Bullet choice for 280 AI Accubond 160g vs. Hammer Hunter 143g

[BlackGreyhounds]

Working up hunting loads for 280 AI. Anyone want to discuss relative benefit vs. costs of lighter monolithic vs. heavier bonded bullets. I'm sure this has been discussed a bunch, and I have tried to read older posts on the subject. Heck, I will probably work up loads or both bullets to see which one shoots better in my rifle....

 

[BlackGreyhounds]

P.S. I already have a 6.5 creed shooting 140g Sako super hammer heads for smaller animals, so I'm leaning toward the heavier load for the AI

 

[gsurko]

I use 145 gr. LRX from Barnes, kills everything you point it at.

 

[String&stick]

Killed my bull last year with 143g hammer hunters out of my 7mm rem mag. I have Zero complaints about that bullet! Accurate and definitely did the job.

 

[Pickettpuncher]

What game are you hunting and why are you wanting a heavier bullet? That would dictate a lot of which bullet to choose. I think the long range craze of the last decade has gotten most people to shooting much heavier bullets than needed

 

[ZWA]

Are you thinking the OG hammer or the new HHT?

 

[bmart2622]

Of those 2, Accubond all day

 

[A382DWDZQ]

If you have the twist, I would check out the 168gr LRX. It needs a 1:8 twist.

 

[LightFoot]

I used the 143 HH exclusively last year for whitetail and one stag. While they shot well from my rifle, the results were not as impressive as the forum lead me to believe.

Between those two, I’d go Accubond.


>>>——JAKE——>

 

[BAKPAKR]

I used the 143 HH exclusively last year for whitetail and one stag. While they shot well from my rifle, the results were not as impressive and the forum lead me to believe.

Between those two, I’d go Accubond.


>>>——JAKE——>

What did the 143 HHs do or not do that differed from your expectations? I am on the same fence as OP and have both the 143 HH and the 160 Accubond shooting fairly well. I will be going after elk and whitetails.

 

[LightFoot]

What did the 143 HHs do or not do that differed from your expectations? I am on the same fence as OP and have both the 143 HH and the 160 Accubond shooting fairly well. I will be going after elk and whitetails.

Lack of internal damage (compared to my experience with cup & core and bonded lead bullets), did not get exits when I expected them to, and the actual BC was less than expected.

I shot 4 whitetail, broadside or quartering, between 90 & 150 yards. Shot a red stag at 350 broadside … two shots in boiler room.

Lots of people love them. They worked. The aren’t bad. For me, this year I’m going with 180 VLD and ELDM in my 7s.


>>>——JAKE——>

 

[bmart2622]

Honestly, I dont know why a guy would go with copper if you didnt have to

 

[Bomberodevil]

I’ve developed a 280 AI in both 160 AB and 162 ELDX, and I’m likely going to use the ELDX this year for mule deer. I haven’t harvested anything with the rifle yet, but I like the terminal ballistics with the ELDX in other similar cartridges and velocities. Just keep it off the mid shoulder if I get lucky with a sub 100-yard situation.

 

[6mm Remington]

I use the 140 gr. Accubond in my 280AI and really like that bullet. It's performed perfectly on game for me and shoots exceptionally well. It was the 140 gr. Accubond I used on my grizzly bear also. One shot.

 

[Bomberodevil]

I use the 140 gr. Accubond in my 280AI and really like that bullet. It's performed perfectly on game for me and shoots exceptionally well.

What MV do you have with the 140 AB, and what powder? I’m kind of old school, and like heavier for class bullets. I haven’t tried the 140s yet in the 280 AI. Obviously you like the terminal performance?

 

[6mm Remington]

What MV do you have with the 140 AB, and what powder? I’m kind of old school, and like heavier for class bullets. I haven’t tried the 140s yet in the 280 AI. Obviously you like the terminal performance?

IMR7828SSC with both the 140 gr. Partition & 140 gr. Accubond. Same load and they both shoot great and extremely close to the same POI.
140 gr. Accubond is 3184 fps
140 gr. Partition is 3230 fps

Cow elk one shot 450 yards. 140 gr. Partition. She took a few steps and went down.

This was before I got the Accubond loads worked up but its a winner also.

 

[Bomberodevil]

IMR7828SSC with both the 140 gr. Partition & 140 gr. Accubond. Same load and they both shoot great and extremely close to the same POI.
140 gr. Accubond is 3184 fps
140 gr. Partition is 3230 fps

Cow elk one shot 450 yards. 140 gr. Partition. She took a few steps and went down.

This was before I got the Accubond loads worked up but its a winner also.

That’s smoking fast! I’m at 2942 fps with the 162 ELDX, and 58.8 H4831. I like the 7828, my second favorite powders for the 280 AI. I should try lighter bullets some day.

 

[The_Whitetail_Kid]

Me personally, I’d want a heavier bullet than a 143. I know copper bullets are different but in that caliber I’d want at least 160+ grain. I’m running the 160 AB’s in my 7mm Rem Mag this year anxious to give them a try. I’ve always been a Berger fanboy but everyone rants and raves about the accubonds and since they’ve become available these past few months I figured I’d give them a try.

 

[Ddubs20]

Honestly, I dont know why a guy would go with copper if you didnt have to

Copper doesn't seem to create much bloodshot meat. I don't like eating lead.
The cost is pretty much the same between hammers and accubonds. Also when accubonds were unobtainable for 3 years the hammers were in stock the whole time.

 

[bmart2622]

Copper also makes smaller wound channels, hence the potential for less blood shot. Id rather lose a little meat to blood shot than not recover an entire animal.