I guess you better switch to 180 grain Hornady Interbonds!

Hi all,



I am writing this from a hotel room just outside of Edson, Alberta. I hunted with two friends for Mulies and Whitetails over the Canadian Thanksgiving weekend.



We were all using .300WSMs shooting 180gr. Accubonds (2 of us were using factory Winchester ammo, one of us the Federal (uncoated)Accubonds.). I will guess that muzzle velocities were around 3000fps.



Results as follows:



1. One large doe shot once at 60 yards, died. Frontal right angling shoulder shot. Accubond blew up front shoulder blade and heart but failed to penetrate any further. About 10 inches total penetration. Accubond looked quite smashed and parts of jacket were exposed. Main concerns: Lack of penetration, much shoulder meat destruction.



2. One small doe shot once at 100 yards, died. Front quatering towards shot to shoulder. Accubond blew through top of shoulder blade, top of lung and lodged just in front of filets under backbone. About 16 inches of penetration on a small-boned, 70 pound deer. Bullet was mushroomed but flatter-looking and peeled back than I would have expected. Main concerns: Lack of penetration on such a small animal, but meat destruction less than on large doe.



3. One 3-point, 1.5 year old Muley buck shot once at 150 yards, alive after paralysing shot. Texas heart shot right through a-hole. Accubond shattered whole pelvis and created a 6" internal crater of bone and meat mush, destroying much of both back hams and only penetrating about 10 inches until the back filets. Bullet was very mangled and parts of jacket were exposed much more than I would have liked to see. Deer was alive and was killed with knife. Main Concern: Lack of penetration. IMHO, a 180gr. .30 caliber bullet travelling around 2900fps on impact should be able to penetrate enough on a Texas heart shot deer to reach the vitals.



Now, some of you may debate whether the bullets failed or we failed in choosing the 180gr. Accubonds for shorter range deer hunting. My take on it is as follows:



The Accubond bullets failed.



1. All three Accubond bullets penetrated less than we expected (given the Nosler Ads, articles and tech support), even on closer range, higher velocity shots. Remember, we were using 180 gr. bullets at modest (by today's standards)3000fps mv, which should have provided greater penetration and held together better on deer-sized animals.



Our intentions in using the 180gr. Accubonds on deer was to provide for a higher b.c. for possible longer shots, better penetration all-around (close or far)and still be adequate for a possible elk should we encounter one. Should we have had a chance at elk, it is quite possible that with such shallow penetration on deer, that the end results would have been a wounded animal. Yes, shot placement is number one, but with lack of penetration, an angled shot to the vitals will never reach the vitals, even with perfect shot placement.



2. While we did not weigh these bullets, our hypothesis is that they retained less than 60% of their weight. If memory serve me correct, they advertise greater than 60-70% weight retention. My friend in Calgary has a digital scale so I will weigh them and let you know.



So, here are some first-hand field results, fresh from the field. I will be back in touch next week.



Cheers,

CL

I'd really like to see what those bullets look like. Please post pics when you can. I agree that performance leaves much to be desired. I would have expected the first two to exit or at least be under the hide on the rump. I would have expected the last one to get to the brisket at least. Post pics when you can.

I do agree with bowhuntrrl, however on your shot placement. If you're hitting the shoulder blade on a frontal quartering shot you're missing. But I still think they should have penetrated farther.

I wouldn't say the Accubonds failed as much as you all did in picking your shots!!! From the description of the 3 shots, not one of them was a high percentage shot. If you want to shoot from end to end on a deer, at least use a solid or a Barnes X or TSX, or even a Nosler Partition. Magnums are no substitute for poor shot placement, proven once again.

I disagree with your statement that they were "low percentage" shots. It is factual that shoulder shots offer one of the highest kill percentage of any shot out there (save the spinal or head shot of course), with a 300 (well a "real" 300, i.e., Win Mag, H&H Weatherby, etc) and what is touted to be a tough bullet, a THS is not all-together unreasonable. I grant you that I would not take the THS as a matter of routine, but they are certainly effective on all game, provided of course the bullet gets to the vitals. I am quite surprised that Accubonds failed to perform at those "magnumwannabe" velocities. jorge

Any of this sound familiar Jon?

Same performance almost exactley as what I saw two weeks ago.

These bullets just don't do bone...

(Non tempered blanket statement #2)