Accubond or Partition .270 elk load

2eagles · 10-31-2004, 05:17 PM

First of all, please don't bother telling me my .270 isn't powerfull enough for elk. It's the rifle I have and the rifle I'm using. I am going on a cow elk hunt in two weeks and have a question on which bullet to use. It will be either a 140 grain Accubond or a 140 grain Partition. I have handloads ready. Both shoot good groups in my Ruger and the point of impact is about the same, so I can decide the morning of the hunt when I load up. Last year, I was ready to use the Accubond, but at the last minute, decided to go with the proven performance of the Partition. My cow didn't go over 30 yards after the shot. So why even consider the Accubond? I like to try new things and the Accubond groups a little better than the Partition. What do you think? Thanks, Jim

jjt · 10-31-2004, 09:29 PM

either will do just fine i would go with the bullet that shoots the best out of my rifle

if you go over to the reloading forum there is a couple of reviews on the accubond and everybody already knows how well the partition performs

i also shoot both bullets out of my .270 and .300wm the accubond typically shoots flatter and usually tighter groups

James B · 10-31-2004, 09:44 PM

You are well armed with your 270. A good hunter will have no problems at all. I would stay with the Partition bullet. I know its fun to try new things but IMO you can't improve on the partition.

Colorado Bob · 10-31-2004, 10:29 PM

Partitions----if it's not broken why try to fix it? CB

idahoelkinstructor · 10-31-2004, 11:35 PM

The accubonds are suppose to be a combo of the partition and the ballistic tip. Because of its (B.C.) a ballistic tip groups well at long range. Now as you already know a partition holds together through anything. My question to you is do you plan on shooting long range between 300-500 yards? Or do you plan on shooting 300 yards and under? If I was shooting 300 yards and under I would stay with the partition. And if I was shooting over 300 plus yards, I would use the accubond. I shot my first bull elk at age 13 with a .270 at 350 yards, using a junk 130 gr. remington corelock bullet. Now that I have a lot more experience, I would not make that mistake again and use a quality bullet. But on the other hand I would not shoot over 300 yards with any .270 no matter the bullet. That is why I own a .300 RUM, but I realy don't need it, being a bowhunter at heart I love to get close. But if I'm on a rifle hunt and the bull of a lifetime is 500 or 600 yards away I want a wepon that can kill him. Just to let you know I did shot my bull this year with a 180 gr. accubond at 70 yards. If you want the full story read my post (another successful season with pictures). I will post pictures of my recovered bullet in the near future. Thanks and good luck with your choise and hunt.

skeeter 7MM · 11-01-2004, 09:26 AM

This year I used the AB in lieu of NP for a Elk and Moose hunt - 160 gr .284. In both cases the bullet passed through both bulls and was never recovered. The entrance hole was the size of the bullet, exit was 1 1/2 - 2" in diameter and vitals were destroyed. In both cases the animals dropped within sight, shots were 100 - 150 yards. Now in my case the bullet only touched the lower leg for bone structure, the rest was ribs and hide. But given moose have extremely thick hides I was impressed at the penetration the AB offered.

Like said either would work and would lean toward the one that showed you the best return on the range. Best of luck.

handloader1 · 11-02-2004, 12:40 AM

Congratulations!!

TerryM · 11-02-2004, 12:07 PM

Both are rated for elk sized game. I have killed 1 moose with 160 .284 Accubonds. If you are planning on taking longer shots the Accubonds have a higher Ballistic coefficient so will retain a bit more energy and shoot a little flatter but you are splitting hairs really. I would shoot whichever the rifle shoots best.