After BurninDupont asked me about the ABLR I called Nosler. To my surprise the tech suggested not using them closer than 500 yards with the velocity I am getting. He said they are designed to open up clear down to 1,300 feet per second. These must be made for the 260 Remington. He said the have no feed back from the field at all.

I have a bunch of Barnes LRX 127 I will switch to them.

No feed back from the field.

Yup. I bet Nosler just boxed these up without any pre-release field testing at all.

Most times "switching to Barnes" is not as glorious as some would lead you to believe.

boatanchor,

I'm not enamored by Barnes bullets. Never the less, I have killed a lot of game with them. But I know from talking to the Nosler tech, the ABLR 142 bullets will be used for for jack rabbits. They may over penetrate, but I can live with that.

The .30 210's work under 500 yards at high velocity. Not apples to apples but then I didn't ask a tech before I shot stuff. mtmuley

You better go call him, right now!

The new Noslers won't make it through the standard body armor being issued to deer or elk with any consistency. 50% weight retention is like throwing a rock at them anyway. Maybe there are some DU rounds you could get your hands on.

Regular AB's kill the livin' snot out of stuff anyway.

It's all about velocity.

Pushed to hypervelocity, I think Barnes are better. And I'm talking about 26 Nos and the high performance rounds Ringman likes.

I found 120 TAC-X and 120 E-Tips to be more accurate than the 127 LRX, all three out shooting the 129 ABLR, which the 26 Nos was built around.

At more reasonable velocities, the ABLR should do well.

IMO,

DF

The only thing that's going to over penetrate, is your bolt going through your head when you blow your rifle up...

smokepole, no need to call him. Found out here on the internet that they don't work. mtmuley

What did the Barnes tech say?

JGRaider,

That's the bullet the tech recommended.

heavywalker,

Haven't called them yet. I didn't see a need to call them since no one told me they are soft.

Short story about Nosler and their bullet advice-

When I was a young pup I went in Shooters Pro Shop on a Thursday afternoon and bought a 257 Weatherby with the oiled stock, 26" of course. Needed dies, brass, bullets, scope, mounts, the works, and got it all right there. Being young and even MORE full of myself I told them I was going to shoot a bear with it on Saturday. Mmm hmm says they. I opted for 100 grain ballistic tips against their advice. They said whatever you do don't shoot a bear up close or it'll blow up, (the bullet, not the bear). Well, Saturday I was on the mountain and low and behold snuck in on a bear huddled up and sleeping on the uphill side of a large tree. He died. The shot was 40 yards with the little Bee.

The bullet took out a couple ribs and fell out of the hide on the offside when I skinned him out. A more beautiful and perfect mushroom could not be made. So much for Nosler knowing all things about all situations with all cartridges shooting their bullets. That Weatherby broke all their rules and yet, the bullet performed perfectly.

Just 'cause he's a sales clerk at Nosler does not qualify him for advice, but I'm also sure it never stopped him from giving it.

When BT's first came out I tried them in a .257 Roberts, and was not impressed. I've heard from others I should give them another try now though. I don't know if I'll live long enough to shoot through the pile of partitions I've got before I'll need to try something new.

Don't overlook the 120g GMX.

Wrong direction in BC.

I am fixing to get some field results with the 142s any day now. They look really soft- should be interesting!

This says that Nosler Accubond Long Range Bullets [ALBR]:

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/8/21/nosler-accubond-long-range-bullets/

Nosler states that ABLR bullets readily expand at impact velocities as low as 1300 f.p.s. That is 500-f.p.s. slower than the company’s other big-game bullets and 300-f.p.s. slower than even Ballistic Tip Varmint bullets. That low-velocity expansion is achieved with a thinner jacket at the nose and a deeper cavity below the polymer tip compared to regular AccuBond bullets. On the fast end, Nosler states that ABLR bullets expand yet remain mostly whole at extreme velocities. Expansion is controlled by a jacket that thickens toward the rear and is halted by a solid base that encompasses the entire boat tail. The jacket comprises approximately 45 percent of the bullet’s weight and is bonded to the lead core to ensure bullet integrity.

This is very encouraging. I will try a couple more powders and then do some penetration testing.

Fixed.

Fireball2,

I discovered my son-in-law is a natural born bear hunter. He sees so many he doesn't even hunt them anymore. Maybe I should get him together with you and me.

.450 vs .468. You ain't that good....

We need to take a day in the mountains with your son in law, some sammiches, Gatorade, optics, and rifles!

I'm just starting to work with some 150's in my 284 with R17. Initial shots hinted at very good accuracy though I've some work to do as I'd like to hit 2850-2900 fps.

The 140-gr TTSX is stellar in this rifle both accuracy-wise and in velocity with R17 but on some longer range deer kills there was less (as in hardly any) expansion than desired. Hence, trying another bullet. These looked like a good bet and are only a "smidgen" longer than the mono- 140's.

I don't think the velocity issue as described will be one in this cartridge.

I have got chrono readings with Re17 [without pressure sign] that were so high, I would bet big money it was not possible:
270 130 gr NBT moly 3.34" 57.7 gr Re17, 22" barrel measures 3129, 3228, and 3228 fps.

That rifle with 4895 and that bullet is usually 2875 fps.

But once I calculate the powder charge reduction safety margin I need with Re17 wild temperature coefficient, all gains are lost.

Clark, those are certainly high numbers but not outrageously so. IIRC, and someone may correct me, but back in the 50's-60's an outdoor writer (JOC ?) mentioned filling the 270 case with H4831 and under a 130-grain for 3100 fps+. And again if memory serves with a 22" barrel.

A couple weeks ago I popped the top on a still-sealed cardboard can of mil-surp H4831 and went up to 62 grains with the 130-grain Hornady Interlock Spire Point in a 22" barrel Winchester Model 70 Classic. Average velocity was 3159 fps, without any moly on the bullets, and I could lift the bolt handle easily with the little finger of my right hand.

How old is that powder?

It's World War II powder for 20mm cannons. It was either retrieved from broken-down 20mm rounds, or powder that hadn't been loaded yet by the end of the war. Hodgdon bought tons of it and sold it as H4831 until they ran out in the early 1970's. So it's around 70 years old.

Dang, that's crazy.

I have several pounds that I bought back in the '60's, and it was surplus back then. It still performs as well as it ever did. It's good stuff.

DF

They should be perfect for folks shooting deer with the .300 AAC blackout.

That is the bullet that I have used in various 270s to kill a mini ark full of deer. One year I actually killed 17 with it,from under 50 yards to nearly 400. None of the 17 took a step,no not one.

Now days such bullets are very unfashionable,flat base,cup in core,nonbonded with a less than ideal ballistic coeffecient.But they often are more accurate and generally can be loaded to higher velocity than the modern uberwunder bullets.

And they kill stuff really quickly because they do tend lose some of their original weight.

The GMX (BC .450) velocity gains and accuracy eclipse the LRX BC .468) marginal BC advantage. My .260 shoots the GMX at 2910, vs the LRX at 2850. Yes on paper the LRX has less wind drift, but for hunting applications, 120 GMX shoot flatter and more importantly, is more accurate at distance.

John: Let me know if you can spare a few pounds. That Mil-Surp 4831 is all we ran in our .270's up until a couple of years ago when we ran out. It has no equal in the .270 with 130 pills.

I used to buy that same powder from the old Buttreys Grocery store in Bozeman, Montana back in the late 60's in bulk paper bags for .67 cents a pound. We put in Ball canning jars to store it. Talk about the "good old days".....grin!

1966: thereabouts
Hamburger ~$.25

Fries ~$.25

Tall malted ~$.25

Gas ~$.25 gal

MS H4831 ~$.67 lb

Those WERE good days. 😊

Yep.

Still had some of those bags until recently when they got so brittle, my thumb would about poke thru the side of a bag, just handling it. I transferred everything into empty powder cans, now labeled with a Magic Marker.

The powder still smells good, looks good and shoots good. No dust or evidence of deterioration.

DF

A friend talked about buying a 100lb keg and splitting it with his shooting buddy in the '60's, he said it ended up costing about 30 cents a pound. When the delivery truck arrived the driver wouldn't unload it (fearing it would "blow everyone up") so they wheeled it off the truck themselves. Good times.

Clarification on the bags. Mine were Hodgdon one pound bags that came, IIRC, 10 to a cardboard box. I get the feeling your bags were generic paper bags filled from a drum at the store.

Yep, things have changed quite a bit. I recently traded a .244 40XB that invoiced in 1966 at wholesale, $164 + $17 for SS barrel. Our dollars won't buy what those dollars would.

Even with inflation, that was cheap powder and really good stuff.

DF

The last batches of the old H4831 I've gotten have all been gifts. In the late 1980's Eileen and I did a road trip through the South during spring turkey season, on the way stopping to visit an older writer, Charlie Waterman, in Deland, Florida. Charlie was in his mid-70's at the time and had just decided to sell their summer/fall home in Montana and quit big game hunting, so he gave me a gallon Thermos jug of old H4831, which he'd used in his .280 to kill a pile of antelope, elk and some really big mule deer. That jug lasted until maybe 1990.

More recently a buddy ended up with several of the original waxed cardboard 1-pound "cans," also thanks to an older friend who quit hunting and shooting. That's where the unopened can came from that I recently tested against the new stuff.

One thing I do know from several tests over the years is that while the mil-surp H4831 was good stuff, and cutting-edge for its era, it was more temperature sensitive (especially in cold) that H4831SC. But then that was true of just about any powder made before the 1990's.

Davidlea, I have done what you've said a friend did. Frankly the first look at a 100lb keg of powder is a OMG moment. But, I'm still here.

Somewhere, Old Jack is nodding his head and grinnin'.

John,

Have you done any testing of the ABLR ?

Yep...

DF

What current powder speed compares to the old surplus 4831? Maybe 7828?

RL22 is probably really close.

I would surmise the forward portion of the jacket is quite thin, thus the ability to expand down to 1300 fps. Here, a 129 gr 6.5mm ABLR with too much powder compression. I've compressed many different loads and bullets and NEVER seen this much ogive bent out of shape.

Alan

That is discouraging, sorta. I tried them today in my 6.5SLR staring with 62.0 and going up to 67.5 grains of H4831. it is about the same capacity of a .264 Win Mag.