Difference between Nosler Accubond and Ballistic Tip?

Evil_Dark

Evil_Dark

Regular
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
The title says all, I used the 165gr .308 for my 30-06, and I switched both with the same results (with exact same reloading reciepe!), they have the same ballistic coefficient.

Now time to purchase some more, and I just realized that the Ballistic tip are cheaper... So why I would chosse one instead of the other? The terminal ballistics?

Thanks

Evil_Dark
 
The Accubond is a bonded bullet ( hence the name) while the Ballistic tip is just a regular cup and core. The Accbonds will hold together and retain much more of there weight compared to the Ballictic tip which tends to fragment at higher velocities.
 
There's a major difference 'cos the AB have a progressive thickness jacket much thickwr after the ogive to provide good weight retention and muhsrooming. From my experience, it also provide fast opening, almost explosive, at impact point.
The BT have a thin jacket pretty much the same thickness all over. It provides explosive expansion but the weight retention isn't there.
 
If these are the bullets you like to use because they give you the same POI, I'd suggest using the cheaper BTs for shooting practice and the ABs for hunting.
 
Baribal said:
There's a major difference 'cos the AB have a progressive thickness jacket much thickwr after the ogive to provide good weight retention and muhsrooming. From my experience, it also provide fast opening, almost explosive, at impact point.
The BT have a thin jacket pretty much the same thickness all over. It provides explosive expansion but the weight retention isn't there.
Click to expand...

Examine the two sectioned bullets below, identical caliber and weight, but one is a Ballistic Tip, and the other an Accubond. The jacket thicknesses are identical as close as I can measure them.

P7230005.jpg
 
stubblejumper said:
Examine the two sectioned bullets below, identical caliber and weight, but one is a Ballistic Tip, and the other an Accubond. The jacket thicknesses are identical as close as I can measure them.

P7230005.jpg
Click to expand...

Can't quite tell from the pic but it looks like the BT's jacket thins out at the ogive where the AB stays thicker right up to the tip. Neat picture!

I like the idea of target practice/plinking with the BT's and hunting with the AB's if they shoot the same in your rifle. If you get an up-close shot on game the .30-06 can drive those fast enough that the BT could be prone to coming apart. I'd trust the Accubond for penetration.

With that said, I've seen many deer taken with the earlier Ballistic Tips and .300winmag's, and while there was at times a lot of meat loss, those deer dropped then and there.
 
Prairie Plinker said:
Can't quite tell from the pic but it looks like the BT's jacket thins out at the ogive where the AB stays thicker right up to the tip. Neat picture!

I like the idea of target practice/plinking with the BT's and hunting with the AB's if they shoot the same in your rifle. If you get an up-close shot on game the .30-06 can drive those fast enough that the BT could be prone to coming apart. I'd trust the Accubond for penetration.

With that said, I've seen many deer taken with the earlier Ballistic Tips and .300winmag's, and while there was at times a lot of meat loss, those deer dropped then and there.
Click to expand...
I have sectioned them to the tip, but this time I left the colored tips in place for identification. The jackets look identical from tip to base.
 
The Accubond is a premium bonded core bullet, the ballistic tip is a standard cup and core bullet. That's about all there is to say about the differences between them.
 
Many original Ballistic Tip bullets did have quite thin jackets. The "Varmint" versions still have thin jackets.

When Nosler brought out the "Hunting" BT's, the jacket thickness was increased to match the Accubond.
Additionally, even the original ballistic tips in certain weights and diameters always had a thicker jacket [.308/180; .323/180; 338/200; etc]

I have a few "original" Ballistic Tips in .277/140. In comparing them to some .277/140 Accubonds, the AB is a bit longer than the BT, indicating
the jacket on the AB is more copper, thus lighter. This means the bullet gets longer in a given weight/diameter. Sectioning them verifies this.

Like Stubble, I often section bullets. It gives a bit of a picture of construction, and likely it's performance as well.
Regards, Dave.
 
This may be a good answer. I dropped BT bullets because of poor penetration at all ranges - but amazing power deliverance at impact - for the AB when they came out.
Good for them if they improved them, but with all the games I took with the AB, I won't go back to BT.

Same goes for Hornady IB vs SST.
 
Last edited:
From the Nosler Accubond FAQ page:

What is the difference between the Ballistic Tip® and the AccuBond®?

Externally, they look the same except for the tip colors, Ballistic Tip® bullets are color-coded by caliber while all AccuBond® bullets have white tips. Internally the Ballistic Tip® is not bonded and is designed for controlled expansion on medium game with approximately 50-60% weight retention. Conversely, the lead alloy core of the AccuBond® is bonded to the jacket. This bonding increases weight retention (65-70%) and slows expansion resulting in deeper penetration and enhanced bone-breaking potential in larger animals.
Click to expand...


 
Depending on the caliber and bullet weight, apparently some of the BT's perform like accubonds. Ive read that the 7mm 150 gr BT matched the accubond in testing so nosler didnt release a 150 AB. The 7mm 120 BT is also supposed to be a good performer. I read that the designer at nosler designed the 6mm 95gr BT to be tough enough to use on elk.
 
Baribal said:
This may be a good answer. I dropped BT bullets because of poor penetration at all tanges - but amazing power deliverance at impact - for the AB when they came out.
Good for them if they improved them, but will all the games I took with the AB, I won't go back to BT.

Same goes for Hornady IB vs SST.
Click to expand...

Say, whhhaaattt?????
 
Never used the BT on game, but I heard that they came apart eaisely. I seen the AB perform on 2 moose shot with a 300 RUM 200 gr. One at appx 90yrds and one at appx 310 yrds. Both bullets came completely apart and meat damage was extensive in both cases. Nosler says they are different bullets, but probably basically the same with a different color tip and a 50% mark up on the AB. They didn't get the nick name accubomb by accident.
 
hunters home said:
Never used the BT on game, but I heard that they came apart eaisely. I seen the AB perform on 2 moose shot with a 300 RUM 200 gr. One at appx 90yrds and one at appx 310 yrds. Both bullets came completely apart and meat damage was extensive in both cases. Nosler says they are different bullets, but probably basically the same with a different color tip and a 50% mark up on the AB. They didn't get the nick name accubomb by accident.
Click to expand...


I have taken dozens of big game with the Accubond and my experience is the exact opposite of what you posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom