Hornady pod cast on bonded bullets!

Did you see hornadys latest podcast on CX and ELDX? They went into great detail on both models, pluses and minus. They answered some common questions about why they didn't bond the ELDX. Basically said the bonding process damages the bullet and you have to use a much thicker jacket, all of which make the bullets less accurate. If you go to the means to repair the damage the bonding makes the cost is too high. I'm not one to always agree with these guys. But my personal experiences have shown this as maybe valid. I have tried over and over in multiple rifles and calibers to try and use ABLR and have not found them consistent in grouping in any rifle yet. I can occasionally get a good group, but not consistently. If you have good for you. But I have not. Get many more unexplained fliers in the ABLR than the ELDX, SGK or berger. Thoughts?

Since Hornady isn't making a bonded bullet it stands for reason on why they say that. That being said I haven't tried any variety of the ABLR but regular accubond have been very easy for me to find a load for.
When Hornady made the interbond it was finicky about seating depth but with some tinkering they came around and are very accurate. I still shoot them in my 280 AI.
There's enough choices in bullets nowadays everyone can pick what works best for them.

Hornady often makes statements like this in their blogs. Jusy because they are not good at something does not mean somebody else is not. I never could get interbonds to shoot but always could get accubonds and sciroccos to. Accubonds in particular are very accurate as they are made by impact extrusion and do not have pure copper jackets and soft lead cores like Hornady says you "need" for bonding. The ablr is more finicky but they still shoot well for me in couple of 6.8W. That being said, there is truth that a cup and core bullet is going to be more accurate on average than a bonded bullet, particularly a thin uniform jacketed (no taper) c&c. That does not mean a bonded bullet cannot be accurate enough

Lou

I haven't tried the ABLR in any rifles as of yet and not sure I will. After working up loads with the 200 grain 30 cal eldx, 150 and 162 grain 7mm eldx's all three with minimal work up I'll keep using them. And they were available during the times that shall not be named. My first go around with the 145 eldx in a 270 win wasn't promising, but another powder is in order for testing, this 270 shot the precision hunter factory load as well as 140 accubond factory loads so hopefully a powder swap changes that tune and I can go on to what's next in line for load work up.

coop2564 said:

Did you see hornadys latest podcast on CX and ELDX? They went into great detail on both models, pluses and minus. They answered some common questions about why they didn't bond the ELDX. Basically said the bonding process damages the bullet and you have to use a much thicker jacket, all of which make the bullets less accurate. If you go to the means to repair the damage the bonding makes the cost is too high. I'm not one to always agree with these guys. But my personal experiences have shown this as maybe valid. I have tried over and over in multiple rifles and calibers to try and use ABLR and have not found them consistent in grouping in any rifle yet. I can occasionally get a good group, but not consistently. If you have good for you. But I have not. Get many more unexplained fliers in the ABLR than the ELDX, SGK or berger. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

While I'm not the biggest fan of ABLR bullets because they have been finicky to find good loads for, the time tested & proven Accubonds have always been easy to load for and have provided consistent terminal performance across the range of bullet diameters.

At times, I can get the Accubonds to shoot smaller groups than match bullets. This tells me that Hornady's claims about the bonding process are just about their efforts and don't reflect the results across the industry.

Just my experience.

It's common knowledge in the bullet industry. I have read and heard that from others not just Hornady. Nosler Accubonds are accurate enough for most folks. The ABLR is a different animal and can be finicky. There is a reason no match bullets are bonded.

cajun said:

It's common knowledge in the bullet industry. I have read and heard that from others not just Hornady. Nosler Accubonds are accurate enough for most folks. The ABLR is a different animal and can be finicky. There is a reason no match bullets are bonded.

Click to expand...

Yep…that's why the old A-Max and ELD-M were/ are so easy to load for accuracy.

cajun said:

It's common knowledge in the bullet industry. I have read and heard that from others not just Hornady. Nosler Accubonds are accurate enough for most folks. The ABLR is a different animal and can be finicky. There is a reason no match bullets are bonded.

Click to expand...

This makes me wonder about the bonding process used. The federal fusion, fusion tipped, Speer gold dot, and Speer impact bullets are all bonded but more like electroplated with a much thicker jacket than "plated" bullets typically are.

The fusion's are a good cheap bullet that shot very well out of my .270. Have a reputation for being easy-button accurate bullets for factory ammo.


I'd be interested in comparisons between these kind of bonded bullets vs others.

What I like about the ABLR is … once you get your load tuned, you can hunt short or long range with the same load.

The Speer Impact intrigues me.
I have a good load of 172 in 30-06 and will work one with some 140's in 6.5-284.
Haven't shot an animal yet with the 172's but if they have the ancestry of the Hot Cor or Grand Slam… I'm in!

I have zero issues hunting with ABLR bullets because I do not shoot groups on animals…never will.
All I care about is the first shot landing EXACTLY where aimed.
Those that whinge that the ABLR produces fliers do not know how to tune correctly. Seating depth FIRST, then powder/primer.
Do you know you CAN tune just with primer switching…

Cheers.
Oh, I don't use ANY Hornady bullets, dislike core shedding crap bullets…
Hornady…pfffffft!

MagnumManiac said:

I have zero issues hunting with ABLR bullets because I do not shoot groups on animals…never will.
All I care about is the first shot landing EXACTLY where aimed.
Those that whinge that the ABLR produces fliers do not know how to tune correctly. Seating depth FIRST, then powder/primer.
Do you know you CAN tune just with primer switching…

Cheers.

Click to expand...

Really? That's interesting. To be honest I've never really messed much with "tuning" of any kind apart from fiddling with seating depth and charge weight. And to be honest I've always just done charge weight first and then fiddled with depth a little. It's worked for me. But I'm no extreme range shooter or bench competitor either, if I can get honest to God 1moa I'll settle for it and .75 or better gets to be about as well as I can shoot so further tuning may not realize it's benefit with me behind the trigger.

I also haven't ever used lead sleds or anything like that, bipods and solid makeshift in the field type rests like a backpack or a solid branch or the hood Of a van haha, but the way I see it I'm never going to be out hunting in the real world with a massive bench setup or lugging a led sled around or whatever. So even if I could use all that and maybe realize that last .25" moa of benefit, it wouldn't translate to field shooting and might just give me false ego and confidence about what my real world ability is.

Lou270 said:

Hornady often makes statements like this in their blogs. Jusy because they are not good at something does not mean somebody else is not. I never could get interbonds to shoot but always could get accubonds and sciroccos to. Accubonds in particular are very accurate as they are made by impact extrusion and do not have pure copper jackets and soft lead cores like Hornady says you "need" for bonding. The ablr is more finicky but they still shoot well for me in couple of 6.8W. That being said, there is truth that a cup and core bullet is going to be more accurate on average than a bonded bullet, particularly a thin uniform jacketed (no taper) c&c. That does not mean a bonded bullet cannot be accurate enough

Lou

Click to expand...

It'd be fun if on a live interview someone asked them if the felt their own interbond bullets weren't accurate haha.

I love hornady, I use some of their stuff, but good lord the marketing, spin, hype, etc gets a bit thick sometimes.

I've had good luck with ABLR way off the lands.
I've heard of guys having luck with touching or 10k off but that's not happened with my loads.
The closest I've run in one is 60k but most are at 100k+ off the lands and found very good accuracy and consistency there.
These loads are with 7mm 150's in 2 284 Win. rifles and 168's in 3 others (280AI, 7 SAUM and 284 Win).
I do have some 129 grain and 142 grain ABLR in 6.5 but never tried them yet.

I'll will admit though... they are finicky.