I am hoping that the 30 caliber 200 Accubond will be my ideal, all-around big game bullet in my 300 Win Mag for use on deer, cougar (called or spot and stalk), elk and big black bear. My ideal bullet would have a number of attributes, including (not yet in order of importance to me): accuracy, ballistic coefficient, penetration, expansion, tendency to penetrate in a straight line, and weight retention (which is somewhat tied to penetration). I guess that is everything.

I prefer to hunt deer, elk, cougar and black bear with one rifle and one bullet. My cartridge of choice is my 300 Win Mag. So I will obviously choose a bullet that will work more ideally on elk and big black bear and perhaps give up some performance on deer and cougar- like I will use a heavier bullet that is more heavily constructed which would not fly as flat as a lighter bullet which I might pick solely for deer or cougar.

Penetration: I think is most important. The problem is all attributes must kind of be thought of as a whole because if for example we say the Barnes X (hard cast flat point probably actually would be) is the best penetrator but accuracy is horrible (in most but not all of my guns I have gotten lousy accuracy with Barnes bullets) then we would not want to use the best penetrator to the exclusion of all other factors. I really like to have the bullet exit, especially on bears in order to give a better blood trail if needed.

Straight line penetration: clearly this is desired but I admit I have not tested the bullets I have been using to check this aspect. I would say it is very important as it is directly linked to penetration to and through the vitals.

Accuracy: is very important to me. Probably too much so but I just cannot get myself to go hunting with a bullet that is shooting lousy groups. I strive for sub MOA groups at 500 yards. I can usually achieve that with Partitions. Even better accuracy is preferred. What really gives me confidence is when I can shoot 3 groups of 3 shots each and put all 9 shots in maybe like 5" at 400 yards.

Expansion: is important but too much will limit penetration. I do not know enough to know how much is too much but know that I want the bullet to expand at 500 yards and yet not be a bomb at 25 yards. Supposedly Nosler was trying with their Accubond to work the jacket alloy, jacket taper and core alloy to ensure that the bullet would be a better penetrator than the Swift Scirrocco. Maybe they did not succeed?

Weight retention: is not all that big of a deal to me. The Partitions tend to "only" retain about 65%, yet they penetrate, expand and kill extremely well. If the Accubonds do as well as the Partitions then I will be very happy, though I would ideally like to see them exit more often.

Ballistic Coefficient: prefer to have very high to minimize drop and wind deflection at long range but I would put accuracy and on game performance over bc.

So you get some idea of my thinking about bullets. With that in mind what bullet would you recommend? The Nosler Partitions would be very close to perfect if they were a bit more accurate and had a bit higher ballistic coefficient. In my hunting situations (hunting on foot with 9# scoped sporter stocked rifles as opposed to hunting from a bench with 30# bench guns) I realize that in the field I will probably not realistically be able to utilize a bullet with a better ballistic coefficient or better accuracy (though I typically use a laser rangefinder and get prone with a bipod and then rezero my scope to that range if shooting at more than 300 yards and from prone with my bipod I can usually shoot very similarly sized groups as I can from the bench). But if I can find a bullet that is more accurate and has a higher bc than the Partition and yet performs equally as well or better on game then I might as well use it. I hear the new Barnes Triple Shock is tending to be more accurate than the older non-grooved Barnes bullets and they have a great reputation for performance on game as well as high ballistic coefficients. Perhaps they will be worth a try. Any general suggestions or comments? Rufous.

1. They don't exist.

2. They never will.

3. Buy a decent bullet, load it in a decent cartridge, shoot it alot to make sure you know where its hitting at distances you'll be shooting. Nosler Partitions, Speer GS, the new bonded plastic tips, X- Bullets, all seem to be decent. I know there are others.

4. Go hunting.

The hunter who shoots Remington Core-lokts well will harvest more game at longer ranges and register cleaner kills than the hunter who barely knows his rifle and loads shooting premium bullets costing 5 times as much.

[ 08-14-2003, 14:36: Message edited by: Kentucky Nimrod ]

What Kentucky said. I have tried the NABs in 7mm & .338 in wet phone books. Compared to other bullets, they perform well, about like a sim. wt. partition. I am going to try & take some game w/ them this fall, but you have to like those looong bullets if they'll perform. Ithink it's hard to beat a partition for any shot presentation (JMO).

Was just on the 800 number with Hornady and Sierra customer service today and this topic briefly came up about Premium bullets.

While I do believe in the partitions, and that they work. Not much improves still on a good old round nose design. Both technicians at both companies shared the same opinion.

Both admitted they are making what the guys in marketing tell them will sell. They keep dropping the round nose designs because no one buys them any more. Has nothing to do with performance and everything to do with what the consumer believes.!

wstrnhntr, I am not sure I understand what you are saying or asking or implying. Are you asking me what planet I am from because I want sub MOA groups at 500 yards? If so why is that so hard to believe? Perhaps you are thinking that Sub MOA means less than 1" groups at 500 yards. It actually means less than 5" groups at 500 yards which has been farely easy for me to obtain. Rufous.

5" groups at 500yds MIGHT be easy off of a benchrest but from field positions? Do you intend to shoot at an elk or deer or bear from 500yds or is having a gun capable of that somehow necessary for you to be happy with it? No offense meant here but I've seen a number of great markmen and none of them could pull off those size groups from field positions.
The 200gr Accubond is still new and there hasn't been much reporting about it yet. A few months from now and we'll all know a lot more about how it hangs together.

Sub MOA isn't that hard off a bipod lots of hunters use them in the feild. I have one rem adl in 300 mag that will do that all day long with 180s. Give me a range finder a chance to shoot of the bipod and good wind I'll make that 500 yard shot all day. What in the heck are feild positions anyway. Sitting, standing, prone, Prone over a log off a rock ect useing a rest in the feild is vey common. I guess only really hunters use feild postions meanng they don;'t use a rest. Yes 500 is getting out there but do able under the right conditions. I am not saying every one try it nor the ones that haven't done their home work. But for someone that has and can go for it.

John S, it is not my intention, plan or desire to shoot at unwounded big game at 500 yards or further. That is not the point of this discussion. Confidence is what I require. It enables me to place my shots. So if I can get 4" groups at 500 yards with round groups, rather than 6" groups at 400 yards with one of those shots a flier then I know I can confidently place my shot into the vitals at normal ranges. I practice a lot at that range from the bench and quite a bit from prone with my bipod. I did take a deer at 508 yards back in 1999. I got the range with my laser range finder, dialed up 19 clicks on my scope, laid down prone and fired. One shot, one dead deer. I confess that I have also foolishly taken some long range shots at black bear and lost them. I have learned that black bear are not deer. They do not leave much of a blood trail. Close is much, much more important with bear than deer. Anyway I can generally get sub 5" groups at 500 yards if I am prone with my bipod and the wind is calm. Rufous.

Hey Ruf, good for you if you can do it.

I've never found it necessary.

Most of my shots are at less that 100 yards....

A 2" group is plenty good enough for me...........

Ruf, I know what you're talking about. I wish all of my rifles would shoot 1/2MOA, but they don't. I just hold to my max. range accordingly. I have never taken a shot much past 350yds & plan to keep it that way. I practice out to 400 but if I can't get closer, I won't shoot, just my rule. I can hold 6" @ 300 sitting w/ a sling, so that's my max.
My only concern about the NABs for hunting is in their perf. @ close range. I think the 200gr is going to work out fine in your rifle, even out to 500. Keep us posted.

[ 08-15-2003, 18:31: Message edited by: fredj338 ]

I agree that the absolute, infallible, perfect-from-every-angle big game bullet does not exist.

With hunting equipment, everything is a compromise. This applies to rifles, cartridges, scopes, bullets - the works!

I like to be ready for extended long-range shots, but long shots should always be avoided if you can stalk closer, and sometimes it's prudent to pass up such opportunities. Lots of guys seem to find a lot of romance in the idea of taking game at extra-long range, but I do not.

Actually, I've found that if a rifle gives you consistent 1" groups or less and a consistent point-of-impact, you're set to go for anything. Lots of guys seem to have big game accuracy confused with varmint hunting accuracy, and sometimes bullet construction is badly compromised for the sake of a few thousandths of an inch in group size. Remember; you're hunting big game, not statistics or pocket gophers.

We'll have to see about the Accubond. I remember a few years ago Swift came out with the Scirocco (same concept), and expectations ran high. There were early failures reported (blowups, etc.), so I'm sure some changes have been made as a result. Big game bullets sometimes need to evolve and have the bugs worked out before they ultimately succeed.

The .300 Win. Mag. remains my favorite all-around hunting cartridge. I've yet to find a bullet I like better than the 180 gr. Nosler Partition at somewhere between 3000 & 3100 fps. MV. That bullet seems to work for everything, and at all hunting ranges. If you want an ideal .300 Win. Mag. bullet, you could do a lot worse.

AD

I agree that having a very accurate rifle is comforting, but I still don't care to call 500yd shooting anything but long range target shooting...no stalking skills needed, no woodsmanship required. Just a super accurate rifle, rangefinder, bipod, etc etc.
Allen's post about the 180gr partition is a good one, I'd probably rather use it in a 300Win mag than I would the 200gr. I use the 200s but only because I use a particular 300Wby that loves them and manages a bit more velocity than the other can produce. I will be using Accubonds in it this fall, as well as my 270. Maybe a nice 150yd shot on the deer and elk will tell me they are a stouter bullet than their BT cousins!

After shooting nearly 150 200 Accubonds from my RUM, I think that bullet is exactly what you're looking for. In a week or two when I get some pictures developed I'll start a new thread on it, but I'll try to sum up the results for you:

Penetration:

Tested side-by-side with the 180 XLC and the 180 Scirocco this bullet seems to be a nice compromise that fits in between the two. Although the Scirocco generally retains more weight, the Accubond will easily out penetrate it. The Scirocco simply opens up to a HUGE diameter. In a test to simulate a long range hit, the XLC obviously penetrated the most but it barely opened up and the wound channel was tiny. It's also the only bullet in any of my tests to not penetrate straight. The Scirocco expanded way down to its base to a very large diameter. The Accubond was the happy medium. At high velocities the XLC looks better to my eye (opened up more) and the Scirocco looks like it's about to turn inside out. The Accubonds look almost identical to the low velocity test. I tested them from 2900 to 3300 fps and their frontal areas are very consistant. In fact, it's difficult to tell them appart--as the velocity increases the bullet just gets a little bit shorter. They also penetrated farther the faster I shot them.

Accuracy:

Nothing to complain about there. I didn't do any formal bench testing but I was shooting sub MOA groups with them out to 700 yards leaning over the hood of my Trailblazer. Sheesh, with some of the comments on this board lately you'd think that would take an act of God or something. When the wind got beyond the 15 MPH range they were noticably harder to hit with from 700-800 yards than the 240 MK's I've used in the past. But they won't leave you wanting in the 500 yd range.

After his second shot dead-centering my gong at 500 (the first time he'd ever shot from that far) my little brother said, "Time to go to 600. This is too easy. It's like we're cheating or something."

In the 300's I long ago settled on the 200 gr. Nosler partition, a choice I have never had reason to regret....It will work on duiker to Eland....I will try the 200 gr. Nosler bonded core soon, but I know it will not be as good a bullet as the partition simply because it will not have the penitration that I'm so fond of..It will have a larger cross section at full expansion...

rufous

When you say 9# scoped rifle do mean 9 power or 9lbs?

You might be surprised, Ray. The ones I've recovered look more like recovered Partitions than they do any of the other bonded bullets out there. I'll try and get pictures up soon.

rufous,
You should take a look at North Fork Bullets.
http://www.northforkbullets.com/
They are what you are looking for, if you can live with a bit lower BC.
Try the 180 grain for your listed animals, or the 200 grain if after the big bears.
I use the 225 gr .338" and they are the best bullet I have used.
Personally, I think ballistic coefficients are over rated. If you intend to shoot at long range, you need to practice at long range. Then you will know exactly how they will fly.

http://www.groovebullets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=534

I am using these this year. If they work good on game I wiil stick with them.

Jon A, thanks for posting the results of your testing. From your tests it does sound like I will be pleased with the Accubonds on game. Is 3300 fps a safely achievable velocity from your RUM with the 200 grain bullets? What barrel length? Rufous.

I tend to agree with Ray A here. The easiest answer without dragging out every bullet made is the Nosler Partition. It is a overall great performer, perhaps not quite as accurate as some of the other premiums, but when it get's there (to the game) it usually gets the job done. Hunting accuracy involves getting off an accurate shot under a multitude of field conditions, laying down, sitting, kneeling, or even standing, the ability to utilize your surroundings to your shooting advantage ie, taking a rest on a rock, using a stick to help stabilize your hold, etc. It doesnt matter how accurate your rifle is at the range, it does matter how accurate you can be, while afield hunting.

I hate it when I do that....

[ 08-17-2003, 02:22: Message edited by: Jon A ]

I said it wrong, hunting accuracy in the field is what matters, of coarse I want it accurate at the target range, but then, sub 1/2 at 100 yards really isnt necessary for a hunting rifle, but then, it is nice to know braced up, it can perform like that. How you shoot under field conditions is the key to hunting accuracy.