Hi Guys, I have used Nosler Partitions in 270, 3006 and 375 h+h as my standard soft nose for the last 30 years. Yes they are a bit soft and occasionally more meat damage especially to shoulders but usually a good blood trail and effective. Ie the animal dies quickly
A friend gave me some Accubonds to try in my 375 - any experience on their effectiveness on game as compared to the Partitions

When they came out, I put them through the same test that I have been using to test bullets (primarily partitions) for years. Similar penetration as the partition. Same in animals. I believe the AB loses a bit less of its front half and therefore does not cause the internal damage that the NP does when it's front core 'fragments/explodes' which I believe accounts for the NP quick killing reputation--along /w deep penetration. In WT deer, both sail right thru on broadside shots. The only way I have been able to recover either is if I shoot them w/ the deer facing me. If you like the NP, I will predict you will like the AB.

According to Nosler they were designed to replicate the Partition in terminal performance and have the long range efficiency of the Ballistic Tip. Only the back
2/3 of the bullet is bonded so you get some fragmentation and 60% weight retention. If you like the partition, you will be very happy with the Accubond.

I've taken a feral hog with a .338/225 grain Accubond, but the only real test I've put an Accubond to was a cow elk at 200 yards. It was a 180 grain out of a .300 H&H at 2960 MV. Bullet entered just behind shoulder on a slightly quartering shot and the jacket/core weighing a little over 100 grains was in the offside hide after exiting the ribs.

A Partition might have penetrated the hide since the rear portion of the Partition is usually almost cylindrical after the front portion has expanded/fragmented. But I can't see that a Partition would have killed any faster or with more certainty. I was happy with the performance of the Accubond and will continue to use them in various calibers.

I've used 270 150gr Partitions for deer and elk for years, lots of DRT's. I tried 130gr Accubonds in a new 270 a few years back as they were a bit more accurate with that rifle at longer ranges. When I finally recovered a Accubond it weighted the same as the few 150gr Partitions I've recovered.

Neither bullet was recovered from broadside shots out to 350+ yds except on elk, and then breaking a shoulder was what seemed to limit penetration of both bullets.

Accuracy with Accubonds was the deciding factor as the slight difference in trajectory was immaterial.

I will probably try the 150gr Accubonds at some point but I've got several hundred 130gr Accubonds as well as a bunch of 150gr Partitions. Either one works great!

My experience with 250gr 9.3 Accubonds as compared to 286gr 9.3 Partitions is limited only to the range, both are more than adequately accurate for anything I'd use a 9.3 on. I culled a few dozen eland a while back with my 9.3 with 286gr Partitions and their performance was absolutely flawless. Meat damage acceptable on less than perfect shots and penetration and internal damage bloody awesome. Only three animals required more than one round and that was my fault.