Accubond workup utilizing Ballistic Tips Question?

[300winnie]

For those that have followed my load work-up (or lack thereof) of the Swift Scirocco II bullets in my .300 Winchester Magnum, you know that I am headed for the Nosler Accubond, 180 grain. For those that haven't, the process was long and non-gratifying...and I am headed for the Nosler Accubond, 180 grain.

My question is this:

Has anyone worked up their load for the Accubond by getting close with the ballistic tip of like make (in my case the 180 Accubond/180 Ballistic Tip) as they have the same ballisitic coefficient, weight etc.?

I am just wondering if it would be a cost savings to me, albeit a small savings if I worked up close with the Ballistic tip and then tweaked the load slightly as needed for the Accubond, or are they two different cats in the experience of those that have tried this route.

My thought is that not only would work-up be slightly cheaper, but I could shoot the ballistic tips for practice if they were close.

Any thoughts?

[Jerry Ricker]

300Winnie, already went that route with a 30-06 also with 180's. I seated both between .005"&amp;.008" off the lands with same results from both about 3/8"@100yd.,velocity was within 10 fps. Be sure to use a bullet comparator to be sure your base to ogive dimension is the same. <font color="black"> </font> </font> <font color="black"> </font>

[keithcandler]

I use the standard Ballistic Tip to work up a load, then transfer the loading data to an Accubond bullet in 7mm's.

There is one fly in the ointment, you absolutely have to use an Ojive guage to establish the seating depth that the load likes. You can not assume that the profile of various lots of bullets are the same, they are infact quite different. To get down to bug hole accuracy, my 7 mags and 7 STW's are very particular in their seating depth, with all of them liking the bullet seated .010 off the lands to .003 into the lands...they are very unforgiving of any mistakes on your part when it comes to seating depth striving for extreme accuracy. Of course, everyone's rife is different and a little bit of experimentation may give big dividends. I seat the first bullet longer that will not go into the magazine and the second round to fit the magazine. I can count on one hand the number of times that I have had to fire more than one round, and the first round was usually the only one that counted because they were usually running dead on the hit with the second round.

If you don' like the complexity of keeping track of two lenghts of loaded rounds, then seat the bullet as long as the magazine will allow and be satisfied.

[Takman]

I started with the 180 BT and found my powder, powder charge and primer and then went to the Accubond using same data. Shoots same clicks out to 1000 yds. Both bullets show same accuracy. I don't have seating depth in front of me but as I recollect not much difference. If you want me to check on this let me know.