Sectioned 35 and 375 cal Accubonds

gerry

Ammo Smith
Mar 1, 2007
6,636
1,155
On the left is the 35 cal 225 gr, center 375 cal 300 gr and right 375 cal 260 gr Accubonds. The 225 gr and 260 gr did 6 jugs in my tests and the 300 gr did 7 jugs all reported in the bullet test section. It is easy to see why the two lighter bullets peform so well having such thick jackets, the 300 gr bullet is great but the others come close to matching it for most hunting situations and have less recoil.

Spring2012009.jpg
 
Nice picture. Man, that 375 260 gr AB is quite robust.

JD338
 
Great pictures Gerry! That 225 is going to get a chance on elk this year! Looks like it should be up to the task..
 
Jim,

I thought the 225 grain 35 cal. looked pretty robust. I'm thinking it will work very well for almost any situation I might encounter.
 
Once my supply of 300 gr bullets run out I think I'll go back to the 260 gr it grouped very well too. As for the 225 gr 35 cal it is hard to beat that bullet in the Whelen, the moose from last year didn't like it at all :) Scotty, I hope you can nail an elk with one this fall, you were getting some spectacular groups.
 
I love them!
I am just a little perplexed that 40 more grains of bullet only upped the 300's BC to only .485 from the 260's 473.... :?
 
Serious bullets there. Is it just the angle of the bullet or does the 300gr seems to have a shallower boattail?

Thanks for the work.
 
DrMike":35li2opi said:
Jim,

I thought the 225 grain 35 cal. looked pretty robust. I'm thinking it will work very well for almost any situation I might encounter.

Mike,

It is. What I noticed was the jacket thickness of the 375 260 gr all the way up to the tip.

JD338
 
JD338":11gdup34 said:
DrMike":11gdup34 said:
Jim,

I thought the 225 grain 35 cal. looked pretty robust. I'm thinking it will work very well for almost any situation I might encounter.

Mike,

It is. What I noticed was the jacket thickness of the 375 260 gr all the way up to the tip.

JD338

I see what you mean now Jim, taking a 2nd look at the picture. Pretty serious bullet. Those Heavyweight AB's are tough. It'll be cool to see what the 9.3 Nosler's look like when Mike gets a few down range as well..
 
Scotty,

You are correct. I'm getting pretty anxious to send a few of those 9.3 AccuBonds and Partitions downrange before fall arrives. In the interim, I'm quite content to depend on the 225 grain AB in the 35 Whelen.
 
DrMike":6x2yds5p said:
Scotty,

You are correct. I'm getting pretty anxious to send a few of those 9.3 AccuBonds and Partitions downrange before fall arrives. In the interim, I'm quite content to depend on the 225 grain AB in the 35 Whelen.

What 9.3 chambering are you intending Mike?
Just curious as I haven't run penetration test with either in my 9.3X74R. I just have shot them for accuracy testing so far. Of which, is impressive with both, but not all that suprising also!
This .375/260's certainly will be in my stock here. Don't have a .35 cal as of yet.
 
It is a 9.3X64 Brenneke. It has been in the works for about eighteen months. The extractor groove must be cut, but the barrel is cut and screwed onto the action. I do want to have it by fall for this fall hunt.
 
The 9.3x64 is a great round! In way's, I'm susprised it isn't more widely used!
When I had the TC Encore 9.3x74R built, I was giving more consideration to the 64. But at that time, brass was extremely hard to find. Since, Jamison Brass has become more readily available, making it have more potential for a future build for me in a lefthanded bolt gun. Is that are what you are using, or do you have some Brenneke brass source?
 
I bought RWS, and paid a pretty penny for it. However, I should have a reasonable supply for a while; I picked up 220 pieces. Quality Cartridge now produces brass, but the cost is very near what I paid for the RWS brass.
 
Ah, I think I faintly remember this now, in some discussion earlier.
Be what it is, I know at least one fellow, when not guiding bear hunts in AK., uses it for his personal choice for brownies. Otherwise, when guiding he tends to go with a .416 Rigby.
 
gerry":qzgwtxtr said:
On the left is the 35 cal 225 gr, center 375 cal 300 gr and right 375 cal 260 gr Accubonds. The 225 gr and 260 gr did 6 jugs in my tests and the 300 gr did 7 jugs all reported in the bullet test section. It is easy to see why the two lighter bullets peform so well having such thick jackets, the 300 gr bullet is great but the others come close to matching it for most hunting situations and have less recoil.

Spring2012009.jpg

Gerry, I love that one on the far right for sure....looks real tough :wink:
 
FOTIS":2fjat5xr said:
I love them!
I am just a little perplexed that 40 more grains of bullet only upped the 300's BC to only .485 from the 260's 473.... :?


The 260 gr (to my eyes) appears to have a little fatter (smaller radius) ogive than the other two bullets? this would account for the lower BC. It may be my eyes drawing "optical conclusions" but that is how it appears to me.
 
Surprised to see this thread come up again but since you now are in the 375 club it isn't surprising Lou :) The 260 gr AccuBond is a great bullet that's for sure, wonder how a 270 gr ALR would do? ;)
 
gerry":1ewio499 said:
Surprised to see this thread come up again but since you now are in the 375 club it isn't surprising Lou :) The 260 gr AccuBond is a great bullet that's for sure, wonder how a 270 gr ALR would do? ;)

Hi Gerry, sorry but what is ALR :?: :shock:
 
Back
Top