Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics


Reply

LR Accubonds too good to be true?

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 02-16-2013, 12:55 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Posts: 2,720
Re: LR Accubonds too good to be true?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe King View Post
I believe that Nosler generates the BC's by a calculator which seems to always generate a high BC, no doubt though that Nosler uses that as a sales pitch. Berger's BC's, though I know at least some are (if not all) generated by rounds fired down range, using (I think) 2 Doppler radar units to track them.

To high light the difference between the 2 methods you can look at 168gr 7mm Matrix VLD and the static BC VS. the BC generated by Brian Litz using the Doppler method

Matrix advertised static BC (calc generated) 0.7136

Brians BC (rounds down range) 0.611 <-- this one is spot on I've tried these bullets
I am pretty sure he uses mics that detect the sound of the bullet flying by and he measures the BC by looking at flight time between mics at set ranges.
__________________

I'm 15
"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth."
~George Washington

"The only advantage a light rifle has is weight, all other advantages go to the heavy rifle."
~ JE Custom

Biggest fail of 2014 so far... http://www.longrangehunting.com/foru...ea-ftf-128972/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:18 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 3,400
Re: LR Accubonds too good to be true?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineering101 View Post
I was looking at the new Nosler Long Range Accubonds. They expand all the way down to 1,300 fps minimum terminal velocity and with the huge BCs, they should be impressive. In particular, the 30 cal, 210 grain looks amazing. Nosler lists the BC at 0.730, but since Nosler uses ICAO standards as opposed to standard metro conditions to establish their BCs, I have to multiply their published BC by 1.018 for use with my ballistics program. This results in a BC of 0.743!

]But then again, Iím having a hard time believing that BC which is right up there with the 300 grain SMK. Anybody got any inside info on this bullet and is it to be believed?
Rumor has it that Nosler's sales' staff define ICAO to mean Inter Continental Altitude Operations. The air is thinner up there...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:20 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: The cold part of Montana
Posts: 1,390
Re: LR Accubonds too good to be true?

Quote:
Originally Posted by barnesuser28 View Post
I am pretty sure he uses mics that detect the sound of the bullet flying by and he measures the BC by looking at flight time between mics at set ranges.
Could be, I'd have to look in the book. But since it's at home and I'm at work.....
__________________
Keep in mind the animals we shoot for food and display are not bullet proof. Contrary to popular belief, they bleed and die just like they did a hundred years ago. Being competent with a given rifle is far more important than impressive ballistics and poor shootability. High velocity misses never put a steak in the freezer.

Joe
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 32.68%
84 Votes
NO - 49.81%
128 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 17.51%
45 Votes
Total Votes: 257
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC