New bullet maker that looks interesting

[Pdvdh]

Keep in mind that Nosler is located in Bend Oregon. This is where they set their BCs. Bend is at altitude. The advertised BCs are not adjusted to sea level,

I have to question the correctness of this statement. If Nosler is advertising their BC values based on a reference atmosphere at an elevation of 3600 feet, then they should be sued for false advertising, unless they're informing their customers of that fact. Mathematically, it's simple to adjust a BC value to Standard Atmosphere conditions, so customers can evaluate and compare bullet BC values on a level playing field.

Bullet BCs by large bullet manufacturers are referenced to one of two Standard Atmospheres; ICAO or Standard Metro conditions.

Berger's BC values are referenced to the ICAO standard atmosphere, and Nosler bullets are also, to the best of my knowledge. The ICAO standard was adopted by the Department of Defense in 1956.

The ICAO Standard Atmosphere conditions are:
29.92 inch Mercury
59 degrees F
0% RH

If a bullet's BC is referenced to the Standard Metro atmosphere, then its BC value needs to be multiplied by 0.982 in order to convert it to the ICAO referenced BC value.

 

[elkcoast]

I think that most people have checked the actual b.c. at around .660? To get a .720 b.c. as advertised, they would have to have tested at over 6000'......Rich

that seems curious, I'm gonna have to contact nosler and see what they are up to. If I get a bullet to reload with an advertised B.C. I want that information to be accurate. It would greatly annoy me to have a manufacturer intentionally decieve me.

 

[cohunter14]

that seems curious, I'm gonna have to contact nosler and see what they are up to. If I get a bullet to reload with an advertised B.C. I want that information to be accurate. It would greatly annoy me to have a manufacturer intentionally decieve me.

I hate to break it to you, but that is, indeed, the case. Do some searching on this site and you will find the evidence.

 

[Pdvdh]

If I get a bullet to reload with an advertised B.C. I want that information to be accurate. It would greatly annoy me to have a manufacturer intentionally deceive me.

Better strap yourself in tightly. Severe turbulence ahead.

 

[Outlaw6.0]

Better strap yourself in tightly. Severe turbulence ahead.

Where's the "Like" button?


t

 

[elkcoast]

I hate to break it to you, but that is, indeed, the case. Do some searching on this site and you will find the evidence.

Is it nosler exclusive or are the other manufacturers doing the same thing?

 

[elkcoast]

Better strap yourself in tightly. Severe turbulence ahead.

I guess in reality my accuracy is only good to so far anyway. Out over 600 takes the right guesswork so it might just be a waste to complain too harshly. Oh, I have had myself strapped in pretty tight for some time, not just on these issues. Yep, there is serve turbulence ahead.

 

[MMERSS]

I think that most people have checked the actual b.c. at around .660? To get a .720 b.c. as advertised, they would have to have tested at over 6000'......Rich

Specifically when establishing a BC for the 210 ALR using a DA of 5600 ft not corrected back to 0 ft the provided G1 BC was almost to Nosler's claim on their box!

I never did run the numbers but it would be interesting to see how 10000 ft would stack up compared to a 0 ft standard! With elevation just keep on cranking those number up. If one wants to see high non-standard BC numbers don't shoot them at sea level, take them above the tree line!

 

[elkaholic]

Specifically when establishing a BC for the 210 ALR using a DA of 5600 ft not corrected back to 0 ft the provided G1 BC was almost to Nosler's claim on their box!

I never did run the numbers but it would be interesting to see how 10000 ft would stack up compared to a 0 ft standard! With elevation just keep on cranking those number up. If one wants to see high non-standard BC numbers don't shoot them at sea level, take them above the tree line!

Thanks for that info! I didn't actually run the numbers and was winging it a little at 6000'. I just know that they are inflated considerably by Nosler....Rich

 

[swager62]

I can't vouch for the 7mm ALRs but the 210s are not even close to .730 G1. They still have a great BC but it's not as advertised. They are slightly lower than the 210 VLD and 208 amax.

Michael: Your Father's Day Present is in the mail, make me proud..

Al & John gun)

 

[MMERSS]

Thanks for that info! I didn't actually run the numbers and was winging it a little at 6000'. I just know that they are inflated considerably by Nosler....Rich

Great winging estimate! Yes I would call a 13% to 14% overinflated G1 BC considerable.

It makes you wonder if the 210 ALR was drop tested around 4000' on a very warm day and someone forgot to click the "adjust for standard atmosphere" button on the ballistics application? Sound timing test perhaps and forgot to click the button? I would hope they didn't just use a computer simulation model and advertise the BCs without verifying. Maybe someday Nosler will have an answer. Either way an inaccurate BC under the assumption of a standard atmosphere sure causes pain truing a ballistics solution. There is no need for inaccuracies with today's technology and certainly a respected approach would be to adjust claims once determined they are inaccurate. Take the bullets out and shoot them to verify the BC. A good test should achieve results within 5%. It's not too difficult with a good chronograph and quite fun in the process.

 

[elkaholic]

Great winging estimate! Yes I would call a 13% to 14% overinflated G1 BC considerable.

It makes you wonder if the 210 ALR was drop tested around 4000' on a very warm day and someone forgot to click the "adjust for standard atmosphere" button on the ballistics application? Sound timing test perhaps and forgot to click the button? I would hope they didn't just use a computer simulation model and advertise the BCs without verifying. Maybe someday Nosler will have an answer. Either way an inaccurate BC under the assumption of a standard atmosphere sure causes pain truing a ballistics solution. There is no need for inaccuracies with today's technology and certainly a respected approach would be to adjust claims once determined they are inaccurate. Take the bullets out and shoot them to verify the BC. A good test should achieve results within 5%. It's not too difficult with a good chronograph and quite fun in the process.

Ya, I don't get it. They must know it will soon come out and they have a lot more $$$$$ and something to gain rather than letting us do it. I have NO DOUBT that they realize that their b.c.'s are not real world....Rich

 

[elkcoast]

It makes you wonder if the 210 ALR was drop tested around 4000' on a very warm day and someone forgot to click the "adjust for standard atmosphere" QUOTE]
I just got a short (seemed somewhat blunt with very little useful information)back from nosler. They DID say, however, that they test their bullets at 3700 feet. Did not mention if they compensate the equation for BC to sea level or not.

 

[Pdvdh]

If they test their bullets above the stratosphere, they won't hardly drop a bit. They won't slow down with distance traveled either. The BC values will be unbelievably outstanding, if uncorrected to a standard reference atmosphere. However the BC values will also be of no use to us earthlings.