I'll try to get a pic up tomorrow. Pretty much a perfect mushroom. You can use your imagination until then

i don't know about bullet failure, but i have never seen an exit hole that size in my life. to me (and probably ONLY me), that's too damn much.

UUUHHHH, I guess if you want a bigger hole, you could load the hollowpoint with a compound of fulminate of mercury, or the old trick of black powder in the cavity topped off with a primer, but DAMN!!!!! that is serious meat damage.



beautiful deer, BUT, that is why I like by big heavy slow mover bullets. With the .358Win or the 45/70 you can pretty much eat right up to the hole. Haven't seen an "exit hole"that big since I had a gangbanger who took a contact blast from a dbl bbl 12ga with both bbls tripped at the same time. Now... THAT was impressive also....



(ADDED TIP... IF you are a gangbanger and you are fronting off to a rival gangbanger re- a turf war, and the one has a 12"bbld sawed off stuffed into your midsection, do NOT call him a "BITCH" and tell him "you aint got the balls to do it man, c'mon pull the trigger BITCH!!!!")according to the eyewitnesses who would talk to us.



That is why we have "discussion" boards

Shot this buck last week in CO with a 140 accubond traveling about 2950 fps out of my 280. It hit ONE rib on the way out, it never made it past the skin. I got the bullet or what was left of it and I would veture to guess that it weighs in the neighborhood of about 55-65 grains. He was shot offhand at about 80-90 yards. Killed him stone dead, but... I was expecting a little diffrent results. I did shot a cow as well with the same gun and 160 Accubonds, hit her in the spine right above the lungs, it pulverised her spine and exited. Dead is dead! But these new "wonder" bullets don't appear to do much that a cup and core wouldn't do.

Oh I don't have a problem with the hole either... The problem is I can spend half to a third the money to get the same results... I was just expecting the hole to be ya know golf ball size or so... like most non-varmint bullets..

my mule deer had a little smaller hole than that. both shots broke the left shoulder. you should see the hole that a 200gr. nosler out of a 338 does to 80 pound deer. i can fit my fist in the hole an not touch the sides, and i dont got small hands.

im going to keep using them. nice buck by the way.

Agreed. I think Nosler has to go back to the drawing board and come up with a tougher jacket for their lighter (ie. 180gr. .30 cal vs. their 200gr. initial version) bullets.

This should not be the result from a premium bonded bullet- mind you dead is dead.

Absolutely great buck !!!

This kind of leads back to what I said in CanadianLefty's post. I don't think Nosler has the research & development into the new bullets (7mm - 140, .308 - 180) that they had into the original offerings. It sounds like your 160 (original offering) performed as advertised and designed. It looks like this clearly did not. I, as well as many others I'm sure, would be interested in you posting a pic of the recovered bullet.

BTW - Nice Buck

ivan, in my opinion, no, the bullet did not fail. one shot, and you are skinning and dressing him. no failure. that's my opinion, take it for what it's worth.

the bullet obviously would have gone further if it would have still had to go through the deer, the elastic action of the hide absorbed a LOT of energy. i am currently reading jack o'connor's book, "THE ARt of hunting big game in north america," and he mentions this as being a pretty common thing, even abck in the 60's. as for two holes, better blood trail, etc., looks to me like you didn't need it, and this bullet would have anchored the animal with just about any hit except in the guts. in that case, no bullet will perform well, no matter how many holes. my experience is that gutshots don't bleed much because the guts poke out and plug the hole.

the bottom line, to me at least, is that if you are sure of your shot, the chance of bullet "failure" is reduced dramatically.

Nice buck! Awful big hole for a "failure"!

--Mike