Long Range Bullets and Terminal Performance

[MontanaRifleman]

Thanks.

Did you run the chart for 5500 feet elevation?

I ran it for 3300 fps and 6000' elev and 59 temp.

The advertised expansion vel for the AB is 1800 fps and I find it curious why it expanded at 1600? In the case where it hit the bone, I can understand, but the neck shot is puzzling. Maybe, heat friction on the bullet from an MV of 3300 and an extended TOF softened the jacket?

 

[MontanaRifleman]

On Berger vs AB, I would have to agree with GG as far as the AB probably the best *all around*. The Bergers probably edge out the AB's in long range ballistic performnace and possibly accuracy. Not from experience, but from everything I've seen and read.

I simply would not use a Berger for less than a 600 yd shot. JMO

 

[Franklin]

That would all depend on velocity. Big difference in 3300mv vs. say 2800.

 

[Akkill]

well what about the new AB 338 and 250 grains, it sould be better than the 225 grains

 

[goodgrouper]

I ran it for 3300 fps and 6000' elev and 59 temp.

The advertised expansion vel for the AB is 1800 fps and I find it curious why it expanded at 1600? In the case where it hit the bone, I can understand, but the neck shot is puzzling. Maybe, heat friction on the bullet from an MV of 3300 and an extended TOF softened the jacket?

Well the chart you ran would just about been perfect then. Good guess.

I am curious where you found the data that AB's need 1800 fps to open? I have seen them open up as designed well below this speed. Anyhow, if that is their claim, the bullet in the neck shouldn't have opened but it did quite well.

 

[goodgrouper]

well what about the new AB 338 and 250 grains, it sould be better than the 225 grains

I was hoping it would be but the advertised BC as of right now doesn't look as high as it should be.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

That would all depend on velocity. Big difference in 3300mv vs. say 2800.

True, I figure 600 yds cause that's where the Berger bullet vel would be in the low 2000's.... and I'm just guessing that's where I would see more controlled expansion.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

...I am curious where you found the data that AB's need 1800 fps to open?

I called Nosler, they said 1880 fps was the minimum required expansion vel for all AB's.

Interesting... would like to do some long range expansion tests someday.

Any ideas anyone? Phonebooks?

 

[FlinchedAgain]

I called Nosler, they said 1880 fps was the minimum required expansion vel for all AB's.

Interesting... would like to do some long range expansion tests someday.

Any ideas anyone? Phonebooks?

I would say that the people at Nosler probably add at least 200fps to there minimum expansion velocitys just to avoid any consumer complaints about poor bullet performance.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I would say that the people at Nosler probably add at least 200fps to there minimum expansion velocitys just to avoid any consumer complaints about poor bullet performance.

They show a picture of an E-Tip tested @ 1800 fps, (which is also the advertised expansion vel for the E-Tip) and it is oppened a little but the petals are definitely not rolled back.

This is a comparison with the TSX, the middle bullets are 1800 fps and the other fully opened are at 3200 fps.

 

[FlinchedAgain]

They show a picture of an E-Tip tested @ 1800 fps, (which is also the advertised expansion vel for the E-Tip) and it is oppened a little but the petals are definitely not rolled back.

This is a comparison with the TSX, the middle bullets are 1800 fps and the other fully opened are at 3200 fps.

Well thats marketing for you, you can read into it whatever you like, It doesnt even state what they were fired into for testing, all this add really really proves is that they know how to photograph expanded bullets, even I can do that, Im sure the people at Barnes would show you something completely different.
Im not trying to sound negative or anything but at the end of the day they are just two companies competing for you hard earned dollar, the only way to know for sure is to get out there and try them, as they say your own experience is worth more than a thousand expert opinions.

 

[edge]

The Nosler website says 1600-3000 fps for the Ballistic Tip, and 1800-3100 for the Accubond. You just have to go to each bullets page and the velocity ratings are almost at the bottom.

IMO, 3000 for the regular BT seems a bit high, and the low end seems fairly high for both! I tend to think of BT ( type) bullets as exceptionally fast openers.

edge.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Well thats marketing for you, you can read into it whatever you like, It doesnt even state what they were fired into for testing, all this add really really proves is that they know how to photograph expanded bullets, even I can do that, Im sure the people at Barnes would show you something completely different.
Im not trying to sound negative or anything but at the end of the day they are just two companies competing for you hard earned dollar, the only way to know for sure is to get out there and try them, as they say your own experience is worth more than a thousand expert opinions.

I agree, I didn't post the picture to compare the E-Tip vs the TSX, I posted it to show the E-Tip perfomance at 1800 fps, which I would guess would be the same or close to the AB. Point being, I dont think they would advertise bullet expansion @ 1800 fps if it actually opened @ 1600 fps.

 

[edge]

IMO, while the E-Tip did not open great ( @1800 fps) in the previous picture, it did attain a blunt surface.
Also IMO, if a monolithic copper will open that much, a ballistic tip is going to be a whole lot better! To my eye there is just no comparison as to ease of opening between the E-Tip and Accubond.

edge.

,