Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Question on 30 cal 210 accubond long range pills,whats wrong with them.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rifleman97" data-source="post: 2853367" data-attributes="member: 103996"><p>I use them. They perform great but they're pretty expensive. I think a lot of people still have some salt in their wounds from the controversy around them when they first came out. They claimed something like .730 BC, but people noted they dropped a lot more than they should. Turned out they straight up lied about the BC, and turned out to be closer to .6xx than .730 or whatever it was. </p><p></p><p>They took more tweaking than I'm used to to get them to shoot well. They also have a thinner jacket than other hunting bullets and tend to fly apart above 3000fps. So they perform wonderfully at range but if you're using them in a big magnum, they don't have as good of performance as the partition or regular accubonds at sub 200m.</p><p></p><p>When a bunch of people have even their own one problem with it, people will see those and think that everyone will have all of those problems with them, and they get a bad rep.</p><p></p><p>I use them in my 30-06 because I couldn't get them to shoot in my 30-378 I bought them for (they really don't like that much freebore) and they shoot well at the 2600 or so I'm getting (I'd have to check my notes as I've been primarily shooting 180's for a while now) and on deer/elk they expand perfectly at the low speeds I'm pushing them. But they're finicky and expensive, there's better bullets in the same price range, and there's cheaper bullets that do the same thing. I'd personally suggest sticking with partition/accubonds and staying away from at least the 210 ABLR. I've never used the 190's or non 30 cals so no opinion on those.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rifleman97, post: 2853367, member: 103996"] I use them. They perform great but they’re pretty expensive. I think a lot of people still have some salt in their wounds from the controversy around them when they first came out. They claimed something like .730 BC, but people noted they dropped a lot more than they should. Turned out they straight up lied about the BC, and turned out to be closer to .6xx than .730 or whatever it was. They took more tweaking than I’m used to to get them to shoot well. They also have a thinner jacket than other hunting bullets and tend to fly apart above 3000fps. So they perform wonderfully at range but if you’re using them in a big magnum, they don’t have as good of performance as the partition or regular accubonds at sub 200m. When a bunch of people have even their own one problem with it, people will see those and think that everyone will have all of those problems with them, and they get a bad rep. I use them in my 30-06 because I couldn’t get them to shoot in my 30-378 I bought them for (they really don’t like that much freebore) and they shoot well at the 2600 or so I’m getting (I’d have to check my notes as I’ve been primarily shooting 180’s for a while now) and on deer/elk they expand perfectly at the low speeds I’m pushing them. But they’re finicky and expensive, there’s better bullets in the same price range, and there’s cheaper bullets that do the same thing. I’d personally suggest sticking with partition/accubonds and staying away from at least the 210 ABLR. I’ve never used the 190’s or non 30 cals so no opinion on those. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Question on 30 cal 210 accubond long range pills,whats wrong with them.
Top