Question on bullet type for Africa

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

What I don't understand about the Partitions however, is when any other bullet does exactly what the Partitions do, we say the bullet failed.

It's almost as if they could not fix the problem, then simply rebranded the bullet so that it seems that is doing what it's designed to do.

 

[Philip Glass]

@Philip Glass
Why a 12 power scope. That would limit hunting opportunities.
Taint nought wrong with a 3 to 9 or 3.5 to 10.
A max of 10 power should allow you to shoot to at least 500 yards If'n y'all need to

My thinking is that 3-9 is such old news when we have better optics. My Ruger .375 has a Leupold VX6 in 2-12X. 2X is wide enough you can see the iron sights and a charging leopard!
My Blaser R8 in .375 Ruger is topped with a Swarovski Z8 1.3-13.3X42. I am not a fan of the popular 1-5 or 1-6X DG scopes. They lack versatility in my opinion. Plus my aging eyes need all the help they can get.
Regards,
Philip

 

[CJW]

What I don't understand about the Partitions however, is when any other bullet does exactly what the Partitions do, we say the bullet failed.

It's almost as if they could not fix the problem, then simply rebranded the bullet so that it seems that is doing what it's designed to do.

Which bullet are you referring to as rebranded? Accubond's?

As far as bullet "failure" goes, it's pretty humerous to me to read each individuals definition of it. According to some, my Accubond's, considered a premium bonded bullet, failed when they shed around 1/3 of their weight. Ever since peopled started bragging online about 100% weight retention with a-frame and tsx bullets, it seems that's the only acceptable outcome to some.

Or is that what you're referring to since I saw earlier that you recommended Accubond's? I'm tired so I apologize if I seem slow.

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

Which bullet are you referring to as rebranded? Accubond's?

As far as bullet "failure" goes, it's pretty humerous to me to read each individuals definition of it. According to some, my Accubond's, considered a premium bonded bullet, failed when they shed around 1/3 of their weight. Ever since peopled started bragging online about 100% weight retention with a-frame and tsx bullets, it seems that's the only acceptable outcome to some.

Or is that what you're referring to since I saw earlier that you recommended Accubond's? I'm tired so I apologize if I seem slow.

Referring to the Partitions. When any other bullet does what a Partition does, we often say that the bullet has failed.
I like the Accubonds. I prefer all bullets to shed a little bit.

 

[CJW]

I like the Accubonds. I prefer all bullets to shed a little bit.

Me as well. I understand the draw of the shock of an a-frame and toughness when shooting magnums and large, heavy structured game, but I like the performance of a small penetrating grenade inside the chest cavity on the non-lethal stuff.

 

[revturbo9967]

Referring to the Partitions. When any other bullet does what a Partition does, we often say that the bullet has failed.
I like the Accubonds. I prefer all bullets to shed a little bit.

The Partition should stop shedding any frontal core when it reaches the partition itself. Not saying it doesn't happen but I've never seen one completely explode like other bullets. I'm not sure what other bullets you were referring to in your post, but that would be the difference in my opinion. My definition of failure is full on grenade on impact, not just shedding some of the front.

The swift a frame has a similar design as the partition? is it bonded as well?

This partition did not go past the partition section and it was basically at muzzle velocity on impact.

 

[sgt_zim]

I'd probably be more inclined to 180 gr NP and 150 gr NAB. NAB should handle high impact velocities a bit better than NP, and NP should handle low impact velocities better than NAB. But certainly is a long ways from being a show-stopper for me.

 

[CJW]

The Partition should stop shedding any frontal core when it reaches the partition itself. Not saying it doesn't happen but I've never seen one completely explode like other bullets. I'm not sure what other bullets you were referring to in your post, but that would be the difference in my opinion. My definition of failure is full on grenade on impact, not just shedding some of the front.

The swift a frame has a similar design as the partition? is it bonded as well?

This partition did not go past the partition section and it was basically at muzzle velocity on impact.

View attachment 442046

Yes, the a-frame is bonded. It's the bonded version of the partition.

The AB and Partition have pretty similar terminal performance from what I can tell.

 

[revturbo9967]

Yes, the a-frame is bonded. It's the bonded version of the partition.

The AB and Partition have pretty similar terminal performance from what I can tell.

Then it is probably one of the best designed hunting bullets on the market. 2 very good combinations.

I have never shot an A frame but have a few boxes for my 375 to load up soon. High hopes

 

[CJW]

Then it is probably one of the best designed hunting bullets on the market. 2 very good combinations.

I have never shot an A frame but have a few boxes for my 375 to load up soon. High hopes

It's a beloved bullet in Africa for DG but works on everything.

The truth as I see it is, we're spoiled for bullet choice these days, and despite millions invested in R&D we still wonder whether they're good enough for light skinned game. Add to that some folks thinking PG are armor plated and that the location of their vitals is drastically different than NA game and we're blessed with non stop debates.

I never considered AB's until about 1.5 months before my trip but 13 heads of game hated them. I assume the results would have been the very similar no matter what I took.

 

[mark-hunter]

Thoughts?

Mixing ammo 180/150 grains to be used in two barrels, does not sound too good idea, to me. Regulations of the barrels is not perfect, second thing, mixing the ammo in pocket or belt, and possibly during loading of rifle in haste, finally the accuracy at longer distance with scope (200 m +) is not certain as it looks to me. What about zero of two barrels with different weight of bullet at longer distances, and different drop of both?

I wonder, if there is a chance to take bolt action, and then to use premium bullet with that? That would be my first suggestion.
Another suggestion, having in mind that the hunt will be for plains game species, to use rental gun in the camp, in case other rifle is not available at home to bring to safari?

 

[Firebird]

I’m chewing my tongue OFF at some of these posts but here is the most simple
Solution of all time to your dilemma—use your ph’s rifle and ammo. They will be trustworthy, time tested and fully approved. And as I understand it, the ammo issues have not caught up to South Africa yet. Use whatever you have at home for practice off sticks at
Your local range.

 

[IvW]

Proper expansion and maximum weight retention is my preferance.....

 

[Ares]

A .375 would probaly be the most affordable and cheapest to shoot. On bear a .375 would be fine, but on moose let's just say you wouldn't do much eating. On moose a .300 mag or a .338 would be more than enough.

 

[mark-hunter]

What I don't understand about the Partitions however, is when any other bullet does exactly what the Partitions do, we say the bullet failed.

It is intersting point, and when looking from this perspectvie, it really is as you put it.

I think that unlike other bullets, the remaining part - "rear partition" of this bullet still keep some shape, and is more stable on impact, keeping penetration, and thus likely making the exit wound.

Standard soft point might loose penetration with fragmentation of lead core, and uncotrolled deformation of the shape of remaining part. Also, I saw stripping of the jacket in some classic soft point bullets, in that case even worse. Partiton cannot strip off the jacket in its rear part.

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

It is intersting point, and when looking from this perspectvie, it really is as you put it.

I think that unlike other bullets, the remaining part - "rear partition" of this bullet still keep some shape, and is more stable on impact, keeping penetration, and thus likely making the exit wound.

Standard soft point might loose penetration with fragmentation of lead core, and uncotrolled deformation of the shape of remaining part. Also, I saw stripping of the jacket in some classic soft point bullets, in that case even worse. Partiton cannot strip off the jacket in its rear part.

What is the average weight retention of a Partition? Or what do they claim?

 

[BeeMaa]

@Rubberhead - I'd recommend placing a call to John at Safari Arms LTD to have a ladder worked up for your rifle to find the proper regulation. He has several high quality bullets to choose from. If it were me, I'd try the 165 grain TSX and 180 gran SAF's and see what works best. His website is below.

https://www.safariarms.com/

 

[ldmay375]

What is the average weight retention of a Partition? Or what do they claim?

Per their website Frequently Asked Questions:
65-70 %. They stated the same for the Accubond.

 

[IvW]

A .375 would probaly be the most affordable and cheapest to shoot. On bear a .375 would be fine, but on moose let's just say you wouldn't do much eating. On moose a .300 mag or a .338 would be more than enough.

A premium 300gr 375 will waste less meat than either of the other two.....

 

[Hunter-Habib]

I have exclusively been using .30-06 Springfield rifles for hunting my African plains game in all my safaris over the years. I started with 180 Gr Remington Core Lokt soft points for most of my plains game and 220 Gr Remington Core Lokt soft points for the blue wildebeests , kudus and especially the elands.

Nowadays, I prefer the Sako Hammerhead premium grade soft points in the same weights. Such a beautiful bullet. I try to abstain from Nosler Partition soft points, because their quality has visibly deteriorated ( in my experience ) after Nosler altered the bullet construction procedure in order to reduce manufacturing costs ( it’s disturbing how many fine rifles, shotguns and cartridges have become complete horse shit after the manufacturers try to pull this off ).