Author Topic: Hornady InterBOND expansion test (Read 7042 times)

snuffy · « **on:** July 18, 2003, 06:29:09 AM »

:grin:
I've posted this on several other boards, just thought you might be interested.

This was from my 300 WSM Browning, 165 gr. Hornady interBOND. At 2966 av 15 feet from the muzzle, target was at 100 yds. Here's some pics.

Retained weight was from 138.6 to 146.0 grains, for 83% to 88%. Expansion was from .759 to .800.

Set up was 4 water-filled gallon milk jugs set end to end in front of a big box of rags,(in case a bullet went through 4 jugs). All three bullets were found in the third jug. The first was shredded into 6-10 pieces, the second was split in half, the third had a small hole in it.

Notice how the bonding process refuses to let go of the lead! It's peeled over but still hanging on. :-) Expansion is halted at the point inside the jacket where it gets thicker, what Hornady calls the expansion control ring.

There's been some accubonds tested and posted on other sites. On several, weight retention for the accubonds was only 50-60%. Time will tell which bullet is best.

jhalcott · « **Reply #1 on:** July 18, 2003, 09:14:59 AM »

HMMM!!! What's that , about 20-25 inches of penetration? I like to take a novice to the range and fill jugs with water and red food dye. Watching their reaction to the red mist is priceless. It shows them the power in that bullet,and why they MUST be careful pointing the muzzle in a safe direction. I let them know what will happen,but it ALWAYS surprises them.
Now take those jugs out to 3-400 yards and see if you get more penetration! You should get less expansion too! jh

snuffy · « **Reply #2 on:** July 18, 2003, 09:35:15 AM »

:grin:
JH, my rifle club is limited to 200 yds. I may join another one tomorrow that would allow 3-400 yds. Accuracy becomes a concern that far out, I haven't been able to get them much under an inch at 100.

I'm wondering too if the expansion would be adequate at longer ranges. That's a question that begs for an anwser.

Duffy · « **Reply #3 on:** July 19, 2003, 06:39:15 PM »

Instead of trying to shoot it at 400 yards look up the vel drop in the book and simply load it down to that vel and shoot it at 100 yards. Saves allot of walking and makes it easier to hit the target.

IronKnees · « **Reply #4 on:** July 20, 2003, 04:09:47 AM »

Great post and pictures there... Thanks for the info... It will be interesting to see actual hunting results! :grin:

snuffy · « **Reply #5 on:** July 20, 2003, 06:53:18 AM »

BUT, there's no data available for down range velocity for the 165 SST. Since the SST interbond has the same BC as the SST interLOCK, it should be possible to figure velocity at whatever range. The 5th edition of the Hornady manual doen't have the 165 SST listed. So how do I figure velocity?

Then how do I slow down the 300 WSM, what load data do I use?

It would be easier to load some in a .308 Winny, which I happen to have access to.

If you can supply the velocity, I will do the test and write it up here, along with pics.

Muddyboots · « **Reply #6 on:** July 20, 2003, 02:00:06 PM »

FYI - I have a 300 WM loaded up with 200 gr Accubonds. Accuracy has been acceptable with RL-22 (71.5 gr. = 2950 fps) even out to 200 yds (Sendero SF). Averages 1.8-2.0 at 200 yds which is OK by me for any premium hunting bullet. I will try a jug test at 200 when I get a chance over next 2 weeks and will advise as well. Ultimate test will be this Oct on elk hunt to CO and hopefully I will be able to post up "real" results. Wished Hornady or Nosler released a 180...seems like they are in cahoots with Swift so each other doesn't step on each other toes.
Muddy

Duffy · « **Reply #7 on:** July 20, 2003, 03:33:57 PM »

Snuffy,
Can you give me the BC for the interlock/SST if it's the same as the Bonded and I'll figure it for you. Even if it's close we'll be in the ballpark. The 308 would be a great choice to test these on also, I was going to suggest going to the fastest powder and loading the minimum load in the mag but let's see what the BC is and go from there. I'm going to be starting harvest so if you can get me the info soon I'll get right on it.
Ryan

snuffy · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2003, 04:03:40 PM »

Duffy, according to what I've been told the interbond has the same shape and BC as the SST. The SST 165 has a BC of .447. I'm sure I can come up with a load for a .308 that can deliver 3-400 yd velocities at 100 yds. This months rifleman has 50, 100, and 200 yd expansion tests on the back cover. Maybe I can help them out if my tests are as good as the first test. LOL

Edited to add, the BC's are listed on the Hornady website now. It's near the bottom of the products page.

Duffy · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2003, 04:44:10 PM »

Ah-ha caught you at your puter.

Ok I didn't look up your altitude but it makes very little difference from 0-3000 ft (about 7fps).
With your present load at 2966 fps the bullet is traveling
2843 @ 100
2721 @ 200
2602 @ 300
2485 @ 400
To equal the 300 yard Vel @ 100 you have to start out at 2710 fps.
For the 400 yard Vel @ 100 you need to start at 2600 fps.
These should actually be easy to download in the mag and even if its a little slower it would be interesting to see how they perform. I found that a 160g Nosler partition in my 708 encore still penetrated farther than the 150's even though it was traveling 100+ fps slower. I would like to try the interbonds just to see how they would work in a slower handgun. Nosler claims 1700 as their minimum.
Hope this helps some and thanks for the testing!

snuffy · « **Reply #10 on:** July 21, 2003, 03:00:18 PM »

Thanks Duffy, I should be able to get those velocities out of my 300, with a little less powder than a starting load. As long as I use the fastest powder listed I should be okay. I've heard alarming stories about downloading slow powders, detonation it's called. Won't be getting to it till next week though, going on a road trip! :grin:

Duffy · « **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2003, 07:22:41 PM »

Glad to help. When I get done with harvest I'll finish my bullet test's and post them here also.

snuffy · « **Reply #12 on:** July 26, 2003, 12:19:57 PM »

Phew, over 1,000 miles in a 5 speed geo metro from Oshkosh Wi the Fayettville NC in 2 days. Never been the the east of Ill. What some beautifull country in through W Virginia and Virginia. This from a flatlander from east central Wis. Looked over the edge of the road to the land below-- took a deep breath! IT MUST HAVE BEEN 1,500 FEET TO THE LEVEL GROUND! :eek: Flat top summit was at 3200+!

Visiting my son, who's serving our country in the Army and delivering the car loaded with stuff from home. Flying back monday, will do the tests discussed as soon as I can.

snuffy · « **Reply #13 on:** August 05, 2003, 01:53:01 PM »

Second batch of tests were run today. I attemped to simulate 300 and 400 yd impact velocities. I shot one at 15 yds to see if I could get the interbond to blow up,,-NOPE. But it did shed more weight than after hitting at 100 yds with a MV of 3207(bullet # 2 in pic)! I also ran some load workups, while testing.

Last time I did the same with 4831SC. The top load,(69.0)only went 2975 but started to show a tendacy to tighten. Pressure ring mearsurements showed it was very mild. SO today I opened the throttle a little went to 70.0(3029 av), 70.5(3059) and 71.0(3078). The 71.0 load the first 2 were nearly touching! I debated whether to shoot the 3rd one into the group, or at the jugs waiting to be busted. The jugs won! That would be bullet # 3 in the pic.

The experiment with 3-400 yd impact went badly. I shot a 3 shot group with the 400 yd simulated velocities, then shot the last one at the jugs. Couldn't find the bullet, it looked like it skiped out the front of the jug, but missed the box of rags! :mad: The next test was for the 300 yd.s, this time I shot 2 at a target and the third at the jugs. Again the bullet was lost in the grass! I still had one left, that one was in the third jug! Thats bullet #1 .

The second load workup was with AA XMR4350.
66.0 3111 av 31.0 ES 3 rounds
67.0 3157 av 16.7 ES "
68.0 3207 av 8.6 ES For two rounds.
Needless to say I was very happy to see those kind of velocities. The target however was not so good, vertical stringing, groups 1.5 to 2 inchs.

Bullet 1 wt 148.2 exp .825 is supposed to be hitting at 2602 fps with a MV of 2710. I used 57.8 gr of WW760, it went out at2753, so a little fast. BUT it was the heaviest of any recovered so far.
Bullet #2 wt 130.5 exp .695 It hit at 15 yds from the muzzle. It lost the most weight af any so far, but it hardly "blew up". Jacket is peeled back further than any other so far as well.
#3 wt. 134.8 exp .695, Launched at 3207, is the fastest velocity so far. Jacket peeled back nearly as far as the 15 yd.
#4 wt 134.9 exp .715 This one was launched at 3078, nearly identical to #3.

Observations. The board in pic 3 is now almost totally destroyed. It got worse as the day grew longer. I'm going to design something to hold the jugs in-line. It'll have to be quite stout, there's a lot of force there! :eek: That's why the bullets kept getting lost, the jugs move when they're hit. # 3 skipped out of the side of jug 3 and went into the rag box. The first flannel shirt caught it just fine. I stopped using 4 jugs after the second bullet was lost.

I will repeat the 400 yd test some day soon

todbartell · « **Reply #14 on:** August 05, 2003, 05:11:34 PM »

Snuffy, you must drink alot of milk!

Good tests, these InterBonds are superb! :grin:

Guybo · « **Reply #15 on:** August 07, 2003, 01:57:33 AM »

Thats some really good pics. I load a lot of Hornady bullets but haven't tried the interbonds as of yet. Those are some nice mushrooms and looks like it's a great bullet. Thanks for the pics.

snuffy · « **Reply #16 on:** August 09, 2003, 06:18:39 AM »

If anybody has any doubts as to how well the interbond will penetrate, take a look at this thread on accurate reloadings website.
http://www.nookhill.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007897

That kind of penetration should certainly be enough for elk, moose or black bears. That's why Hornady went with 165 grain as the top weight in 30 cal to start with. With over 80% weight retention, you don't need the extra weight of a 180.

snuffy · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2004, 10:15:13 AM »

Bringing this to the top for long winters.

rpseven · « **Reply #18 on:** March 21, 2004, 05:42:32 AM »

I read an artical a while back that firing a bullet into a pile of soaked newspapers is the closest thing that they found that represents live tissue for testing bullets. I haven't tried yet but I am saving up my newspapers.

snuffy · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2004, 07:43:06 AM »

The main problem with wet newsprint or any paper is the weight. Lift a bundle of newsprint thick enough to soak up a high speed rifle bullet, then add 20 or so pounds of water. It adds up in a hurry. Then realize that you only get maybe 3 shots with one bundle. Now you have to dispose of the mess when you're done.

In my way of thinking, newspaper is much denser than animal flesh. Not to say that solid water is AS dense, just more easily transported, it disposes of itself into the ground. Also it is very consistent. I carry a garbage bag with me for the torn up jugs, then re-cycle them.

Ballistic gelatin has been the standard for years for bullet expansion testing. It is expensive, hard to transport, and very perishable. Corbin is selling what they call sim test, very similar in mass to bal. gel. www.corbins.com/sim-test.htm It too is expensive, BUT it is much less perishable and re-moldable to be re-used.

gdolby · « **Reply #20 on:** March 25, 2004, 08:39:13 PM »

These are what I use also. I first tie them into bundles 4 to 6 inches thick, put them dry into a tub in my p/u. after 2 or 3 days go to the range and stick them in a card board box. Dont know about the level of consistency but the results are worth talking about. It also helps if you have a friend that delivers newspapers, you dont have to save as long. Good shooting...B

Wlscott · « **Reply #21 on:** March 26, 2004, 05:01:13 PM »

Hey Snuffy. Good to see ya again.

That's a good test you've got going with the 300WSM and the Interbonds. I'm currently loading 165 grain Nosler Partitions in my Featherweight. Took a couple of elk with it so far and several deer.

I'm getting ready to start load development for a 168 grain Barnes TSX bullet and Re19. I may have to try your water bottle trick once I'm done with development of the load itself.

How's that boy of yours doing?

Tell 'im I said Hooooah AIRBORNE!!!

snuffy · « **Reply #22 on:** March 26, 2004, 05:51:10 PM »

wlscott, he's nearly on his way home from Iraq!

. He leaves the fulushia area tomorrow morning for Kuwait. He will stay in Kuwait for 7-8 days then fly to Ft Bragg around the 11th. Debriefing for a week - ten days and then home here. Then I can let out that deep breath I took back in Sept. when he left!

I just ordered some of both the Nozler and Hornady in accu-bond and interbond in the new 180 grain weight. Finally a chance for a side by side test of the two offerings form those two companies.

I plan to use the same set-up at as close to the same velocity out of the 300 WSM. Then I will do the same with a .308 for a look at lower muzzle velocities.

I too plan on using R-19 in those tests. It worked well with 190 matchkings. Seems to be the right burn rate for heavier bullets in the WSM.

Wlscott · « **Reply #23 on:** March 27, 2004, 08:19:52 AM »

Glad to hear he's coming home safe and sound.

I'll be interested to hear how the Accubonds work for you also.

Hcliff · « **Reply #24 on:** March 30, 2004, 01:00:07 PM »

rpseven,

I have shot into wet news print for years. It is a great medium. It is the set up and the take down. The neat thing is you can see would channel and how different bullts expand. Some do blow up very fast. I always use a 30/06 180 as a tandard to judge by. Some time watersaturation of the paper effects the results so I use that as a gauge each time. The new experiment I am thinking about trying is with baggies filled with water. You can line them up. (But so far I have been to cheap to do it) The neat thing about news print is you get mulitple shots out of each paper if you space your shot out. It is something to page through the paper and compare. My 25/06 with 90 grain Xbullets at 3400fps makes devistating wound channels compared to alot of bigger guns. (It has shown that in the field too)

Hcliff

Power · « **Reply #25 on:** March 31, 2004, 08:46:51 AM »

Great post, thanks for sharing!!!

I hope it's ok but I shared this page on another hunting site I frequent;

http://forum.hunting.net/asppg/tm.asp?m=590781

Again thanks. Looks like the IB stays together really well. I'm looking for something a little lighter like the Accubond that might impart energy into the animal a little better. For deer-size game I believe the Accubond might be better based on that principle (have no experience yet in the field) but the IB is definately one good bullet. Be interesting to hear reports on game this fall and next year. I hopefully will have some to share for deer and elk, maybe bear too.

snuffy · « **Reply #26 on:** April 09, 2004, 03:43:21 PM »

I finally had time and good weather at the same time today. The range road was open as well, so off I went to shoot some groups for load workup on the 180 accubond Nozler and 180 interbond Hornady. This was in my Browning 300 WSM, 23 inch BBL.

The powder I chose is Alliant reloader-19. I looked in the sierra manual for their 180 grainers, their top load is 70.5 grains. So I started at 68.5, went up 1.0 gr. At a time to 70.5. Mainly I wanted to test for pressure and see if any would group under an inch. AFTER loading this test run of 3 each, I looked at Speer and Hornadys data. Theyre extremely conservative, their top load is 68.5 R-19! So I loaded 2 each at 67.0 and 2 at 68.0.

Now for the pleasant surprise!
Accubond interbond
67.0 2952 av 2973 av
68.0 3006 av 3044 av
68.5 3026 av 3059 av
69.5 3080 av 3103 av

I got chicken, did not fire the 70.5 loads. Hornady and Speer were telling me I was well over max. The appearance of the fired shells, no hard sticky bolt lift and steady climb of velocities said I was still safe. (These were brand new Norma cases.) Upon measuring the expansion ring I know I could-should have fired the 70.5 loads. I hate skatin on thin ice.

Heres the best group, it was 68.5 R-19. win large rifle primers, new Norma brass. It measure .900.

These velocities are well above what they were supposed to be. Im at a loss to explain how I got over 3100 fps with the 69.5 load with the Horn IB. The 69.5 load shot a 1.7 inch group. I will pick the 68.5 load for expansion testing at least for the IB

The accu bonds didnt shoot much for groups, the best was at 69.5, 1.770. I will probably use that load for expansion testing as its real close to the same velocity as the 68.5 load for the IB.

Looks like a good start, I should be ready to do some expansion testing next week, weather permitting. Im also going to include some .308 loads for both the AB and IB, to research lower velocities. If I have time and jugs, Im also going to try some 139 gr IBs in my boys 7-08.

Power · « **Reply #27 on:** April 09, 2004, 04:54:49 PM »

Thanks for the post, looks like you're doing a great job with your loads. Does that rifle usually shoot pretty good or are those groups average for that rifle?

Thank you for taking the time to do the testing. I as well as others really appreciate you taking the time.

longwinters · « **Reply #28 on:** April 10, 2004, 05:04:07 AM »

Good info Snuffy. I too noticed that Hornady loads seem alot lower than Nosler and a couple of others. I am getting good accuracy results with the 150's out of my 308, but am now working on the 139's out of my 7m-08. Here is a question tho, was this kind of grouping accomplished on the 1st time out with these reloads? I am pretty new at reloading (less than a year) but seem to have to try several loads and OAL lengths to get MOA. If I can shoot MOA ,with say a Nosler Ballistic tip, is there anything I can take from this concerning powder, amount, OAL/Ogive that will put me on the money with another bullet, like say the Hornady Inberbond? So that I can get good results faster. I saw that you did have several different powder loads. Did you have each cartridge length the same with only the powder grain being the varience? If so how did you determine What OAL you were going to go with. I guess I am particularly interested in OAL/Ogive relationships between different bullets in the same rifle.

thanks,

Long

snuffy · « **Reply #29 on:** April 10, 2004, 05:37:35 AM »

Long, in my experience,(over 30 years), it's a crap shoot. The only thing I changed in these loads was the two different bullets and the amount of powder. The OAL I chose was just under what I could get to fit into the box magazine for my Browning. All of the powder charges were compressed to some degree. The bullet invades deeply into the case. I used a long drop tube on my powder funnel and the "swirl" method of slowly pouring the powder into the funnel. This causes the powder grannuals to swirl around the bottom of the funnel to pack them into the case. The powder level would have been slightly lower in a fire-formed case. New cases are always slightly smaller in internal capacity.

Some will tell you NOT to compress powder. I've been doing it since I started loading. It IS possible to over do it, going as far as bulging the case. That goes without saying. Generally as long as the case will contain the powder without overflowing, it's okay. None of the loads I just fired were above the neck/shoulder junction.

Yes, this was the first time I did any testing on these bullets. As to whether you can use data obtained with say a Nozler BT to get a starting point for another bullet the same weight, I would say no. It has to do with materials used in construction of different bullets, ogive, bearing surface and type of heel, boat-tail, solid base or other considerations. Unfortunately there are no shortcuts that I know of. The fact that the AB's did not want to group is witness to that. It could be that I could change powder type, primer type, OAL or something else to get them to shoot tight groups. I don't have the time or the bullets to do that. They only put 50 in a box, they're expensive, and I don't plan to hunt with either bullet,,,,YET. 1.7 inches @ 100 is plenty accurate for the bottom of a milk jug.