Nosler Partition or Accubond???
 

what do you use now????

I also have a 300 win mag and the nosler partitions work awesome. I have not tryed the acubonds so can't coment on them. Most of the recovered bullets are a perfect mushroom. I would post pics but my comp skills are very much lacking and can't figure the pic posting.

I was using 165 gr. Nosler Partitions, but I've recently changed to 180 gr. Nosler Partitions. They seem to work very well on game, but I've heard really good things about the Accubond. Just wanted to get some feedback from everyone.

-Trevor

I use Swift Sciroccos in my 300 win mag and have had excellent results with them. These bullets are very comparable to accubonds and I would highly recommend them. I have used my gun on deer, elk, moose and black bears and the bullets actually hold together quite well and expansion is very reliable.

They are both great choices,, see which one shoots well in your rife.

Personally I'd recommend the partition. I've only shot three deer with the accubond and none of them have been really high velocity (165 grain .308 @ 2850) I haven't hit anything overly solid (broadside ribs) and all of them have blown up on contact. I've seen fist sized entrance wounds and very small or no exit. The wound channels have been fairly short and I've been thankful that I didn't have a quartering shot or a bigger animal where I needed more then ten inches of penetration. I've read a lot of guys saying there getting great penetration with them and maybe it's just that batch that was having issues but personally I gave up on them and went back to barnes, which are a wicked bullet. I've never seen a lack of penetration with them.

nosler
 

I have used both this past fall on deer under 75 yards. 180 gr partitions with my 300 wby and 140 gr accubonds with my 270 wsm. Both good hits, both ended up running. Both needed a second shot. I think the bullets were just going to fast when they hit. I have had great results with both once you are 150 yards out. Bang flop! I'm thinking of trying the ttsx's personally

We've used both, and only use Accubonds now. Not because there was anything wrong with the Partitions, just personal preference (must be the sexy white tips).:love: There is no wrong choice to be made on this one. Kind of like drinking a bottle of Crown vs a bottle of Gibsons; the end result will be the same.:lol:

Never tried the Accubond, but do use the 180 gr NP in my 30-06.

I've used both and only use partitions anymore. The Accubonds are accurate for sure but the on game performance is less than desirable. Just what i have witnessed.

I have used both extensively, accubonds shoot better out my rifle, sendero 7mm. Performance on game is also awesome from what ive seen, several deer and a couple moose, and real easy track jobs. I use them exclusively now and dont plan to change. The ballistic tip is nice for deer as well but stick to head shots if your shooting for meat because they do a fair share of damage.Ive attempted to load barnes a few times and will never waste my money again, they never expanded in the three animals ive taken with them. The clincher for me was a bull moose at 100 yards square through the shoulder, i found the lead after and probably could have loaded it again...

I made the switch to accubonds for last season and was glad I did. Most accurate load i've shot out of my 7mm rm and they really kill $h!t.

I have shot both out of several different rifles. I have had great results with both as well. I favor the accubond now as the ploymer tip does not flatten in the clip of the big rifles. I find that the recoil from the magnum rifles tends to flatten the lead on the end of the partitions. Both bullets seem to hold weight well.

Both are good bullets, and there are other bullets out there that are a step up, for sure. I have used both the partition and accubond in .308, .338, .375 calibers. Of the 2, I would choose the partition, assuming equal accuracy. I find that the accubonds tend to over expand, especially at close quarters where velocity remains high. I do like that you now shoot a 180 grain bullet from your .300 Win in place of a 165. I'd stick with the partition.

In our moose hunting party, 4 of us shoot Sako m75 rifles 3-300WM, 1-300WSM - all shooting 180gr Accubonds. The other 2 guys shoot 140gr Accubonds in their 270WSM's.

180gr Accubonds would be my first vote. Been shooting the factory Winchester Supreme AB's since they come out (2004 I believe)..and reloading them since 2005. My reloads are 3-shot grouping almost 1-holers with 5 shot under 0.5".

Prior to that, when there was just 2 of us in our mose group we shot Winchester Supreme Partition Golds-180gr. We had our Sako m75ss 300WM rifles since 1997. Got tired of the bullet nose squaring off from cycling for the clip to the chamber and removing it after if no shot at game. The Partition Golds were a great bullet though.

Of the few recovered bullets, they retained between 67-83% of their weight. Most were double lung pass-thru penetrations. Great expansion. Devestating results. I know of only one bull that needed an addition shot to anchor him in the spot he was in and not make it into the timber.

Same results with the elk, deer and bear. GO ACCUBONDS !!!

Next choice would be 180gr TTSX's. Or even the 165 TTSX's for reloads.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3Dshooter (Post 556097) I find that the accubonds tend to over expand, especially at close quarters where velocity remains high.

I wonder if you guys got a batch that never bonded properly or something Shooter? If by over-expanding you are saying that you guys had poor penetration or bullet failure? We've taken bull elk, cow elk, cow moose, calf moose, muley bucks, and whitetail bucks and does with 180 and 200 grain Accubonds and haven't recovered a single bullet yet. I took a BIG bodied bull elk at about 85 yds with a 200 grainer out of my .300 Ultra Mag running in the mid 3200 fps range and had a complete pass thru. I'm confident enough in the performance of the Accubonds that I'm going to drop down in weight and load 165's in my .300 WSM.:cool:

No, bonding was never an issue. I feel the jacket is too light in the frontal section, causing the diameter to over expand, ie. flatten at high velocity. If the bullet was a bonded, partition style bullet, it would definitely be a tougher offering. I do feel the manufacturing process lends itself to a more accurate bullet than the partition, not to say that the partition is not accurate. Weight retention is unimpressive for a bonded bullet, typically 60- 70%. Much the same as the standard Nosler Partition and nowhere near a Trophy Bonded, Swift A- Frame or even the Woodleigh Weldcore.

The Accubond is a good bullet, I won't say great. It does and will kill animals dead! They are quite evenly matched with the partition, but I'll give the partition the edge. If you've had great luck with them, that's good, continue to use them. I'm not trying to talk anyone out of using anything. In fact, I had acceptable performance from them... not exceptional. Just my 2 1/2 cents!

I have had great luck with both bullets.

I used to shoot a 140Gr 0.284" Nosler Partition and took Moose, Elk and a bunch of deer with this bullet.

As I progressed with my shooting, I switched to the Nosler Accubond because of the higher ballistic coefficiant than the Partition.

I have also taken Elk, Moose and countless deer with 140Gr 0.277" and 165Gr 0.308" Accubond bullets. I have not run into any of the problems that some of the other guys have run into.

Any way you slice it, Nosler makes outstanding bullets. Choose the one that shoots the best in your rifle, and your freezer will be perpetually full!

I've used all 3 bullets that you mention in this post in a 300 Weatherby as well. All are a good bullet when properly placed, and I have seen animals with their heart / lungs destroyed run nearly 100 yds. We can't blame bullet performance based on that criteria. Don't underestimate the toughness of deer:)

I've chose the accubond to try first because of their price and according to nosler, the accubond should have similar penetration and weight retention compared to the partition. Accuracy is a consideration as well but I'm thinking for my hunting purposes, I should have no problem getting desirable groups.

out of the two partitions. But am not a fan of them having no base.I would recommed sothing other that either and sure not any barnes bullets.I love my bergers.Never chaced anything after I shoot them.Even the bigger ones.

If you're just after deer it doesn't matter. But I would lay my money on Partitions if I were hunting the big stuff. I have personally had bonded bullets come apart on heavy bone (moose shoulder). It was a Swift Scirroco. Have also seen Accubonds fail on elk that I have skinned for customers. I tested these bonded type of bullets in pine stumps at point blank range and thought they did well. But I cannot believe how much more destructive an animal shoulder is to a bullet. If you insist on bonded core bullets, there is always the swift A frame and Trophy bonded bear claw, each of which have a fail safe mechanism built in.

Just curious, but wonder why you disdain the barnes bullets so much. How many failures have you experienced with barnes bullets? I use them exclusively and they work for everything I point them at. They only way a barnes bullet could fail is if it didn't open up, and even then it would punch a hole in the critter. Bullet failure to me is when the thing comes apart, in which case it isn't going to penetrate properly.

I think they are unethical. I will explain(I am useing easy numbers no actual) Say you shoot a 180 grain barns it has 1500 lbs of energy when it hits a dear but blows right through how much energy is put in to the animal? 5-100lbs of energy. As fo the same bullet but a berger goes in 3"
and blows up.That deer or what ever you shot just got 1500lbs of energy.I will bet it is dead on impact.Your barnes unless through the sholders just make a cut but not all the internal damadge as the other so it is not dieing for some time.That is why I dont like copper bullets and bonded bullets the math and the use of then prove it all to well.I hope this make my point a little more clear.

It makes the fact you haven't any real world experience with them clear as a bell. Energy smenergy. Your pretend calculations are interesting though. I tend not to do math calculations while shooting but instead focus on being mean, and Barnes bullets are mean if breaking hips and shoulders with the same bullet brings a tear to your eye.

I seriously, and with no disrespect, have to question your intellect regarding bullet performance! I don't know what else to say.... maybe,....." huh?"

I agree it depends on what you want, but I'll side with Justin on this one. I don't want to shoot shoulders or hips, which I have no doubt any solid will do better including the Tsx line. On the other side if we only ever made broadside heart/lung shots, most any bullet will do. To me the Nosler partition is the do it all king, from easy opening for good expansion, to the bone smashing partition when a less then optimal shot opportunity takes place. To each their own, but I'll take the partition for most of my big game hunting.

Interesting theory I suppose, but in my experience it don't work that way. My experience with the X and TSX includes over twenty deer, several of which were just ribs/heart/lungs. While mathematically there may have been less energy expended, dead is dead.

Just cause I hate barnes bullet dont come on here and say I know nothing. In what I have seen I dont like them at all.other than a berger partitions would be the only thing I shoot. So you go brake some sholders and hip bones and I will shoot them dead with what I use.