Accubonds vs Accubonds Long Range

[fishnguy]

Got another question, so two for the day, lol.

Can’t think of a better place to ask this question than here: what is the difference between Accubonds and Accubonds LR bullets?

[JCart]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

Got another question, so two for the day, lol.

Can’t think of a better place to ask this question than here: what is the difference between Accubonds and Accubonds LR bullets?

I think the Long Range version will mushroom at 1300fps and the normal Accubonds are 1800fps.

[marky_mark]

The long range’s have a more tapered jacket that allows them to expand at lower velocities more consistently. While not completely blowing up at higher velocities

The standard accubonds kill really well

[fishnguy]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

So the long range would be less than ideal for shorter distances?

By “not completely blowing up”, Mark, are you saying they would/there is potential for them to do so at close shots?

Thanks.

[Pathfinder76]

I’ve used both at close range. Both make a bigger mess than they should.

[stob]

idk about the rest but i find the standard AB's more accurate in my rifles than the LRAB's???

[sns2]

Take it for what it is worth. One of the best members this forum ever had, who gave up because of ignorance and idiocy, has loaded them in numerous rifles. He often told me how fussy they were to get a good load for, and their on game weight retention, and penetration was not at all what regular accubonds resulted in. Thus, I always stayed away. I have read similar reports elsewhere.

[Pathfinder76]

They will shoot. But I agree, they take some work. I have found that ABLR’s respond well to seating them deeply. They need space. But I’m always disappointed by the mess both varieties seem to make.

[JBE]

the regular accubonds have worked very well for me for a long time so never found a need to try the lra's

[marky_mark]

I know I’ve never had to track an animal with an accubond

[brewster29]

Originally Posted by Pathfinder76

They will shoot. But I agree, they take some work. I have found that ABLR’s respond well to seating them deeply. They need space. But I’m always disappointed by the mess both varieties seem to make.

I found Accubonds to be fussy. It usually took me a fair bit of fiddling to get decent groups. They killed ok, but did not penetrate like Partitions. I gave up on them and now shoot Barnes LRX.

[Pioneer2]

Specifically 160gr in a 7mm Rem mag at 2925fps and they have always had text book expansion and did 40" of moose. Half inch or better groups.

[eric2381]

I’ve been loving the Ttsx the last few years. However, 180gr AB from my Sako 85 300 win mag shoot very well and have killed the elk and deer I’ve shot them at very well. Great bullet.

[prarie_boy1]

I load the AB for a friend in a .338 win excellent accuracy and velocity and got lucky with the load seated them to max mag length and 1 of 4 trial powder chargers yielded SUB MOA accuracy so we stopped there. Very mild load by .338 standards but on game performance has been excellent. I bought the 150 ABLR to try in a overbore 7MM wildcat and didn’t have the best luck with dialing in a load however I can echo a previous members comment that they were more sensitive to seating depth and preferred to be seated deeper. I recently switched to the 150 Barnes TTSX and was able to get excellent accuracy right out of the gate with minimal load development doing the typical Barnes .050 and deeper seating depth to start.

[fishnguy]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

[fordtruckin]

Originally Posted by JBE

the regular accubonds have worked very well for me for a long time so never found a need to try the lra's

Same! I found them easy to group in my 308 and have had no issues with "exploding" at short ranges. My go to bullet for everything I hunt.

[Smokinyotes]

i Was having problems getting 142 gr LRAB to shoot so I emailed Nosler. They replied that they recommend 0.70 off therifling

[Duramaximos]

I agree with much of what has been said here.
Imo, terminal ballisics of the LRAB are very similar to ELDX. ELDX is more accurate and less expensive. Neither are a TSX or Partition.

[Pathfinder76]

I’ve shot a lot of game with TSX’s, TTSX’s, and LRX’s and sure appreciate their contained nature. I don’t recall having a hard time killing something with them either.

[bcpappy]

The regular accubond is my go to bullet to try first, in a majority of rifles in various calibers its easy to get them to shoot well. I have had them kill everything that I shot at and not ruin meat unless I had them blow up heavy bone, sending bone fragments everywhere and only then a couple of times over a couple of decades they have blown up. I have had the soft front of the partition ruin more meat than accubonds. With that said shot placement is more important as you get towards softer bullets, I prefer the accubonds as they are a tougher but not too tough like the ttsx. If you're rifle is purpose built for bigger game use a tougher bullet. I like the ttsx for 338 and bigger cals. I have one longrange rifle that shoots the long range accubond and it was a little bit more time to find the load to get it accurate. I haven't got any game with this load yet so I can't say how the performance is. That long range gun is purpose built and I rarely shoot farther than 300 yards but it uses a purpose built bullet, so I may never shoot game with it lol. If you are shooting regular hunting ranges just use the accubond if they group good. If you're shooting past 500 yards use the long range accubonds again if they group good in your gun.

[birdseye]

The regular Accubonds we have used over the years in .30 cal,?338 cal and .375 cal have all been excelent in accuracy,penetration,weight retention.Deff a great killing bullet.All so far have been Sub.

My son would like to try long range paper punching with some ALR in his 30-378 Wby maybe 200gr or 210 gr,but for hunting it will be the regular Accubonds

[kokanee king]

The original Accubond has a thicker or stronger jacket. Designed to work well at closer ranges, if you will. Conversely, the ABLR is designed to perform better as velocities start dropping off and get there accurately.
I’ve killed 10 or 12 elk with the 250 gr. Accubond out of a .338 Jarrett (2950 FPS)
Ranges from 30 yards to 500. Classic broadside to hard quartering. The only bullet I recovered was the 500-yard bull, shot through both shoulders.
I’ve killed two deer with the 6.5 creedmore and 129gr ABLR. Both were inside 200 yards. Both shot in the crease. The bullet behaved like a ballistic tip.
I know it’s an apple and oranges comparison. of 338 vs. 6.5 but particularly on larger critters, I’d be inclined to go with the Accubond.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by sns2

Take it for what it is worth. One of the best members this forum ever had, who gave up because of ignorance and idiocy, has loaded them in numerous rifles. He often told me how fussy they were to get a good load for, and their on game weight retention, and penetration was not at all what regular accubonds resulted in. Thus, I always stayed away. I have read similar reports elsewhere.

Someone pointed out that this post came across as a slam against current mods. Nope. Bulletman gave up long ago. Bent over backwards to track down and buy hundreds of lbs of hard to find powders, just to be able to resell them and cover his cost because he was retired and wanted to help reloaders out in whatever way they could. Also collected hundreds of bullets from his own tests into media, as well as from numerous hunters’ on game, recovered bullets, all so he could share his thoughts on something that interested him. Got tired of passive aggressive guys taking runs at him. Common refrain. Btw, I was a mod at the time he gave up. These were the stories you hated to hear. Bulletman is a gentleman of the highest order. Our forum is always the loser when this happens.

If anyone ever wanted to hear first hand on long range accubonds, I bet he checks his PMs still from time to time.

PS: In his church, he is known as “The Bread Man” for his great loaves that he gives out as gifts. Powder sales were often accompanied with an incredible loaf from his kitchen. He still lets me know when he finds a sale on Robin Hood flour

[pikeslayer22]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

I know I’ve never had to track an animal with an accubond

X2

[sns2]

Back to accubonds. I dropped quite a few moose and deer with them. The few I recovered on the off hide were perfect mushrooms with about 70% ish weight retention. If I never shot another bullet in my lifetime, I’d be tickled pink. My experience, as well as numerous friends I loaded for, was that they were always accurate. Pretty damn good.

[fishnguy]

Good discussion. Thanks for the replies guys.

P. S. I don’t know who you are talking about, sns, though I follow the forum closely, at least the hunting and this sections of it. Sounds like some posts I would be interested in reading.

[prarie_boy1]

Here is a picture of 2 .338 Cal 225 grain accubonds after passing all the way through 2 separate elk. Bullets weighed 157 and 175 grains representing 70 and 78 percent weight retention. Excellent performance in my opinion and the elk didn’t have any complaints either they didn’t make it 5 paces on both occasions.

[Steelhorse Cowboy]

Tried to use Interbond, tried the Accubond, went back to Partition.
Interbond didnt group well out of my 300..the Accubond where abit better but both opened up too violently. the Partition just works day in day out in the typical hunting ranges. I think the LR is just another flash in the pan phase.
Call me a old fuddy.