I also don't think that first hand experience on a forum is any different that trusted first hand experience from someone else, ie. second hand experience. I have no reason to believe that the guide with the pictures was being dishonest with me. Especially since he had his set-up with him.

I did post my first hand experience also. Did you see the dead goat on the other thread?

Ps. When in doubt, use Triple Shocks.

I loaded some 180 accubonds for my 300 and I plan on using them for North Dakota mulies. As far as failures, are we talking bullets less stable than the old style 180 grain ballistic tips? Even those held up on 60 yard shots at 3000 fps. for me in the past, and they supposedly have thinner jackets than the new style BTs.

All this talk is confusing. I've even heard 180gr. partitions fail so who knows what to believe. I'm going to use them and find out for myself. In a way I guess it's stupid on my part--I should just use the BTs because they've worked for me...

Doc, with all due respect, I hope you are not trying to start a 'pissing' contest given the photos, results direct from Nosler and first-hand facts (photos on Sunday)that I have provided on the other thread regarding the failures of Nosler 180gr. Accubonds on deer.

Any attempt at discrediting another forum poster is not cool ex:

Quote:

---

Accubonds/Scirocco failure? I don't think so .

---

My motivation in posting this info is purely to share first-hand experiences and share latest facts and results with the 180gr. Accubond bullets. If you had different experiences first-hand, post them. Please refrain from the 'some guy showed me a photo book full of dead animals' type of second-hand, secondary source information- it usually is perceived as less credible anyways- besides, I have no first-hand experience with the Scirrocco.

As mentioned, I do believe that the 200gr. Accubonds are getting better results from what people are posting and I hope that I did not indirectly offend you (or anyone) in your bullet choices when I posted our results.

I do not doubt that they would work some of the time on angled shots or most of the time on broadside, behind the shoulder type hits. But test results on game and directly from Nosler put the 180gr. Accubond in my "wait and see, do not use" category for the time being (see latest comments and photos on the updated Accubond Failed thread).

Happy Hunting,
CL

I just saw your goat and mulie- congratulations!

Great to hear about a fellow lefty too.

I may just have to start trying the 168gr. TSXs. About the only bullet that I feel confident in and have lots of experience using is the 180gr. TBBC.

I will continue experimenting with bullets to find the best, longer range (read higher B.C., less wind drift) and more accurate bullet that would still penetrate well on angled shots or double up for elk on a mixed bag hunt.

Cheers,
CL

Naa. Just more argument for and against all the bullets out there.

No different than those that like B-tips and those that don't.

Hence, the little smiley face at the end of my post.

How on earth could I start a 'pissing' contest with a fellow leftie!?

It all sounds a little like Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge. We've all had one or the other because they were a great truck, or our buddy said he loved his. We've all heard of the lemons or owned one and will never own another. No question that there could be a few lemons out of whatever rolls off the assembly line, bullets or trucks.

It is interesting to hear about the lemon issues as it makes one think and evaluate. However, careful analysis would argue against a stampede away from one item or model based on anecdotal evidence or experience. What would worry me more would be several reports consistent with similar failure patterns.

While out in Wyoming (and after I killed my little speed goat with an Accubond), I met a hunter/guide from the midwest. He had a photo album with him. He hunts with a 300 RUM exclusively. In fact, I met a couple of guides that have used similar set-ups.

One of these guys showed me about 57 pictures of all the game he has taken with one gun/one load: 300 RUM, 180 Scirocco: 8 bull elk, 9 black bears, mulies, whitetails, antelope, hogs, etc. I asked him specifically if he ever had a bullet fail. He laughed and said, "you're looking at every animal I ever shot with them! Ask them if they think the bullet failed."

I shot my goat at 165 yards with my 300 RUM and the 200 Accubond. I thought it was pretty much a no brainer that the bullet would exit and it did. Exit hole impressive. I also had my 270 with me using 140 Accubonds when in Colorado. My friend used it to kill his deer at 43 yards. Blew right through both shoulders and dropped it. No bullets were recovered.

The other hunter, the one with the photos, has been using the 180 Accubond since they came out and has only tested them this year. He took a Wyoming mulie and one buck and one doe antelope at various distances, no bullet recovery.

These bullets didn't fail.

I also just got a report from the guide that I hunted with for bears a month ago. He had 4 hunters take bears with 270's and 30.06's. All using accubonds. No failures, no bullet recovery. No long tracking.

These bullets didn't fail.

Neighbor just returned from Wyoming also. Killed his 5x5 bull elk with his 270/140 Accubond that I loaded for him. Bullet exited at 72 yards behind shoulders. Broadside shot placement.

I'd say this bullet didn't fail, and so would my neighbor.

130 Scirocco, 270 Win, 200lb. 6 year old South Carolina whitetail. Shot was 8 yards under treestand on powerline at my brother's hunting club. Bullet blew big hole in deer and in dirt. Deer recovered at 8 yards (right where it was hit).

This bullet didn't fail either.

However, I would not discount that others have indeed had different experiences. I'm glad I don't.