500m BC test of the new .30 180gr Norma Bondstrike

[MrMacke]

Since it's hard (or near impossible) to find a range in Sweden with more than 500m i decided to do the test there.
I made a video about it, but the advertised BC of G1 0.615 turned out to be 0.53 in my case...
It's advertised as an extreme long range hunting bullet so i figured that i should post it here!
Norma has been very interested and have a new manager at marketing that did take notes and wanted to be educated on BC and how to verify it, so change on how they collect BC might be on the way.

 

[jamiebolseth]

Great video. I just bought a few of these bullets to play with in a 300 WSM. I have been shooting the 178 ELDx (which ABM says has a G1 BC of .555). I have lots of data on the 178 ELDx and know the ABM G1 BC value of .555 to be accurate. I took a picture side by side with the 178 ELDx and it fits with the picture of the other bullets you had in the video. The 178 ELDx clearly has a longer, pointier nose. So the Bondstrike "looks" like it would have a BC notably lower that the ELDx's .555.

Based on the "eye test" and your shooting data I believe your G1 estimate of around .530 is probably very close. I will shoot a few to verify when I get the right weather.

The Bondstrike is still potentially a good contender for a good hunting bullet as it would compare favorably to the 180 grain Accubond with a G1 BC of around .485. Obviously the ELDx will be more ballistically efficient, but it's not bonded.

 

[Kimber7man]

Very interesting. Was this out of a .308 Winchester chambering?
I'm shooting their 300 WSM 180 Bondstrike ammo, it shoots well (under 1" group at 100 yds) but I don't have a longer range close by to do the same test you did.

 

[Mikecr]

OK,,
Your velocity is likely lower than ABM's standard
I don't see accounting of YOUR air density -vs- ABM's standard
You inserted your 'dope' which may include errors including scope height and elevation adjustment errors
The tune itself could be throwing shots lower than expected

 

[Kimber7man]

Anyone have any more info on these bullets? They shoot really well in my 300 WSM, thinking about taking it to WY this fall…

 

[hawg chaser]

So you started out about 1.6 low at 100 and were about 1.6 low at 500. That would tell me that their numbers were fairly accurate, or am I missing something?

 

[308win]

So you started out about 1.6 low at 100 and were about 1.6 low at 500. That would tell me that their numbers were fairly accurate, or am I missing something?

I agree. The OP said he would account for the difference down range, but did not.

 

[wvbearhunter]

What caliber was he shooting, I seemed to have missed that

 

[Darryle]

What caliber was he shooting, I seemed to have missed that

308 Winchester

 

[AZ82New]

Since it's hard (or near impossible) to find a range in Sweden with more than 500m i decided to do the test there.
I made a video about it, but the advertised BC of G1 0.615 turned out to be 0.53 in my case...
It's advertised as an extreme long range hunting bullet so i figured that i should post it here!
Norma has been very interested and have a new manager at marketing that did take notes and wanted to be educated on BC and how to verify it, so change on how they collect BC might be on the way.

It doesn't appear to me that you accounted for your zero being off.

What am I missing here?

If anything, I would think you probably would have come up with a slightly higher bc.

Any comment?

 

[AZ82New]

Since it's hard (or near impossible) to find a range in Sweden with more than 500m i decided to do the test there.
I made a video about it, but the advertised BC of G1 0.615 turned out to be 0.53 in my case...
It's advertised as an extreme long range hunting bullet so i figured that i should post it here!
Norma has been very interested and have a new manager at marketing that did take notes and wanted to be educated on BC and how to verify it, so change on how they collect BC might be on the way.

Ok, now I finished watching your video.

I definitely need your address. I'm going to be sending you an invoice for the 8 minutes of my time that you owe me.

Joking aside.

Comparing the "shape" of 168 grain match bullets is a fools errand. It's not how this works. The mass of the bullet, in this case 12 grains higher, is an integral part of the ballistic coefficient. Try throwing a small rock. Then throw one that is heavier. The mass of the larger rock carries it farther, all things being equal.

Good try though!