Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Ha ha.

Mine is accurate enough to shoot a mouse or a moose!

---

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Naa - LOL - just playing with it and various loads since 1975.
Some light loads too along with 400's at 2,150fps, 350's at 2,296fps and 510gr. WW at 2,060fps. In an 8 pound rifle, they still booted somewhat.

---

Ya...I am shooting 350 gr. Speer and 350 gr. TSX out of my .458 for hunting at home. Using AA2230 and pushing them along at just over 2,450 fps. I could no doubt get a wee bit more velocity but there is no point. Both bullets shoot nice tight groups and they are putting out more than enough horsepower for anything I pull the trigger on here...which is usually bear and they are always DRT with a bounce. Certainly do not need to use it here either but the only way to stay completely familiar with it is to pack it around hunting at home.

---

Why not! With better powders the .458 Win Mag is very capable. I would load 480 gr Woodleighs in it not 500 or 510 gr projectiles. A much much more capable cartridge than a .45/70. The .458 Win Mag has an element of recent vintage nostalgia. IMO.

I considered a Whitworth K98 sold by 4seventy on here once. I remember the .458 Win Mag M70 African with fondness from catalogues maybe 1980? I wanted one back then. A cannon!

---

Yes all of the new advances in powders and bullets, etc. has changed things for so many older cartridges. I used a Brno 602 in .458 WM to shoot my first cape buffalo close to 40 years ago. Back then most of the PH's wanted you to use solids as they didn't trust many of the cup and core bullets at that time. Now we have so many great expanding bullets that are bonded or monmetal that are up to the job and as you mentioned, you can back down a bit on weight with a 480 grain Woodleigh or the Hornady bonded DGX. There are also 450 grain bullets in both expanding and solid configuration that are good choices.

My current and last .458 is a Win. Model 70 CRF version of the Safari Express. It now has a composite stock and the barrel was shortened to 21 inches and NECG sights put on and Cerakoted. It is a joy to pack around.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Naa - LOL - just playing with it and various loads since 1975.
Some light loads too along with 400's at 2,150fps, 350's at 2,296fps and 510gr. WW at 2,060fps. In an 8 pound rifle, they still booted somewhat.

---

Ya...I am shooting 350 gr. Speer and 350 gr. TSX out of my .458 for hunting at home. Using AA2230 and pushing them along at just over 2,450 fps. I could no doubt get a wee bit more velocity but there is no point. Both bullets shoot nice tight groups and they are putting out more than enough horsepower for anything I pull the trigger on here...which is usually bear and they are always DRT with a bounce. Certainly do not need to use it here either but the only way to stay completely familiar with it is to pack it around hunting at home.

---

Why not! With better powders the .458 Win Mag is very capable. I would load 480 gr Woodleighs in it not 500 or 510 gr projectiles. A much much more capable cartridge than a .45/70. The .458 Win Mag has an element of recent vintage nostalgia. IMO.

I considered a Whitworth K98 sold by 4seventy on here once. I remember the .458 Win Mag M70 African with fondness from catalogues maybe 1980? I wanted one back then. A cannon!

---

Yes all of the new advances in powders and bullets, etc. has changed things for so many older cartridges. I used a Brno 602 in .458 WM to shoot my first cape buffalo close to 40 years ago. Back then most of the PH's wanted you to use solids as they didn't trust many of the cup and core bullets at that time. Now we have so many great expanding bullets that are bonded or monmetal that are up to the job and as you mentioned, you can back down a bit on weight with a 480 grain Woodleigh or the Hornady bonded DGX. There are also 450 grain bullets in both expanding and solid configuration that are good choices.

My current and last .458 is a Win. Model 70 CRF version of the Safari Express. It now has a composite stock and the barrel was shortened to 21 inches and NECG sights put on and Cerakoted. It is a joy to pack around.

---

Modern bonded bullets are amazing, IMHO... I have told this story a lot.. BUT, during one hunt in Zim I shot a buffalo at about 80 yards using my .416 Rem.. 400gr A-Frames.. PH asked if I had a soft in ..said yes..he said take him.. I fired.. took him AND the bull standing on his off side.. PH said he had never seen that happen before in 20+ years of guiding buff hunters..

Have never used anything other than those bullets since.. with the exception of high mtn hunts..using accubonds..

Differnce I have found is the Swift's hold up to crazy velocities where the Accubonds will not.

I am running my 28 Nosler at 3150 with Swift 175's .. Ran my 300RUM at over 3300 with Swift 180's.. all held up no matter what the distance was near or far.. Accubonds will not do that.. much thinner jacket.. Accubonds work best with 3000 fps or less ..used them in Africa the first trip out of my 300RUM.. mistake..



--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

So then my next question on the performance you experienced is what were the impact velocities on the game animals you hit with the Accubonds out of your .300 RUM? As you know well, muzzle velocity is one thing, but what actually matters is the actual impact velocity on the animal at 200 yards or whatever the distance was.

I am not arguing or disagreeing with what you said, just trying to establish a better frame of reference.

I do not shoot any of the RUM's or the Nosler chamberings. Had a 26 Nosler at one point and got rid of it. Too be honest when I thought about it after reading your post, I don't think I have ever used an Accubond our of anything that is a high velocity chambering. No real reason for that other than I have been shooting a lot of monometal offerings in recent years and that is what I usually had in the fast cartridges.

I have used Accubonds in the .270 Win and they have always worked great...that being 130 or 140 grain bullets at their respective velocities. Also 165 grain in a .30-06. The 225 grain bullets out of a .338 Win Mag and 260 and 300's out of a .375 H&H. So I have not really strained them with ultra high velocity cartridges...they have always had E-tips, Barnes, CEB or Peregrine leaving the barrel.

I have used the A-frames a fair amount over the years...when I could get them...but again out of more "moderate" chamberings when it comes to muzzle velocity. They always do what they are suppose to as those who have used them a fair bit know.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So then my next question on the performance you experienced is what were the impact velocities on the game animals you hit with the Accubonds out of your .300 RUM? As you know well, muzzle velocity is one thing, but what actually matters is the actual impact velocity on the animal at 200 yards or whatever the distance was.

I am not arguing or disagreeing with what you said, just trying to establish a better frame of reference.

I do not shoot any of the RUM's or the Nosler chamberings. Had a 26 Nosler at one point and got rid of it. Too be honest when I thought about it after reading your post, I don't think I have ever used an Accubond our of anything that is a high velocity chambering. No real reason for that other than I have been shooting a lot of monometal offerings in recent years and that is what I usually had in the fast cartridges.

I have used Accubonds in the .270 Win and they have always worked great...that being 130 or 140 grain bullets at their respective velocities. Also 165 grain in a .30-06. The 225 grain bullets out of a .338 Win Mag and 260 and 300's out of a .375 H&H. So I have not really strained them with ultra high velocity cartridges...they have always had E-tips, Barnes, CEB or Peregrine leaving the barrel.

I have used the A-frames a fair amount over the years...when I could get them...but again out of more "moderate" chamberings when it comes to muzzle velocity. They always do what they are suppose to as those who have used them a fair bit know.

---

The impact velocity was on the higher side..I had those 180s going 3370fps..shots in Afica are much closer than most of what I do here in Montana..would say they were 150 yrds or less..some much less..

I shot an impala one day fore leopard bait and blew the fetus right out of the doe..

First animal I shot was a waterbuck..took for shots to finally put it down..it dropped on every shot and got back up

I have had very good results in my 280AI with the accubonds..but.. also much lower velocity and most shots are 300 yards or more..the last Ibex was 430 ..

---

Well I doubt I have on my personal hunts or with clients I was guiding, seen impact velocity with Accubonds that exceeded 3100 fps. My closest impact velocity was probably from around 3100 fps with a 110 grain Accubond out of a 25-06. It certainly seemed to have performed as expected on a mulie and exited the off side. Outside of that particular instance I doubt I have had more than a handful of impact velocities that exceeded 3000 fps and most have probably been down in the 2400 to 2900 fps from the various cartridges I have used them in.

It would be interesting to hear of others experiences with impact velocities exceeding 3100 fps. For the most part, when I have recovered Accubonds they were nice mushrooms and had weight retentions that were similar to what you would have for weight retention with their Partitions, as has been claimed by Nosler. Of course the Partitions are not bonded, like the A-frames, but with the partition they generally turn in weight retentions of around 55 to 60% with the entire front portion of lead core gone.

Generally I have leaned towards full monometal bullets or monometal rear shank bullets like the North Fork or Trophy Bonded in recent years. For the most part they offer high BC's and you can drop back a notch or two in bullet weight and have higher muzzle velocities.
And on that note, I am getting ready to order some of the Hammer Bullets to give them a try.

So many bullets to try these days that you just can't keep up with it. Not enough time, money and in many cases you cannot depend on availability.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So then my next question on the performance you experienced is what were the impact velocities on the game animals you hit with the Accubonds out of your .300 RUM? As you know well, muzzle velocity is one thing, but what actually matters is the actual impact velocity on the animal at 200 yards or whatever the distance was.

I am not arguing or disagreeing with what you said, just trying to establish a better frame of reference.

I do not shoot any of the RUM's or the Nosler chamberings. Had a 26 Nosler at one point and got rid of it. Too be honest when I thought about it after reading your post, I don't think I have ever used an Accubond our of anything that is a high velocity chambering. No real reason for that other than I have been shooting a lot of monometal offerings in recent years and that is what I usually had in the fast cartridges.

I have used Accubonds in the .270 Win and they have always worked great...that being 130 or 140 grain bullets at their respective velocities. Also 165 grain in a .30-06. The 225 grain bullets out of a .338 Win Mag and 260 and 300's out of a .375 H&H. So I have not really strained them with ultra high velocity cartridges...they have always had E-tips, Barnes, CEB or Peregrine leaving the barrel.

I have used the A-frames a fair amount over the years...when I could get them...but again out of more "moderate" chamberings when it comes to muzzle velocity. They always do what they are suppose to as those who have used them a fair bit know.

---

The impact velocity was on the higher side..I had those 180s going 3370fps..shots in Afica are much closer than most of what I do here in Montana..would say they were 150 yrds or less..some much less..

I shot an impala one day fore leopard bait and blew the fetus right out of the doe..

First animal I shot was a waterbuck..took for shots to finally put it down..it dropped on every shot and got back up

I have had very good results in my 280AI with the accubonds..but.. also much lower velocity and most shots are 300 yards or more..the last Ibex was 430 ..

---

Well I doubt I have on my personal hunts or with clients I was guiding, seen impact velocity with Accubonds that exceeded 3100 fps. My closest impact velocity was probably from around 3100 fps with a 110 grain Accubond out of a 25-06. It certainly seemed to have performed as expected on a mulie and exited the off side. Outside of that particular instance I doubt I have had more than a handful of impact velocities that exceeded 3000 fps and most have probably been down in the 2400 to 2900 fps from the various cartridges I have used them in.

It would be interesting to hear of others experiences with impact velocities exceeding 3100 fps. For the most part, when I have recovered Accubonds they were nice mushrooms and had weight retentions that were similar to what you would have for weight retention with their Partitions, as has been claimed by Nosler. Of course the Partitions are not bonded, like the A-frames, but with the partition they generally turn in weight retentions of around 55 to 60% with the entire front portion of lead core gone.

Generally I have leaned towards full monometal bullets or monometal rear shank bullets like the North Fork or Trophy Bonded in recent years. For the most part they offer high BC's and you can drop back a notch or two in bullet weight and have higher muzzle velocities.
And on that note, I am getting ready to order some of the Hammer Bullets to give them a try.

So many bullets to try these days that you just can't keep up with it. Not enough time, money and in many cases you cannot depend on availability.

---

My experiences with Accubonds along with an extensive test I posted years ago where GUNS AND AMMO tested what they felt were the top 10 hunting bullets, they do perform very similar to partitions with 50 to 60% weight retention.. With the Swift Scirocco's --they seem to be in the upper 70% to low 80% out of my 300RUM..The jacket on the Scirocco is considerably thicker than the Accubonds.. The A-Frames I have recovered are near 90%.. which is why I prefer them.. I also prefer them over the Barnes on elk.. I feel they hit harder with their mushrooming effect..I base that on dozens of elk.. along with dozens of PG in Africa.. but, each to their own, just what I prefer..

On a more positive note for the accubonds, my findings are they are easier to get to shoot well ..and shoot incredibly well in my 280AI.. Factory loads are 3 shots touching at 100yards.. close enough for me..

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Well you certainly have me beat on elk. I have only taken 15 or 16 I believe, and not too many with the same type of bullet. My first was taken many years ago with a .308 calibre 180 grain Imperial Sabre Tip from Dominion Industries...back when Canada still had a company manufacturing ammunition for civilian hunters and shooters. Interestingly, it was the first plastic tipped bullet on the market in North America, unlike today where they are common place.

Over the years I also used Partitions, A-frames, Sierra Gameking (only once), Grand Slams, Barnes X, Barnes TSX and Barnes TTSX, North Fork and Accubonds on elk. Most recent was an 165 grain Accubond on a big cow. Was shooting a Pre-64 in .30-06 at about 250 yards. Complete pass through on a broadside double lung shot. She did a slow little trot in a circle and fell over. Hardly a strain test on the Accubond.

I have only been to Africa 3 times and, as with most hunters, I took two rifles. One for dangerous game and one for PG. So on each trip I was just using one brand of bullet in my PG rifle, which with only three safaris under my belt, didn't lead to much in the way of bullet performance comparison. Swift A-frames in a .338 WM on one, Barnes TSX out of a .308 Norma Magnum on another, and 260 grain Accubonds out of a .375 H&H. They all did the job nicely and there really was not one of the three that stood out as being better than the others.

We really are blessed with all of the exceptional bullets we have to choose from these days. Fifty years ago it was not the case and there were many that suffered from the problem of jacket separation. Back then Partitions were the fair haired child.

---

Post Extras: