I HAVE SOME 139 INTERBONDS WAITING, BUT HAVE NOT TRIED THEM YET.

I HAVE SHOT SOME 150 G. SCIROCCOS OUT OF A 7 REMINGTON MAG. ON SMALL DEER AND PERFORM REALLY WELL. OF 9 ANIMALS SHOT, 9 DROPPED IN THEIR TRACKS.

I HAVE RECOVERED THREE BULLETS, TWO SHOT TO ANIMALS THAT WERE RUNNING AWAY ( BULLETS ENTERED HIND LEGS AND WERE RECOVERD IN CHEST AREA), MUSHROOMED JUST AS YOU SEE IN SWIFT�S PICTURES. BUT THE THIRD WAS JUST A SMALL PIECE OF THE SIDE OF THE BULLET, WITH AROUND 30 % RECOVERED WEIGHT.

A friend shoots a 7x57. On a recent trip to Scotland he shot 13 red hinds with the 139 interbond. No bullets recovered, all dead within 5-10 yards. Examination in the larder showed good initial expansion which appeared to hold up (ie no subsequent overexpansion) for the length of the wound channel.

A fluke accident (rear deer moving into line as the shot was taken)saw the bullet smashing 2 spinal columns and exiting thereafter. He is a convert.

One of the techs at Nosler stated that in early tests the prototype Accubond performed similar to the Scirrocco and Interbond, expanded very rapidly and held a large frontal area by maintaining nearly all it's weight thus limiting penetration. This required some reengineering to allow the mushroom to shed some material.

---

HUH? It's not logical to say this. Somebody please explain how a bullet the retains nearly all it's weight, suddenly stops penetrating besause of a large frontal area.

My tests with the interbond that I posted last summer, showed the same violent initial expansion, then penetration to over 20 inches of water. I wouldn't feel handicapped with even the 165 IB, even for elk sized animals. Now that the 180 is available, I would probably switch to that just for extra insurance.

Nozler purposely made their bullet to shed weight? Seems to defeat the purpose of bonding the core to the bullet.

i shot 10 deer w/ 130 grain 270 interbond this past season. the biggest bucks were around 200 lbs.
the shots ranged from 50 to 150 yds. 9 of the 10 shots were full pass throughs, through both
shoulders. the one that didn't pass through was on a 165 lbs buck. the deer was alsomst striaght
away from me. the bullet entered just in front of the hind quarter and was recovered just under
the skin on the far side shoulder. the bullet retained its weight and did much internal damage. for
whitetail deer, i do not think that i'll ever shot anything else.

A lot of good information coming here. It would seem that the Interbond "may" penetrate to nearly the same depth as a Partition and will hold a larger mushroom creating a greater wound channel due to the higher retained weight.

Here's four of the bullets I tested last year.





This is over-expansion? Or "pancaking"? Not in my book, this is how I would expect the bullet to look after exiting whatever I shot.



This is the set-up. It can be seen that the first jug is badly blow away, the second shows less damage, the third is where every bullet was found with a split where it entered it. A milk jug stands about 9 inches tall, that makes at least 18 inches of solid water with entry into the last one

Here is a link to another thread discussing this topic. The conclusion by the poster seems to be in favor of the Interbond for use in "standard" cartridges producing MV's of 3000 fps or less.

Interbond discussion

What the hell do you do with 10 deer in one season? Are you hunting or just testing bullets?

Grizz, the techs at Nosler can explain it much better than I, but basically by the Accubond giving up some frontal area penetration is increased and velocity through much of the wound channel is higher. Keep in mind that the Partition also sheds some weight, even occasionally loosing the entire front core.

Bullet fragments travelling in diverging paths from the main projectile will destroy additional lung tissue and might also penetrate the heart and liver.

I agree that the Interbond is capable of taking elk, but I would be no less confident with the Scirocco, Accubond, Ballistic Tip, CoreLoct, Power Point, or even a Game King or Match King.

Ruff, I just may do a side by side comparison with the 180's in accubond and interbond, using the same set-up as last summer. I love to experiment, it would be interesting to see how they perform.

I don't think it's going to change my mind on using the interbond in my 300 WSM, but may give info to someone else that hasn't tried either bullet yet. I always loved the way the BT shot in every rifle I tried it in. After seeing the destroyed meat and failure to penetrate, I switched to Hornady bullets.

Grizz,



Am I correct in assuming that the bullets shown in your pics are 180's fired from your 300 WSM?



I remember back in the 60's and 70's, ammo manufacturers would display pics of tormented and ugly mushrooms and praise them for their devastating effects on game, big and small alike. The trend has certianly moved toward pretty mushrooms today. Im not putting down the outstanding mushrooming characteristrics in your pics mind you, just trying to put things into perspective. I just really dont see penetration with a bullet like that being a problem for 90% of hunting around the globe.. I really think that in time these bonded poly tip bullets are going to become the standard. They simply offer too much to be ignored.

westrnhuntr, no, those were the 165 interbonds from last summer. I just ordered some 180's in both the interbond and accubond. As soon as the road to the range is useable, I will test both from my 300 WSM. Should be in about a month.

Looks like they have great weight retention and nice expansion. What more could you want?



For those guys that dont like the Interbond or Scir. results, Why dont you just use FMJs? Seems like you dont like expansion.



The more expansion, the quicker the kill. These less expanding bullets result in more lost game and long, slow deaths too. We owe it to the game we take, to take them as quickly as possible.



Reloader

Grizz

Did you ever try wet news print? It is a mess to set up but you can see the wound channel and the destruction it does. You can shoot mutilple bullets in the same paper with different aiming points. When I tried milk jugs I seemed to get quite a few flies that would not travel straight (did matter on the bullet brand). I stood the jugs up. Neat stuff. I like experimenting like that

Have fun

Hcliff

I've got some Hornady 139 gr Interbonds on the way for my 7mag. I like Hornady's price, and fact you get 100 bullets per box. As an avid Nosler fan, I somewhat smell BS from their tech rep.Pretty easy to tell people we went back to the drawing board and changed ours. I've used the 150 grain Scirocco the last two years, and I am convenced it is a great mule deer on down bullet. These bonded bullets arent failsafes, X bullets, or such, but they hold together well, and provide good mushrooms. It is because of the scirocco the other manufacturers had to come out with theirs. But I believe the scirocco also needs to be in the mix. My biggest reason to give the interbonds a try is boredom, and decent pricing. Swift also gives you 100 bullets per box in most cases. As a Nosler fan, frankly, I find myself moving away from them, except the partition.

To expand on what Jon A stated:
Those bullet fragments that are shed at very high velocity from the main rotating mass of the bullet do not cease to exist. They also contribute tissue destruction and are IMO a huge factor in lung shots that result in instant kills.