Nice to see Nosler admitting that the b.c. isn't .719! Just saying

Yeah, I took that 719 with a serious grain of salt. My figures in my 264 WM came out to around .620.

i just noticed last night on Nosler's website in the Nosler News section, that they had all the B.C.'s of the ABLR line doppler verified by an independent lab. The last sentence of the press release recommends using the G7 value for calculating trajectories.

I did a bunch of testing at distance and I believe I had to drop to .550 to make them jibe with my actual drops.

Here ya go.........


https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/testing-the-142-lr-accubond.155514/

Shiit!! Good info aalf. Ever test the 129 lrab? Thanks

Any input on the 142's on game performance from near to far?

I'd be interested in any tests on the 7 mm 150 if anyone has seen results.

I just stuck with the 130 Bergers......

They gtg?

https://www.nosler.com/accubond-long-range-bullet/

Link to all of the updated Nosler BC numbers. The 7mm 150 is now showing .546 or pretty much the same as the Hornady ELD-X I think.

Outstanding accuracy, and kill quite well.......so yeah......

Looking to try both the 129 and 142 in my 6.5 Creedmoor. Will report back once loads have been developed.

The revised BC's are now listed for the ABLR's on Nosler's main website. From the numbers it looks like the "independent" testing was done by Bryan Litz.

I believe you're correct, John.

The Nosler site says they were tested at the "Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center (EMRTC) at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology".

I obviously missed that--partly because the BC's Nosler now lists are very close to Litz's results.

Litz often lists BC's for two different rifling twists, and with faster, less common twists there's more of a difference.

Obliged aalf. I’ve always ran the 140’ in my 6.5 ai, they perform well on deer, elk , and bear I’ve killed with em. Pondering 130’s..

I stood in their ballistics lab and tactfully mentioned the bloated bc's to their head guy. His friendly attitude changed rather abruptly. Gives me a good chuckle to see them change it.

Better late than never.


Looks like fun, for a school facility.
http://www.emrtc.nmt.edu/

As long as you have a good load for the 140's, I'd stay there......

Out of curiosity....

Nosler ABLR corrected BCs vs Litz's determined (pulled from my Kestrel's AB bullet data based; also checked a few in Litz's bullet data base book)

Nosler (G7) vs LItz (G7)

6.5
129gr 0.267 0.283
142gr 0.315 0.293

270
150gr 0.298 0.291

7mm
150gr 0.275 0.284
168gr 0.310 0.332
175gr 0.326 0.330

308
190gr 0.301 0.292
210gr 0.333 0.332

Took a bull elk at 137 through both shoulders and dropped him. He got back up but couldn't move so I planted another through the hip and found it in the outside meat of the off shoulder. 45% weight retention.
Took a whitetail this year at just under 300 yards with a 6.5x55 at 2800 mv. Entered behind near shoulder and exited the rear of the off shoulder. DRT
Took an axis with the 6.5x55 at 109 yards. Entered and exited behind the shoulder. DRT.

Exit wounds about the size of a nickle. Not much meat damaged/lost either.

I don't understand the need to use a fragile, squirrely bullet like this to shoot game at 100 Yards. My experience has been with the 142s in 6.5 and the 175 gr 7mm. Neither lived up to the grossly inflated BC's (now confirmed) and they were so soft that typical seating pressured would cause erratic bullet seating depth due to deflections in the jackets. I found they were more trouble than they are worth and game them away.

I have found just the opposite with the Hornady ELD-X. They seat uniformly, match the published BCs and are quite accurate.

This year during our hunt in Mexico, we killed everything with Bergers. We just keep going back to them because they work. Too bad they are so back-ordered now!

Did you, or have you, used any 6.5 Bergers? Considering the 140 VLD hunting for a 6.5 Creed.