Bullet shootout article

Great link. Seemed to me like a well thought out test/ comparison. Didn't look good on the BT. If they will shoot for you the AB and IB perform as advertised, but I've had little luck with them in terms of MOA accuracy. I've limited experience with the TSX ( 1 box of 168 .308 out of a '95' ) but plan on some summer experiments with more 'serious' rifles.:)
 
Interbond have consistently disappointed me... both in accuracy on paper and performance on game.
My interpretation of the figures on that test does nothing to change my opinion.
I have had extremely good results with Accubonds both off the bench and on animals. Partitions have disappointed me on game much in the same manner that the author of that article describes.
 
Interesting analysis. I do have to question his accuracy conclusions though. As we all know, each bullet/powder/primer/rifle combination is unique in terms of its downrange accuracy. The author's "one load for all" determination of accuracy is..... well I can not think of anything polite to say.

I have had groups of less than 1/4" to 1/2" from Fail Safe's, SST's, Interlock's, Accubonds, etc., in calibres from .277 to .44, it just takes some work and experimentation.

More interesting is the penetration / wound channel analysis - apply to the critter in question.

Cheers
 
BIGREDD said:
Interbond have consistently disappointed me... both in accuracy on paper and performance on game.
My interpretation of the figures on that test does nothing to change my opinion.
I have had extremely good results with Accubonds both off the bench and on animals. Partitions have disappointed me on game much in the same manner that the author of that article describes.
Click to expand...

Curious how Interbonds have disappointed you on game? I happen to like them a lot mainly b/c they shoot so accurately in my rifle (165gr in a 300WM). I get a lot of extra confidence knowing they shoot so well...though I've only taken a couple deer w/ them w/ excellent results. Thanks for any feedback! :)
 
I didn't need any further cconving that the TSX is one of the best hunting bullets out there- they are very accurate, expand to a classic "mushroom" shape immediately and penetrate deeply...what more do you want?:dancingbanana:
 
Wound channel volume. What the article says to me is that the interbond should be great, though 150 grainers are a little small for the really big stuff
 
I saw a similar bullet comparison some time back and I liked the way the article ended. It said something like "though there was a bit of difference in the way in which these bullets performed, ALL OF THEM provided sufficient expansion and penatration to get the job done as a big game bullet."

And I see the same here.

Robin
 
Gatehouse said:
I didn't need any further cconving that the TSX is one of the best hunting bullets out there- they are very accurate, expand to a classic "mushroom" shape immediately and penetrate deeply...what more do you want?:dancingbanana:
Click to expand...

You could add "doesn't make a mess" for the meat saving crowd. It took me awhile to become a convert but I'm fast switching in most everything. A downside to the TSX is animals often don't show as much reaction to hits as with leadcores. You can't have everything.

One problem with the article that I picked up on was the reference to that speed being equivilent to different calibers at different ranges. This is ignoring the fact that different muzzle velocities will give different RPMs. Different RPMs can give wildly different results in bullet expansion. Bullet spin doesn't drop off nearly as fast as velocity or most bullets we shoot would start tumbling evenat hunting ranges.
The US military did penetration tests years ago with downloaded 30-06 ammo instead of shooting at the actual distances. In the end they had to be done over, because all the data was flawed.
 
Dogleg said:
You could add "doesn't make a mess" for the meat saving crowd. It took me awhile to become a convert but I'm fast switching in most everything. A downside to the TSX is animals often don't show as much reaction to hits as with leadcores. You can't have everything.

.
Click to expand...

The animals that I have seen hit wiht TSX and the last few ears of X bullets have pretty much gone down rigth away. Take a few steps and "PLOP":cool:

Wound channel is always the same, long, large, fairly even and somewhat tubular:rockOn:
 
After reading that same article a few months back, I chose to give the IB's a try, they are more economical to shoot than AB's and get a good review. So far, on paper the 225 gr. IB's are on par with the 225 gr. AB's. We'll just have to wait and see how the perform on game.
 
Gatehouse said:
The animals that I have seen hit wiht TSX and the last few ears of X bullets have pretty much gone down rigth away. Take a few steps and "PLOP":cool:

Wound channel is always the same, long, large, fairly even and somewhat tubular:rockOn:
Click to expand...

The wound channels always seem to be as you describe, and so far I have only managed to recover one bullet. Animals seem to go down about as fast as lead bullets but I don't get the same visual and auditory hit indicators on rib hits. On the other hand I only shot 16 big game animals with TSXs last year, my impression might premature but I thought I saw a pattern. Bullet speeds were from 2500 to 3500 MV. Shoulder hits are spectacular. I think it is small trade off for the ability to shoot through large animals lengthwise if necessary.
It was getting a little annoying last July in South Africa. A typical rib shot went like this:

Bang.
I think you missed.
Nope
Thump of animal hitting the ground.
I guess you never.
I guess.

Shoulder hits with the .375 consistently went like this:

Ba..THUWHACK.Thump.:eek: :eek:
You'll bring those bullets for the buffalo hunt right?
I guess. :dancingbanana:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom