Like the Remington Accelerators, or hand loads.

Looking for feedback from people who have.

Not in an AR, but a Match L39A1.

Disappointing, to say the least.

I might revisit the idea again, if i didn't have something that shoots .224 bullets much more accurately, namely an AR in .223 . . .

Not in an AR.  Tried them in an M1A, 03A4, Rem. 742, etc.

M1A - would not function and groups pretty much sucked. (.308)

Rem. 742 - would not function and groups pretty much sucked. (.30-06)

03A4 - functioned (bolt action) and groups pretty much sucked. (.30-06)

Fun at 25 yds to shoot containers (metal or plastic) filled with water.  Shoot metal locks (huge fireball).

Only gun I ever shot accelerators in that would have been worth it was an old Savage pump .30-30.  Like shooting a nice .22.  I could have head shot squirrels with that thing.  Shot accelerators into groups less than 1/2 the size of 150 or 170 grain .30-30 ammo.

I still have a very old box of 30.06 Accelerators, accuracy was terrible

No wonder they were dropped.....

They were outlawed because they are untraceable by balistic/forensic labs

Not true.

Movies =/= reality....

Well, since I now have a cup full of sabots, and some .224 plugs headed my way, I will just have to play with loads to see what I can get.
Wonder if the plastic will delay opening long enough to clear the muzzle brake.

Lots of muzzle flash would suggest too slow of powder being used.

Yes, in an M1A.

Cycled action.   Horrendous accuracy and keyholing.  

I stopped experimenting with them thereafter.

I would suspect accuracy is an issue due to the twist rate/bullet weight. Most 308 ar's are either 1-10 or 1-12 twist. Original M16 was 1-12 twist wasn't it? And it was suppose to use a 45gr bullet? Maybe try really light projectiles and see what happens? I've always been fascinated, but I haven't done anything with them.

Seems like we should be able to 3D print sabot's...

Report back please!

Thanks bfoosh06 !
Luckily I have one upper without any muzzle device


Plan on it, even if it's a complete cluster ....

A 1-12 M1A or a 1-10 .308 is more than enough to stabilize a 55 to 68 grain .22 caliber bullet at the launch velocities typical from a .30-30 or .308.

The main source of inaccuracy with sabots is poor separation between the sabot and the penetrator.  The trick of accurate sabot shot is getting the sabot to fall off the penetrator without disturbing its flight.

As to sabots fired through muzzle brakes and other muzzle attachments, success depends on the sabot design.  The plastic flower petal design opens almost immediately on clearing the muzzle due to centrifugal force*, so unless the device has enough internal diameter to accommodate the petal diameter, things will get ugly.    These guns managed to shoot non-fin-stabilized sabot round without difficulty:

17 pr QF:


76mm, M1A2:


17 pr sabot


The US did successfully develop a sabot round for the 76mm, the HVAPDS-T, M331, but its accuracy was poor and the US preferred the HVAP.

* One of the reasons they ain't all that accurate, the sabot is not all that well balanced abut the central axis, so as soon as it clears the muzzle the bullet/sabot combination begins to wobble.  Another issue is "punch-through", when the bullet sets back into the sabot and rips through the back of the plastic.  The Army did a lot of work with these things in the 7.62mm and Caliber .50 Saboted Light Armor Penetrator (SLAP).

Okay, first off, if you get your hands on any of the old SLAP rounds or any other old round with a hardened penetrator in an old plastic sabot.  You need to realize that, that old plastic deteriorates with age and can break up on the feed ramps during feeding in a semi-auto or less likely during firing even if carefully loaded in a bolt gun.  What do you think happens when a hardened core with sabot failure goes rattling down the bore?


That caution stated (old Remington accelerators or similar which don't use hardened penetrator just a regular bullet is not much of an issue).

I have done some experimentation with making my own sabots on some old manual machine tools and have had some decent but not by any means perfect results.

First off I found so long as I had enough barrel twist going up a little in main bore diameter helps.  338 is easer to work with then 308 and so on.  So far best results have been with aluminum two piece sabots.  Have to machine two solid sabots on the lathe and then use the mill to shave off half of each to make one two piece.

In addition you have to figure it out just right to prevent both "punch through" where the sabot outruns the center projectile which punches through the base of the sabot and on the other end "Newton's Cradel Effect" where the core can bounce forward and out of the sabot under thrust inside the barrel.  It takes a lot of trial and error and live fire experimenting.

As to accuracy, theoretically nearly full accuracy is possible and has been proven in the big bore tank and towed gun rounds.  I haven't been able to tighten it up that well so far, 3-to-4 MOA out of a gun that with normal loads is 1.5-MOA capable is the best I've been able to pull off.

And I have had clear POI shift due to different barrel harmonics but I have been able to make it predictable with a lot of work.

Currently I am using copper cores.  Theoretically, I could switch to hardened steel cores but I will save that for if the big turd hits the big fan.  At least currently it's not illegal to think about doing it, actually doing it especially when I own handguns in the same cartridge chambering as the rifles I have been using is too high of a defense capabilities benefit vs. big brother problems.  If the big turd hits the big fan though that equation may change accordingly.

I personally do not see much use for hunting applications, the accuracy isn't good enough along with the POI change and the amount of time and effort to develop a working load and making them one at a time on manual machine tools.

There are of course obvious defensive applications.  Even without a hard core and just a copper core steel plate can be defeated by velocity alone.  With a high enough velocity you get a weird energy transfer effect.  The soft projectile point impacts on the plate and "splatters" but sufficient energy in a fast enough shock load is transferred to a small enough section of the plate that a semi-round core like chunk of the plate itself shears out at that point and projects out the back of the plate at sufficient velocity to serve as a secondary deadly projectile(s) that continues on on the other side of the plate in the same line and it being a chunk of the hardened steel plate material is capable of punching through even a secondary layer of Kevlar soft body armor.  Now with the really top end ceramic/poly multi layer composite armor at least at the velocities I have been able to top out at (4,300 top end so far) if thick enough that armor will protect against the soft copper cores I am currently using but it does severely damage the armor so multiple hits can chew their way through.  Whether a hardened steel core in the same load would be single shot punch through I don't know.

As to "sport" use.  Well that's what I would consider my current situation.  It's fun to fiddle around with stuff like this just to see what's possible and how far you can push a DIY.

Edited to add = Also, the two sabot pieces are a downrange lethal projectile as well for a short distance.  Armor your chrony against them and be sure the foreground around your shot doesn't include anything you don't want to kill or destroy.  I wouldn't suggest "bounding overwatch" type manuvers with this kind of DIY sabot ammo using two piece machined aluminum sabots where the two halves fly wide in a cone past the muzzle.

I have new nylon sabots, not old ammo.
Going to start off with 60 gr soft points, but been eyeing some 30 gr, and some 77 gr.
Thinking the .77 gr will be the better choice, if it doesn't protrude too far.
One place that sells the sabots offers a special die for seating the projectile into the sabot. Waiting for it to show up.

Years ago at an abandoned gravel pit, tried both .44 mag, and .223 Fireball against an old gravel hopper made out of 1/4" plate.
.44 mag would get through, but stretched the steel doing it, but the .223 Fireball made a very nice, clean punched hole, almost as if it was drilled.

Some mentioned it already but the 1-10 twist rate of many .308 barrels may be too fast. nylon isnt very hard and it may slip in the bore causing inaccuracy. Also powder efficiency is also dependant on bullet weight for building up pressure.

Powders that work with a 168 gr slug, might not be good with a 55 gr bullet.

I never bothered with sabots for that reason.

Buy yourself a .243 barrel and load up some hot ones if you want speed. probably be happeir with the results. Dont even need a new bolt or magazine.

I was not able to get plastic sabots to work for me, others have, I went to making my sabots out of aluminum and that has worked for me.  I I'd make a matched set male/female fine tooth spline set.  Male plug of hardened steel that I press my aluminum sabots around with a collet type die.  And a matching female push through die that I run my projectiles through.  This solved my "slippage" issues with the rifling spin not transferring.  That was after I gave up on plastic, might have worked with plastic as well ???

As to your "Just get a 243".  Although I love AR-10/DPMS-308 guns chambered in 243-Win and think they are a great option.  Sabots can do more, and do it with less bore wear issues.

I'm running a 338-Fed and 358-Win chambered large frame ARs fast twist bores.  I can run heavy 300+ grain cast lead pills from custom molds as both subsonic or supersonic loads and the twist is just fast enough to stabilize them (which is what I originally built those guns for) but I can also run sabots with projectiles turned from 1/4" copper rod myself and also 6.5mm commercial projectiles (multiple versions of same homemade sabots with different inside & outside diameters) and can consistently acheive velocities of 4,000+ fps with projectiles that are heavier then they even make for the 243 caliber at least commercially with BCs in the 0.5-to-0.7 range.  That kind of performance is something a 243-Win is NOT capable of delivering.

Sabots are a game changer that are basically a "loophole" that let you get away with legally cheating the laws of physics.  They are just finicky as heck and are hard to get to work just right so you can get the performance while minimizing the accuracy problems.  It takes a lot of development to find a sabot/bullet/charge combo where everything plays nice as a harmonious combination and it settles down into a consistent load that holds an acceptable group.

I'm still deep down the development rabbit hole myself.  But I do have some loads that work in my specific guns that give me performance levels that could not be achieved by simply necking down to a smaller bore with the same size case body.  Got to have the big bore for enough surface area to push on to maximize the internal ballistics then shed the sabot for the long thin pointy core to maximize the external ballistics.  That is the inigma that the sabot attempts to solve.  Bigger bore with short fat light for caliber projectile maximizes internal ballistics, small bore long slender heavy for caliber projectile maximizes external ballistics.  The sabot is the only way to get both, to have your cake and eat it too.

Very interesting idea.