Yes, poorly designed shape. And retaining velocity is a pretty important function.
I did assume anything, yiur the one that posted those apples and oranges photos to try and pump your favorite bullet.
Your contention that the NF are "poorly designed" is like that of a Corvette owner claiming the F250 diesel trucks are "poorly designed" because they can't go as fast as the Corvette. Such claims totally ignore the designer's goals. While a F250 may not be the right choice for the Corvette owner, the Corvette owner's assessment is hardly a universal truth - as any F250 owner with a heavy load to haul will tell you. A Corvette wouldn't have had any problem beating my F250 up I-70 to the Eisenhower-Johnson tunnels but it couldn't do so at legal speeds even if I had a bed full of gear and my boat or camper in tow. As I said before, form follows function.
Both Mike Brady, the original NF designer, and the current NF owners are totally unapologetic regarding the NF bullet shape. The NF bullets were never intended for long range use but rather to perform extremely well from the muzzle to ranges well past where most game is taken. You, like the Corvette owner, are fixated on a single attribute (B.C.) and the conclusion you come to is no more valid than a claim that Newtonian physics are universal truths. (Any nuclear physicist will tell you they are not and that they only apply to certain frames of reference and scale.)
If retaining velocity is so important, why do you prefer AB when there are bullets available that do a much better job at that? If B.C. is the primary consideration, AB bullets are clearly "poorly designed".
BC is one factor. I see no reason to use bricks when here are plenty of bullets out there with decent BC and performance.
