New EnABELR

[DocUSMCRetired]

The EnABELR (Engineered by Applied Ballistics for Extreme Long Range) is the result of years of testing and competing with large caliber rounds. Developed by Mitch Fitzpatrick and Bryan Litz as a reliable performance, low maintenance, ‘shoot all day’ cartridge, the 375 EnABELR is magazine feed-able with the new Berger 379 gr and 407 gr Solid bullets which provide this moderate capacity round with highly effective performance, proven at ranges of 2+ miles.

In a 30” barrel, the EnABELR makes:
2800 fps with the Berger .375 cal 407 gr Solid, G7 BC of 0.507
2900 fps with the Berger .375 cal 379 gr Solid, G7 BC of 0.479
3200 fps with the Berger .338 cal 300 gr OTM, G7 BC of 0.418

These performance numbers were measured with Doppler radar. There are also Custom Drag Models (CDM’s) available for these bullets in the Applied Ballistics library to support highly accurate ELR fire solutions.

Note there are larger cartridges that make more velocity, but they’re also higher maintenance and less predictable. The EnABELR was developed to provide practical, long term, reliable performance for ELR applications for many shots, making your brass investment take you further across more rounds.

What we’ve learned competing in ELR matches in recent years is that the value in consistent and reliable performance is more important than the extra +100 fps of a higher maintenance cartridge. These lessons are incorporated in the EnABELR design.

ABWD is supporting the EnABELR cartridge by offering all associated components including: chamber reamers, Peterson Cartridge Company made brass, ABWD made reloading dies, and complete rifle system builds in both tactical and competition configurations which includes ammo loaded with Berger Solid Bullets.

 

[demolitionman]

Just saw a video of the Enabler doing work on a deer at 1000yard headshot by Chase Stroud.... heck yeh.

 

[JWG284]

How does this compare to the 33 or 37XC?

 

[SIDS01]

How does this compare to the 33 or 37XC?

Sounds like a similar philosophy, with a little more capacity.

Basically, figure out how much overbore a barrel can take and still give predictable performance, design a 375 cartridge at that level, then offer a 338 version that is on the too much overbore side.

They've added the twist of having it fit in a magazine. If it's based on the Cheytac case head, probably a large and expensive magazine.

 

[oneshot.onehit]

I look at it as they shortened up the case just enough to allow the popular longer solids to run out of a standard Cheytac magazine and still maintain excellent speed and performance. That's my take on it until more info is released.

Oneshot.onehit
JH

 

[wkarma]

Info: https://appliedballisticsweaponsdiv...C-VjZhbJUlyU6MQL7G2-DoWOXIgXgGSBXIBC76izkpYzs

 

[Kadams1563]

Just saw a video of the Enabler doing work on a deer at 1000yard headshot by Chase Stroud.... heck yeh.

I saw that video as well. INSANE

 

[Geno C.]

I look at it as they shortened up the case just enough to allow the popular longer solids to run out of a standard Cheytac magazine and still maintain excellent speed and performance. That's my take on it until more info is released.

Oneshot.onehit
JH

Exactly my take on it also. Only thing it does is let it fit easier in a mag with long bullets... it like a 338 Norma vs the Lapua.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

The marketing notion that one must give up speed/performance for reliability and consistency is ridiculous.

Kinda akin to putting restriction plates on a drag car because you can get better tire life.

IF that was the case then why drop down to 338 in this case?


Sincerely,
Theis

 

[jaybigboy34]

Just saw a video of the Enabler doing work on a deer at 1000yard headshot by Chase Stroud.... heck yeh.

where is this video? I'd like to see it.

 

[JWG284]

 

[Milepost]

Hi,

The marketing notion that one must give up speed/performance for reliability and consistency is ridiculous.

Kinda akin to putting restriction plates on a drag car because you can get better tire life.

IF that was the case then why drop down to 338 in this case?


Sincerely,
Theis

I think the only real reasons for this are the military/tactical aspects. It makes sense considering mag length, powder fill and available temp stable powders. Probably less issues with primer ignition too.

 

[Milepost]

You know, I think I have seen a very similar design once before...

 

[wildcats]

Still trying to re:invent the wheel.

 

[THEIS]

I think the only real reasons for this are the military/tactical aspects. It makes sense considering mag length, powder fill and available temp stable powders. Probably less issues with primer ignition too.

Hi,

Maybe...but that is where the US is behind times IMO. The countries that have been utilizing the 375CT and/or any of its' variants for military/government operations seem to have no problem with any of those above "issues".

We have to remember there are countries that have been utilizing the 375CT for right over 15 years now and continue to do so with great success.

So for academic discussion

Which is going to foul the barrel faster aka make it inconsistent faster?

Slower MV with greater bearing surface or higher MV with less bearing surface ?

Edited To Add: Referring to strictly solid projectiles for this. So no "concern" with blowing jackets off due to MV and/or twist rates, etc etc.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[wildcats]

Hi,

Maybe...but that is where the US is behind times IMO. The countries that have been utilizing the 375CT and/or any of its' variants for military/government operations seem to have no problem with any of those above "issues".

We have to remember there are countries that have been utilizing the 375CT for right over 15 years now and continue to do so with great success.

So for academic discussion

Which is going to foul the barrel faster aka make it inconsistent faster?

Slower MV with greater bearing surface or higher MV with less bearing surface ?

Edited To Add: Referring to strictly solid projectiles for this. So no "concern" with blowing jackets off due to MV and/or twist rates, etc etc.

Sincerely,
Theis

I believe that barrel rifling would be the next real advancement that will take place.land ,grooves etc .

 

[Milepost]

Hi,

Maybe...but that is where the US is behind times IMO. The countries that have been utilizing the 375CT and/or any of its' variants for military/government operations seem to have no problem with any of those above "issues".

We have to remember there are countries that have been utilizing the 375CT for right over 15 years now and continue to do so with great success.

So for academic discussion

Which is going to foul the barrel faster aka make it inconsistent faster?

Slower MV with greater bearing surface or higher MV with less bearing surface ?

Edited To Add: Referring to strictly solid projectiles for this. So no "concern" with blowing jackets off due to MV and/or twist rates, etc etc.

Sincerely,
Theis

I agree with you but then we didn't have the super long high BC solids 15 years ago. (magazine length)

IMO - Their mentioned fouling issues are related to the powders used and respective barrel lengths. Was this ever really a problem? Not really...

I would bet the same kind of questions were asked when the military went from the 30-06 to the 7.62x51 NATO back in the 1950's.

 

[Milepost]

How does this compare to the 33 or 37XC?

Basically the same ballistics.

The 33 & 37XC are single feed only and uses a R 700 Lapua bolt platform.
The EnABLER will work with a magazine but needs a heavier CT platform to do it

 

[Lynn Jr]

I may have read the velocity numbers wrong but the 338 seems anemic to me.
I have 3 Tac408 actions and two of them in 338 SnipeTac and 3300-3350 FPS is done with ease with a 300 grain Berger.

 

[Swamplord]

If they released the EnABELR cartridges to the public then they should at least be honest and admit that it's parent case is the 375 Mercenary shortened to work in detachable magazines and shoulder angle similar to the 338 NM, AND it's no secret that the 375 Mercenary is off the 585 Nyati basic/cylinder brass, no credit for that either ...... The web diameter at .655" with a CT rim diameter is not a new concept and neither is shortening the case to mag feed, my 338 Slayer is such a design and they were very well aware of it .....

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

So from reviewing the 338 Slayer and the 338 EnAB in some dimensional software (I could be wrong, but doubt it) it appears there is barely .2" difference in OAL case length and the web area of the EnAB is exactly that of the 585 Nyati.

Looks like a whole lot of:

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[Swamplord]

Hi,

So from reviewing the 338 Slayer and the 338 EnAB in some dimensional software (I could be wrong, but doubt it) it appears there is barely .2" difference in OAL case length and the web area of the EnAB is exactly that of the 585 Nyati.

Looks like a whole lot of:
View attachment 7011416

Sincerely,
Theis

There have been a few revisions to the 338 Slayer since that post two years ago, along with the addition of the 300 Slayer

Nothing wrong with more of the same, good quality brass for me to improve in my chamber is a good thing, necking down 585 Nyati brass to 338 cal is a lot of farking work

 

[LastShot300]

Info: https://appliedballisticsweaponsdiv...C-VjZhbJUlyU6MQL7G2-DoWOXIgXgGSBXIBC76izkpYzs

The Velocity Migration for the 375 Lethal Magnum graph is basically showing that the response to the shot-to-shot vel dispersion is, essentially, hardly a linear fit, just see the Rs values (Excel 101) so, how in hell they wind up on the 20 fpsf Extreme Spread...is a clear mystery to me.

On the other hand, the paper makes the case for the 375 Lethal and where is the much needed comparison of the same velocity dispersion of the "new" case? Wasn't this "paper" goal to make a point for AB new cartridges or not?

If you say A is bad and B is good, well, even a 5th grader kid is aware of putting up front the evidence of such claim .

And the so-called Ballistic Performance Comparison chart is tricky to put it kindly.

They compared different cartridges with different bullets and surprise...the highest BC bullet was only used on the "new" case. Call me paranoid, but such chart is just too much biased... to the hell with technically-wise honest comparisons! after all who needs them

All in all, AB don't disappoint when it comes to sales pitches and deceptive marketing.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

Notice the resemblance of the 375LethalMag and the 375 Warlord lolol....Guess which was first?

338LM, 375CT and 375LethalMag

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[LastShot300]

Just saw a video of the Enabler doing work on a deer at 1000yard headshot by Chase Stroud.... heck yeh.

I can show the same with any other caliber...or not? What does the video proves? That a headshot is always 100% mortal? C'mon guys we know better!

 

[Swamplord]

I believe that is the "tested and proven in the field" part ..... It was an awesome shot

 

[badassgunworks]

Sounds like a similar philosophy, with a little more capacity.

Basically, figure out how much overbore a barrel can take and still give predictable performance, design a 375 cartridge at that level, then offer a 338 version that is on the too much overbore side.

They've added the twist of having it fit in a magazine. If it's based on the Cheytac case head, probably a large and expensive magazine.

not even close to the same philosophy the xc is a stretched out case obtaining capacity from length in fact its too long in relation to its diameter the xc added an 30 grains from its parent lapua case where the enabler reduced the capacity to match the capacity of the cheytac with a wider column

 

[badassgunworks]

Hi,

The marketing notion that one must give up speed/performance for reliability and consistency is ridiculous.

Kinda akin to putting restriction plates on a drag car because you can get better tire life.

IF that was the case then why drop down to 338 in this case?


Sincerely,
Theis

just smoke and mirrors

 

[badassgunworks]

There have been a few revisions to the 338 Slayer since that post two years ago, along with the addition of the 300 Slayer

Nothing wrong with more of the same, good quality brass for me to improve in my chamber is a good thing, necking down 585 Nyati brass to 338 cal is a lot of farking workView attachment 7011544View attachment 7011545

dated 2015 well what do you know lol

 

[mpl2353]

not even close to the same philosophy the xc is a stretched out case obtaining capacity from length in fact its too long in relation to its diameter the xc added an 30 grains from its parent lapua case where the enabler reduced the capacity to match the capacity of the cheytac with a wider column

What problems come with being too long in relation to the diameter for these rounds?

 

[JWG284]

What problems come with being too long in relation to the diameter for these rounds?

Mag feed maybe?

 

[badassgunworks]

the longer the cartridge in relation to columm diameter its burns powder more inconsistent less efficient

 

[Milepost]

What problems come with being too long in relation to the diameter for these rounds?

That is a very complex subject dealing with internal ballistics and needs to addressed in a separate thread due to it's scope and diversity of the science involved.....

Proper ignition of the powder column, burn rate, energy per grain of powder, etc... All this happening as the bullet is pushed from the case into the first few inches of the rifle barrel. A longer case will take a little bit more time to fully ignite all the powder and any inconsistencies within that burn column will be amplified creating deviation. A shorter, wider column is more consistent and can be better controlled in this regard so deviation is reduced.

BTW - There is also a very small gain in velocity due to the effective length of the barrel will be longer for the shorter cartridge vs the longer one.

The EnABLER cartridge design makes sense for the military given the better bullet designs and magazine length issues. Factors like carry weight, portability and reliability need to be also considered. For the Ko2M or URSA ELR matches there are better options for us to choose from because we are not limited to those constraints.

IMO... Changing the cartridge designs ( shapes) give only small increases to the efficiency for the bullet design and caliber used vs the volume and type of powder (fuel) available. Any further large scale advancements can only take place with improvements in available propellants, and the cartridge , barrel materials / treatments that will handle the subsequent increase of added heat and pressures. I believe this is where DARPA should focus more attention on and not the subscribe to the cartridge of the week mentality we are seeing now.

 

[schmi015]

Darpa's EXACTO was pretty slick, if they could scale it down to a 30cal or 338 it would be very man portable.

 

[BluntForceTrauma]

I notice the shoulder angle on the EnABELR is 21 degrees. Would 30 degrees have been an option?

 

[bjay]

I notice the shoulder angle on the EnABELR is 21 degrees. Would 30 degrees have been an option?

Im pretty sure its already tweaked or improved by now

 

[badassgunworks]

the enabler is a modified /tweaked virsion of something else as already stated

 

[vh20]

I believe that is the "tested and proven in the field" part ..... It was an awesome shot

It was, I agree. But the video puzzles me. In the beginning the guy says the doe is 1000 yards, TO THE YARD. Then she takes a total of 41 steps towards the gun in two segments. I don’t know the ballistics of this round but the come-up is heard to be 5.7 mils (seems awfully low, with a 338NM calling for about 8.0 on a Standard Day). Then, after calling the target at exactly 1000 yards to the yard, and the target taking 41 steps closer to the gun, a perfect head shot is executed, and the range is declared to be exactly 1002 yards. 1000 minus 41 doe-steps is 1002. I haven’t shot this cartridge, but I’m pretty sure 41 doe-steps closer will bring the target WAY out of the danger space for a head shot calculated to be 1000 yards with a 338 NM/LM, etc. Just seems weird.

 

[TripleBull]

That doe must have been moon walking part of the time.

 

[vh20]

That doe must have been moon walking part of the time.

Man! I never thought of that!!

 

[Milepost]

Easily explained....It was never intended to be a headshot! He was actually going for behind the shoulder.....

 

[secondofangle2]

Just saw a video of the Enabler doing work on a deer at 1000yard headshot by Chase Stroud.... heck yeh.

I HIGHLY doubt that was an intentional head shot. In fact I refuse to believe it was called in advance unless there is evidence it was called in advance.

That guy was a foot high and a foot right *at least* and got lucky and hit her in the control center.

Which means he’s minute of deer at 1000 yards with a freaking 375.

Not impressed.

 

[kthomas]

I HIGHLY doubt that was an intentional head shot. In fact I refuse to believe it was called in advance unless there is evidence it was called in advance.

That guy was a foot high and a foot right *at least* and got lucky and hit her in the control center.

Which means he’s minute of deer at 1000 yards with a freaking 375.

Not impressed.

Well, you are making assumptions.

I personally know the shooter in said video, and disagree with your assessment.

 

[secondofangle2]

Well, you are making assumptions.

I personally know the shooter in said video, and disagree with your assessment.

Tell him next time state the point of aim before firing or sceptics like me won’t believe him.

One has to start somewhere with beliefs. The burden of proof is on those who wish for us to believe they intended to hit an unconventional point of aim.

 

[kthomas]

Tell him next time state the point of aim before firing or sceptics like me won’t believe him.

One has to start somewhere with beliefs. The burden of proof is on those who wish for us to believe they intended to hit an unconventional point of aim.

I get the skepticism, I'm not sure if the video was ever really intended to be used for promotional purposes. It certainly could've been done better, if that was indeed the intended purpose.

 

[vh20]

Well, you are making assumptions.

I personally know the shooter in said video, and disagree with your assessment.

Actually, I think the analysis by @Milepost and @secondofangle2 makes the most sense (except for the last sentence about "minute of deer at 1000'). The spotter called 1000 yards "to the yard". The come-up is called "5.7 mils". Then the target makes 41 steps closer before the shot is sent, and there is no mention of accounting for the negative change in distance. I have to believe it was not accounted for because if it were, it would definitely have to have been mentioned in the course of the discussion between spotter and shooter. The negative change in distance would definitely cause the firing solution to be a bit high, and likely enough to have put the impact at about head-level. Factor in about 12" off on windage (which is still not bad on a cold-bore shot at 1000-ish), and a little luck for being off to the favorable direction, and you get what we saw. I disagree with the "minute of deer" comment only because the distance changed without being accounted for, so the elevation could easily be about that much high, and even a 1 mph error on the wind call at that distance could move the impact from shoulder to head horizontally. So that means the rifle could well be shooting way closer than "minute of deer" and the error lies within the shooter's (any shooter's) ability to make the call on a cold bore shot at that magnitude of distance. None of that is mystical to me. The mystical part for me is how a target can be called to be 1000 yards "to the yard", then take 41 steps closer, and then be "1002 yards" afterwards. The only explanation for that would be what @TripleBull mentioned.

 

[secondofangle2]

I agree with the above and I will even go out on a limb further - the video shows amateurish long range hunting for the reasons above. A seasoned ELR hunter would have noted that the range had changed, would have communicated with the spotter or whoever is ranging, would have discussed whether the firing solution changed and by how much, there would also have been discussion of wind conditions (if any, and assuming spin drift, another possible reason for an impact 1 MOA to the right at 1000 yards, were already factored in.) So in the final analysis you have what appears to be some novices who botched the shot because of failure to account for a changing range, got lucky, and pretended they aimed at the head all along. It is indeed minute of deer shooting. It may be a sub-MOA gun, but it is a minute-of-deer system with the shooter/spotter as the weak link.

 

[Bradu]

I really didn't put any thought into the video but what you are saying does make a guy think about it. You have brought up some valid points.

 

[6.5-284 lover]

How does this compare to the 33 or 37XC?

I would like to know how this stacks up against the 37 xc as well. Why would someone pick one over the other?

 

[Bradu]

I read somewhere that there were issues with the brass but can't seem to find it again.