close
Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics

Reply

Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #50  
Unread 01-04-2014, 01:13 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 641
Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

I would feel confident shooting anything in North American with my 300Wm and a 208 amax.
Reply With Quote
  •   #51  
    Unread 01-04-2014, 01:16 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: rathdrum, id.
    Posts: 5,035
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    I've seen some pretty good performasnce with the A-Max even down to 300-400 yards on deer and bear......Rich
    Reply With Quote

      #52  
    Unread 01-04-2014, 08:03 PM
    Bronze Member
     
    Join Date: Aug 2008
    Posts: 62
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    While I'm not as computer literate and you folks, Its often hard to get my point across via computer. Don't take offense.

    My experience on KUDU, Eland, GemsBok, and Wildebeest has been they do not perform.

    The 2 PH's (I'm now good friends with) laughed when I told them what I was shooting.

    They call the A-MAX the meat-musher for the superficial damage it does.

    The skinners-butchers in SA who clean hundreds of animals a year agreed. But what do they know?

    Don't confuse your limited experience as evidence of performance.

    People that do this for a living and the manufacturer disagree with real evidence.

    Accurate yes. Hunting bullets no.

    Otherwise Hornady would market them as acceptable for thin skinned game.

    Hopefully, Ethics is not a lost concept on your generation.
    Reply With Quote
      #53  
    Unread 01-05-2014, 05:56 PM
    Silver Member
     
    Join Date: Jul 2012
    Location: Washington State
    Posts: 491
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    MMERSS

    Many thanks for your efforts!!! You have answered many of the questions I had. Thank you for taking the time and posting the results.

    Concerning the Amax/ABLR hunting suitability. TikkaMike's Dad had it right- two holes, one in and one out. I know the controversy but Denwa is relaying the experience of the African PH's who have considerable experience in these matters. Elmer Keith once said African game did not experience winter so never became "poor in the flesh" because of winter's toll on the herds. He believed that pound for pound African game was tougher than North American game.

    Just sayin'...

    KB
    Reply With Quote
      #54  
    Unread 01-06-2014, 08:28 AM
    Official LRH Sponsor
     
    Join Date: Feb 2011
    Location: N. Texas and S. Africa
    Posts: 7,729
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DENWA View Post
    While I'm not as computer literate and you folks, Its often hard to get my point across via computer. Don't take offense.

    My experience on KUDU, Eland, GemsBok, and Wildebeest has been they do not perform.

    The 2 PH's (I'm now good friends with) laughed when I told them what I was shooting.

    They call the A-MAX the meat-musher for the superficial damage it does.

    The skinners-butchers in SA who clean hundreds of animals a year agreed. But what do they know?

    Don't confuse your limited experience as evidence of performance.

    People that do this for a living and the manufacturer disagree with real evidence.

    Accurate yes. Hunting bullets no.

    Otherwise Hornady would market them as acceptable for thin skinned game.

    {REMOVED}
    Ethics is a taboo subject on this forum so please respect our host and edit.

    I'm not a fan of the Amax bullet for hunting but Hornady does in fact recommend them for light, thin skinned game and varmints.

    Personally I think the Hornady Interbond and Nosler Accubond are ideal hunting bullets for this application and do not trust the Amax at all for game till you get up to the heavies and I'm not even going to shoot them.

    On my trip to Africa I will personally be shooting nothing but Hornady DGX and Nosler Accubonds and perhaps some Accubond LR's but that's another story yet to be written.
    __________________
    Without the First and Second Amendments the rest of The Constitution is Meaningless.
    Reply With Quote
      #55  
    Unread 01-06-2014, 01:02 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: rathdrum, id.
    Posts: 5,035
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DENWA View Post
    While I'm not as computer literate and you folks, Its often hard to get my point across via computer. Don't take offense.

    My experience on KUDU, Eland, GemsBok, and Wildebeest has been they do not perform.

    The 2 PH's (I'm now good friends with) laughed when I told them what I was shooting.

    They call the A-MAX the meat-musher for the superficial damage it does.

    The skinners-butchers in SA who clean hundreds of animals a year agreed. But what do they know?

    Don't confuse your limited experience as evidence of performance.

    People that do this for a living and the manufacturer disagree with real evidence.

    Accurate yes. Hunting bullets no.

    Otherwise Hornady would market them as acceptable for thin skinned game.

    Hopefully, Ethics is not a lost concept on your generation.
    Deer and Black Bear at 300-400 yards out, in NO WAY, is the equivalent of shooting a Kudu, Eland, Wildabeast, etc! That is why most of us stay away from elk sized game at close range with these bulltes. Bullet impact velocity has a HUGE amount of effect on performance. I have never been in Africa, let alone hunted African game, but based on my experience with relative size and toughness of an elk, for example, I feel pretty comfortable with my comments concerning 300-400 shots on deer and bear. Personally, I would rather (ethically) shoot an A-max at long range than something like an (A-frame) that might be used in Africa. REMEMBER, this is a long range forum......Rich
    Reply With Quote
      #56  
    Unread 01-06-2014, 01:20 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Feb 2007
    Location: Townsend, Montana.
    Posts: 8,547
    Re: Accubond LR Comparison and G7 BC Test

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elkaholic View Post
    Deer and Black Bear at 300-400 yards out, in NO WAY, is the equivalent of shooting a Kudu, Eland, Wildabeast, etc! That is why most of us stay away from elk sized game at close range with these bulltes. Bullet impact velocity has a HUGE amount of effect on performance. I have never been in Africa, let alone hunted African game, but based on my experience with relative size and toughness of an elk, for example, I feel pretty comfortable with my comments concerning 300-400 shots on deer and bear. Personally, I would rather (ethically) shoot an A-max at long range than something like an (A-frame) that might be used in Africa. REMEMBER, this is a long range forum......Rich
    Bingo!!!!!!! we have a winner!!!

    I agree Rich.

    Jeff
    __________________
    Reply With Quote
    Reply

    Bookmarks

    Thread Tools
    Display Modes



    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 PM.


    Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
    All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC