taw

I was thinking about loading the hornady interbonds in my 300RUM. I would be using them mostly for black bear, but also for elk. If anyone has any opinions, or experience withthem, please let me know. Also, if anyone has a good load to try for them, I would appreciate it.Thanks in advance.


Tim

Roskoe

I tried them in a couple of .30 caliber rifles, and didn't get very good accuracy. Also tried the 130 gr. .270 with similar results. I'm sure they will shoot well in someone's gun . . . .

48thguns

For the big stuff....I would go with the Accubonds. Regards, Rick.

handloader1

I could not get 165 gr. Hornady IB's to group in my .30-06 Sprg. Iwould use Barnes X, Swift A-Frame, TBBC, Nosler Partition, or Winchester Fail-Safe for elk. Good luck.

Drew Jaeger

Nosler 180gn AccuBonds




I have tested both the Nosler 180gn AccuBond and 180gn Partition in my Ruger M77 30-06 and have found that they are as good as equal in terms of penetration, expansion and weight retention.

180gn AccuBond on the left and 180gn Partition on the right.




180gn AccuBonds produced this is0.39" group at 100m from my Ruger.

lonewolf5347

I use the Hornady 165 grain SP interlock bullet for some 35 years ,my powder of choice IMR 3031 .I used this load in A3-03 springfiels since 1968 and have say never lost a deer with load.I just pick up a H@R Handi -for $179.00 and seem to favor the same load .The above target is at the 100 yard with 3 shots a little under 7/8" IMR 3031 44.5 grains of powder

ejpaul1

I use them in the 180 grain persuasion. Acureate as can be. Penetration is great! Price is best. 30 bucks for 100, whereas the accubond is exactly 2wice as much. EJ

2sixty4

The InterBond will retain more weight and expand to a larger diameter than the AccuBond or Partition but it will not penetrate as deep

Most folks think penetration is directly linked to retained weight but in fact it has a higher correlation to expanded diameter.