Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Nosler Ballistic tips vs Accubonds

I don't know--I still have five or six boxes in my bullet cabinet, so haven't paid any attention to availability...

I was just wondering because I worked up a load with 140 NBTs for a 280. When I switched to 140 ABs darn thing opened up to 1 1/2 MOA groups. I attributed the change to the AB being harder even if it has the same bearing surface. I assumed that that it would be an across the board change due to what I would guess would be engraving pressure or maybe it would be obuteration (sp). I am glad to hear my assumption was mistaken. IIRC there was a 2gr difference in sweet spots. They did shoot very close to same POA, just bigger groups. Once the load was sorted out the ABs shot just as well as the NBTs

mudhen and Jeff O.--

The 200-grain .338 Ballistic Silvertip is still offered as a component bullet. It's exactly the same as the 200 .338 BT except for the black coating on the jacket and the silver plastic tip.

EddyBo,

That's pretty much what I've found when the same load hasn't worked with BT's and AB's of the same weight: A little tweaking of the powder charge will do the job.

Actually, AccuBonds are a little softer than Ballistic Tips, due to the bonding process, even though the gilding metal of the jacket is the same alloy.

I am confused, because the illustration in the Nosler manual (No. 6) shows a rather more complex cross-section compared to the traditional BT and the AB. Going back to No. 5 (which includes data for both the Ballistic Tip and Ballistic Silvertip), the exterior shape and the jacket in the illustrations, as well as the internals, look quite different.

The illustration of the Ballistic Silvertip in the No. 6 manual isn't a cross-section. It's a drawing of the exterior of the bullet. Inside it's a Ballistic Tip.

Thanks. But when I look at p. 400 in No. 5 and p. 477 in No.6, the internals still look different. Did they just not bother to change those diagrams?

Some of the illustrations Nosler uses are generic, and so not intended to be a precise representation of a specific bullet.

OK, I can understand that. However, I can honestly say that I have never tried a Ballistic Silvertip largely because it looked like they took a well-respected brand name and applied it to something that looks to be very differently constructed according to the diagrams in their Reloading Manual. Well, that and the fact that I was never very impressed with the original Silvertip in anything but the .30-30.

Both your decisions involved flawed assumptions. But that's often the way of life!

Man, those original Winchester Sivertips were magic in my eyes.

When i turned 12, back in the day, my father bought me an '06, which was akin to religion in Pa. The bullet of choice were those magic Winchester Silvertips. Mine were 180's.

I still have a few in those old, yellow Winchester boxes......

Tony

Yeah, certainly in mine more than most!

I don't think they still make .338 Ballistic Tips. I use Combined Technologies black colored 200 gr. polymer tipped bullets. I think they're essentially Ballistic Tips with a coating. Could be wrong. They shoot really well in my .338-284.

DF

what is the coating on the ballistic silvertips? moly?

Lubalox. IMO/E nothing like moly. It just looks pretty...

Winchester claims that Lubalox lessens friction and reduces fouling, but I have never been able to see a significant difference between Lubaloxed and bare bullets, whether in the bore or on the chronograph.

That said, they certainly work just as well as the same bullets uncoated.

I would be willing to bet that the thin layer starts getting wiped off by the lands the minute the bullet starts down the barrel.

They should have named it Lube-a-load.

JohnMoses,

It's not too unlike the fishing lure manufacturers, they actually don't have to catch a fish, just a fisherman...

DF