does anyone have a clue on what the BAllistic Coefficients of the 168gr and 175gr 7mm ABLRs would be? thinking about trying these in my 7mm rem mag. Any response will be much appreciated! Thanks yall.
Range Report 7mm Accubond LR BCs
- Thread starter 7mmShooter
- Start date
thanks for the reply, but i guess i wasnt specific. im looking for what yall have gotten for actual tested BC values on these bullets. sorry for not being clear on that, have a nice day!
Nosler claims to have tested the BC's not used static calculations. Here's the 175 SMK (0.64 on Left) and 180 Hybrid (0.67 on Right) on either side, I'd say that the 0.65-.67 G1 is pretty reasonable to start with, you're going to need to go shoot them for DOPE anyway and that will certainly get you on paper at distance.
Oh. Silly me. I was thinking .30, obviously, and incorrectly. The shape of the Sierra was different enough to throw me. Those do look in the same ballpark.
Thanks
Thanks
I shot the 168 berger classic hunter along side the 168 ablr, out of my 7saum, both right at 2950 fps muzzle with my magnetospeed. 600-700-800-800 yards the ablr shot an inch to a few inches flatter at every range, just my small sample size
I would like to try the 150 in a 7mm-08, I am thinking it might make that cartridge into even more of an over-achiever......
thanks for all the inputs everyone! going by what ive seen, the 175s should be reasonably close to the 175smk in bc, seeing as bryan litz has calculated it as .652 g1 1% +/-, but i could also be way off.
Too bad it'll be 2600 fps if it's cold and 3100 fps with no more primers in the case when it's hot
Too bad it'll be 2600 fps if it's cold and 3100 fps with no more primers in the case when it's hot
I've always found it pretty temp stable but then again we only get one temp over here cold and wet
While that *would* be awesome, it's also exceedingly unlikely. The form factor required for that kind of real-world BC would make it the most aerodynamically efficient bullet ever created (certainly for 50cal or smaller). Consider the 162amax G1 BC is .599 (per Litz) yet has an excellent form factor (~.94 IIRC). It would be difficult for the 150gr ABLR to even match the 162's BC, nevermind surpass it.
I suppose we can hope.
Last edited:
very true my friend ive used alot of nosler and always had to play with truing on pda to get the right data. ive looked at them side by side with similar bc like the 162 amax i also cant believe they are .611 but like you said heres to hoping
Agreed! Assuming an excellent form factor of ~.94 or so, I think the G1BC would come in around .57 or so - pretty close to the 140gr 6.5mm bullets - except a 7mm08 would push them faster than a 260 can (reasonably) push a 140.
I have always been a big fan of moderate cartridges shooting really efficient bullets.
I would imagine that some folks getting rocked by magnums who make poor bullet choices would be incredulous to see how good some of the smaller cartridges are past 300 when comparing the numbers.
Of course great bullets make big cartridges amazing where needed, but I wish I had a nickel for every Whitetail hunter I have met who used twice the cartridge they need, and have a hard time hitting cleanly.
I would imagine that some folks getting rocked by magnums who make poor bullet choices would be incredulous to see how good some of the smaller cartridges are past 300 when comparing the numbers.
Of course great bullets make big cartridges amazing where needed, but I wish I had a nickel for every Whitetail hunter I have met who used twice the cartridge they need, and have a hard time hitting cleanly.
totally agree spr1, magnum performance is great but you've gotta be able to handle it to be able to use the advatages that they provide.
Last edited:
Agreed.
I was thinking of the folks who "think nothing of shooting a whole box of shells(!) to get ready for deer season", and then shoot their deer in the guts at 25 yds.
The high BC bullets available now push every cartridge up a notch or two from what was traditionally thought of for maximum ranges.
I was thinking of the folks who "think nothing of shooting a whole box of shells(!) to get ready for deer season", and then shoot their deer in the guts at 25 yds.
The high BC bullets available now push every cartridge up a notch or two from what was traditionally thought of for maximum ranges.
Ditto! I work with a bunch of these folks... 300WM, 7mag... one guy even has a f'ing 338RUM to shoot at whitetail with.
Personally, I think a 243 does a bang-up job on whitetail.
Yeah, we have a lot of those type where im from. kinda off topic here, but i dont know why (other than logistics issues) that the military hasn't switched to 7mm vs 7.62. the 7mm-08 absolutely destroys the 308 when both loaded to m118lr levels with 175gr smk. the 7mm rem mag vs 300 win mag comparison is much more complex though.
It might just be me, but i think the m40 series rifles would be way better chambered in 7mm-08. to each there own i guess.
Last edited:
I think it all goes back to the replacement of the 30-06 by the 308. The DoD mandated a 30cal. "Tradition" took over from there.
100% agree a 708 is a better choice in almost all scenarios though.
yeah i get that, plus the fact that the actual soldiers who put their lives on the line daily using the equipment, have hardly any say in what they can use or not use. it would be way different if the were able to choose the equipment they'd use.
Any updates on the 150 ablr? Prolly gettin away from the 162's (unless I manage to score a bunch from someone ) these could be a great match round for my 7-08 @ hella speed
) these could be a great match round for my 7-08 @ hella speedI have some 150 and 168s to work on in my 280AI.
I did a few load attempts but reverted back to my proven load with the 140 AB for hunting season. I will do some more testing in the spring.
There is a bit of discussion on them with good results on the Nosler Reloading forum.
I did a few load attempts but reverted back to my proven load with the 140 AB for hunting season. I will do some more testing in the spring.
There is a bit of discussion on them with good results on the Nosler Reloading forum.
I just received a couple boxes of the 150's and compared them to some older 140 NBT's.
It appears the bearing length is about 1/2 the length of the lighter bullet. I am hoping that bodes well for velocity.
It appears the bearing length is about 1/2 the length of the lighter bullet. I am hoping that bodes well for velocity.
I just got 500 of the 150 Grain LRAB. They look close to the same shape as the 162 amaxes.
I am going to run them in my 280 and my 7wsm. The 7wsm should smoke them out of the barrel. Excited about that. They will be devasting on game because of the speed and the bullet construction.
I am going to run them in my 280 and my 7wsm. The 7wsm should smoke them out of the barrel. Excited about that. They will be devasting on game because of the speed and the bullet construction.
im excited to hear the results, i think the 150s might be a little too light for the velocities you'll probably be seeing. but hey, won't know if you dont try right?
Any updates yet guys? I am building a short action savage 284 winchester with a 28" 9 twist krieger and accurate mags that get me 2.95" coal. I'm plannin on runnin IMR 4350 and I have 1000 Nosler ABLR. I'd love to hear some results at distance. Even if they're .55bc that'll be a hell of a load at about 3150.
Hello guys. I am now working with the 150LRAB and the 168 Nosler CC over 2000MR. Too early for details yet on them but the 162 amaxs with 2000mr is impressive to say the least. At 300yds my group size was 2.25" horizontal spread and a .46" vertical spread. That was initial load development and I will now do some load tweaking and it should shrink a little more. Haven't chrono'd it but will soon. The problem with 2000MR is that there is no load data available and I am working in uncharted territory. Will see how that turns out. Later
Gunny, I found a node at 42gr with the 162 amax bullet. I haven't chrono'd it yet but will try this weekend. I called Alliant and the service tech said it was around the Varget, RL 15 rates but I've read it produces higher velocities. I will have more to report this weekend if we get a break in the weather.
Ok. Latest update. Since I had no data to go by, I loaded up 8rds in half grain increments from 39 - 42.5gr under 150gr nosler accubond. I did the same with 168gr nosler custom competition from 37.5 - 41gr. Findings as follows:
The 150s had a little sticky bolt at max but no flat primers. Easily gone higher. The groups was scattered.
The 168grs again had a little stickiness but primers looked ok. Don't think I could have gone much higher. The groups were much better with groupings on some rounds.
Starting to look like 2000mr may work better on the larger pills. More testing to be done.
The 150s had a little sticky bolt at max but no flat primers. Easily gone higher. The groups was scattered.
The 168grs again had a little stickiness but primers looked ok. Don't think I could have gone much higher. The groups were much better with groupings on some rounds.
Starting to look like 2000mr may work better on the larger pills. More testing to be done.
That's exactly what I figured. The lighter the bullet is, the worse it'll work. That's why I went with the IMR 4350. I should be able to push the 150 accubond through my 28" tube up to and above 3100. That I believe, is where they're gonna be most effective. The guys on the nosler reloading forum seem to be having excellent luck running it 3000 and above. I'll try my r15 and IMR 4350 for a while. Another curiosity I have is 8208 xbr. There's a load for it in hodgdon running a 139 gr from a 284 winchester approximately 2975 with about 45gr. That powder handles 168gr 308 loads excellently. I figured I'll experiment with it and the 150's starting at 39gr and going up to 43 since I have two pounds of it left. My dream outcome would be to find out that an extremely fast powder like the 8208 xbr ends up throwing the 150 ablr above 3100 with farrrrrr less powder. wouldn't that be awesome? something that no one's ever done! I'm sure it'll end up just being a pipedream though. The velocities that everyone on the nosler page has been getting are higher than their lighter accubond counterparts though. Average speed is 100fps higher due to smaller bearing surface. I can't wait till my 284 gets here. I'll do an in depth writeup as soon as the loads start. I have 1000 of the ablr 150's to play with and eight pounds of IMR 4350.
Thanks Gunny. Keep me posted. I will do the same on the heavy end. I have a USPSA sectional match coming up and need to turn my focus to that for awhile.
Good intel, Gunny. When I factor in the OAL you used, the pressure data is right on the line, which wouldn't register as extreme.
Code:
Cartridge : .284 Win.
Bullet : .284, 150, Nosler Accubond LR 58734 G7
Useable Case Capaci: 57.239 grain H2O = 3.716 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.956 inch = 75.08 mm
Barrel Length : 28.0 inch = 711.2 mm
Powder : IMR 4350
Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !
Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms
-20.0 82 42.80 2481 2050 34054 6917 93.4 1.644
-18.0 84 43.87 2538 2145 36320 7106 94.3 1.602
-16.0 86 44.94 2594 2242 38718 7288 95.3 1.558
-14.0 88 46.01 2651 2341 41245 7460 96.1 1.513
-12.0 90 47.08 2708 2442 43927 7624 96.8 1.470
-10.0 92 48.15 2764 2544 46780 7778 97.5 1.429
-08.0 94 49.22 2820 2648 49818 7921 98.1 1.389
-06.0 96 50.29 2875 2753 53052 8054 98.6 1.351
-04.0 98 51.36 2931 2860 56498 8175 99.1 1.314 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 100 52.43 2985 2969 60172 8284 99.4 1.278 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 102 53.50 3040 3078 64091 8380 99.7 1.244 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 104 54.57 3094 3189 68277 8464 99.9 1.211 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 106 55.64 3148 3301 72751 8534 100.0 1.179 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 108 56.71 3201 3413 77538 8590 100.0 1.148 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 110 57.78 3254 3527 82666 8639 100.0 1.119 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 112 58.85 3307 3642 88167 8686 100.0 1.090 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 102 53.50 3146 3296 75259 8063 100.0 1.167 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 53.50 2887 2777 53120 8382 96.0 1.346
greggrissom: I hit 3201 with the 150 ablr today with 55 grains of IMR 4350. I use a 28" 9 twist krieger 5r with brake. The overall length was mag length 2.956". Pressure signs showed up at 56 grains. I did manage 3257 with the 56 though. the 54 grain load at 3100 ish was the most accurate with 1/4" group at 100 yards. I'm gonna load 100 rounds now of 54.5 IMR 4350 to finish breaking in the barrel. The barrel is new so I expect some things to change and possibly the velocity to rise. I believe I've stumbled onto a good combination of powder and bullets. I used winchester 284 brass and wlr primers. I haven't found a single soul on the internet that uses IMR 4350 with a 150-175 gr bullet in 284. I wonder why that is. It's turning out to be a hell of a performer for this application. I wonder why more folks haven't tried this more often.
Code:
Cartridge : .284 Win.
Bullet : .284, 150, Nosler Accubond LR 58734 G7
Useable Case Capaci: 57.239 grain H2O = 3.716 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.956 inch = 75.08 mm
Barrel Length : 28.0 inch = 711.2 mm
Powder : IMR 4350
Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !
Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms
-20.0 82 42.80 2481 2050 34054 6917 93.4 1.644
-18.0 84 43.87 2538 2145 36320 7106 94.3 1.602
-16.0 86 44.94 2594 2242 38718 7288 95.3 1.558
-14.0 88 46.01 2651 2341 41245 7460 96.1 1.513
-12.0 90 47.08 2708 2442 43927 7624 96.8 1.470
-10.0 92 48.15 2764 2544 46780 7778 97.5 1.429
-08.0 94 49.22 2820 2648 49818 7921 98.1 1.389
-06.0 96 50.29 2875 2753 53052 8054 98.6 1.351
-04.0 98 51.36 2931 2860 56498 8175 99.1 1.314 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 100 52.43 2985 2969 60172 8284 99.4 1.278 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 102 53.50 3040 3078 64091 8380 99.7 1.244 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 104 54.57 3094 3189 68277 8464 99.9 1.211 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 106 55.64 3148 3301 72751 8534 100.0 1.179 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 108 56.71 3201 3413 77538 8590 100.0 1.148 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 110 57.78 3254 3527 82666 8639 100.0 1.119 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 112 58.85 3307 3642 88167 8686 100.0 1.090 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 102 53.50 3146 3296 75259 8063 100.0 1.167 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 53.50 2887 2777 53120 8382 96.0 1.346
greggrissom: I hit 3201 with the 150 ablr today with 55 grains of IMR 4350. I use a 28" 9 twist krieger 5r with brake. The overall length was mag length 2.956". Pressure signs showed up at 56 grains. I did manage 3257 with the 56 though. the 54 grain load at 3100 ish was the most accurate with 1/4" group at 100 yards. I'm gonna load 100 rounds now of 54.5 IMR 4350 to finish breaking in the barrel. The barrel is new so I expect some things to change and possibly the velocity to rise. I believe I've stumbled onto a good combination of powder and bullets. I used winchester 284 brass and wlr primers. I haven't found a single soul on the internet that uses IMR 4350 with a 150-175 gr bullet in 284. I wonder why that is. It's turning out to be a hell of a performer for this application. I wonder why more folks haven't tried this more often.
Attachments
Any body getting real world numbers yet for BC's yet. I just got a box of the 7mm 168's. to play with. Looking at them compaired to 168 berger and 162 Amax, the AB's are longer and have a longer boat tail than either of the other two. They look sleeker than the berger and the amax..Maybe the BC's are close??
