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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
INTRODUCING Accubond Long Range
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="Michael Courtney" data-source="post: 713693" data-attributes="member: 28191"><p>Please share your experience, along with the specific accubond models, how impact velocity was determined and how expansion was verified.</p><p></p><p>I'd have to review the available data, but I do not recall ever seeing a convincing test of expansion thresholds for the accubond, but most convincing tests I've seen fail to confirm an expansion threshold as low as claimed by the manufacturer. </p><p></p><p>To me, gelatin is a more convincing test than anecdotal field observations. A bullet that fails to expand in soft tissue can perform quite well if it happens to hit bone. I've seen bullets expand on rib hits that fail to expand in soft tissue. A bullet that fails to expand in soft tissue can also create a satisfactory wound if it happens to tumble. But tumbling and hitting bone are not nearly as reliable as expansion for ensuring bullet performance. Sure, a sufficient quantity of field observations can establish a reliable expansion limit, but a few shots into gelatin are probably a more accurate predictor of the case where the bullet only hits soft tissue.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Michael Courtney, post: 713693, member: 28191"] Please share your experience, along with the specific accubond models, how impact velocity was determined and how expansion was verified. I'd have to review the available data, but I do not recall ever seeing a convincing test of expansion thresholds for the accubond, but most convincing tests I've seen fail to confirm an expansion threshold as low as claimed by the manufacturer. To me, gelatin is a more convincing test than anecdotal field observations. A bullet that fails to expand in soft tissue can perform quite well if it happens to hit bone. I've seen bullets expand on rib hits that fail to expand in soft tissue. A bullet that fails to expand in soft tissue can also create a satisfactory wound if it happens to tumble. But tumbling and hitting bone are not nearly as reliable as expansion for ensuring bullet performance. Sure, a sufficient quantity of field observations can establish a reliable expansion limit, but a few shots into gelatin are probably a more accurate predictor of the case where the bullet only hits soft tissue. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
INTRODUCING Accubond Long Range
Top