Bullet proof elk

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Not again…

 

[jonboy]

Honesty, I roll my eyes every time a writer says The gun did it’s part so long as I did mine.

 

[UTJL]

It’s from a 6UM with a 115 Dtac Noseringed

Would anyone say they want more damage?

Accubonds that I have shot past 500 yards with 300 Rums have narrow deep would channels like a mono. No thanks.

I shot an elk with accubonds out of a 300 Jarrett (ballistically similar to a 300 RUM) at under a 100 yards. They only penetrated ~6” and completely fragmented. Do you have any experience using them at close range? Just curious

 

[Rich M]

Just some guy regurgitating stuff that's been talked about for "100 years".

You know that writers have to write something. 1/2 of what they write is pure trash, the other half is suspect - especially these days with blogs and pod casts. There is very little accountability for many of them.

 

[SoloWilderness]

I shot an elk with accubonds out of a 300 Jarrett (ballistically similar to a 300 RUM) at under a 100 yards. They only penetrated ~6” and completely fragmented. Do you have any experience using them at close range? Just curious

I shot my bull this year with a 300wm 190g Accubond (ABLR) at 176 yards this year. High angle, quartering away. Entry right above and 12" behind the left shoulder, exit through the right front quarter just above the knee. Dropped in it's tracks. My rifle likes them and 200g Eld-X the best, so that's what I shoot. Whether it's optimal, there are people far better versed than I am on that aspect, but in my experience, they work just fine in close, and I would prefer one to an Eld-X at that range. Wound channel was not huge, but it was effective, probably 1-1/2 to 2" diameter of damage all the way through.

 

[Marble]

I shot an elk with accubonds out of a 300 Jarrett (ballistically similar to a 300 RUM) at under a 100 yards. They only penetrated ~6” and completely fragmented. Do you have any experience using them at close range? Just curious

This was disgusted in the article I referenced above. In the simplest terms, imagine slapping a body of water with your hand as hard as you can with your palm open. It has a violent impact with a lot of resistance. Makes that slap sound. Now do the same thing at half speed. Less impact. The reason behind the difference is surface tension and how fast water can move out of the way of an object. High velocity bullets striking an animal hit what turns out to be a harder surface than a slower traveling bullet hitting the same surface. This is why at close range a high velocity bullet may break apart, loose its jacket etc. Take that same scenario and increase the distance where the bullet has slowed down a bit and you get great performance and penetration.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

It’s from a 6UM with a 115 Dtac Noseringed

Would anyone say they want more damage?

Accubonds that I have shot past 500 yards with 300 Rums have narrow deep would channels like a mono. No thanks.

Nice shooting and the projectile performed its function in the 300 RUM. Did the animal travel an undue distance and make recovery harder? I'm asking respectfully. What is the reason with respect to the way the creature expired (as it sounds like some element wasn't acceptable) that makes that wound channel a "No thanks" other than its appearance?

 

[Short Track]

I'm actually tired of these discussions. .308 7mm-08 6.5cm all kills big game.

 

[Grundy53]

I shot an elk with accubonds out of a 300 Jarrett (ballistically similar to a 300 RUM) at under a 100 yards. They only penetrated ~6” and completely fragmented. Do you have any experience using them at close range? Just curious

I've shot quite a few elk with 200 gr accubonds. Out of a .300 WM. Usually under 100 yards (I timber hunt Roosevelt's). They've all held up well and have done their job. I suspect mine were going a lot slower than yours.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Wrench]

I'd be a horrible "gun writer". I have a lot of guns ans killed a ton of critters, but my opinions on headstamps and bullets are pretty bland. Just make it go to the right area at the right speed.

End of the story.

 

[sneaky]

It’s from a 6UM with a 115 Dtac Noseringed

Would anyone say they want more damage?

Accubonds that I have shot past 500 yards with 300 Rums have narrow deep would channels like a mono. No thanks.

33XC kills them 2 at a time. Saves money in the long run

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

I shot an elk with accubonds out of a 300 Jarrett (ballistically similar to a 300 RUM) at under a 100 yards. They only penetrated ~6” and completely fragmented. Do you have any experience using them at close range? Just curious

With that penetration, did it get just one lung or did the fragments take out the vitals as a whole? I'm gathering it was a broadside shot, but maybe it was a quartering angle?

 

[UTJL]

This was disgusted in the article I referenced . In the simplest terms, imagine slapping a body of water with your hand as hard as you can with your palm open. It has a violent impact with a lot of resistance. Makes that slap sound. Now do the same thing at half speed. Less impact. The reason behind the difference is surface tension and how fast water can move out of the way of an object. High velocity bullets striking an animal hit what turns out to be a harder surface than a slower traveling bullet hitting the same surface. This is why at close range a high velocity bullet may break apart, loose its jacket etc. Take that same scenario and increase the distance where the bullet has slowed down a bit and you get great performance and penetration. Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

The physics make sense! I just didn’t think the upper velocity limit of an accubond was only ~3300fps. Looking back a partition, terminal ascent or copper bullet would’ve been best.

 

[UTJL]

I've shot quite a few elk with 200 gr accubonds. Out of a .300 WM. Usually under 100 yards (I timber hunt Roosevelt's). They've all held up well and have done their job. I suspect mine were going a lot slower than yours.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

With that penetration, did it get just one lung or did the fragments take out the vitals as a whole? I'm gathering it was a broadside shot, but maybe it was a quartering angle?

They were 180 grains going over 3300fps at the muzzle so faster than a 300 win mag. Having learned a lot since then, that is obviously overkill for an elk.

The first shot was broadside behind the shoulder and only got the onside lung, second shot was steeply quartering away and broke the hip but didn’t penetrate any further. Third shot it was facing me and thats the one that put it down. All three didn’t penetrate well. That said I was using the wrong bullet for the situation.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Nice shooting and the projectile performed its function in the 300 RUM. Did the animal travel an undue distance and make recovery harder? I'm asking respectfully. What is the reason with respect to the way the creature expired (as it sounds like some element wasn't acceptable) that makes that wound channel a "No thanks" other than its appearance?

We have already been down this road on another thread.

Past 500 yards, a harder bullet is not your friend. Yes, they were fatal, but the animals stayed on their feet longer with the bonded and mono bullets. Just because something can kill doesn't mean it's the most effective way.

I am not anti bonded or Mono. I tried another mono last year. My friend's daughter shot a little buck with a 125gr bullet out of my 6.5 Saum, 200-ish yards bedded, and made almost a perfect shot through both lungs. The buck went well over 200 yards. You just hardly ever see that with good heavy-for-caliber match bullets. Now move that buck out to 550 yards.... that's why I say no thanks.

Underwhelming......

 

[Marble]

The physics make sense! I just didn’t think the upper velocity limit of an accubond was only ~3300fps. Looking back a partition, terminal ascent or copper bullet would’ve been best.

What was also interesting is what the guy on that article stated about how the tip of the bullet can make a significant difference in a lot of ways.

My dad used to shoot a RUM with the 200 AB at 3240. They performed well. Most shots were 200ish yards. But it was just unpleasant to shoot. Even with a brake.

I like these discussions when guys are willing to provide their own feedback and are open to other ideas or info.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[gerry35]

We have already been down this road in another thread.

Past 500 yards, a harder bullet is not your friend. Yes, they were fatal, but the animals stayed on their feet longer with the bonded and mono bullets. Just because something can kill doesn't mean it's the most effective way.

I am not anti-bonded or Mono. I wish they did work. I tried another mono last year. My friend's daughter shot a little buck with a 125gr bullet out of my 6.5 Saum, 200-ish yards bedded, and made almost a perfect shot through both lungs. The buck went well over 200 yards. You just hardly ever see that with good-match bullets. Now move that buck out to 550 yards.... that's why I say no thanks.

Underwhelming......

While I do believe that the faster expanding bullets kill quicker on average it could be that buck had a will to live more than most. What did the wound channel look like?

 

[Ryan Avery]

While I do believe that the faster expanding bullets kill quicker on average it could be that buck had a will to live more than most. What did the wound channel look like?

Maybe, but I seem to witness "more will to live" with monos than any other bullet.

I don't know about the wound channel. We loaded it whole, and I went hunting. I did ask him about it later, and he said it wasn't as messy as the bullets we usually use. So I guess that's a plus.

I need to start doing @Formidilosus level autopsies. LOL

 

[gerry35]

Maybe, but I seem to witness "more will to live" with monos than any other bullet.

I don't know about the wound channel. We loaded it whole, and I went hunting. I did ask him about it later, and he said it wasn't as messy as the bullets we usually use. So I guess that's a plus.

I need to start doing @Formidilosus level autopsies. LOL

Haha. You know guys are going to ask! I have only shot about 7 animals with mono's and nothing at long range so was curious.

 

[35WhelenAI]

We have already been down this road on another thread.

Many go down the same roads in different threads...

Past 500 yards, a harder bullet is not your friend. Yes, they were fatal, but the animals stayed on their feet longer with the bonded and mono bullets. Just because something can kill doesn't mean it's the most effective way.

I am not anti bonded or Mono. I tried another mono last year. My friend's daughter shot a little buck with a 125gr bullet out of my 6.5 Saum, 200-ish yards bedded, and made almost a perfect shot through both lungs. The buck went well over 200 yards. You just hardly ever see that with good heavy-for-caliber match bullets. Now move that buck out to 550 yards.... that's why I say no thanks.

Underwhelming......

We share the same advice on no need for monos at extended ranges.

I've shot many animals (elk, pronghorn, muleys, whitetails) with monos at the approx distance of that buck, then some less, and some further for 30 years and not had an animal go more than 30 yards. It's no fun when they do, as I have seen that with traditional bullets others in my hunting party have used at regular range over those same 30 years. Not many, but a enough to remember the work tracking. Usually because the bullet expanded quickly based on the necropsy and didn't penetrate as well as it should.

I have paid attention to wound channels for those years, monos put holes and wound channels in vitals real well, leaving chunks and tattered tissue in their wake.

Impressive....