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
Nosler accubond performance
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="nicholasjohn" data-source="post: 1983759" data-attributes="member: 109113"><p>I agree with your comments on heads shots - too many variables in the equation. This is the first time I have heard of anybody who didn't like the terminal performance of the Nosler Partition bullet. I suspect that poor shot placement was the reason for his loss of these animals. If they didn't find the elk, he doesn't know where they were hit. I've shot a fair number of animals with them, and have never had them fail to expand, even on rib cage shots on lightly-built deer & antelope. One of the reasons guys often think they didn't expand is the small exit wounds they sometime leave in the animal. This is because they often lose the front core, and the jacket folds back along the shank like a rivet. This doesn't leave a large hole, but the internal organs are usually pretty well destroyed. </p><p></p><p>I have talked with outfitters who won't allow the use of a particular cartridge or bullet, and I make it a point not to hunt with those outfitters. A lot of them blame the bullet or cartridge for problems that probably resulted from poor shot placement. I talked with an outfitter a while back who told me not to show up with anything smaller than a 338 Winchester. I took his advice and chose not to show up at all. He said this was because the 300 magnums just don't kill elk reliably. I think that the 300's he's seen used were probably too much gun for the shooters who employed them, and they didn't place their shots well. The 338 would have just been that much worse, due to increased recoil and not enough practice. </p><p></p><p>Also, there are no bullets that perform perfectly 100% of the time, because there are far too many variables that can affect the way the bullet expands and/or penetrates. There's also the matter of whether the hunter prefers complete penetration or not. Everybody's experiences dictate what he likes best, and we haven't all had the same experiences, good ones or bad ones. Some guys swear by the head shot; others swear <em>AT</em> it. Different strokes for different folks. We all get to make our own choices about bullets, cartridges, and shot placement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="nicholasjohn, post: 1983759, member: 109113"] I agree with your comments on heads shots - too many variables in the equation. This is the first time I have heard of anybody who didn't like the terminal performance of the Nosler Partition bullet. I suspect that poor shot placement was the reason for his loss of these animals. If they didn't find the elk, he doesn't know where they were hit. I've shot a fair number of animals with them, and have never had them fail to expand, even on rib cage shots on lightly-built deer & antelope. One of the reasons guys often think they didn't expand is the small exit wounds they sometime leave in the animal. This is because they often lose the front core, and the jacket folds back along the shank like a rivet. This doesn't leave a large hole, but the internal organs are usually pretty well destroyed. I have talked with outfitters who won't allow the use of a particular cartridge or bullet, and I make it a point not to hunt with those outfitters. A lot of them blame the bullet or cartridge for problems that probably resulted from poor shot placement. I talked with an outfitter a while back who told me not to show up with anything smaller than a 338 Winchester. I took his advice and chose not to show up at all. He said this was because the 300 magnums just don't kill elk reliably. I think that the 300's he's seen used were probably too much gun for the shooters who employed them, and they didn't place their shots well. The 338 would have just been that much worse, due to increased recoil and not enough practice. Also, there are no bullets that perform perfectly 100% of the time, because there are far too many variables that can affect the way the bullet expands and/or penetrates. There's also the matter of whether the hunter prefers complete penetration or not. Everybody's experiences dictate what he likes best, and we haven't all had the same experiences, good ones or bad ones. Some guys swear by the head shot; others swear [I]AT[/I] it. Different strokes for different folks. We all get to make our own choices about bullets, cartridges, and shot placement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Nosler accubond performance
Top