100% with you on this one. Don't need to talk even about their BC for long range hunting
Nosler LR accubond
- Thread starter swagger700
- Start date
Spellchecker error? Surely you meant appealing
My own experience with Barnes is very good: one and done on Roe and Fallow domestically [6.5mm, 2700fps,sub 160m]. I have never retrieved a bullet from those species as it always results in pass-through but...
The same bullet design in .375 did mortal damage to a buffalo I shot last year. That bullet was found under the skin on the far side of the beast's chest and had performed brilliantly:
View attachment 150949
Barnes techs declare that for expansion to take place fully, terminal velocity needs to be 2000fps. It is up to the shooter/reloader to work out at what distance their round will run out of puff.
Yes all of this is fine and dandy, the problem is the specifics of this test outcome, which is a short range vs long range test.
Barnes have chosen to name this bullet “Long Range Hunting”. They say their bullet range has a minimum expansion velocity of 2000 ft./s., but in the case of the LRX they claim it will expand down to 1600 ft./s. The bullet in this test will have impacted around 1700 ft./s assuming it is a 300 WinMag. God knows if it was their other .300 offering (.300 RUM) the outcome is even worse.
Read the VOR-TX LR bullets page on their website! They have really queered their pitch with this ridiculous attempt at jumping on the long-range bandwagon.
There are numerous complaints about these bullets not expanding at the ranges that Barnes claim they will. What are you are using them for is absolutely fine and if they didn’t work that would be an even bigger problem!
CarlW
Well-Known Member
I use the Barnes for buffalo too. At close range.Spellchecker error? Surely you meant appealing
My own experience with Barnes is very good: one and done on Roe and Fallow domestically [6.5mm, 2700fps,sub 160m]. I have never retrieved a bullet from those species as it always results in pass-through but...
The same bullet design in .375 did mortal damage to a buffalo I shot last year. That bullet was found under the skin on the far side of the beast's chest and had performed brilliantly:
View attachment 150949
Barnes techs declare that for expansion to take place fully, terminal velocity needs to be 2000fps. It is up to the shooter/reloader to work out at what distance their round will run out of puff.
This is about long-range performance. The Barnes doesn't cut it, based on Dodgy's picture (albeit a sample of one
). At times, I shoot deer at 300-400 metres. I wouldn't be confident in that bullet.
Deermanagement
Well-Known Member
I think Nosler suggest 1800 fps, so you would think more in terms of too explosive rather than too hard at normal ranges
Nosler’s expansion limit for ABLR is 1,600fps.
Bonded bullets don’t explode.
Thin jacketed varmint bullets explode.
Deermanagement
Well-Known Member
Certainly not too hard then. I've loaded 130g Accubonds for Sika in 6.5 Cr and did intend to load 120g BT's for roe but maybe the LR would do a decent job?
No shirtyness from me.
Been showing similar pictures for years. Many of them are not fir for purpose at short range 2-300
But with a lot more data
The expansion can’t be tested from a small sample into a single media
Needs to replicate all ranges and species and all shot types
Selling long range hunting bullets is a bit like selling extra large condoms.
Men will always buy them whether they need them or not and whether they actually are or not.
Too much marketing and not enough field data
deeangeo
Well-Known Member
Frankly, at ranges out to 300yds +, say 320....I have never found the standard Accubond bullet wanting.
The bullet stops deer, no fuss, no bother. Shoots very accurately from my rifle so I have absolute faith in it.
But then, I have only taken reds at extended range when there really was no other option.
Nosler don’t anyway make an LR version in .257 (or didn't) so I never bothered considering change from the standard offering. Nosler do make good bullets though, select the correct one for purpose & I’d trust it to perform.
They are pricey though......
The bullet stops deer, no fuss, no bother. Shoots very accurately from my rifle so I have absolute faith in it.
But then, I have only taken reds at extended range when there really was no other option.
Nosler don’t anyway make an LR version in .257 (or didn't) so I never bothered considering change from the standard offering. Nosler do make good bullets though, select the correct one for purpose & I’d trust it to perform.
They are pricey though......
It’s not designed for
Not surprising as it is beyond its performance envelope. Terminal velocity too low. Not really comparing apples with apples
CarlW
Well-Known Member
It claims to be a long-range bullet.
Hi, not wanting to cause upset but the ABLR is designed to expand down to 1300fps according to Nosler’s website. I don't know if it will be effective at that lower speed and you need to take manufacturers info with a pinch of salt sometimes but that is one of the things that is making me think about using it as it sounds like it will do all the things I want it to. Again not wanting to prove you wrong.
Thanks
Dave
Totally agree the Barnes marketing as a LR bullet is BS. The monolithics are great at high velocity but don’t cope well with lower TV or long range as well. Whilst I am a fan of the monolithics this is one situation where frangible lead core ammunition works far better than a monolithic
I had a look at the Barnes data and their declared max distances for the VOR-TX LRX cartridges are calibre specific, so blanket statements about their bullet design possibly obscures facts.
Also Barnes do not set a max distance above 700yds for any of their VOR-TX LRX cartridges. So the test image above citing a LRX expansion fail at 800yds is at once true and also unfair.
But what I do note is that the MVs the VOR-TX LRX cartridges generate are quite peppy. Clearly that is how they can claim adequate expansion at distances shown in the tables and ballistic gels. However, reloaders may not want to load to those values which are probably skirting SAAMI pMax.
Spot on and very happy to be proven wrong cos otherwise how do we correct our mistakes! Somehow, somewhere I got my wires crossed with A-Max after other discussions about minimum expansion velocity, as I did know it was 1,300fps, as I’ve argued about it... Argued about it in the sense that we worked out how far that equated to for a 7mm bullet in the 28 Nosler. It was something nuts like 1,500yds! This is inviting all sorts of trouble. In the .308 Win its about 1,000yd...
My point at the time was that by setting the expansion limit so low, inevitably some fool would try shots that were well outside their capability. And Nosler weren’t exactly flooding the internet with proof of the bullet’s expansion at this low velocity. In fact, there’s bugger all evidence of 1,300fps expansion. Their silly promo video conveniently stops the expansion model well before 1,300fps...
I’d wager heavily on expansion at 1,300fps being minimal and dangerously so. I know what ELD-X looks like at 1,800fps and I don’t want to see anything less than that.
No it’s not unfair! Cobblers! They say:
“Unmatched flight characteristics combined with a specially engineered nose cavity that peels back into four cutting petals delivers massive expansion and identical on-game devastation from up close to well past 700 yards.”
The listed velocities aren’t particularly fast either, nor are they on the limits of pressure. That’s a guess but I bet it’s correct.
There’s heaps and heaps of comparative testing out there, looking at different bullet designs. The Barnes bullets never do well at longer range. My steadfast belief is that the marketing blurb from Barnes on the LRX is deeply irresponsible as they seek to cash in on the growth in the “long range” game.
Odders
Well-Known Member
Back in 2007, I witnessed a friend take a cow elk at just shy of 700yds (670yds lasered) using a 168gr Barnes TSX from a .300 WSM. Due to him not taking into account the uphill angle, the bullet hit high, just under the spine but expanded perfectly, with the wound cavity including severe damage to the spine/spinal cord.
It wasn't a kill shot, needing a 9mm in the brain but the bullet performed in the manner Barnes claimed it would.
The next year, another one of our group took another cow elk with the same bullet, only at less than 100 yds - all four petals broke away, forming separate wound channels & the shank went through the chest, destroying a chunk of both lungs & lodged under the skin on the other side.
Odders, you can shoot an elk just under the spine with a FMJ and it will go down. Your mate can be thankful he didn’t put it where he intended.
I refer again to the marketing nonsense by Barnes above:
Unmatched flight characteristics? With that BC? Bollocks.
Massive expansion and identical on-game devastation from close up to well past 700 yards? Double bollocks!
The only bullets that have ever delivered identical expansion from close up to well past 700 yards and that’s a hard musket ball! It’s just pure nonsense.
There are numerous expansion tests out there. Tons of them. If anyone can show me a proper long range test where the primary mass of an expanded lead core hunting bullet is narrower than the Barnes, which might have its tip slightly opened, then all good. Don’t include the Bergers, they aren’t hunting bullets.
Bottom line is that I have never come across a single long range shooter with a monolithic bullet, and I reckon that if someone pitched up with that intention here, they’d be sent packing. Long range, remember, is generally regarded as 700m+.
I refer again to the marketing nonsense by Barnes above:
Unmatched flight characteristics? With that BC? Bollocks.
Massive expansion and identical on-game devastation from close up to well past 700 yards? Double bollocks!
The only bullets that have ever delivered identical expansion from close up to well past 700 yards and that’s a hard musket ball! It’s just pure nonsense.
There are numerous expansion tests out there. Tons of them. If anyone can show me a proper long range test where the primary mass of an expanded lead core hunting bullet is narrower than the Barnes, which might have its tip slightly opened, then all good. Don’t include the Bergers, they aren’t hunting bullets.
Bottom line is that I have never come across a single long range shooter with a monolithic bullet, and I reckon that if someone pitched up with that intention here, they’d be sent packing. Long range, remember, is generally regarded as 700m+.
Similar threads
