Disappointing Accubond performance?

Redlich said:
Sheephunter, I basically agree with your idea of how wounding ballistics works, except in the case of one detail. You've repeatedly said that energy can ONLY be transferred into heat, and that's not true. Energy can be transferred into all sorts of other forms of energy, heat being only one of them. The energy can also be transferred into, for example, mechanical energy, or sound.

If energy could ONLY be transferred into heat, then the potential energy that is released by burning the gasoline in your truck would just heat the truck up until it's red hot, but it could never drive anywhere. In reality, some of the energy becomes heat, some becomes noise, some becomes mechanical energy that is harnessed so that you can drive, etc.

Similarly, when you fire a bullet in the chamber, the bullet heats up (heat) both from the heat of the chemical reaction and the friction of the barrel. But it is also accelerated (mechanical).

When the bullet strikes the target, it doesn't kill the animal by turning its energy into heat, although this would happen to a small degree as a byproduct, just as it did in the last two examples. I think that once again it is the mechanical energy transfer that does the killing, because the bullet tears, crushes, and displaces tissue, thereby destroying said vital organ tissue. The tissue is accelerated from being stationary, and moved by the bullets passage, exhibiting energy transfer just as one pool que ball imparts energy into another, moving it by striking it. It's not a question of friction, but of one mass physically displacing or impacting, or otherwise destroying another. If I rub my foot against the floor, it causes friction and generates some heat, but leaves the floor basically unaffected. If I were to smash an object through the floor, that's another matter entirely!

I don't know if that made sense, but I hope so :S

I'm off to bed so I won't be able to respond today at least.

Cheers!
Red
Click to expand...

I think you totally missed my point. I wasn't suggesting that heat had anything to do with killing. It's just a byproduct of friction. A bullet moving through the air encounters friction. A bullet moving through tissue encounters friction. This friction causes the bullet to slow, changing energy to heat. The heat has nothing to do with how a bullet kills just as energy doesn't other than energy allows the bullet to move through the tissue and do its work. The thought of an energy tranfer killing is a myth....plain and simple. Holes kill...energy doesn't. Heat from friction doesn't either.
 
sheephunter said:
I think you totally missed my point. I wasn't suggesting that heat had anything to do with killing. It's just a byproduct of friction. A bullet moving through the air encounters friction. A bullet moving through tissue encounters friction. This friction causes the bullet to slow, changing energy to heat. The heat has nothing to do with how a bullet kills just as energy doesn't other than energy allows the bullet to move through the tissue and do its work. The thought of an energy tranfer killing is a myth....plain and simple. Holes kill...energy doesn't. Heat from friction doesn't either.
Click to expand...

Energy can only be TRANSFORMED into heat.... energy can be TRANSFERED from one object to another....

When you drop a rock in the water the energy produced by the effect of gravity on that rock is transferred to the water when teh rock hits it... that's what makes the ripples.... it doesn't cause the puddle to burst into flames.... :)
 
This friction causes the bullet to slow, changing energy to heat. The heat has nothing to do with how a bullet kills just as (kinetic)energy doesn't other than (kinetic) energy allows the bullet to move through the tissue and do its work.
Click to expand...
Kinetic Energy: Kinetic energy is energy of motion. The kinetic energy of an object is the energy it possesses because of its motion.

Maybe that will help people understand what the "energy" of the bullet really is.
 
For me, I took a decent mulie in 2004 @ 44m-quarter away and recovered the bullet:eek: the buck dropped in his tracks. About an hour later I took a 8x7 whitetail @ a quite longer distance and the bullet went right thru-double lung. My 2 bucks and Hour year!!

I have been using the 180gr AB's in my 300WM since 2004 and reloads since 2005....love the performance on elk, moose, bears and deer. Most of the time - pass-thru penetration. Of the bullets ever recovered by me or my buddies on their animals, the Accubonds had perfect expansion with a retained weight between 68-85%.
 
I just orded some 200 grainers for my 300 rum that should be here this week.
Man a lot of "energy" there to kill by "Dyanamic force"..lol
 
shot 10 plus deer this year with 130 grain accubonds @ 2900 fps from a 6.5 mm. Wont choose them again. good looking bullet, accurate etc etc but they proved to be like hunting with a shotgun loaded with cooper coloured confetti. Were the dear dead? yep. Would I shoot at anything other then a perfect broadside no way. On the plus side many off side shoulders were spared for the butcher which a better bullet would have traveled through.
 
Getting back to the original post anyways, I'm about to start working on loading up something accurate using 200gr accubonds. I haven't used them on an animal yet, I'm hoping for decent performance. I think that what people have seen is that these are tougher than a non-bonded bullet, but they're still not indestructible at very high velocity/close range. Added on to that, I'm sure every once in a while some kind of defect or inconsistency makes a bullet or a lot of them more delicate than they should be :/

I just hope the ones I have are up to par, but I have confidence. Every bullet fails due to defects every once in a while, but the noslers seem to have a pretty good reputation.
 
saskcop said:
200 AB in a .30-06 would fix just about anything. Animals would not be impressed with the outcome.
Click to expand...

I'm loading my 200grn AB on top of a 300WM, chrony at 2870fps

little white tail I shot the bullet went in .3" and then hit a rib the hole was 3 fingers wide and continued that way to the exit side

quartering away hit just behind the right sholder high up nicked the bottom of the spine and came out just in front of the left sholder, just a little rib meat destroyed :D

nothing not to like about those Accubonds
 
No complaints with the Accubonds. I dug these two bullets out of a moose and a mule deer. They performed flawlessly, with approx 65% weight retention.
6387421843_3d4164bf09_z.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom