Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Has anyone here tested an Accubond LR (Long Range) yet?

Looks like the bullet could be a real game-changer if it performs as advertised (expansion down to 1300 fps with high ballistic coefficients). Just wondering if anyone here has had an opportunity to test the bullets yet for expansion (in media or game) or for BC.

I'm most interested in the 6.5mm, but any data would be welcome.

The Nosler Forum moderators indicate the first two Accubond LRs for release, the 150 grain .270 and 210 grain .308, should be released in late March.

Not a gunwriter!

I picked up 264, 7mm, 308, and 338 AccBond Bullets the other day and intend to use them....they should be the cat's whiskers...

I haven't, but I think it's a good bet that Nosler has. Are they in the habit of putting out crappola and lying (excessively) about it?

No - Nosler has a great reputation, so I expect that they have done extensive testing. However,

1. I've seen data indicating their advertised ballistic coefficients may be a little overly optimistic as a general rule (or possibly that they use the best, not average, BC for a given range of velocities).

2. Also, their advertised optimum impact velocity range for the new bullets of 1300 fps to "unlimited" max is VERY different than anything I've ever seen before. That would be a minimum impact velocity 500 to 600 fps below most every other rifle bullet on the market, including Nosler's hunting bullets.

If the new bullets do what Nosler says they can do, and are accurate (precise on target), the new bullets will be the new platinum standard for premium bullets for anybody who thinks they might shoot farther than 300 - 400 yards.

Interesting link here on determining ballistic coefficient of bullets written by Bryan Litz, Ballistician for Berger.

http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/AccurateSpecificationsofBallisticCoefficients.pdf

I didn't realize prior to reading this how complicated determining BC of a bullet was. Seems like bullet makers have quite the task. And of course, then someone is unhappy when they shoot under "other than tested" conditions and get different numbers. I'm not defending bullet makers, but I believe, like velocities, they just report what they saw in the test.

I'm not sure how many bullet makers actually test their published BCs - Berger does. I suspect most bullet/ammo manufacturers probably just use computer modeling software to estimate a range of BC values for a particular bullet, and then choose a BC value they will publish based on the range of values the software predicts. Obviously anybody wanting to shoot at extended ranges needs to test their drop data and correct for variations in BCs.

That said, I would hope that if Nosler is bringing out a bullet line they specifically advertise as being for "long range" that they would actually test the BCs for the production bullets and not just rely on a computer model. Would be even better if Nosler published more detailed BC data (like Litz's data) for various velocities for their upcoming "long range" Accubonds rather than just one value that isn't referenced to any particular velocity - I'm thinking at least three BC values referenced to three separate velocities spaced well over a range of typical velocities.

I consider it likely that Nosler performed far more tests, and under more controlled circumstances, than any who respond to your question.
I'd trust their info, less a grain of salt due to overexuberant marketers, above any anecdotal responses.
Once MBAs take over at the company, all bets are off!

But it all makes for campfire discussion, so continue...

In science one doesn't just blindly accept the data of the people who publish the first paper - other scientists verify the data. Verification is what I'm looking for (as a great American famously said, "Trust but verify.")

If you look at JBM Ballistic software in the bullet selection you'll find the manufactures listed BC and some of the bullets also list the BC that Brian (Litz) has determined through actual testing. I'll ask Brian if he plans on testing the new Accubonds the next time I run into him...

Not to highjack the thread, but this also makes me wonder if anyone's heard of plans to update the Nosler Reloading Manual?

Bob

I'm thinking he's got to be planning on testing them.

Bryan and his dad are out to the Southwest Nationals till the 12th. I'll shoot him an email when they return...

AJ300MAG, Ever hear back fom em?