Bullet Failure?

[MikeDeltaFoxtrot]

Yesterday was opening day of rifle season Virginia. I was blessed with a great morning hunt. I took a nice 8 point buck at 101 yards right at the beginning of legal shooting hours at 6:30 a.m. I then shot a button buck an hour later at 248 yards. I thought the latter was a doe, but it happens. Both animals dropped in their tracks and were DRT. The buck was a heart shot and the button buck was a double lung. That is of course good. Here is the buck.




The shot on the button buck was through and through, but on the big buck I recovered the bullet inside the hide on the opposite shoulder. I guess I can't complain about the result, but what worries me is that what I recovered only weighed 90 grains, and it started at 160. That is not impressive from a weight retention standpoint.

The bullet was a 160 grain Nosler Accubond in 7mm, fired from my 7mm Weatherby Magnum at about 2970 fps. The rifle is a Mark V from 1985, made in Japan. It is very accurate with this load. Here is the recovered bullet next to an unfired example.



I had thought this load and rifle combination would be good to go for Elk, but the performance of the bullet makes me question that. Do others have experience with the Accubond moving fast? I welcome any thoughts.

 

[BAKPAKR]

I have had 200 gr Accubonds be pretty splashy out of a 300 RUM at 3150 fps.

 

[Outdoorsman12b]

Nosler claims 65-70% weight retention so your within 10% of that spec. Your not specific in what you would have preferred to occur for bullet performance, but assuming you want more weight retention and/or pass through?

 

[hodgeman]

Your AB has a retained weight of 56%...that's pretty close to the designed weight retention of 60-70%.

I'd plug one into an elk and never think another thought about it.

At a range of 100 yards, your impact speed is pretty high which likely explains the lower retained weight. I've only recovered a couple. of ABs, one on a small caribou shot at 80 yards with a 300WSM with a similar impact velocity. Longer shots on bigger animals have completely passed through.

I think your result is more of a function of the close range/ high impact velocity than a function of the Accubond. If you substituted an elk for that 8 point, I'd expect it to be just as dead.

 

[WeiserBucks]

Textbook close range, high speed Accubond performance. If you're expecting more weight retention and penetration at that range you need a different bullet.

 

[HuntInWild88]

like others have said pretty text book high speed AB performance. If you want better penatration and weight retention switch to a partition or a mono like barnes.

 

[EastMT]

High speed bullets will almost all do that, unless A frames or PT, copper. That’s about what they were designed to do.

 

[MikeDeltaFoxtrot]

I appreciate the replies. Several people mentioned Nosler's claims and design criteria for weight retention, but I don't see those on the product page on their site. If it performed as designed, then I accept that.

Most of my prior animals, including numerous deer, a caribou, and some African plains game, have been taken with Barnes TSX or TTSX. This is a 180 grain TSX I recovered from a whitetail doe I shot at 200 yards in 2019. The bullet was launched at about 2950 from a Winchester Model 70 in 300 Winchester Magnum. It retained almost 100% of its weight.





I did kill my waterbuck with a 265 grain Nosler Partition. It worked great and held together. I have found the partitions to not be particularly accurate in load testing.

I went with the Accubond for this rifle because it is stupid accurate for me. It consistent shoots about 0.5 MOA. Here is a three shot group at 330 yards. The grid squares are 1". The TTSX I tried was not as accurate, at least with the powder I was using.



I'm curious to hear from others about my choice of bullet here. I guess the Barnes TSX is my baseline for bullet performance. I expect the bullet to expand, hold together, and penetrate, while being very accurate.

Is there an advantage to the Accubond other than high BC and accuracy? Is the way it performs better in some way?

Thanks in advance.

 

[hodgeman]

I've used the Accubond quite a lot over the last 15 years for game up to moose at ranges from 25' to 450 yards and bullet performance has only been really good. I've only recovered two out of 80 or so shots on game.

They tend to be very accurate in my rifle and have given me a routine track record of dead animals with big exit wounds. I tend to hunt open country and close range shooting is very unusual- more normal is the 200-300 yard range than 100 or under. At the ranges I hunt it just performs better than other loads I've tried.

 

[Kotaman]

Text book for an accubond. No failure.

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

Bullets do weird things sometimes. You've gotta be one of the few guys that would have both a 160gr Accubond and a 180gr TSX both get stopped by a deer. Both of them should've been through and through, and I understand your hesitancy to use them on an elk because of that. I wouldn't hesitate to use that 160gr Accubond on an elk, as I'm betting that the next few animals you kill with it will have exits.

 

[Formidilosus]

Is there an advantage to the Accubond other than high BC and accuracy? Is the way it performs better in some way?

Yes. They kill faster. Retained weight is not a measure of lethality… quite the opposite, all else being equal higher retained weight means less tissue destroyed. Less tissue destroyed, longer animals live/travel.

 

[HuntInWild88]

Yes. They kill faster. Retained weight is not a measure of lethality… quite the opposite, all else being equal higher retained weight means less tissue destroyed. Less tissue destroyed, longer animals live/travel.

I'm not sure I would agree on the higher weight retention means less tissue destroyed..hydrostatic shock you get from shooting bullets designed like hammers ,woodleighs and even barnes. Do some pretty serious damage. I've actually considered switching from monos because of the amount of meat I have to toss do to hemorrhaging compared to shooting Aframs and core&cup style bullets. I just keep with monos due to the fact I don't have to worry about a bullet plashing on the shoulder or lack of penitration. I know the animal is going to die. I would rather worry about losing some meat over loosing and animal.
Because let's face it unfortunately sometimes bad shots happen.

 

[WCB]

Yes. They kill faster. Retained weight is not a measure of lethality… quite the opposite, all else being equal higher retained weight means less tissue destroyed. Less tissue destroyed, longer animals live/travel.

Not sure you can just through a blanket statement of "they kill faster". I have shot 90% weight retention bullets, 60%, and Bergers which is a coin toss what the hell they are going to do. I have noticed no difference in time to death from any noticeable standpoint on dozens and dozens of animals. Some flop dead, some run, some stand there, etc.

To the OP...60 ish % is normal for the Accubond at those ranges. As the bullet slows down at longer ranges weight retention should go up. On most mono bullets like the TSX you will be floating around 100% retention but generally have a narrow operation window for that bullet to expand so longer ranges are no advised. High B.C. bullets will have generally better flight characteristics than low B.C. bullets at longer ranges. IN NO WAY does this mean out of your rifle they will be more accurate or any rifle for that matter. Also, B.C. has really nothing to do with terminal performance.

If you want something in between something like a Swift Scirocco, Federal Trophy Bonded Tip, or Federal Terminal Ascent will have around 80-90% weight retention.

I wouldn't have a problem shooting an elk with that combo.

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm not sure I would agree on the higher weight retention means less tissue destroyed..hydrostatic shock you get from shooting bullets designed like hammers ,woodleighs and even barnes.

“Hydrostatic shock” doesn’t exist, isn’t a wounding mechanism and has repeatedly been proven false in ballistics testing. It is repeated by gun writers and people as a catch all, with no legitimate meaning. What most people think of as “hydrostatic shock”, is the temporary stretch cavity.

Yes high weight retention bonded bullets with large frontal area can create large temporary stretch cavities at high impact velocities, however, they will not create as wide of a permanent wound channel as a comparable heavily fragmenting bullet.

Not sure you can just through a blanket statement of "they kill faster". I have shot 90% weight retention bullets, 60%, and Bergers which is a coin toss what the hell they are going to do. I have noticed no difference in time to death from any noticeable standpoint on dozens and dozens of animals. Some flop dead, some run, some stand there, etc.

As a 100% blanket statement- no. As a general, 99% statement- yes.

A few dozen animals will show a difference, but that isn’t what I am referencing. I’m speaking to hundreds upon hundreds of medium and big game that have been shot with the same rifle and cartridges, controlling for game size, placement, and impact velocity, where the only difference is between heavily fragmenting projectiles and high weight retention bullets such as most monos, TBBC, etc. and measuring the actual distance traveled and time to incapacitation (animal on ground and physically not able to continue forward motion) between them.

For instance, with 30cal Hornady 168gr and 178gr Amax/ELD-M’s compared to Barnes 165/168gr TSX/TTSX, the Barnes shot animals travel much longer on average (less than 10 yards for the few that ran with the Hornadys, but between 40-130 yards with Barnes) as well as much longer time to incapacitation- less than 4 seconds with Hornady, more than 10 seconds with Barnes.

That is one example, that specific one was more than a hundred deer per bullet. What is notable, was with the Amax/ELD-M combo, I believe was either 4 or 5 deer total that was not an instant drop with pure lung shots. With the mono, it was only a couple that had an instant drop.

That isn’t the only example, I’ve been apart of numerous culls doing the same thing. In every single case- as long as sufficient penetration is achieved (chest) the bullet that makes a larger wound kills faster. Well, technically incapacitates quicker.

 

[Studd muffin]

That's what the few accubonds I have found out of my 7mag look like. Nicely mushroomed, caused large wound channel, and critter didn't go far.

 

[theleo91386]

I've shot multiple elk with the 140gr 7mm Accubond out of my 280AI doing 3,100 fps and have yet to get any back. The last bull I shot with them was nice 6 x 6 at 90 yards. I put 3 in his lungs just to see if I could get one to blow up, all exited. I'm very surprised a deer was able to stop that bullet at that range, but then again, weird stuff does happen.

 

[magnum44270]

100 yd shot on a big bodied buck out of a fairly fast cartridge. The bullet worked perfect! Around 57 percent weight retention, normal for them is 60%. Bullet Stayed together and did not shed its jacket.

 

[magnum44270]

The barnes should not be your baseline. ---
Barnes is at the high end of the specteum along with etip, GMC, copper solids; all weight retention, some expansion(usually depending on speed) and full penetration.
- Next is swift Aframe followed by nosler partition; great expansion , high weight retention and good penetration.
This is the normal baseline and the "gold standard" have you
-Next is AB, ABLR, swift sirocco, fusion. Great expansion, good weight retention medium penetration.
- next is normal cup and core; interbond, grandslam, hotcore, ballistic tip, sst, PowerPoint. Lots of expansion, weight retention can be hit or miss depending on speeds and sometimes a coin flip, jacket and core often seperate.
-last is berger style; complete expansion, energy dump. Designed to penetrate 3-4 inches and then violently come apart


It all depends on what theory you prescribe to. Penetration is king, expansion/energy dump is king, or a happy medium between the two.

Aframe and partition is slightly higher happy medium. AB, ABLR, Sirocco, is the happy medium. Standard cup and core is a coin flip, like a box of chocolates.

 

[magnum44270]

142g ABLR at 2920fps. 60yd follow up shot on mature cow elk. Broadside shot, rib, liver, rib found under hide . 82.7g 58.3% retention.

Perfect AB/ABLR performance, just like yours!