Difference between Nosler Accubond vs Nosler Accubond LR

[tribb]

Partition for me too!

While we're on this subject what needs to happen and it probably never will,is for nosler to add a plastic tip of some type to protect the point of the partition bullet adjusting lead hardness accordingly add some more boat tail and you probably would never need another bullet of any kind which is exactly why they most likely won't do that. Okay imdone wishing good shooting to you all

 

[grouse]

The nice thing about the LR is some of the heavier offerings. Up to 175 in the 7mm. I like heavy bullets on big game.

 

[Hespco]

The OP stated best bullet between 150 & 400 yds. While the AB & the partition shoot very well in my 6.5's I prefer the the copper mono regardless of brand. The reason is the almost non existent blood shot meat when using the mono. Any bullet with lead , even a partition while performing well in putting down game still splatters lead shards .While this shedding of lead is deadly it can cause considerable loss of meat because of being badly bood shot. We have all seen many pictures on this site of severely blood shot game. For me the meat is the main reason I hunt. In past years before the Barnes copper mono the Nosler Partition was absolutely my preferred bullet for elk but have been using the copper mono since 1994. Never had a failure or reason to switch back. There are times when an angled shot from the front or back can be the only shot presented or let the elk walk. Experienced hunters understand this. In my personal experience this is where the mono shines. Deep penetration thru retain bullet weight & absolute minual blood shoot meat. I realize many are primarily horn hunters & so this is not important . What ever bullet you like is up to the individual & not right or wrong

 

[FEENIX]

What is better for hunting elk between 150 and 400 yards, accubond 160 grain vs accubond long range 168 grain? Shooting 7mm rem mag, thanks again!

Do NOT complicate it unnecessarily. From your choices, the elk will NOT know the difference, esp. at 400 yards. Shot placement and the NUT behind the trigger remains the biggest factors.

 

[Jcook02]

ABLR shoots great out of my 7. AB shoot great out of my RUM. 175 ABLR and 200 AB. I haven't shot a ton of deer with the LR but I have yet to have one take a step. Average is 317 on deer. Elk with the 200 AB average is 316(cows and bulls). Like FEENIX said, the elk will not know the difference. Shot placement is more important as both bullets will easily make it in the vitals. Both guns and bullets go with me on hunts and I wouldn't second guess myself if I had to use one or the other.

 

[AZHunter04]

I haven't heard anything really great about the nosler accubond lr. Has anyone had super consistent groups?

 

[AZHunter04]

The accubond on the other hand. That's a heck of a bullet!

 

[Calvin45]

No experience with either. Do have some 210 ablrs yet to try in my 300. This being said I vote original accubond. This due to numerous reports of underpenetration with the long range bullet when used in magnum chamberings not at long range - this shouldn't be seen as a shortcoming, it's explicitly marketed as a niche purpose bullet - long range - except that Nosler advertises it's optimal velocity terminal performance window very optimistically.

the accubond is a true all purpose bullet. And it's profile and bc is the same (or at least advertised as the same) as the ballistic tip of similar weight. The ballistic tip I do have experience with. Super super easy to work with, no messing around trying to find a sweet spot seating depth or any fine tuning. Nosler ballistic tips and flat base hornady interlocks you can usually just load to standard oal, load a grain under max book, and go shoot if you're pressed for time. Also they kill things real dead . The accubond I consider a ballistic tip with an extra "insurance policy". Can't recap ever hearing anyone too displeased.

 

[Rifleman97]

The long range has a noticably thinner jacket for low velocity expansion. Theyre great for slow rounds like 30-06 that cant push the 210gr ABLR faster than around 2600fps, or for magnums for long range shots. At close range with really high velocity (3100+) sometimes they mushroom, sometimes they blow apart. Either way the animal still dies, but when it blows apart it tends to ruin more meat than I'd like.

For 400 yards and under with 7rem mag, I'd stick with standard Accubonds. Go to the long range versions if you are planning for longer shots or want the higher bc. I love my Accubond LongRange bullets, but they have their use case.

 

[LkHntr]

My buddy shot an elk 175yds with ABLR using a 28 nosler shot in the spine and found on opposite side under the hide nice mushroom, we decided it having a thinner jacket it upset a lot more then regular ab might have, an is why it stayed in the animal

 

[Hunterjones]

In my experience, the difference is that the standard Accubond is generally QUITE accurate. The Long Range Accubond is not.....

 

[Ingwe]

What is better for hunting elk between 150 and 400 yards, accubond 160 grain vs accubond long range 168 grain? Shooting 7mm rem mag, thanks again!

I shot Zebra with both. I would DEFINITELY use the regular accubond. The LR is allot softer. Unless you can/will wait for a perfect broadside shot I wouldn't use a LR.

 

[Troutslayer2]

I haven't heard anything really great about the nosler accubond lr. Has anyone had super consistent groups?

I got that bullet to shoot way better than a regular AB in my 280AI. I have taken a couple elk and deer with the 7MM 168 ABLR from pretty close to 475YDS and have been pleased. I will keep shooting this bullet.

 

[Chico guy]

I played around with the LR in a couple rifles and could not find a sweet spot for accuracy. On the other hand both rifles grouped well, one exceptionally with the AB. Those rifles loaded with Accubonds have killed dozens of deer, pigs, and antelope out to 585 yards with great terminal performance. At 400 yards I don't see any need for LRs unless they group exceedingly well.