INTRODUCING Accubond Long Range

[300stw]

i will take 1000 of the 7mm 168,, where can i get them,,,,

 

[BryanLitz]

Thats me too...... Would be interested in that 210 30 cal and the 165 270.... But I am skeptical of the bc's.
Wonder if Brian Litz will chime in and offer an opinion on their bc numbers...

They look good on the calculator with those numbers thats for sure

First, this is very exciting news for long range hunters who prefer a bonded bullet. The original Accubonds are good bullets, but with their relatively short noses and essentially non-existing boat tails, they just didn't have the BC's for long range. However these new LR Accubonds look much better designed for BC.

Having said that, I have to apply the sanity check to the advertised BC's. Consider the G7 form factor (noted as i7 and explained in more detail here: Berger Bulletin » Form Factors: A Useful Analysis Tool)

The form factor is basically the component of BC that describes a bullets drag in relation to a standard, lower is better.

The lowest form factor (lowest drag) bullets I've ever tested are in the neighborhood of 0.89. On average, Berger VLD's have form factors in the .92-.95 range which is quite good and results in high BC's.

The G7 BC's cited in the announcement imply the G7 form factors listed below. As you can see, some of them are quite low. I tend to question any claims that imply form factors below .90. After all, of the 100's of bullets I've tested, there's only been 4 or 5 that have actually had form factors below .90 and those have been radical designs, often requiring non-standard twists.

Cal	weight	G7 BC	i7 
0.264	129	0.285	0.928
0.277	150	0.317	0.881
0.284	150	0.309	0.860
0.284	168	0.353	0.843
0.284	175	0.364	0.852
0.308	190	0.325	0.880
0.308	210	0.366	0.864

I haven't tested these bullets yet, so I can't say for sure if the claimed BC's are accurate or not. For now I'll say congrats to Nosler on offering a bonded bullet geared more for LR hunters. I'll report back when I've done some BC testing.

Take care,
-Bryan

 

[Fotis]

From what I understand all popular factory twists were taken into consideration before bullets were designed.

Hence the 129 6.5mm and not a 140...yet at least. Performance on game will be AB identical.
Feel free to contact Nosler with all tech ?????

1-800-285-3701. Fax: 541-388-4667

 

[Fotis]

Is it April 1st?

No sign of this on the Nosler web site!

NoslerReloading.com • View topic - INTRODUCING Accubond Long Range

 

[Joe King]

First, this is very exciting news for long range hunters who prefer a bonded bullet. The original Accubonds are good bullets, but with their relatively short noses and essentially non-existing boat tails, they just didn't have the BC's for long range. However these new LR Accubonds look much better designed for BC.

Having said that, I have to apply the sanity check to the advertised BC's. Consider the G7 form factor (noted as i7 and explained in more detail here: Berger Bulletin » Form Factors: A Useful Analysis Tool)

The form factor is basically the component of BC that describes a bullets drag in relation to a standard, lower is better.

The lowest form factor (lowest drag) bullets I've ever tested are in the neighborhood of 0.89. On average, Berger VLD's have form factors in the .92-.95 range which is quite good and results in high BC's.

The G7 BC's cited in the announcement imply the G7 form factors listed below. As you can see, some of them are quite low. I tend to question any claims that imply form factors below .90. After all, of the 100's of bullets I've tested, there's only been 4 or 5 that have actually had form factors below .90 and those have been radical designs, often requiring non-standard twists.

Cal    weight    G7 BC    i7 
0.264    129    0.285    0.928
0.277    150    0.317    0.881
0.284    150    0.309    0.860
0.284    168    0.353    0.843
0.284    175    0.364    0.852
0.308    190    0.325    0.880
0.308    210    0.366    0.864

I haven't tested these bullets yet, so I can't say for sure if the claimed BC's are accurate or not. For now I'll say congrats to Nosler on offering a bonded bullet geared more for LR hunters. I'll report back when I've done some BC testing.

Take care,
-Bryan

Until then I think I'll take it with a grain of salt, probabley stay with the Bergers. Having a known verified BC to me is just as important as terminal ballistics. After all having the best designed LR game bullet means little if you don't know where that 1st round goes and can't place it precisely.

 

[Topshot]

Is that the official launch? No offense, but that just looks like a thread on a forum to me. Nothing on the Nosler press release page or Web site home page.

Anyway, if it is true, Nosler are to be congratulated. If not true then good stooge.............LoL.

 

[Varminator 911]

While I'm excited about these bullets I can't understand why Nosler continues to inflate BC numbers. Sorry Nosler but Berger is still a better bullet company. And thanks Bryan for your usual dose of sanity.

 

[Scot E]

Performance on game will be AB identical.
F

I hope this isn't exactly the case. The issue with the AB's weren't just BC. They didn't shed any weight so no secondary wound channels for additional destruction of the vitals. And there are some expansion issues. I would love to see them shed 30-50% of their weight.

In my mind an A-max with a bonded bullet would be about the perfect bullet for LR. Something that can still expand down to lower velocities, A-max's now will expand nicely down to 1100-1200 fps, and still shed some weight.

I don't think there is any doubt that the Berger concept of initial penetration with an explosion of shrapnel to the vitals is devastating. The issues in some circumstances has been penciling or blowup at entry. If any company could perfect this issue they would be onto something big. A tipped and bonded bullet in some fashion seems to be on the right track to that ideal performing bullet IMO. Finding the right combination while keeping the BC's high will be the key. I wish Nosler well, Like a number of gents have stated, competition is a good thing!


Scot E.

 

[Buffalobob]

They didn't shed any weight so no secondary wound channels for additional destruction of the vitals. And there are some expansion issues. I would love to see them shed 30-50% of their weight.

Not my experience with them nor is it the experience of long range hunters who have killed several small eastern whitetails at extreme ranges.

The Nosler BC is in the realm of magic pixie dust. I shoot the old 7mm Wildcat 200 grains bullets that were once claimed to have a G1 above 0.9. I have tried Bryan Litz published BC for the Wildcats bullets at ranges beyond 1000 yards and find them to be very close, in fact close enough to result in one shot kills. I have little doubt that the BC is going to be a lot lower than Nosler is saying if normal twists at normal velocities will stabilize them.

The thing I find intriguing about the new bullets is that the Nosler Jackets will withstand the firecracking that develops in the super magnums such as the 7mm Allen Magnum. So when my barrel finally begins to eat bullets I can switch to the 175 Accubond with its thicker jacket.

 

[270 MKV]

I am currious as to the overall length of the 150gr .277 version.

I measured the bearing surface on the Matrix 165 to be ~1/2", and a 130gr Standard Accubond to be ~7/16"

I would expect the ALR 150 to have a bearing surface less than both, a ogive as long as the 165, a thicker jacket (more "brass" to offset the material density of the lead thus adding the needed length for the long ogive and boat tail)

150 grains is possible...just have to adjust the material densities.

 

[Franklin]

I am currious as to the overall length of the 150gr .277 version.

I measured the bearing surface on the Matrix 165 to be ~1/2", and a 130gr Standard Accubond to be ~7/16"

I would expect the ALR 150 to have a bearing surface less than both, a ogive as long as the 165, a thicker jacket (more "brass" to offset the material density of the lead thus adding the needed length for the long ogive and boat tail)

150 grains is possible...just have to adjust the material densities.

Don't forget about the plastic tip weighing next to nothing.

 

[Pdvdh]

I hope this isn't exactly the case. The issue with the AB's weren't just BC. They didn't shed any weight so no secondary wound channels for additional destruction of the vitals. And there are some expansion issues. I would love to see them shed 30-50% of their weight.

Like a number of gents have stated, competition is a good thing!

Scot E.

No desire or intentions to pile on here. As I recall, Nosler's primary advertised purpose for bonding the core to the jackets in the Accubond line of bullets is to increase weight retention, compared to the Ballistic Tip line of bullets. The ABs have a reputation for retaining about the same % of weight as the Nosler Partitions, which is in the 30%-50% weight loss parameter that you are desirous of. The ones I've used appear to have performed within that weight retention criteria, although most have passed through and never been recovered. So I don't think you should expect too much different from their bonded line of bullets. Shouldn't expect the explosive, massive shrapnel effect that some of the non-bonded lead core bullets exhibit.

I will qualify my experiences with the ABs by stating that the longest shot I recall with an Accubond was a little over 400 yds, and that bullet passed through and exited a black bear's rib cage. The wound was very lethal, however I didn't recover the bullet. The Accubonds have been 100% reliable performers on game in my experience, meaning I've never had one fail to expand and never had one pencil through game yet without expanding - up to this point in time.

However I did experience a non-expanding pass-through-the-ribcage incident on a Dall ram at a distance of 12 yards about 30 years ago, shooting a 150 grain Ballistic Tip from a .280 RCBS 30 Improved. I believe that few, if any, expanding bullets perform in accordance with design intentions 100% of the time. Since the Accubonds are physically identical to their twin BTs, and since I had a BT fail to expand at high-velocity impact, I am certain it occasionally happens with the AB bullets also. Perhaps even more likely to happen at longer ranges, with the reduced impact velocities.

 

[Danny1788]

In the OP it says that:
The ogive of the AccuBond®-LR is designed to provide excellent accuracy in a wide variety of firearms without the necessity of being loaded close to or in contact with the lands.

Could this be a new Nosler hybrid Ogive? Would make sense if they are getting such a high BC? Also didn't Berger experiment with a bonded VLD before? Maybe the Berger guys can throw in some info on there testing and why a bonded hunting vld never came out before?

 

[Joe King]

While I'm excited about these bullets I can't understand why Nosler continues to inflate BC numbers. Sorry Nosler but Berger is still a better bullet company. And thanks Bryan for your usual dose of sanity.

I don't think they inflate them so much as it just what BC calculators do, sort of nature of the beast. Berger's BC's are verified by rounds down range, but that doesn't really translate into increased sales to the ave Joe that really doesn't understand the concept very well, but that's not Berger's market either, we as more demanding shooters and reloaders are more along the lines of a nitch, and Berger is more interested in selling us a product that we can use rather than trying to sell us what we think we want. Where companies like Nosler, Sierra, Hornady, Speer. Are mass manufactures and inflating BC's translates into sales to the mass, simply because they don't fully understand. Not at all saying Nosler and the others don't make a very good product, they do, just different target consumers.