150 ABLR Journey

[N2TRKYS]

Dropped a black bear with the 142 at 2100fps. Performance was reasonable but notably smaller wounds than an ELDX.

One’s a bonded bullet and one’s not. Stands to reason.

 

[solarshooter]

there's too much variability with 2 shot samples to extrapolate a meaningful "pattern" from

This is why I tend to stick with 1 shot groups. Most consistent and we all know the first shot is all that counts!

I am not done testing but I’m not shooting a 10 shot group for each load either as that is nothing I’ve ever done and never had any issues with accuracy at various ranges.

This is very smart. I like to shoot 1 shot at each bull with 2 hrs cooldown period in between each shot. Look only at vertical dispersion. For every 0.1" vertical distance between shots, add 0.001" seating depth. This has worked reliably for me across 432 rifles I've tried it on.

 

[solarshooter]

Jokes aside, your method of "load development" is utterly meaningless and a waste of time.

I follow a few people that develop loads using the 2 shot method like this and look for that back to back minimum patterns and seat every .006. Once I seen this, I tried it and have been using it on my last 4 load developments with various rifles. And it’s been pretty spot on for fine tuning.

This is meaningless. You would be better off looking for animals in the clouds.

Why would you say this:

This is hunting. Not a professional match. Everyone has there way. This is not what this thread is for. I am not done testing but I’m not shooting a 10 shot group for each load either as that is nothing I’ve ever done and never had any issues with accuracy at various ranges.

And then shoot 12rds of the same load?

Finally went testing again today. Fired 3 groups of 4. The attached one was the best group. The one that is on the target low, was the initial cold bore. Then the next 3 as you see. The other 2 groups shot the same height but were about 3/4” groups.

If you had put those all on the same bull you would've gotten closer to seeing the real group of this gun/load. But instead you fired 3 sets of 4, then chose to post your favorite 3 out of those 12 shots and hand wave away the "cold bore flier". If you believe your gun actually shoots that type of cold bore flier, it should be repeatable, and then you should throw that gun in the trash because something is horrifically wrong with it.

Here's an alternate theory to all this noise you're making: your 2 and 3 shot groups are not telling you anything. They are dominated by randomness. The rifle really shoots a much larger cone that you don't want to admit. Now you've been led to water.

 

[FLHunter87]

Jokes aside, your method of "load development" is utterly meaningless and a waste of time.


This is meaningless. You would be better off looking for animals in the clouds.

Why would you say this:

And then shoot 12rds of the same load?

If you had put those all on the same bull you would've gotten closer to seeing the real group of this gun/load. But instead you fired 3 sets of 4, then chose to post your favorite 3 out of those 12 shots and hand wave away the "cold bore flier". If you believe your gun actually shoots that type of cold bore flier, it should be repeatable, and then you should throw that gun in the trash because something is horrifically wrong with it.

Here's an alternate theory to all this noise you're making: your 2 and 3 shot groups are not telling you anything. They are dominated by randomness. The rifle really shoots a much larger cone that you don't want to admit. Now you've been led to water.

Even if seating depth is different you consider that the same load?

 

[solarshooter]

Even if seating depth is different you consider that the same load?

Are you saying your test was 3 groups at different seating depths? If so then your statements were not inconsistent.

However, small (and large) differences in seating depth don't have much of an effect on precision. Anyone who has actually tested it has arrived at this same conclusion. With small samples you will convince yourself there are differences due to small changes in powder or seating depth, but really you are just seeing the normal large variations in 2-5 shot group sizes.

 

[glock233]

One’s a bonded bullet and one’s not. Stands to reason.

No one is confused about why. The relative performance gap being massive should be the interesting part.

 

[N2TRKYS]

No one is confused about why. The relative performance gap being massive should be the interesting part.

Not really, but ok.

 

[Harvey_NW]

No one is confused about why. The relative performance gap being massive should be the interesting part.

IME bonded bullets are volatile depending on what they impact. With Accubonds/ABLR in 7mm, I've gotten a very narrow and deep wound channel on a quartering away shot that impacted behind the ribs and was recovered in the brisket, a more normal wound channel full pass through on a broadside shot, and an exit the size of a grapefruit on a broadside shot that center punched a rib on exit. The narrow wound channels in tissue was what lead me back to a cup and core, and has produced more consistent results for me.

 

[FLHunter87]

I went today and groups were not great. I think this journey is ending. After 100 shots total and nothing worth while I’ll stick with the 147s and try them again hunting. I can shoot the 147s way tighter at 200 than these things can shoot at 200. Nosler may need to go back to the drawing board with these.

 

[crowlja]

I have some loaded up, just need to find time to shoot them. I'll report back as to what I find as well. Different rifle, shorter barrel, maybe some different components...we'll see what I find.
I've used Nosler AB's in all of my hunting rifles and been able to find a good load and the bullets do there job. But haven't used the ABLR's yet so we'll see what happens.

 

[Harvey_NW]

I went today and groups were not great. I think this journey is ending. After 100 shots total and nothing worth while I’ll stick with the 147s and try them again hunting. I can shoot the 147s way tighter at 200 than these things can shoot at 200. Nosler may need to go back to the drawing board with these.

Not to beat a dead horse, but this is the reason for some of the suggestions in this post. You can shortcut that conclusion by shooting a larger sample size in the beginning. I digress.

 

[solarshooter]

Not to beat a dead horse, but this is the reason for some of the suggestions in this post. You can shortcut that conclusion by shooting a larger sample size in the beginning. I digress.

But 2 shot groups are smaller than 10 shot groups...

 

[FLHunter87]

I have some loaded up, just need to find time to shoot them. I'll report back as to what I find as well. Different rifle, shorter barrel, maybe some different components...we'll see what I find.
I've used Nosler AB's in all of my hunting rifles and been able to find a good load and the bullets do there job. But haven't used the ABLR's yet so we'll see what happens.

I use the regular ones as well in other rifles and they are really accurate and love the terminal performance. I wish they could make a heavier Accubond option 150g or larger for .264 caliber. I’m just wanting to stay around the 150g range as a personal preference.