OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Firearms, Bows, and Ammunition > Reloading & Ballistics
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - New Nosler Accubond Long Range
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

New Nosler Accubond Long Range

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bitterroot Bulls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2012 at 17:36
Originally posted by rustic rustic wrote:

Too bad they don't have a .308 in a 168??


They already have a 165 Accubond.

The point to these ALRs is high BCs
-Matt
Back to Top
DCAMM94 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/19/2008
Location: Fort Worth
Status: Offline
Points: 3491
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DCAMM94 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2012 at 21:44
Where's the .338?  I talked to Richard Mertz yesterday, and I'm thinking of a two-barrel MOA maximum.  I think barrel #1 would be a .338 RCM, and barrel #2 would be a 6.5x47 Lapua.  A 300gr .338 would be good medicine for a 16.5" Maximum!
Although personally I am quite content with existing explosives, I feel we must not stand in the path of improvement. -Winston Churchill
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2012 at 22:33
Those are only the initial offerings.  I'm sure .338, as well as 6mm/.243 will likely be added to the line in another year or two.  New bullet designs always start out with a limited selection of the bullets they feel will be most popular at first until the mfg gets tooled up for full production capacity and their distributor  inventory builds.
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4853
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonoMT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 00:45
Originally posted by Kickboxer Kickboxer wrote:



G1 is really only good at one velocity, G7 is good, for modern bullets, over the entire velocity range.
I asked Bryan Litz about this because I noticed in his book that flat based bullets actually had less variation in G1 BC than in G7 BC across the velocity range. Since most of us use boat tails you're right to prefer the G7 BC since the drag model fits the bullet shape.

But if G1 is all you have, you'll be fine out to 600 with most high-power loads. Believe me, I was skeptical of this but ran a ton of different loads when unit testing my ballistic calculator app (and manually in JBM). The variation out to 600 might be 1". You'll see that difference just between reputable calculators using the exact same input.

Ultimately, the only true test is actual range dope. You can tweak your calculator then so it can be used under other air densities.
Reaction time is a factor...
Back to Top
djp0623 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: August/08/2011
Location: Pinehurst, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote djp0623 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 08:26
Sorry for my Amax post.  I looked up the AMax BC.  It appears this new hunting round has a better BC than the Amax target bullet.

I've been thinking about trying 208gr in my FNAR.  It has a 1/10 twist, and really likes the 168gr.  Then I could use the 208gr for hunting and longer range target.
Back to Top
Ernie Bishop View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2010
Location: Gillette, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ernie Bishop Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 08:43
DITTO!Bandito
Originally posted by jonoMT jonoMT wrote:

[QUOTE=Kickboxer]
Ultimately, the only true test is actual range dope. You can tweak your calculator then so it can be used under other air densities.
Ernie



"If you think you are perfect, just try walking on water."
Back to Top
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 23679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kickboxer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 11:52

G1 vs. G7 Ballistic Coefficients — Which Is Right for You?
G1 and G7 refer both refer to aerodynamic drag models based on particular “standard projectile” shapes. The G1 shape looks like a flat-based bullet. The G7 shape is quite different, and better approximates the geometry of a modern long-range bullet. So, when choosing your drag model, G1 is preferrable for flat-based bullets, while G7 is ordinarily a “better fit” for longer, boat-tailed bullets.

G1 G7 Ballistic coefficients

Drag Models — G7 is better than G1 for Long-Range Bullets
Many ballistics programs still offer only the default G1 drag model. Bryan Litz, author of Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting, believes the G7 standard is preferrable for long-range, low-drag bullets: “Part of the reason there is so much ‘slop’ in advertised BCs is because they’re referenced to the G1 standard which is very speed sensitive. The G7 standard is more appropriate for long range bullets. Here’s the results of my testing on two low-drag, long-range boat-tail bullets, so you can see how the G1 and G7 Ballistic coefficients compare:

G1 BCs, averaged between 1500 fps and 3000 fps:
Berger 180 VLD: 0.659 lb/in²
JLK 180: 0.645 lb/in²

The reason the BC for the JLK is less is mostly because the meplat was significantly larger on the particular lot that I tested (0.075″ vs 0.059″; see attached drawings).

For bullets like these, it’s much better to use the G7 standard. The following BCs are referenced to the G7 standard, and are constant for all speeds.

G7 BCs:
Berger 180 VLD: 0.337 lb/in²
JLK 180: 0.330 lb/in²

Many modern ballistics programs, including the free online JBM ballistics program, are able to use BCs referenced to G7 standards. When available, these BCs are more appropriate for long range bullets, according to Bryan.

[Editor's NOTE: BCs are normally reported simply as an 0.XXX number. The lb/in² tag applies to all BCs, but is commonly left off for simplicity.]

Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living
Back to Top
MC Escher View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: September/25/2012
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 121
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MC Escher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 12:49
OK, now I understand. Thanx.
The older I get, the better I feel about tearing up parking tickets and cheating on my taxes.
Back to Top
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 23679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kickboxer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 12:59
You are welcome...
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living
Back to Top
338LAPUASLAP View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master

Scope Swapper

Joined: October/17/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2596
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 338LAPUASLAP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 15:40
I read his book after a peaceful day right before bed.

I haven't read it for long long time.

If I had to choose two books I could take with me that would be one of them.
No one
Back to Top
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 23679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kickboxer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2012 at 20:32
Roger that...
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 13181
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/07/2012 at 02:06
For just about any modern boattail bullet, G7 is a better number to work with.  Especially if the it has a secant ogive.

ILya
Back to Top
Stevey Ducks View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/03/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stevey Ducks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/13/2012 at 16:15
All this is sort of academic for me.
 
I limit my hunting ranges to 400 yds and less and don't plan to shoot targets or varmints with bonded bullets beyond 400 yds.
 
Almost all of my long range shooting is done with Hornady secant ogive projectiles namely the 123 gr 6.5 Amax, 105 gr .243 Amax & lately the .224 AMax.
Back to Top
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bitterroot Bulls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/13/2012 at 16:24
Even out to moderate ranges, increased BC only helps a bonded hunting bullet.
 
Flatter trajectory, less wind drift, increased impact velocity/energy.
 
Win. Win.  Win.
-Matt
Back to Top
Stevey Ducks View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/03/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stevey Ducks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/16/2012 at 15:03
I have made the decision years ago that 5-7 percent increase in velocity, less than 10 percent increase energy, 1 inch or less trajectory, and less than 2 inches of windage is less important than accuracy, magazine function, and wound producing effects (penetration combined with expansion) on game animals at my self imposed 400 yd game shooting limit. Abilities to hold in hunting situations also are limitations.
I like Barnes tipped TX bullets and unfounded or not I have concerns about lead fragments in game meat.
 
Targets up to 1000 are a different matter shooting from rests, bipods, tripods, hay bales and such. In this case ballistic "rocket science" does produce noticable results.
 
I would expect that other major bullet makers will start using G7 data as the trend for long pointy long-range bullets and software development continues.
Back to Top
Cooper25 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/01/2010
Location: MN
Status: Offline
Points: 50
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cooper25 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/06/2012 at 13:16
Noslers are real pretty what with all the colored tips but nearly every gun I own always shoots Sierras a little bit better, so my Noslers sit on the shelf.
Jeff
Back to Top
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4853
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonoMT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/06/2012 at 14:03
Originally posted by Stevey Ducks Stevey Ducks wrote:

I would expect that other major bullet makers will start using G7 data as the trend for long pointy long-range bullets and software development continues.
Most ballistics calculators will accept either G1 or G7 BCs. Out to 600 yards it really doesn't matter (as long as you pick the matching model, e.g. G1 model with a G1 BC). In fact, getting air density input values (atmospheric pressure, temperature, altitude - if using corrected pressure) are more of a pain. But regardless of what models bullet makers make BCs available in I just wish they'd publish accurate numbers. I won't rule out a bullet with a lower BC if it has other performance characteristics I want. But I will shy away from brands that publish BS. Nothing like wasting a dozen rounds or so just to find out the BC was overstated by 5-10%.
 
Originally posted by Cooper25 Cooper25 wrote:

Noslers are real pretty what with all the colored tips but nearly every gun I own always shoots Sierras a little bit better, so my Noslers sit on the shelf.
If you have any .308 165 gr. Accubonds gathering dust I'll take them off your hands if the price is right!
Reaction time is a factor...
Back to Top
WYcoyote View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: April/06/2010
Location: Kane,WY
Status: Offline
Points: 154
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WYcoyote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/06/2012 at 16:35
These new Nosler Lond Range Accubonds should give those who are uncomfortable with the Berger VLDs "grenade" effect an option that may retain more weight and add some penetration for shots that are at a less than ideal angle.
I have had good luck personally with VLDs but I'm looking forward to trying these out.
Back to Top
Stevey Ducks View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/03/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 266
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stevey Ducks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/03/2013 at 17:11
Regarding the ballistic coefficent question there is an interesting publication from the Defense Technical Information Center entitled: Comparing Advertised Ballistic Coefficients with Independent Measurements.
I was not disapointed to find one of my favorite bullets as listed as having a 8% or so overated BC - that is the .264 Nosler 120 gr BT and that is it kills deer very well up to my self imposed 400 yd limit when shot out of a 6.5 - .308 (AKA .260 Rem). I have concerns regarding bullet time of flight between me and a game animal that is likely to move.
 
For varmint shooting and and long range targets I generally shoot VMax's & AMax's.
 
Would you believe that many select bullets on the basis of published ballistic coefficients?
 
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.215 seconds.