Is there interest in a 6.5mm 150gr Accubond?

[cal30_sniper]

The core is lead and it’s glued to the outer copper jacket. Whatever you call it is semantics.

Terminology, not semantics. They are not the same.

Here, AI can explain it to you:



On second thought, I predict a rant about AI based on what else I've seen in this thread. How about taking Federal's definition? They know a thing or two about bullets:

"Although they’ve taken countless larger animals like elk, moose and bears, all cup-and-core bullets can start to break apart on contact with heavy bone and other tissue, making shot placement critical. That’s where bonded projectiles come in. Unlike cup-and-cores, the copper jacket is electrochemically fused to the lead core at the molecular level."

How To Select The Right Rifle Bullet

If you’re new to hunting, the variety of bullet styles available is enough to stop you in your tracks. But don’t get overwhelmed. Instead, follow this easy-to-understand guide.

www.federalpremium.com

 

[TaperPin]

The ABLR isn’t a cup and core bullet.

I have to admit to being curious about the history of impact extruded jackets -

Terminology, not semantics. They are not the same.

Here, AI can explain it to you:
View attachment 885155


On second thought, I predict a rant about AI based on what else I've seen in this thread. How about taking Federal's definition? They know a thing or two about bullets:

"Although they’ve taken countless larger animals like elk, moose and bears, all cup-and-core bullets can start to break apart on contact with heavy bone and other tissue, making shot placement critical. That’s where bonded projectiles come in. Unlike cup-and-cores, the copper jacket is electrochemically fused to the lead core at the molecular level."

How To Select The Right Rifle Bullet

If you’re new to hunting, the variety of bullet styles available is enough to stop you in your tracks. But don’t get overwhelmed. Instead, follow this easy-to-understand guide.

www.federalpremium.com

Bonding is just gluing the two parts together. It doesn’t change the fact the core is a lead slug attached to the copper jacket.

If you want to go full nutzo on the semantics of all be my guest. I quite honestly don’t care what names you use, so knock yourself out.

 

[cal30_sniper]

I have to admit to being curious about the history of impact extruded jackets -
Bonding is just gluing the two parts together. It doesn’t change the fact the core is a lead slug attached to the copper jacket.

You're wrong and doubling down on it.

Note: bonded bullets are not "glued" together in any case that I know of. (though some processes are proprietary, so hey, it's not impossible). Most commonly, bonded bullets are made via a chemical process not unlike plating.

Cup and core refers specifically to non-bonded copper jacketed bullets without a partition. The standard production process is swaging. This is industry terminology that predates all of us. This category includes includes Core-Lokts, Interlocks, Hot-Cor, etc, which are all still considered cup and core bullets.



Bonded bullets and partitions do not fall under the Cup and Core category, despite being made of both lead and copper. Every major bullet manufacture has verbiage to this effect in their literature, as does this peer-reviewed paper from DOI: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723049136

 

[cal30_sniper]

If you want to go full nutzo on the semantics of all be my guest. I quite honestly don’t care what names you use, so knock yourself out.

Again, it's not semantics. It's terminology, and you've got it wrong:

 

[TaperPin]

Again, it's not semantics. It's terminology, and you've got it wrong:

View attachment 885171

A bonded bullet is still a cup and core design, with a little glue to hold the core in. Marketing departments can use whatever term and description they want as if it’s a miracle of science and people eat it up. Lol

 

[TaylorC]

Not sentiment, just physics and aerodynamics.

"You shouldn't...."

 

[TaylorC]

A bonded bullet is still a cup and core design, with a little glue to hold the core in. Marketing departments can use whatever term and description they want as if it’s a miracle of science and people eat it up. Lol

Cup-and-core is industry lingo for "simply" cup+core without chemical bonding. There's nothing useful about confusing the terms.

 

[cal30_sniper]

A bonded bullet is still a cup and core design, with a little glue to hold the core in. Marketing departments can use whatever term and description they want as if it’s a miracle of science and people eat it up. Lol

Okay, RollPin. Have it your way.

 

[cal30_sniper]

"You shouldn't...."

Maybe “there’s no demonstrable, evidenced-backed reason to” would have gotten the point across clearer.

“Shouldn’t” seemed more efficient.

 

[sndmn11]

A bonded bullet is still a cup and core design, with a little glue to hold the core in. Marketing departments can use whatever term and description they want as if it’s a miracle of science and people eat it up. Lol

Why don't you rely on the ballistic tip bullet design then?

 

[TaylorC]

I’ve loaded the ABLR 150g in my 6.5cm and the 190g in my 30-06, I just loaded them to max COAL and about .5g under book max. I saw the 190g drop a large, 60” bull moose at around 190yds and the 150g kill an aoudad at just over 100yds. In both rifles I regularly load the more common AB sizes so 180g in the 30-06 (which I have shot several animals with) and the 130/140g ABs in the creedmoor.

I didn’t have any issues with either, I’d use either of them again without hesitation. The 190 especially in the 30-06, I forget the exact numbers but even moving more slowly at the muzzle than the 180s they would get me some more distance out of my 18” barrel.

Assuming your 6.5 was a 24" and starting at 2700, impact was maybe 2550fps. [That 18" delivered the 190 was what, 2375?] Those are great use-case examples for the ABLR.

The PRC adds around 300fps to that impact velocity, and would drop to 2700 at 200 yards. On a 10"-thick aoudad it would make little difference, but on a mature bull slightly quartering-to with a 2" scapula to get through? I'm sure it would kill but I'm not sure the AB of same weight wouldn't drive deeper by opening slower.

 

[wind gypsy]

Didn’t read all the posts but what is a 140 accubond lacking that one would hope to accomplish with a 150 AB?

 

[TaylorC]

Didn’t read all the posts but what is a 140 accubond lacking that one would hope to accomplish with a 150 AB?

10 grains, 14% more bullet on the ass end.
As I mentioned elsewhere above, your line of questioning can be as reasonably applied to virtually any single step up in any bullet weight of any cartridge.
To wit: what does the 140gr accomplish that the 130 won't?

 

[z987k]

10 grains, 14% more bullet on the ass end.
As I mentioned elsewhere above, your line of questioning can be as reasonably applied to virtually any single step up in any bullet weight of any cartridge.
To wit: what does the 140gr accomplish that the 130 won't?

I think hawk makes some 150 and 160gr round nose 264 bullets. Built like a bear claw instead of an accubond but I think that design does accubond stuff better than an accubond does.

 

[The Guide]

On a 10"-thick aoudad it would make little difference, but on a mature bull slightly quartering-to with a 2" scapula to get through?

Where are you finding a 2" thick scapula? I've butchered a lot of animals (wild and domestic) and never seen a scapula that was thicker than 3/4" unless you are counting the tiny scapular ridge in your measurement. Muscles on the scapula are soft and have no way of being bullet proof. The scapula in itself is a soft and brittle bone with little that would prevent penetration from a bullet above terminal velocity.

Jay

 

[TaperPin]

Why don't you rely on the ballistic tip bullet design then?

I think bonded bullets are a good design, but a lightly constructed bonded bullet that sheds 45% of its weight at a very slow 2400 fps isn’t anything I’m looking for.

 

[TaperPin]

Didn’t read all the posts but what is a 140 accubond lacking that one would hope to accomplish with a 150 AB?

 

[sndmn11]

I think bonded bullets are a good design, but a lightly constructed bonded bullet that sheds 45% of its weight at a very slow 2400 fps isn’t anything I’m looking for.

What part is semantics then?

 

[N2TRKYS]

Are the 150 ABLR worth buying over the 142 ABLR in a 6.5 PRC?

 

[wind gypsy]

10 grains, 14% more bullet on the ass end.
As I mentioned elsewhere above, your line of questioning can be as reasonably applied to virtually any single step up in any bullet weight of any cartridge.
To wit: what does the 140gr accomplish that the 130 won't?

And there’s an answer that makes sense in many cases. I.e. a better BC or more sectional density on a frangible bullet to help with penetration. In this case, you seem fine with a lousy BC and in a bullet design that doesn’t need the additional SD for adequate penetration.