good grief, stay away from me.......you're like arguing with some ignorant teenage kid......


AD

allen I think he is one???

AIU: Your post regarding as to why there was a need for Premium bullets is fraught with false logic. If we follow your logic( or lack thereof) why hunt with center fire cartridges at all? after all didn't the black powder cartridges work just as well and for that matter I'm sure there's been plenty of game taken with flintlocks and lead bullets, no better yet, bows and arrows, no better yet sticks. The 300s for the most part anyway have got to be one of the greatest improvemnts to the sport of hunting we've ever had. Are they needed for deer at short ranges? not really, but a lot of us thankfully have the opportunity to expand on the game we take and the magnums AND premium bullets represent a quantum leap in improving our chances for a successful hunt. jorge

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
Western, if you actually go back and read the thread and initial post you'll see I started the thread to hear about the Interbond's from those with actual experience with them. Ackley apparently has no reading comprehension as he's contributed nothing but spew arrogance while proving his ignorance.

Western, as to you... where does your supposition "I've made up my mind" fit in with a thread I started about Interbonds which most consider a premium bullet. I'd suggest you need to read the thread before commenting.

Sheesh, where to start.

I expect "my supposition" could be tied in with your supposition that "most consider interbonds a premium bullet", along with the part of your previous post that I pasted earlier, if you payed attention.
Actually you are helping to illustrate my point in saying they are premiums. Ive never really looked at them that way, but in considering it I guess they kind of bridge the gap between premiums and standard bullets IMHO. They are less expensive than most "premium" bullets and yet they have some very nice characteristics.

About AIU,

I thought he had some good stuff to say about answering Allens question, (which I myself have answered before with no further reply, not a big deal) that is, until he got off on the wine analogy. It seems apparent that anyone who dares suggest that a premium bullet is not nessecary can expect to get the proverbial dog pile by the premium only crowd. Oh well.

All AIU is saying is that in spite of all the whizbang goodies the plain vanilla stuff still works, he's just being a bit more exuberant about it than I would. I thought his answer with another question hit home pretty well though.

As for the original thrust of the thread, my limited experience with the bonded poly tip bullets at this point leads me to believe that the Accubonds are a better choice, but I need to do some more testing to further qualify that opinion.

quote:

I guess they kind of bridge the gap between premiums and standard bullets IMHO. They are less expensive than most "premium" bullets and yet they have some very nice characteristics.

Western, I can totally agree and think that's a good way to view these bullets. I'd also add I'm very clear that simple cup bullets work quite well. I call Premium's "1% Bullets", ie, you don't need them 99% of the time. However, when you do they're generally needed badly. If all I did was hunt deer I'd never bother with them. For elk I'll always take a premium.