Ballistic Tip vs Accubond Long Range

old_school_guy

Beginner
Jan 8, 2017
30
0
I have a Remington 700 in 7mm Rem Mag that I have been loading 150 gr Ballistic Tips at 3050 fps for about 20 years. I average harvesting 3-7 Whitetails a season with them, and for the most part, am very pleased with them. I have tower stands on power lines, huge clear-cuts and big agriculture fields. I never know when a deer is going to walk out at 30 yards or 500 yards. I've had numerous BT disintegrate at the 30-70 yard range, but still killed the deer. I've also experienced pass through at 400 yards with a clean kill. So after saying all that, I'll get to the main purpose of this post. I have just acquired a Remington Gen 1 Sendero in 7mm Rem Mag. I want to load for it and it will probably be the rifle I use in these tower stands in the future. My dilemma is, I don't want to load 150 gr BT (red tip) in this rifle because there is no doubt I would eventually get the bullets mixed up with the ones loaded for my other 7 mag. This Sendero has a longer barrel than my other 7 mag, so powder type/charge and seating depth will probably be different also. I really wanted to load the AccuBond (white tip) for the Sendero, but they don't make a 150 gr in it. I think shooting a 140 gr in a 7 Mag is defeating the purpose of shooting a magnum to begin with. I don't want to step up to the 160 gr AB because velocity suffers a little and recoil would increase. This leaves me the choice of AccuBond Long Range 150 grain. It has a gray tip so I would never get them mixed up with my other 7 mag bullets and its 150 gr like I want. Now, Nosler says there is no advantage to using the ABLR shooting less than 500 yards. I’ve read a lot of post in various forums where people claim the ABLR is a fragile bullet and would explode worse than the BT at close ranges. I want to load these 150 gr ABLR in my Sendero but am concerned of bullet performance at 30-200 yards, where I frequently get shots. The ABLR is a bonded bullet unlike the BT, so I would like to think that the ABLR would still be a decent bullet in the wide range of distances that I shoot Whitetails. I have also read that these ABLR like a lot of jump, with some people seating them .075" to .125" away from the rifling. I currently seat my BT at .030" and get sub MOA accuracy with them. I read somewhere that John Porter is suppose to be an "expert" on these ABLR but I can't find of a way to communicate with him. Do any of you have a lot of actual game taking experience with these bullets, if so I would love to hear your opinions or experiences with these ABLR bullets. Thanks for your time.
 

Tommer23

Beginner
Feb 1, 2017
19
1
I'll try not to be too long winded but I really enjoy talking about this stuff.

First, if you are at all concerned about recoil and "heavier" bullets, then you should consider something other than a magnum cartridge. However, the Sendero is not a light gun and I don't think recoil is something you will need to worry about even with heavier bullets in that gun. I would be willing to bet the recoil in that gun with a 160 gr. bullet would feel much like a .280 Rem with a 140gr. bullet in a standard sporter weight rifle.

I do not have any experience with the ABLR, however I have used the Ballistic tip and AccuBond. In my experience, the AccuBond and Ballistic tip, in the same weight and caliber, expand very similarly. The difference being, the AccuBond will retain more weight and will not experience jacket/core separation. It will stay together better and retain more weight than the ballistic tips at the closer ranges that you are talking about, however will still expand much like the ballistic tip at the 300-500 yard ranges.

The difference in recoil between a 150gr. and 160gr. bullet is so minimal, I would doubt you would be able to tell the difference. I'm with you on shooting 140gr. bullets defeating the purpose of a magnum, however I go as far to believe that anything less than 160gr. bullet in a .284 caliber magnum is defeating the purpose. A 160gr. AccuBond, maintains enough velocity to 700 yards to expand reliably.

I am in no way trying to talk you out of ABLR. I am just playing the devils advocate and present an argument for not needing to use them unless your shots are 600+ yards and reasoning on why Nosler does not make a 150 gr. AccuBond in .284. The 140gr. is more suited for standard cartridges while the 160gr. is suited more for the magnums.

And now an argument for the ABLR (based on what I have seen on paper). If it were me and I was considering the ABLR in a 7mm mag., I would go with the 168gr. Your velocities at closer ranges would be low enough that the bullet wouldn't "over expand" however the heavier bullet will maintain velocity at longer ranges. A 168gr. ABLR in 7 Mag will reliably expand at over 1000 yards, however, your muzzle velocity is under 2900fps. It would seem to me (again, based on what is stated on paper) that anyone that has experienced an ABLR "exploding" is using a lighter bullet in the caliber in question. ABLR bullets, like most any bullet to be used for long range shooting, whether it be target shooting or hunting, generally should be heavy for caliber. Heavy for caliber bullets, even though they have relatively lower close range velocities, perform better at longer ranges because they resist wind drift and maintain velocity downrange better than lighter bullets.

I hope I have helped, and wished that I have had first hand, real world, experience with the ABLR. I have had excellent experiences with Noslers other bullets using them for their intended purpose, and would not hesitate to use the ABLR for it's intended purpose.
 

Blkram

Handloader
Nov 25, 2013
1,933
424
Tommer23 gives great points above.

I too would not worry about the differences in bullet weight between the 150 and 160 in your Sendero.

I have used 160 and 165 gr bullets in the 7MM Rem Mag, 140 and 160/162 gr bullets in the 280 Rem, and 160 gr bullets in the 7MM STW, of various makes and styles, for over 25 years now, on game ranging from antelope to elk, and at distances from 15 yards to 475 yards. The ballistic tip (and other cup and core bullets) has worked well on game from deer to moose at close to medium ranges (50-200 yards), and the AccuBond has worked well on all game from very close to very far - for me- whitetail at 15 yards and mountain goat at 30, to elk at 475 yards. I would not hesitate to shoot any North American big game with the 7 RM and a 160 gr AB at any sensible range. (Granted, it may not be my first preference for brown bears, but if it was the only rifle I had, I Would not hesitate to use it, with some very strict considerations on distance, shot presentation and state of wariness of the bear)

The ABLR is proving to be a fickle bullet. It works very well in some rifles, while it will not perform at all in others. I have not seen this with the AB! It has proven to be the easiest bullet to work up loads for in all the rifles that I have done so to date. It has proven to be the most consistently accurate bullet in each rifle I have loaded it for, or used in factory ammunition, to date.

And it's performance on game for me has been nothing short of phenominal when I have placed the bullet properly. When I am able to recover an AB from an animal harvested, it is always under the skin on the far side of the animal, with 1.5 to almost 2.5 times the original diameter in expansion (dependent upon impact velocity due to animal body characteristics, caliber and range), and has retained 90-95% of its original weight.

For your situation, I would recommend use the 160 gr AB, and not worry about it any longer, as you will discover the same experience and performance as I have! Good hunting!

As for John Porter, he is on the Best of the West team. You could try contacting him through their website.
 

DrMike

Ballistician
Nov 8, 2006
35,188
1,737
I have used the 150 grain ABLR in my 280 Rem to harvest elk and mule deer. The first elk I shot was at 75 yards. The only mule deer was at 20 yards. Of course, no recovery of the bullet, but two very dead animals. Tissue damage was not extensive. Muzzle velocity was ~3000 fps. I can't imagine that you would have a problem loading the 150 grain ABLR in your Sendero.
 

Dr. Vette

Handloader
Apr 16, 2012
1,320
35
I have shot 140s, 160s and 168s in my 7mm Sendero, and not noticed any appreciable change in recoil. My 18yo daughter shot the Sendero with 168s last fall and had no problems with it, so I would not worry about that if I were you.

I'd go with the 160 AccuBond and not look back.
 

old_school_guy

Beginner
Jan 8, 2017
30
0
I would load the 160 AccuBond if I could get 3000 fps out of this 26" barrel. I don't want to buy 5 different powders and work loads for all, it would take forever. Not to mention have a lot of wasted money in powders laying around that I wasn't going to use. Do you know what powder would achieve the 3000 fps goal in my 7 rem mag with 160 gr Accubonds? Would IMR-4350 be to fast burning for the 26" barrel? That's what I use in a 24" barrel 7 mag with the 150 gr BT and get 3050 fps (62.5 grs) without any pressure signs.
 

Dr. Vette

Handloader
Apr 16, 2012
1,320
35
No guarantees at all for speed, but check out the Nosler load data for the 160s:

https://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/ ... on-magnum/

You might also politely ask here to see if a forum member would run a Quickload for you and see if that points you toward any one powder that Nosler lists.

Or, take a look here:

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/ ... nds-44380/

Given the option, I would take accuracy with the AB over a bit of speed. No elk will notice 2950 vs 3050 if the 2950 groups much better. The HSM ammo I've used in my Sendero gets 2900+ fps with the 168 Bergers. That's nothing to sneeze at.
 

SJB358

Ballistician
Dec 24, 2006
31,355
654
old_school_guy":2aabaqk1 said:
I would load the 160 AccuBond if I could get 3000 fps out of this 26" barrel. I don't want to buy 5 different powders and work loads for all, it would take forever. Not to mention have a lot of wasted money in powders laying around that I wasn't going to use. Do you know what powder would achieve the 3000 fps goal in my 7 rem mag with 160 gr Accubonds? Would IMR-4350 be to fast burning for the 26" barrel? That's what I use in a 24" barrel 7 mag with the 150 gr BT and get 3050 fps (62.5 grs) without any pressure signs.

Any of the good 7mm Rem powders will EASILY do 3050 from a 24" 7mm Rem Mag that isn't sick. With your 26" barrel, you'll get there easily. RL25, RL26, Retumbo, RL22, H1000, Magpro, and a host of others.. My point is, that probably even your 4350 will work well too with the 26" barrel. I'd probably start with a slower one myself though..

I am with the others, I LOVE LOVE LOVE the 160 grain AccuBond. I was just mentioning it to a buddy that it is probably my favorite .284 magnum bullet. Super accurate and works very well on deer and elk.

If you could make the 150 or 168 ABLR's shoot the way you want, it would probably be great for deer. I could never make them act the way I wanted and quickly went back to the 160 AccuBond and life is easy. They expand well at distance and will crush bone anywhere you stick them.

Here are a couple of runs just to show you a couple of the powders mentioned from your 7 Mag.

Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.(CIP)
Bullet : .284, 160, Nosler AccuBond 54932
Useable Case Capaci: 72.289 grain H2O = 4.694 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch = 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : IMR 4350

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.813% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-08.1 85 56.50 2797 2779 49501 10079 99.4 1.373
-07.3 86 57.00 2818 2821 50683 10143 99.5 1.358
-06.5 87 57.50 2839 2864 51892 10206 99.6 1.343
-05.7 88 58.00 2860 2907 53127 10265 99.7 1.329
-04.9 88 58.50 2882 2950 54390 10323 99.8 1.314
-04.1 89 59.00 2903 2993 55681 10377 99.9 1.300 ! Near Maximum !
-03.3 90 59.50 2924 3037 57001 10430 99.9 1.286 ! Near Maximum !
-02.4 91 60.00 2944 3080 58350 10479 100.0 1.273 ! Near Maximum !
-01.6 91 60.50 2965 3124 59729 10526 100.0 1.260 ! Near Maximum !
-00.8 92 61.00 2986 3168 61140 10571 100.0 1.246 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 93 61.50 3007 3211 62582 10613 100.0 1.233 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 94 62.00 3027 3255 64057 10655 100.0 1.221 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.6 94 62.50 3047 3299 65565 10696 100.0 1.208 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.4 95 63.00 3068 3344 67108 10736 100.0 1.196 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.3 96 63.50 3088 3388 68686 10777 100.0 1.183 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.1 97 64.00 3108 3432 70300 10817 100.0 1.171 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 93 61.50 3098 3411 72535 10264 100.0 1.158 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 93 61.50 2870 2926 52600 10781 98.0 1.332


Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.(CIP)
Bullet : .284, 160, Nosler AccuBond 54932
Useable Case Capaci: 72.289 grain H2O = 4.694 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch = 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : IMR 7828 SSC

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.747% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-07.5 91 62.00 2883 2953 47872 11584 97.7 1.375
-06.7 91 62.50 2907 3002 49089 11665 97.9 1.359
-06.0 92 63.00 2931 3051 50340 11743 98.2 1.343
-05.2 93 63.50 2954 3101 51626 11818 98.4 1.327
-04.5 93 64.00 2978 3151 52945 11890 98.6 1.312
-03.7 94 64.50 3002 3201 54301 11959 98.8 1.297
-03.0 95 65.00 3025 3252 55694 12025 99.0 1.282 ! Near Maximum !
-02.2 96 65.50 3049 3303 57127 12087 99.2 1.268 ! Near Maximum !
-01.5 96 66.00 3072 3354 58599 12146 99.4 1.253 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 97 66.50 3096 3405 60112 12202 99.5 1.239 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 98 67.00 3119 3457 61668 12254 99.6 1.225 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 99 67.50 3143 3509 63268 12303 99.7 1.211 ! Near Maximum !
+01.5 99 68.00 3166 3561 64915 12348 99.8 1.197 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.2 100 68.50 3189 3614 66609 12390 99.9 1.184 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.0 101 69.00 3213 3667 68352 12427 99.9 1.170 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.7 102 69.50 3236 3720 70146 12461 100.0 1.157 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 98 67.00 3255 3765 74914 11764 100.0 1.132 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 98 67.00 2923 3036 49782 12132 94.8 1.345


Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.(CIP)
Bullet : .284, 160, Nosler AccuBond 54932
Useable Case Capaci: 72.289 grain H2O = 4.694 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch = 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H1000

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.705% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-07.0 100 66.00 2851 2887 46952 11358 97.7 1.383
-06.3 101 66.50 2875 2936 48156 11432 98.0 1.367
-05.6 102 67.00 2898 2984 49396 11502 98.2 1.351
-04.9 102 67.50 2922 3034 50672 11570 98.5 1.335
-04.2 103 68.00 2946 3083 51985 11634 98.7 1.319
-03.5 104 68.50 2970 3133 53334 11694 98.9 1.303
-02.8 105 69.00 2994 3184 54730 11751 99.1 1.288 ! Near Maximum !
-02.1 105 69.50 3017 3234 56163 11805 99.3 1.273 ! Near Maximum !
-01.4 106 70.00 3041 3286 57642 11854 99.4 1.258 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 107 70.50 3065 3337 59164 11900 99.6 1.243 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 108 71.00 3088 3389 60733 11942 99.7 1.229 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 108 71.50 3112 3441 62351 11980 99.8 1.214 ! Near Maximum !
+01.4 109 72.00 3136 3493 64019 12015 99.9 1.200 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.1 110 72.50 3159 3546 65740 12045 99.9 1.186 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.8 111 73.00 3183 3599 67517 12071 100.0 1.172 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.5 112 73.50 3206 3652 69350 12093 100.0 1.158 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 108 71.00 3232 3712 74330 11421 100.0 1.132 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 108 71.00 2878 2944 49048 11806 94.5 1.353


Cartridge : 7 mm Rem. Mag.(CIP)
Bullet : .284, 160, Nosler AccuBond 54932
Useable Case Capaci: 72.289 grain H2O = 4.694 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.290 inch = 83.57 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-26

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.725% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-07.2 89 64.00 2925 3040 47897 11662 100.0 1.399
-06.5 90 64.50 2948 3087 49166 11702 100.0 1.383
-05.8 91 65.00 2970 3134 50464 11741 100.0 1.367
-05.1 91 65.50 2992 3181 51794 11779 100.0 1.350
-04.3 92 66.00 3014 3228 53157 11817 100.0 1.335
-03.6 93 66.50 3036 3275 54556 11854 100.0 1.319 ! Near Maximum !
-02.9 94 67.00 3058 3323 55992 11891 100.0 1.304 ! Near Maximum !
-02.2 94 67.50 3080 3370 57466 11928 100.0 1.289 ! Near Maximum !
-01.4 95 68.00 3102 3418 58978 11964 100.0 1.274 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 96 68.50 3123 3466 60530 11999 100.0 1.260 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 96 69.00 3145 3514 62124 12034 100.0 1.245 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 97 69.50 3167 3562 63760 12068 100.0 1.231 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.4 98 70.00 3188 3611 65440 12102 100.0 1.217 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.2 98 70.50 3209 3660 67166 12135 100.0 1.203 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.9 99 71.00 3231 3709 68938 12168 100.0 1.190 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.6 100 71.50 3252 3758 70758 12200 100.0 1.176 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 96 69.00 3264 3784 77249 11575 100.0 1.144 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 96 69.00 2961 3114 47771 12624 99.5 1.384
 

c. schutte

Handloader
Jan 24, 2012
578
0
Funny thing, I was talking over the weekend to my brother regarding this very subject............ 140 vs. 160 grain AB for a 7mm mag............

Our thoughts are that the 160 grain over the 140 grain for a host of reasons. One is if hand loading a rifle with a 26" barrel 3000 fps should not be too hard to get and for some reason you can't quite make it, 2950 with a bullet that has a greater sectional density would equal or surpass the lighter 140 grain before 500 yards? Any angled shot at any distance and the 160 grain bullet would be a good choice for elk.

I would also not worry about any extra recoil between the 160 grain and 150 grain bullets. "If" you could tell the difference it would be very slight and the last time I handled a Sendero it was a heavy rifle. A hot loaded 160 grain out of that rifle might feel less than the 140 grain out of your other rifle. In my opinion the 160 grain AB is the bullet for the 7mm mag in the Sendero platform. It would be the only way I would go with this.

I love these topics too and will be following this thread. Good luck......................chs
 

JD338

Range Officer
Staff member
Nov 4, 2004
21,863
1,263
The 7mm 150 gr ABLR is a fantastic bullet and it will serve you well in your 7mm RM Sendero.
I am running this bullet in a 280AI at 3100 fps and on game performance is excellent.
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=25378

JD338
 

old_school_guy

Beginner
Jan 8, 2017
30
0
Thanks every one for the replies. I agree with c. schutte, I love this site and learning from others that have been there and done that. Anyone else with experience to share, please chime in.
 

Darkhorse

Handloader
Mar 14, 2014
747
18
The recoil pad on my old M700 7mag. got hard over time and the rifle started to pound a little. I replaced it with a Limbsaver and felt recoil now is almost non existent. You should give one a try.
I would go with the 160 grain AB myself. My favorite powder is IMR 4350 but I would try something else in a 26" barrel.
 

Gunner46

Handloader
Jan 12, 2015
483
2
I Oh So miss the 162gr Solid base. It was a clean, mean killing machine out of my 7RM. When they were discontinued I went to the 150BT, at the same velocity you stated you're now shooting Worked pretty d@mn well for me too. The deer just kept falling.

Aside from that, and back to your Sendero....

We're talking deer here, Right? Not big bears, nor mt goats
, nor grizzled old pigs.

Why not the 140 AccuBond, or Partition ?

I mean you reeeallly have to stretch the range WAY out there to gain any significant advantage from the ABLR.

Just as a case in point, I have a friend that has used the 140AB, out of a 7mm/08, and dropped elk at over 500yds, with complete pass through.
 

Silent Sam

Handloader
Dec 22, 2010
294
0
As a reloader and rifle looney we tend to look at all the available data and mull it over and over weighing all the minuscule differences in print... My best advice is load 'em up and go shoot. (y)
 

old_school_guy

Beginner
Jan 8, 2017
30
0
Hey Gunner46, I just hunt Whitetails and Hogs here in SC. I may try the 150 gr BST or the 150 gr E-Tip. Or I may retire my 24" 7 mag and just load 150 gr BT for Sendero. LOL
 

bboswell

Beginner
Feb 20, 2016
79
0
I disagree with your assessment on 140's in a 7mag as my pet load has been 140g Partion since the late 80's. I never bothered working up the newer bullets because the 140's plan worked out to 400 or so.

I also started shooting Nosler factory loaded 140 AB's in my 280AI and enjoyed great results. I switched to 150 LRAB's in handloads last year and they have performed great on whitetail and a couple hogs up to 250#

If I were starting over with either rifle and I knew shots were 500yds or less 1st choice would be 140 AB, 2nd choice would be 160 AB & 3rd would be 150g LRAB. Reason being the LRAB offers no advantage at these ranges and it is WAY more finicky n load development.
 

old_school_guy

Beginner
Jan 8, 2017
30
0
Well I've made up my mind for the 7mm Rem Mag Sendero. I'm going to load the 140 gr AccuBond and use IMR 7828 SSC powder, CCI 250 primers and Hornady brass. My goal will be 3100 fps and MOA. Hope I can achieve that. Thanks for all the replies.
 

TackDriver284

Handloader
Feb 13, 2016
1,797
474
I looked up my notes for the Sako M995 7 mm Magnum, I recently used 140 Accubonds with Remington brass, 65.5 grains RL-19, CCI-250 primers and shot cloverleaf groups. I believe it was around 3260 fps. out of a 26 inch barrel. It's max in the Nosler manual. I was pushing 3300 fps. with 66.6 grains but accuracy was not there, so backed off to 65.5 grains. Don't use my loads without a load work up starting low.
 

c. schutte

Handloader
Jan 24, 2012
578
0
old_school_guy":2rywg77k said:
Well I've made up my mind for the 7mm Rem Mag Sendero. I'm going to load the 140 gr AccuBond and use IMR 7828 SSC powder, CCI 250 primers and Hornady brass. My goal will be 3100 fps and MOA. Hope I can achieve that. Thanks for all the replies.


I bet you can get a lot more than 3100 fps out of the 140 gr. AB.

Last Sunday I started working on a load for a 7x57 using the 140 grain AB's. The rifle has an old mauser (1936) action and a brand spanking new Shilen # 3, 24" barrel with a 1:9 twist. Using a clean barrel between the first few shots & different charges, the bullets were landing at an inch apart. Looks like this bullet will be easy to develop. That Sendero with it's 26" tube ought to be able to send 140's out well over 3300 fps and perhaps 3400? My goal for this rifle is 2850-2900 fps and well under MOA.
 
Top