Being a moderator on the nosler website/forums has its perks. :grin:
I could not say anything until now!!!

Check this out:

Interesting.

It'll be even more interesting to see if they are accurate and if they really don't foul terribly.

Reloader

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Don't know what kind of patent Barnes has but I would sure think this could be a court case.

Ya Ya.....Nosler will say it doesn't have rings.....the cavity is different.....the alloys are different.

If they shoot as good as an accubond with the same BC it will certainly sell. It will be interesting to see the reaction from Barnes.

Instead of re-typing everything:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php...9/page/1#Post1366329



http://noslerreloading.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=4&sid...0552116028a01241e1ec

Nosler is looking forward as there will be many lead bullet bans coming up in the next few years.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Nosler is looking forward as there will be many lead bullet bans coming up in the next few years.

BINGO

This is what I received from Nosler.

POP: To answer some of the questions, firstly it's not an all copper bullet like some of the competition's lead free bullets so it doesn't share the characteristics, like snapping the petals at a high velocity. That also means it doesn't foul like an all copper bullet, the accuracy is amazing. I saw the results just two days ago, I'll post when I can.

I'm just waiting for a call back on the price so I can give you a ballpark figure.

I'll keep you posted.

UPDATE:

POP

Just got some more info for you.

Pricing: It will be slightly more than Partition. (that's a lot less than MRX)

Availability: Ammunition through Winchester will be first and it will be available prior to hunting season. Bullets will be available fourth quarter of this year.

That's all I got right at this second. I'll be changing the website off and on all day.

Hey! Any info on them coming out with a 150 gr., 27 cal. bullet? Think I'd like to try them in my .270 Win. What about load data too?
Bear in Fairbanks

Patience Grasshopper.

So Nosler went from leader with the a-frame construction and ballistic tip, to copying the bonded bullet from Jack Carter, and the copper bullet from people like Warren Jensen and Randy Brooks?

Their best argument is that it is cheaper than the MRX, with a secondary argument that it's "not pure copper".

I'm not bowled over with the overwhelming innovation in the design. JMO, Dutch.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Nosler is looking forward as there will be many lead bullet bans coming up in the next few years.

Exactly! And everyone here is waiting to jump on that lead free bandwagon! Don't bullets cost enough now? Look at how much shotgun ammo has risen in price because of the lead shot ban. Do we want that to happen to rifle/handgun ammo? I'm surprised that nosler is helping the enviromentalists in this. They just lost me as a customer!

Hey! Any info on them coming out with a 150 gr., 27 cal. bullet? Think I'd like to try them in my .270 Win. What about load data too?
Bear in Fairbanks

Can't wait to stabe the rest of us in the back?

quote:

Originally posted by grizz:
Exactly! And everyone here is waiting to jump on that lead free bandwagon! Don't bullets cost enough now? ?

Would you rather NOT to have an option and not be able to shoot at all?

quote:

Originally posted by grizz:
Exactly! And everyone here is waiting to jump on that lead free bandwagon! Don't bullets cost enough now?

I can see where you are coming from, bullets certainly are pushing the technological envelope these days, and it shows in prices (case in point, the Barnes MRX).

But look at it from the bullet manufacturers' side. They want their businesses to flourish, and that means they must make money. This can best be achieved with a high end/high margin product.

We as shooters must be more than pleased that competition between bullet manufacturers makes them strive for technological advance. I see no signs of shooters as such not responding to new bullet designs and manufacturing methods. People buy the products because they offer advantages - perceived or real.

I doubt very much that Nosler's decision on making a lead freee bullet has much influence on whether politicians in different countries decide to implement a lead ban. There are too many other manufacturers of lead free bullets out there. But this does position Nosler to survive should a lead ban be put into place - which I doubt it will in the medium term.

Besides, why should Nosler not try to capture some of the "lead free" market. Would it be good business for them to simply leave that market slice to other manufaturers??

Thankfully, I have yet to see clear signs that the advent of new and more expensive bullets stop cheaper bullets from being manufactured. Yes, it probably does happen to some extent, but if there is a market for a particular bullet (cheap or expensive) and if people buy them in sufficient quantities, my guess is that the manufacturers will continue to turn them out. They are in this for a living, after all...

- mike

I will try them.

The pure copper bullet (whether jacketed lead or monometal) has always been plagued with fouling and accuracy problems. Barnes' attempt to address this was through reducing the bearing surface with rings. This methodology's success is approximately proportional to the reduction in bearing surface, which is to say that it is helpful, but still not free of fouling.

Nosler's approach is to use a copper alloy, or "gilding metal" much like that used on conventional jackets. The problem is that gilding metal is less ductile and more brittle than pure copper, which leads me to believe that it will have problems expanding at low impact velocities and problems shedding petals at high impact velocities (advertising hype notwithstanding).

Monometal bullet are, of course, very long for their weight. No amount of promotion will negate that problem.

As I'm sure most others feel, I will have no use of them save and except the for the potential criminalization of lead projectiles.

quote:

to copying the bonded bullet from Jack Carter

Who did Jack Carter copy??? Bonded bullets were on the market long before Jack came along...

DM

I sure wish Nosler would add a cannelure to that bullet.....I actually like this one! But needs a cannelure

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
I sure wish Nosler would add a cannelure to that bullet.....I actually like this one! But needs a cannelure

they probably will for the factory bullets, just like they did with the partition and btip.

I'll be waiting for the availability. As soon as I see someone carrying them, I'll be placing my order.

I like monometal bullets because they are long for their weight so they have better sectional density and out penetrate lead bullets of similar weight.

Frank, I agree, unless we are comparing them to Partitions or Aframes. But I do indeed like the increased bullet length per caliber/weight.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
I'll be waiting for the availability. As soon as I see someone carrying them, I'll be placing my order.

Yep!

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Nosler is looking forward as there will be many lead bullet bans coming up in the next few years.

I think you're very right, Fjold, especially considering the proposed lead ban in California's D9 this year!

I wonder if they'll cost the same as Barnes or Swift a-frames?

Stonecreek,

quote:

The pure copper bullet (whether jacketed lead or monometal) has always been plagued with fouling and accuracy problems. Barnes' attempt to address this was through reducing the bearing surface with rings. This methodology's success is approximately proportional to the reduction in bearing surface, which is to say that it is helpful, but still not free of fouling.

With due respect, we have licked the fouling problem soundly. GSC drive band monos will foul less than one third as much as any other bullet currently available.

quote:

which leads me to believe that it will have problems expanding at low impact velocities and problems shedding petals at high impact velocities (advertising hype notwithstanding).

That is the problem guys. The bloody things will blow their petals off...............

quote:

The pure copper bullet (whether jacketed lead or monometal) has always been plagued with fouling and accuracy problems. Barnes' attempt to address this was through reducing the bearing surface with rings. This methodology's success is approximately proportional to the reduction in bearing surface, which is to say that it is helpful, but still not free of fouling.

First of all, there is NO accuracy problem with Barnes bullets. Any accuracy problem is a reloader or a gun problem. If loaded properly, they're some of the most accurate bullets out there. Secondly, all bullets foul a barrel and I can shoot bunches of Barnes bullets without an unusual fouling problem.

If the price is at or below that of the Barnes TSX, I'll probably try them since I like the fact that they don't have the grooves which in the Barnes bullets leave bullets loose in the case at times. The talk about breaking petals is just advertising hype and will have no influence on what I use. I also very much doubt that they will foul less than Barnes bullets.

Well, I've said it before I'll say it again....I don't give a crap what the bullet looks like, whether it goes on a massive diet and sheds petals, fragments, or whatever. Just as long as the animal goes down, the bullet's post shot appearance makes no difference to me.

If the Barnes TSX does indeed shed it's petals at close range (which I wouldn't know since I've never recovered one), it didn't make a hill of beans worth of difference to the deer because they dropped and died right there.

Think about it, just how far do you think a bullet will travel within the body cavity before it actually sheds metal? I honestly don't care. It hasn't affected the capability of the TSX in my experience.

In the two rifles right now that I load the Barnes TSX bullets in they are the most accurate loads in those rifles.

I have tried 11 different bullets in 5 weights in my 7 mag and it will not shoot any bullet into 1 MOA (3 shots) except for the 140 grain TSX.

I'm running an experiment right now on it (Stainless Ruger M77 with factory barrel), I'm not cleaning it until it fouls so much that it affects accuracy significantly (2 MOA). So far it has 86 TSX bullets through it and the groups are staying between 1 and 1.25 MOA.

My only objection with solid copper alloy bullets...they are too long vs. the same weight of a lead bullet. Opposite opinion of Fjold. atlough he's correct they are better ballistically...my problem has been the overlength copper solid bullets are hard for me to reload with top end powder charges...they take up too much case space.
Then, can't be seated out too far or magazine box restricts the length.
I'll take plain lead bullet types that reload well for me. I tried all the barnes bullets when they first came out...and I couldn't use the powder load & seating depth I needed, so I stopped trying. They are simply too long for their weight. look nice sitting on a table or desk though.
Best Regards,
Tom

white bison wrote:

quote:

My only objection with solid copper alloy bullets...they are too long vs. the same weight of a lead bullet.

Have you ever thought that you would only need a lower weight pure copper bullet (shorter in other words) to achieve the same and even better results than the heavy lead/copper bullet?

Sumbeach!! I like the idea, but dang it! I loaded up on Partitions already!! I'll have to unload on unsuspecting family members, I guess.

Thanks for the info, Pop. When are they coming out with the one with the Tungsten insert in the rear end?

The vast majority of bullets are shot at paper and varmints with the lions share being in .224 cal. The type of bullet you are discussing is small potatos in comparision. If there is a lead ban what is on the drawing boards to supply this demand in reasonably priced accurately designed bullets ? roger

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
I like monometal bullets because they are long for their weight so they have better sectional density and out penetrate lead bullets of similar weight.

Sectional density is constant for a given bullet weight in a given diameter. It has nothing to do with the length of the bullet or density of the material the bullet is made from.

Penetration is related not only to sectional density, but to deformation (or lack therof). Any additional penetration observed in a monometal bullet is due to less deformation, not greater sectional density.

All things being equal, it is generally advantageous for a bullet to be as short as possible for a given weight. The atomic structure of readily available metals limits just how short most bullets can practically be. If you can obtain some depleted uranium you can make some very short bullets with very high sectional density.

quote:

Opposite opinion of Fjold. atlough he's correct they are better ballistically...my problem has been the overlength copper solid bullets are hard for me to reload with top end powder charges...they take up too much case space.

In Barnes loads I've chronographed, the bullets were faster with no signs of excess pressure compared to bullets of conventional construction. You also don't need to use as heavy bullets with Barnes bullets for similar penetration compared to other bullets. As far as I'm concerned, the longer bullet issue isn't really an issue.

quote:

Opposite opinion of Fjold. atlough he's correct they are better ballistically...my problem has been the overlength copper solid bullets are hard for me to reload with top end powder charges...they take up too much case space.

I keep hearing this "They take up powder space"
arguement in a bunch of contexts and with the exception of attempting to cram more RE-22 behind a 165 in a neck sized 30-06 case I find that very few "sound" loads actually use 90% of capacity....

It just is NOT an issue.


AD

Nosler built a great reputation on the partition bullet that expands from low speed and loses the front end causing the damage that kills animals very effectivly. That left the back end of the bullet to drive deep and often through for a good exit wound. I see this mechanism now no longer works? Is the illustrated expansion at 1800fps enough for that sort of speed?

where x bulets are made of pure copper and somewhat "sticky" causing fouling problems, wouldn't a gilding metal bullet harder to get into the lands? if this bullet had grooves like the TSX or North Forks it would be an advantage to the E-tip.
james

What I find curious is that when Barnes introduced the MRX they felt the need to add a heavy Tungsten core to keep the overall length close to that of the TSX. So are these new Nosler bullets not going to be even longer than the current TSX bullets available? Now I do agree with the practice of using light for caliber bullets when utilizing monometals. My reasoning is two-fold. First, the lighter bullets will be driven faster and therefore will most assuredly open at all hunting ranges. Second, since they retain a high percentage of weight, the sectional density of the bullet will remain high after striking the target. These bullets will be worth a try. I really like the monometals.

Ill rather use the Norwegian PBP as they have the bands on them and they are fine bullets, but cant we keep ourt lead bullets, they have worked so long and the ywill work even longer?

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Thanks for the info, Pop. When are they coming out with the one with the Tungsten insert in the rear end?

Nope no tungsten or any inserts. This is why they will cost just a little more than the partition.