I was curious if any of you have shot multiple mid to large sized game with both of these bullets and if you preferred one or the other and what were your observations?

I guess you could throw in the nosler BT vs. the accubond as well.

Is the glass half full or half empty??????

Hey Tikka,

I have used the SST and the BT on deer. I would not use them on anything heavier. We (nosler and hornady) have taken maybe 500 or more deer with these and another 200 with the bonded ones and I would say the about 50% of time there was full penetration and the deer recovered basically in site of the shot. Theay would take the slug and run the normal 15 to 100 yds. They others took some looking to find. Some took into the next morning. We use the normal calibers .277, 7mm, .308 that would be deer guns in the .270 7mmMag .30'06 and .300wm. All angles where taken for a good test of the slugs.

All in all I would take a interlock, corelokt, partition.

ED

Apparently I have stepped on some toes with my statement of the SST and BT. That is fine, they are deer bullets, no more no less. They have/will work and you -MAY- have some trouble. I am not saying they won't kill a 50lb yearling. I am saying that with so many other better choices why even bother with a bullet that there -MAY- be a question.
In my response before this I stated that some of the deer ran of for a merry chase. This was with the "regular" bullets. The bonded SST would blast through from most angle.
As I said, thou not to well, we took any and all shoots(from any angle) as it was for the purpose of testing bullets and culling the deer. The deer where going to be killed whether I poisoned them or head shoot them at night with a .223.
This is/was a horrible business as I no longer do it and have cause to reflect. I worked for a corparation who owned numerous "Trophy" hunting properties. I was respondsible for the transfer of the land to becoming a "Trophy Ranch". This almost always involved removing most of the native game, and rebuilding with the "right" genetics. I worked with the company biologist, I was the dirty hands guy. I had the idea to bring ammo and rifle companies and the usual display of gun rag writers in to do the shooting. I was beginning to sicken of it and thought these guys could do some shooting.
It is always better to have a multitude of shooters to get a cross section of abilities to obtain an average of preformances. WOW that was a mouthful, what I am saying the more shooters using the same bullets in a bunch of different scenerios gives us much more data. That wasn't much better but I don't know how to explain it.
I would wait shoot them all behind the shoulder they would run off from 15 to 150 yds and be dead. Didn't matter if it was a .223 or a .375h&h. They all worked the same. I have done it THOUSANDS of times. Now use different shooters of different skills and temperments and you take shoots that maybe are not as percise and you will start to see what a bullet can do. A 139SST at 3200fps in the slats at 200yds will drop a light doe right there. The same bullet at 5yds on the point of the shoulder will cause a huge spectaculer wound and a deer that -MAY- run off and take some looking to find.
If the SST and the BT are so good then why are they slowly converting all to bonded designs.

ED

First of all turn on the light on this subject-EO The hornady sst is a sst not a bonded sst as you stated for sst bonded,Its called hornady interbond
and the bt-is nosler-bal-tip. Never mentioned any thing about the accubond. As far as I'am concerned
the hornady sst and n-bal-tip will blow up, worse if shoulder shots or bones are hit. As far as comparing the 2,the interlock is a better bullet than the 2, and you mentioned nosler partition, it will hold up also, but I will not use them, they are to hard and do not expand as well as the Hornady interbond or accubond will. No one was [saying the sst or bt-nos-bal-tip as you stated] was so good a bullet. Tikka was asking. I have used the Hornady interbond-165 0n elk--300wby 3390fps with great results, and also seen with good results on deer-154gr Interbond 7mag-H4831-69.1 max at 3100fps. and plan on using the Interbond on this Dec13 late season elk hunt with 7stw imr7828-83gr-3530av,fps. A Molly coated 139 Interbond at 3600Av.fps-K.G.Pill Box. We all know why the conversion of bonded bullets-higher speed in magnums not to say non-mags at even 2900 the bal-tip-nos and sst seem to blow up, expecially the n-bal-tip-total core seperation. GRIZZ AND HIS TESTS, THE AFRICAN SAFARI WITH JJHACK SHOW MORE PERFOMANCE OF THE INTERBOND, AND I THINK IT WAS POP WITH THE ACCUBOND TESTS. PRACTICE AND THE RIGHT SHOT PLACEMENT WITH ABOUT ANY BULLET WILL KILL mostly any time. But less mess with a bonded bullet as to blood shot meat if hit wrong. Plus as you mentioned we[[ nosler and hornady ]], Well do not know what you meant buy that one!!! But have the hornady sst tests on hogs-4inchs of back bone and total dicintergration. Also another test with Lee J. Hoots all of these out of Guns and Ammo, and his 308 cal. hog he hit quartering away and took out 10 in of brisket, total dic-of the heart before exit. That hog was bigger than sst-shot hogs by 3 times. The hog Lee got with I-Bond was as big or bigger than him, He is Big.

The Interbond and Accubond are both the same as the SST and Ballistic Tip in construction. They both use a non-proprietory chemical process that "welds" the core to the jacket.

ED

[ 12-02-2003, 19:05: Message edited by: E O ]

This year I have been involved with 4 deer being taken. I load for both rifles that did the work. I use 150 gn interbonds in the 308 win and 180 gr BT's in the 300rum. I experienced complete penetration on every shot with both loads. Both deer taken with the 300rum were shot around 300yds (one shot high--through the lower back above the shoulder--and one double lung shot quartering from behind one shoulder to in front of the off side shoulder). The first deer taken with the 308 was shot around 75 yds and was a doulbe lung shot. The second was hit at 225 yds and penetrated completely, including bone (I haven't had a chance to butcher it yet, so I don't have details). Oddly, the BT's did not expand as much as did the Interbonds. From the horror stories I heard, I thought I might blow the deer in two with the BT's at 300rum velocities, but the bullets proved to perform just fine. However, when Hornady or Nosler decide to grace us with a 180 .308 bonded pill, I will probably switch to it as I still am hesitant to shoot a reputedly frangible bullet at such velocities. The accubonds in 200 shoot great, but I still like the 180 range for deer.

E O--
I have found your posts to be informative, intelligent, and polite (and I don't even have to decifer what you are trying to say--as you use punctuation--thanks). I hope you share more of your experience in these matters at appropriate times.

I think if you will take time to go to the web sites of Nosler and Hornady you will find out that YES the "Interbond" & "Accubond" are both BEEFED-UP (Meaning heavier-jacketed versions) of the respective SST and BT.
I personally don't shoot either one but just thought I'd lend some actual "Fact" to this thread.

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=interbond/v=2/SID=w/l=WS1/R=2/H=0/*-
http://www.hornady.com/interbond.html

http://www.nosler.com/accubond.html

Hey Hot,

I can indeed be thin skinned when it comes to something like this. Yesterday/Today was a bitch and this morning was not the time for me to check in. We are negotiating next years ranch leases.
The amount of negetive PM's that I get over my opinions posted here are unreal.

As for the accubond and interbonded being "beefed" up WRONG they are the same bullet as the Ballistic tip and SST. I have been right there in camp with the designers of both, have been able to lend input, have shot them while testing terminal performance, did the necrotopsy, collected the spent bullets, etc.......This is a hot new wave in the market. Every manufactor is going to have to get in on this or be left behind.

Again back to the original question "are interbonds an improvement over the SST" NO, they are the same bullet. Yes they will at times work better than the SST but the SST/ bt can be so bad that is not much of an indorcement.
Again the thing that pisses me off over this is that with all the problems that goes with getting to the point of taking the shot, WHY IN GODS NAME would you use a bullet that may or may not get the job done. UUURRRGGGHHHH

I surely don't want to comee of as a brash know it all, but dammit I have been there and done that.

I will post a quick Bio for those who care.

ED

EO,

Not sure we need a bio, but maybe some clarification will help. I believe that the issue of velocity needs to be addressed. The BT or SST WILL blow if traveling too fast. I think that the SST with its "interlock" ring is an excellent bullet with an impact velocity of less than 2800fps which means not through most magnums (unless it is a heavy for caliber bullet). For me, the SST has its place in my 7mm-08. It is much less expensive to shoot at silhouettes matches and does a fine job on antelope/deer sized game. I am would bet that the more expensive bonded bullets will perform better on deer sized game, but for me that would be overkill since at the lower velocities I still get pass through even if I encounter the upper leg bone.

Deke.

I have just sectioned some of the left over loads from the first trials. These where .30'06 ammo that Hornady loaded with the 150gr interbond. This ammo was assembled in sept. 02 according to the boxes. This is in plain cardboard 20rd boxes.
These bullets are visually the same as some 165 SST that I have here. I had 3 hunters this season using the Interbond on Muledeer and the expansion chacteristics "looked" the same as when I shot them last year.
I am heading to a local supplier who stocks the Hornady interbond and will buy the same 150 to section to see if they are "changed"
Trust me if they are I will be the first to say.
I can say from what I have seen of there terminal performance this season they do not "act" any different then the ones last year.
If they are built like a Scirrocco or TB then yes I am wrong and they will work wonders, but based on what I saw they are still a light game bullet.

ED

Copy of e mail correspondance with Hornady Tech.

Hi,

I use the above bullet at a MV of 2,800fps in my 7x57 on our deer. Exits are not dependable on some quite small deer if there is any angle involved (but still conventional shots) and damage/exit wounds have been much bigger than expected even on rib shots on our tiny muntjac. The other day I failed to get an exit on a head shot at close range on a 150lb deer (shot just above the nose)

The accuracy and trajectory is excellent but I am afraid to use them on bigger red deer that weigh as much as 300lbs. This seems different to other reports I have heard about Hornady 139gr bullets. Have you had a bad lot? Unfortunately I do not have the box to tell you the lot#.

Regards

Hi,

I have experienced the same thing with my 7x57 on whitetail deer (175 to 225 lb. class) using the 139 gr. bullets. I had switched to the Hornady 7mm 154 gr. SP and RN bullets for deer hunting. This year I went with the NEW Hornady 7mm 139 gr. IB (InnerBond) bullets and have excellent success with both of the 154 gr. 7mm bullets and the new 139 gr. IB bullets. Once you have used the new Hornady 7mm IB 139 gr. bullets you will not use any other bullet for deer hunting!

The very best to you in reloading, shooting, & hunting!

So even Hornady admit that I am not alone in finding the standard 139gr hornady bullet fragile even at 2,800fps.

The interbond is thought by Hornady to be a lot tougher.

I have been using and have tested about every bullet made over the last 12 years in Africa on my 100,000 acre safari consession. With quite a few big to REALLY big animals taken it gives a strong resolution as to what works and what does not. Over the years we have likely taken many thousands of animals. Some seasons we will shoot as many as 100 impala alone just to supply the local hospitals with meat. With our limit of 24 hunters a year each averaging 8 animals there is another 200 a year as well. Resolution of performance must come from high numbers of game killed. Since it's impossible to shoot two animals exactly the same way each time for comparitive testing of bullets, it must be done many many times to get a better feel for their performance.

Nosler Partitions were for many years the bullet of choice from rifles over 3000 fps velocity. They tended to penetrate deeper and hold together better(the back half anyway) then anything else on the market. For standard calibers under 3000FPS most factory bullets would function well enough to get the job done. Keep in mind there have been quite a few animals taken before bonded core technology and monolithic bullets were introduced. Along with the majority of hunters using simple inexpensive factory loaded ammo.

The Nosler Ballistic tip in my opinion was a dismal failure on animals in Africa from larger bore guns and higher velocity rifles. They tended to come apart and were much more like a big game varmint bullet then a deep penetrating hunting bullet. When combined with a 7mm mag or 300 mag the entry wounds were explosive but penetration much too shallow. When used from sub 3000 fps rifles and used on broadside chest shots the penetration was enough and the explosive nature proved deadly. They are however not as well suited to "any angle" shots as the more strongly constructed bullts.

The Hornady SST bullets are a similiar type of design as the ballistic tip bullets. The jacket is not bonded to the lead core, it uses the interlock design which has been a Hornady trademark for a long time now. They will, or at least have been holding together better then the Ballistic tips for me. However they are not bonded, check the price and that becomes clear!

The Interbond bullet which on the surface appear to be the same are actually a completely different bullet inside. The Interbond bullet is actually a flux bonded core holding the jacket to the lead core preventing seperation. This is the same or similiar technology to the Swift A frame bullets bonding process. The difference between the two bullets would be like comparing a 2X4 piece of wood to a 2X4 piece of steel. They both have the same shape but are not the same material or construction.

Many of my hunters choose to hunt with me in Africa without the need of bringing a rifle. Many will travel to other parts of Africa or Europe before or after the hunt and don't want the burden of having to drag a rifle around with them. Rifles after all don't travel well across many international borders. Because of this my rifles are used by quite a few of my hunters.

This past season My 30/06 was used with 165 grain interbond bullets by Hornady. There were 2 dozen big game animals killed with that combination. Animals as large a blue wildebeast which are considered to be the toughest plains game animal to drop on the shot, and Zebra and Gemsbok which also have reputations for their toughness. Kudu were also taken but they don't take much power to fold up compared to the others. Over all I recovered a single bullet from all those animals. The penetration from a tiny underpowered little 30/06 with 165 grain bullets was quite impressive. There is not a Nosler ballistic tip or Hornady SST or any standard construction bullet that would have ever produced repeatable performance like that!

I was actually a bit dissapointed that I had so few recovered from all those animals. I expected to weigh and confirm their retained weight. However the exit wounds were clearly showing massive expansion and the retained weight to drive them through the exit side skin.



Exit holes like this would make blood tracking easy. However with length wise penetrations like this Gemsbok had they usually fall to the ground without a step.

Make no mistake the Bonded core bullets like Accubond, Interbond, and Scirracco are not the same bullet that a Ballistic tip and SST bullet are. This is a whole new ball game of projectile technology! I will not likely use anything but the Hornady 165 grain interbond bullets in my 30/06. At least not until something much better comes along. My hunters using this rifle have made the comment that its the best rifle they ever used and when they get home they want to build one just like it.

It's not the gun that is so wonderful, it's the Interbond bullets!

They are what turn it into a super high performace hunting machine. I also shot an Elk this past season with the same rifle and bullet. As you can see from the photo the bullet is lodged under the skin at the point of the shoulder. The recovered bullet was 85% retained weight. This bull was near 1000 pounds est. weight. All from that old and boring 30/06 with the puny 165 grain slow poke 2900fps bullet. It's not the cartridge folks, it's the placement and the bullet you shoot!

Thanks for the update Hack,
If this is indeed what the current Interbond is doing then I am all wet on this subject. It is NOT the performance I am seeing on deer size game. We got no exits on 3 muledeer and the previous test had about a 50% exits on deer.
Very Impressive on the Oryx.

ED

I will just stick with the .277 cal, 140gr BTSP Hornady Interlock bullet, that I have been using for a while on deer. It's Accurate (sub-MOA), It shoots flat (with a BC of .486), and I get good expansion, and full penetration (@3000+ fps MV).
What is not to like? Why change for the new flavor of the month? IMHO most of these new bullets fill a void that does not exsist.

EO, Sorry if I appeared to disrespected your statements earlier, some of it just came off a little unclear to me. Thank you for clarifying your point.

PS. This old boy seemed to agree with my position on the original Hornady Interlock (.270win 140gr)


[ 12-02-2003, 19:13: Message edited by: Mark G ]

I try not to take any of this personal but there are times when I cannot. I can be vague at times as I write in a stream of thought and this is not always so clear. As long as we all can get our opinion out and it is taken as just that , an opinion, we will be fine.

On this subject if this bullet is improved then great. I didn't build them, I only used them. If they are indeed preforming like the wound on the oryx then I will need to visit with them again. That looks like what I would expect from a Partition or TB.

ED

I am the biggest cock head on the planet.
The 150's I bought today are -MUCH- tougher than the ones I have from last year. I just got off the phone with my contact in R & D and he says, " oyeah I forgot to call you and tell you that is improved".

I will be loading these 150 in the .30'06 and .300 to test on some feral game to test terminal performance.

I stand here with hat in hand to be punished by all.

ED

What Changed? When was the change made? I was suprised at the expansion with the 150 IB's we used this year. I wonder if they are of the old variety?

Glad you decided to stick it out. Sometimes this place can be brutal and unfair. Sort of like enduring a wold pack--once they smell blood...

I would like to express my appreciation to EO and to JJHack for taking the time to inform us on their experiences with this bullet.
I understand the major bullet makers sometimes change the design of their bullets w/o notice. I've been told that Nosler has changed the design of their Ballistic Tip bullets eight times. Apparently some of them are made with much heavier jackets than others. All the BT's above .308 are this way - the jacket comprises over 50% of the bullets weight. I've also learned that the jackets on the 120 gr. .284 diameter BT's are at least twice as heavy as the .284, 140 gr. BT's. E

I'm real confused! As far as I know, the interbond bullet wasn't sold as either a reloading component or loaded ammo until this year. The first interbonds I could get my hands on were at Cabelas and that was in march of '03, this year.

E O, what you were using were probably 150 SST's. Did those bullets have a cannelure? Did the expanded jacket have the interlock ring on the inside of the base? If they were SST's, then I agree they are only a very little better than the BT.

My post here back in july showing the expansion and weight retention of the 165 interbonds in my 300 WSM lead me to believe that very few of the interbonds will be recovered from whitetails or other like sized animals. That fact, that they will nearly always pass through, is what I'm looking for in a bullet. Both sides of an animal leaking blood. The apperance of the first jug in my tests, show me that they expand violently. This should anchor the animal on the spot. But if not, at least you'd have a decent blood trail.

http://www.nookhill.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=009123

As for my season,,, phoey, I missed my only shot at a small buck. He was running close and fast, but I usually hit them anyway. Nobody else that were shooting interbonds hit anything either.

The hornady interlock and the hornady SST are basically the same bullet except the SST has a polymer tip instead of an exposed lead tip. Hornady has not changed these bullets. I would assume the SST would expand quicker than the regular interbond with the polymer tip to instantly start jacket rupture on impact. They do have an interloc ring on the inside of the jacket to prevent the core from squirting out of its jacket at least until the jacket expands or tears enough to release it.
The innerbond is a new bullet that is not related to the interlock or SST. The jacket is much thicker than either and the core is flux bonded to the jacket and the core will not slip or squirt out of the jacket. Even if the bullet fragments there will be lead sticking to the jacket fragments.

I tried out some 130 grain SST in my .270 and was pretty disappointed They shoot nowhere close to how well the ballistic tips shoot out of my 270. I recently got some 130grain interbonds for my 270 now these are shooters, groups average about .75. I can also confirm there killing power I only had a rear facing shot on a deer. I took the shot and the deer fell flat on its ass dead in its tracks. as if struck by lightning the bullet hit the lower rear shoulder first then went into the main portion of the body. So to me why would anyone want the SST any more when you have the interbond, haven't tried noslers accubond yet for some ungodly reason they only make 140 grainers in .270

E O I would like your opinion on the 150 grain Scirocco in a 7 mm Rem mag for mule deer, whitetail, etc.

What is your opinion on the Nosler Accubond? for deer size game.

Ed, I have read this over again and wonder about your comments in regards to these statements. You have written this here as I have copied it exactly as you wrote it:
As for the accubond and interbonded being "beefed" up WRONG they are the same bullet as the Ballistic tip and SST. I have been right there in camp with the designers of both, have been able to lend input

That is the one of the most absurd things I have read on the internet in a long time. I don't know what camp these guys you were with claimed to be in but the bullets you have described in this post are totally unrelated to one another. Not even the same manufacturer. What "camp" of yours were both Hornady and Nosler in at the same time doing their design work with you?

I have done endorsements for Hornady over the years and know some of the people working there today. Nobody I spoke to there knows of anyone who killed 5000 whitetails while testing their bullets. I think that would be a well known bit of data! Could you please tell me the names of the engineers in the Hornady "camp" that told you that the SST and interlock bullets are the same as the interbond. Who were the men that were in the "camp" with you and took your advice?

Be careful what you claim on these forums as there are experienced and very educated people who read them. There are also people from magazines and manufacturing who read these forums and will straighten out some of the mistakes made in posts from time to time. Many more people read these posts then respond. It's easy for anyone to post a line of BS and assume that since the various readers don't know who they are it's OK. However when you begin to post quite a lot of unbelievable details about various "facts" and the "facts" are not true, somebody will call you on it and your done! As an example, if you would like I can scan and post the adds in American hunter Magazine that I have done for Hornady. I can back up the posts I make and have hunted with in excess of 200 people who read these forums and who have been to my lodge in Africa or on my hunts in Alaska. There is a level of credibility you need to earn. It does not come from tossing around comments about all these bullets being "the same bullet" when they are not. You may infact be a good hunter with a lot of experience. Just ease into this without the BS. Folks will eventually pick up on your experience and accept it for what it's worth. It does not come from a few posts over a short time. It's earned over many years of continous interaction with many people. To busrt through the doors rattling off this line of crap about having had design input on these bullets " in the manufacturers camp" when you don't even know the difference between them is about as foolish a mistake as can be made here!

How could you say in one line that the designers were in the same camp as you, and took your input and yet you don't even know they are completly different designs and manufacturers? I'm missing some details here or have not taken enough drugs to follow the thread from that point on!

In another Post you claim to have killed over 5000 whitetails in the last ten years on a Private ranch property. That is 500 a year average. Impressive numbers for sure. What size was this property? I have 100,000 acre hunting consession in South Africa with 28 indiginous species of big game. If I were to kill 500 big game animals a year there would be nothing left in a couple years. The carrying capacity of the land cannot support that kind of population on even 100,000 acres. The breeding populations would be gone,....... totally devistated in two years of that kind of culling operation, on a self contained fenced property.

I happen to know a thing or two about carrying capacity of land regarding game populations and wildlife management as that was my job for over ten years with the Weyerhaeuser Company and the Washington Forest Protection Association. It's mind boggling to me that you have stated 5000 deer in 10 years from a single private hunting consession. I'm guessing you made a mistake and added a zero to that number and actually meant 500 not 5000. That is still a very high number but possible under exceptional conditions. The food resource to feed 5000 deer on a fenced property within the probable realistic size limits in the USA is unrealistic at best.

As a Professional Hunter and game manager in a country where carrying capacity is higher then anyplace else on earth. For the most indiginous big game species found in one location naturally on Earth. I can tell you killing 5000 animals of one species in a controlled or Fenced habitat is unlikely unless they were being brought into the area for restocking. That would make no sense at all if they were being culled at the same time!

By all means give me some data here on this extrodinary operation where you have been able to breed deer nearly as fast as they can be shot!I imagine that killing 500 deer the first year is clearly possible on a typical or even extrodinary sized property. However the second year you're going to struggle a bit more. By the third year what is remaining to breed? They certainly cannot produce the volume to keep pace with the quantity removed. By the 5th and 6th year how are the remaining deer able to produce the volume of offspring needed to continue killing 500 per year average? Yet this continued for 10 full years by your posting.

I have worked in a deer culling operation on an Island just off of the Washington coast. I could have killed every deer on that island in one year or maybe two. It would have been well over several hundred. They had that island vegitation eaten down to nothing because the carrying capacity was so far exceeded they would have starved.

I can't imagine how big the property you were on that contained these 5000 plus whitetails must have been. Do yourself a big favor and ease into this stuff. You have dumped way to much here to be accepted by the average guy visiting. This site is not comprised of idiots! Maybe now you understand why you recieved so many PM's regarding your posts. It's just not going to be swallowed by anyone with an inkling of common sense!

Hot core that article was published in Bear hunting magazine last summer and was regarding black bears in Washington and Idaho. I have nothing to hide regarding that, it's public information in a national magazine.

I can post the whole article here for your reading enjoyment if you like. Not sure how you recall it as a "brown bear" article but it was not. It was striclty involving black bears. The jist of the text was not in how the bears were "cleanly killed" but rather in how pathetic the typical law enforcement handgun was when used on animals of 300 pounds or more. Not sure how you came to the conclusions reading the article but in anycase both of your observations on the text are in error.

Here is the article in it's full length as originally written, and published in Bear hunting Magazine last year. Thousands of copies of that magazine are spread across the USA and Canada so it's easily verified that nothing in the text is changed here, from the original! If anyone can find the references to the comments that Mr. "Hot core" made by all means point them out to me. There is no mention of any handguns cleanly killing brown bears anyplace in this text. By the way I was a paid Employee at the "All Outdoors" forum, not a visitor.

Here ya go:

I have had quite a few guys over the years ask about handgun cartridges for bear hunting. I really like hunting bears with handguns. I have likely taken more with a handgun then by any other means myself. Handguns have some limitations and some, even though referred to as handguns are more like little handheld rifles then handguns. The general term of handgun seems to stretch the definition quite a bit to include these single shot cannons!

When I think of a handgun I see a revolver or semi-auto pistol in my mind. However today the Thompson Contender and other single shot
handguns seem to have taken over as the handgun of choice for serious big game hunters. I have owned many contender barrels and several contender actions in my life so I�m quite familiar with them.

During my early years as a Professional Hunter I was using dogs to hunt lions and bears. I took out a number of guys from the mid-west and eastern states for bears during the spring Idaho hunts and the fall Washington hunts. It was not unusual to take 20 or 30 hunters out per year and shoot 30-40 bears per season. The Idaho regulation allowed 2 bears per hunter per year and the Washington regulations allowed only one fall bear per person.

We booked a hunter from Ohio early in our guiding business. He was a police officer that wanted to hunt using his on duty carry gun. In Idaho any gun .22 center-fire or larger was the minimum for big game. Washington State had muzzle energy minimum requirement at that time. We took the policeman out on the hunt with his 45 ACP shooting 250-grain soft point bullets. His first bear was treed and shot without much trouble. The bear was in the tree about 20 yards above us. We caught our breath, took a couple photos and then he prepared for the shot and fired. The impact was solid, smoke could easily be seen coming out of the hole in the bear�s chest. The bear was angry and peeling bark from the tree after being hit! He began to climb further up the tree when I yelled hit him again. I did not want the bear coming down with the dogs tied up and unable to escape from this angry wounded bear. He was about 225-240 pounds. A nice brown colored typical Idaho spring bear. At the second shot which hit nearly the same place as the first the bear really started going up the tree fast and I yelled to shoot again. I think the third shot missed but the forth hit him solid sounding like a baseball bat hitting a homerun.

The bear was barely visible up in the branches of the tall fir tree when all of a sudden we heard him crashing down and falling to the ground. When he hit the ground he was up in a flash and rolling and running down the hill. He was dead when he came to a stop on the flat, about 100 yards below us.

This experience was really educational for me. I saw this bear shot quite a few times with little effect from that 45 ACP shooting good 240 grain soft point bullets. The hunters accuracy was great, the bullets were big and heavy, and the bear was close. Why would this combination not be a much better killer? The hunter was thrilled and excited to go shoot another bear! This time he loaded his 240-grain HP�s for the hunt. We had a conversation regarding the lack of �crumple power� his gun had shown. He was surprised I felt that his gun was weak, or exhibited a lack of power. He asked what I was expecting from a handgun. I said I expect a bear shot in the center of the chest with a bullet to die in seconds, not continue to climb a tree and growl or be in a fighting mood. I also said if the bear comes out of the tree alive next time, I would also have to shoot him to protect my dogs. The hunter, although he understood the issue with the dogs, was still surprised by my opinion of his guns performance. He also respected my need to guard the dogs should a problem occur with the next bear.

The second bear was bayed and running and bayed and running all day. It�s a trait big bears have so I was quite worried about the gun he had. Eventually this bear also treed and we were able to get to the base of the tree before he jumped out again. It was a big bear of at least 300 pounds. I also carried my .44 magnum revolver this time, as backup. At the shot, which the bear took in the center of his chest all he did was growl and slap the tree with his paw. I said keep shooting until he falls, if he comes down alive I�m going to have to shoot him too.

This bear started to come down the tree. At the next shot he stopped and began to climb further up the tree but fell dead when he hit the ground in a moment or two. The Ohio policeman was thrilled again and really excited to see that his carry gun was so good at killing a big animal like this bear. Far-be it from me to ruin his feelings on the hunt or his gun, but I thought the performance was pathetic! He returned home amongst the most satisfied of all the clients I have ever had. He must have done a great sales job too, because for the next several years the majority of my hunters were mid western police officers using their carry guns for hunting. During this time I relived many of these types of multiple shot hunts at close range with various types of handguns. I suppose it�s where my opinionated feelings have come from regarding handguns for bears or other big game. I also have to laugh when I hear guys talking about �back up� guns for hikes in bear country, or while fishing in Alaska. I also see this kind of chat on the Internet hunting forums. Many of the guys who really believe their handgun is the �be all-end all� choice for protection. They would likely be leaving the dead weight of their gun home if they saw it�s pathetic performance on a 300 pound black bear, much less an angry 1000 pound brown bear or grizzly!

There have been a lot of handgun cartridges used over the years that I would consider worthless hunting guns for big game. The first is the 38
special. It�s lack of penetration and poor bullets are not meant for hunting. A human being is a very soft and mentally weak animal. A Human shot in the leg will go down for the count screaming for help. A deer or bear shot the same way will be a 100 yards away or more before you realize you made a bad shot. I have seen 30 pound coyotes shot with a 357 magnum run a long way before falling down. A man shot the same way would be praying for his life. There are so many drug induced mental problems with humans that those dopers who are shot might be as hard to stop as a bear or deer. The drugs would likely make them more worry free and likely to flee or fight with a serious wound. If I were a policeman watching how my carry gun performed on a bear that allowed him to climb a tree, after a perfectly centered chest shot I would certainly consider a bigger gun! It seems to me many criminals are on dope and they would be like shooting an adrenalin filled bear!

So what are the cartridges which are failures, and the cartridges which are gems in the handgun world according to my experience with hundreds of bears killed? The bad choices are the 38 caliber the 9mm, and the 40S&W. These three should be strictly police work, targets or plinkers. The 40 S&W, and 9mm need cleaning and attention daily. I have seen plenty of these semi-autos fail to cycle with pine needles jammed into them and leaf mulch or dirt in the action. They seemed to have the highest level of cleaning and maintenance needed by far. Revolvers on the other hand seem to be trouble free and made for hunting!

The next group of guns can kill bears but I would certainly not consider them hunting guns. The 357 magnum is able to kill a bear much better then the 9mm and the 38 special even though they actually shoot the same bullets. The 357 mag is much better then the 40S&W as well. The 357-magnum case is just a bigger capacity shell able to provide much better performance. If I were a cop it�s likely what I would carry based on what I saw it do to bears of all sizes. Don�t mistake me here, I don�t like it as a hunting gun for big game especially bears. The 45ACP is another gun which worked but not what I would like in a bear, or big game crumpling handgun. I think soft point bullets with maximum loads would give you a false sense of security for bear backup as well. I don�t see the hard cast bullets in 357 mag being enough better to trust 100 percent of the time. They are not what I would carry and I would never suggest anyone hunt even the smaller black bears or deer with one. The .44 special was a decent performer but again it fell short of the crumple effect I like to see in a bear hunting gun.

This next group is where I think the minimum line is drawn. The 41 magnum and the 10mm seem to have the power to really make an impression
on a bear. I have seen both these cartridges knock bears down and break leg bones. Something the others just don�t seem to be able to manage
consistently. These guns shoot over 1000 fps with bullets well into the 200-grain weight category. They seem to have nearly equal power and
accuracy as well. This is where I would suggest a minimum bear hunting handgun for close range start. They are certainly less than 50 yard guns but a great tool for bait and hound hunting. I would not suggest this cartridge as a backup or self defense against bears, only for hunting.

Finally the best group of guns. These are cartridges, which have never failed to decide matters and have the ability to crumple a bear in his tracks most of the time. The .44 magnum, the 45 long colt, and the 454. I have killed dozens of bears with the .44 magnum in my life and I don�t recall a single one running off after the first shot. I have recovered very few bullets and have broken the bones of the shoulder and legs countless times. These guns are more like rifles in performance then the typical police handguns I�ve seen so often. With a 240 grain hollow point going 1200 or more FPS the .44 magnum revolver is at the top of the heap as a commonly used hunting handgun. With Randy Garrett's hard cast ammo it will whistle though the shoulders of any bear in America. My .44 magnum was a Ruger Red hawk with a 7.5� barrel. It was an easy to shoot gun with plenty of crumple power. The same gun in 45 Long colt or 454 would be as good at getting the job done. I also have a 4� barrel Smith and Wesson Mountain gun that is as good but do to the lower Velocity of the short barrel it has a distance limitation of about 40-50 yards in my opinion. I consider these the proper size handguns for hunting the big game of the world.

The final �sub-category� are the wildcats, the contenders, and the new big bore revolvers. There is now a whole host of big bore revolvers like the 480 Ruger, the 50 caliber S&W, and the 50 Linebaugh. There is even a 45/70 revolver available now! Clearly all these are excellent bear killers if you decide to pack the additional weight and handle the massive recoil forces.

Keep these three factors in mind when deciding on a handgun for big game or bears. Make certain it has 1000 fps impact velocity, not muzzle velocity. .40 caliber or greater diameter, and finally, heavy bullets in the mid 200-grain weight range or bigger. With handguns so long as the impact velocity is about 1000 fps the best way to improve power and visual effect is by increasing diameter and weight of the bullet.

Remember also there are ways of having an effective increase in bullet diameter without changing caliber. Make sure if you use hard cast bullets you have the largest flat nose on the bullet possible also known as the �meplat�. Randy Garrett loads a bullet in his ammo which has a large flat nose which is almost bore diameter! This has an enormous effect on bullet impact over a pointed or rounded nose bullet. Granted the over all diameter has not changed but the bullets impact diameter has improved by a whole bunch with such a big flat nose.

One other thing to consider, don�t think that just because you load a heavy hard cast bullet you have the most powerful load for your gun. This is a very common mistake. Those big heavy bullets will often whistle clean through a big bear like a field tipped arrow. The bears will die but often show little bullet impact reaction. They also tend to run off and die a great distance away. In my experience a high velocity hollow point bullet will cause a significant impact reaction and almost always allow an additional shot while the bear is stunned. The bullets about 240-260 grains in weight as fast as you can drive them will always show a greater impact effect then the heavy hard cast bullets do. They don�t penetrate as well or break big bones as well, but they don�t need to on a black bear. I have shot clean through many many black bears broadside with a 240-grain hollow point bullet at 1200-1300fps muzzle velocity. Upon impact the bears will stop and spin around biting at the wound and struggle to move away. With the many I have shot using a 300 plus grain hard cast bullets, they have launched out of sight like a rocket. Showing little if any reaction to being hit.

Don�t mistake those big heavy hard cast bullets for the most powerful ammunition your gun can use. They are when matched to the proper game, like buffalo, moose, elk, and many African species. However for the typical 250 to 500 pound soft skinned black bear they are a mistake to use.

Consider what works better on a deer shot through the lungs. A 375HH with a 300 grain solid having 4500 foot pounds of energy, or a 270 caliber rifle shooting a 130 grain soft point bullet with only 2400 foot pounds of energy? Clearly you see the energy is far greater and the bullet weight and diameter is bigger on the 375HH. Upon impact the 300-grain solid blows a hole right through and you cannot even tell if you hit the animal. With the explosive 130-grain bullet from the .270 the deer will launch into the air with a nerve reaction and fall within a few steps. It�s the projectile that decides the result much of the time, not the perceived, or calculated power your gun has.

Don�t focus so much on muzzle energy, or the hype surrounding heavy hard cast bullets. The hard-cast bullets do have exceptional penetration, but at the cost of small diameter wounds which don�t often have the same effect as the bigger diameter hollow point wounds which have much more of a shocking or stunning effect. The benefits an explosive soft point or hollow-point will provide you with is a certain visual reaction, and significant tissue trauma. The heavy hard cast bullets are designed for exceptional penetration only. Randy is a friend of mine we have sat and talked about this paradox of bullet choice many times. Black bears absolutely realize more trauma from higher velocity soft bullets, or hollow points. The super hard-cast heavy bullets pass through so quickly with so little transfer of bullet impact that the reaction is poor. Yes both designs will kill bears, but the faster pass through of the solids will make your effort to locate the bear much longer. Often I have seen hunters consider their shot a miss because the bear will show no reaction at all to being hit. If this kind of bullet is chosen the best solution is to break bones and hope the fragments of projected bone will assist in the penetration of important organs like the lungs and heart. If brown bears are the main target then the heavy hard cast bullets make sense. They can be 4-6 times the weight of a black bear and you will likely be shooting for shoulder bones on these big bears. Then the big hard cast bullets are the perfect choice.

I have not come to these conclusions by seeing one or two bears killed, but by seeing as many as several hundred killed. Anyone can see a bear shot with spectacular results once or twice and assume the cartridge bullet combination is perfect. However seeing the same combination twenty, thirty, or more times really starts to give you higher resolution repeatable results. The results that carry the most weight are the ones with the greatest resolution or highest numbers. I have heard countless hunters claiming that their XYZ caliber and bullet is the perfect choice. When asked why they think this, the reply is that they shot a bear with it one time and it worked perfectly. Well in my opinion one time does not make for a very scientific or credible set of facts! This works the other way as well. Plenty of people will make or see a bad shot on game and assume they need a bigger gun. When in fact they only needed to make a better shot!

My take is E O is speaking the truth, and it was also big of him to come back and state he standed corrected. I also wonder how many times someone from a bullet company posts here to mislead us, I hope never.

I will try to clear up a few things as we go here. This will try to tie up this thread and the Bio thread.
As for jjhack;
I culled for this corporation for 10 years on properties in Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Montana, Colorado, North Carolina, Maryland and Pa. I am guessing that at one time or another there was 1 million acres leased/owned. As for the thought that it would decimate the herd, that was the whole idea. We would shot off all the sub standard (trophy quality) and restocked with "Gold Medal" deer blood lines. Please remember this has nothing to do with "hunting" this was for setting up Trophy deer ranches. This is all on a put and take process and with tons of supplemental feeding. I am guessing at the 5000 head of deer it is a rounded number it very well may have that many in 10 years, sorry for not being exact but I didn't keep very good records. When we shot the SST this was on a big farm in N.C. and another in Texas. We used Hornady, Nosler and Federal bullets. Please remember that in the Western US this year 45,000 deer are being culled in the name of CWD. In the county I live in here in Pa. around 10,000 deer will be killed in motor vehicle accidents this year. This is not as big a number as it sounds. I have heard of Aussie cattle stations taking off 25,000 brumbies in a year. I don't want to start a fight by any means I was orginally just adding my 2 cents and was hammered for it. I should have just said f*%# it and went on my way. I am quite envious of your African experience as I now wish I had not wasted so much time on whitetails.
As to the interbond;
This is my own stupidity, I fully well know that bullets change in production. It was stated here that the BT has been changed like 8 times in its run, maybe more. We all know the evolution of the Barnes X. I mistakenly ASSUMED it was still the same bullet I saw as a prototype. I was basing this on the performance of only 3 deer I saw taken this season and none of them had a exit . This was with 2 165 .30 cal and 1 139 7mm.
For this I am forever sorry. Rest assured I will attempt to not go off half cocked.
As for a Favorite deer gun;
If you are asking about caliber then I would say anything in the .25'06 to .300 class with the .270, 7mmMauser, .280, .30'06, .038 would be perfect. I shot most with a .308 and a .30/30. I really am a closet .308 fan. This with a 180gr Rem RN corelokt is just awesome. The 7mmMag is very good as well and I have used the .223 and .243 alot too. Right now if pinned to the wall (this is a dumb thing to say on this forum) I like and use a .30'06 for all of my light game hunting.
There was a question of favorite for Elk. I have no real experience with Elk. I have shot elk size game but this has nothing to do with "hunting" elk. I gather from hunters that do not live in elk country that they are extremely tough and the guys I know who live with them are complacent of there toughness, regularly using seemingly inadequate calibers for them. I am not the person to ask on this, though I would suggest at least a .270 with very good bullets. I have used up to a .375 for this size game and it is wonderful.

I sincerly regret the hard feelings that any of this has brought on. There is no need for name calling as we all know in the world of terminal performance there is -NEVER- 2 identical situations. All we have is observations and opinions.

Lets spend more time in the field and less time mother f#%$*ing each other.

ED

[ 12-03-2003, 18:35: Message edited by: E O ]

The 10,000 was reported by the Pa. comm. at a public forum. The estimate for the state is in the 26,000 area.

You are correct I will not report any numbers from here on.

Ed

EO, I have no issues with you but you mentioned culling deer in Montana. That has never been legal and I'd sure like to know how you pulled that off? In fact there's a whole stack of outfitters with leased land in Montana that would love to be able to cull deer for management purposes but unless some laws are/where broken it isn't going to happen. YOU have some explaining to do.

Just a note about deer/vehicle collisions. One cannot go by numbers provided by insurance companies. They only give the numbers where a claim was actually payed out for a vehicle/deer collision. In my experience in auto body shops only about 1 in 3 deer collisions result in the insurance company being notified or have a accident claim filed. Also a lot of deer are hit and no vehicle damage results especially in areas where deer rarely get over 150 lbs. A lot more deer are killed on the highways than statistics report.

Fair enough.