Nosler match bullets = Sierra match bullets?

I have had better results out of sierra and hornady for me.

But it depends on what you are looking for in terms of accuracy and range. You can definitely get sub MOA accuracy out of a bolt gun out to 300 yards. At least in a savage with 1:10 twist. An ar-10 with 1:11.25 and my 1:12 cz-550 varmint didn't produce nearly as nice results with them.

You won't be disappointed,

I've been using the Nosler 168s for almost 2 years now almost exclusively. I have tried a box or two of pretty much every other offering, including SMKs. The Noslers are capable of consistent quarter-minute groups out of my bench gun, consistent with the best performance of the SMKs. The only bullets that may have a slight performance edge are Berger VLDs, but its so small as to be hardly noticeable. Under 200yards there is no difference, and the price differential keeps me shooting the Noslers.

Loading for 30-06 I have settled for 46.7 gr IMR4064 for a light shooting range load that is extremely accurate out to 300yards. I go to 180s for longer ranges. Gun is built on a Rem700 action, Brux 1:10 barrel.

EDIT:raz-0, I couldn't get the Hornady 168s to shoot well at all. Still sub-minute, but consistency was not as good as competitors.

"Nosler match bullets = Sierra match bullets?"

If your rifle happens to like them they will be equal, or maybe even better. ??

I have shot HM scores with SMK, Hornady Match and Nosler match. They all shoot very well. The "stick" has iron sights and a post. Maybe, unlikely, but maybe you would see a difference with one bullet or another, but I doubt it.

Buy by price.

This is my best 200 yard RF group with a M1a. I was used Noslers on this 200-8X group. Noslers shoot fine.

I love the 168 SMKs inside 1000yds but they seem to drop out of the sky in an unpredictable manner much past that. There are several articles about the defficiency in the boattail design that hampers them at the longer ranges.

Fatelvis, it appears that you not interested in these extended ranges but I thought I'd share just in case.
~z

Rather refreshing to see an honest poster instead of a guy saying "if I do my part"

Boat tailed bullets hampered at longer ranges? That's what they're made for!

In my experience, Nosler match bullets are every bit the equal of Sierra match bullets. Go to the Shooter's Pro Shop area of the Nosler web site. At times they have seconds for sale which is what I use.

I love the 168 SMKs inside 1000yds but they seem to drop out of the sky in an unpredictable manner much past that. There are several articles about the defficiency in the boattail design that hampers them at the longer ranges.

Click to expand...

They will tumble and leave key holes in the target at 1000 yards. Been there and done that.

The 175 SMK is a better choice at 600 and beyond.

Quote from above post:

"They will tumble and leave key holes in the target at 1000 yards. Been there and done that."

Please explain. Thanks

I have used 168 SMKs and 168 NHPBT bullets interchangably with no difference that I have seen in group size or POI. The only difference I have found is their price.

Roger

Grumulkin,
I'm not saying 'boattailed bullets are hampered longer ranges'.
I'm saying the design of the boattail on the .308 cal 168gn SMK is not sufficient for ranges much past 1000yds. There are several articles on the subject. A very good discussion can be found in Brian Litz's book.

~z

Boat tailed bullets hampered at longer ranges? That's what they're made for!

Click to expand...

I am a former Nosler employee and can explain this. Nosler bullets use an "Ojive tangent" which is more like a football shape. Hornady and Sierra use a "Secant tangent" which is more like a sharpened pencil shape. The Nosler bullets tend to be more stubby than the others but some guns really like them.

I load the 168 HPBT Noslers for my .308 because I can get a bag of factory seconds for $14.00/100. I am going to try the Hornady A-max bullets this weekend to see if my gun likes them any better.

By the way, you can find the Nosler factory seconds here:
http://www.shootersproshop.com/index.php?p=11&b=8&s=392&t=Custom Competition

If you were to compare flat based vs boat tailed bullets at similar ranges and in barrels with the appropriate twist for the bullets, the boat tailed bullets would do better. ANY bullet has a range beyond which it becomes unstable with resultant poor accuracy. In fact, try shooting an 80 grain .224 match bullet out of a 1:12 twist barrel and you'll find poor performance at probably 25 yards but that doesn't mean 80 gr. match bullets aren't made for long range shooting.

Regarding 168 gr. match bullets; yes they become unstable at some range which will vary depending on barrel twist and muzzle velocity. The reason boat tailed bullets are used in EVERY application for long range rifle shooting is because the DO perform better at long range than flat based bullets.

Beg to differ with your first statement.

If you were to compare flat based vs boat tailed bullets at similar ranges and in barrels with the appropriate twist for the bullets, the boat tailed bullets would do better.

Click to expand...

The process of forming the boat tail adds an additional step to the process which inherently adds a chance for variance. I think your statement needs a qualifier of ‘at extended ranges’ instead of ‘at similar ranges’.

Check with your local benchrest shooters and see how many are using boat tail bullets at 100-300yds. I’d be surprised if you find any.
~z

Regarding 168 gr. match bullets; yes they become unstable at some range which will vary depending on barrel twist and muzzle velocity.

Click to expand...

This.


~z,

The boattail design is aerodynamically superior. BR shooters use flat based bullets, especially for shorter ranges because better consistency in the manufacturing process. You are correct that they are generally more accurate bullets out of the most precise of rifles. Most rifles you won't be able to tell a difference. If your 168s are keyholing past 1000yards, that is a function of MV and twist, not necessarily the bullet design.

If someone starting turning out boattail bullets with the same internal consistency as say, berger flat based bullets, they would be superior at all ranges. (With the exception of <100yds, but again thats mainly a function of mv and twist)

~z, you're right. I should have said at extended ranges because I would agree that at 100 to 300 yards flat based vs boat tails probably makes no difference. It has been a long time since I shot with bench rest guys since there are no high power bench rest matches that I know of in convenient driving distance to where I live now. I believe the ones I shot with all used boat tailed bullets.

By the way, the bullets Marine Core snipers use are boat tailed as are pretty much all the so called match bullets by Sierra, Hornady, Nosler, Berger and Barnes.

If your 168s are keyholing past 1000yards, that is a function of MV and twist, not necessarily the bullet design.

Click to expand...

Depends upon what 168gr BTHP bullet you are talking about. The problem with the 168gr Sierra MatchKing bullet at 1000 yards is a matter of the angle of the boattail. It was designed to perform at 300 meters, and is good out to 600 yards or a bit more, but fails miserably at 1000 yards. Spotting for a 1k shooter using 168SMK's can be a frustrating experience.

Don

Grumulkin,
Again, I'm not saying 'ALL boattailed bullets'. I’m specifically talking about 168gn SMK boattailed bullets. They are a poor choice for long range due to the design of the boat tail on this particular bullet (168gn SMK). As Don clarifies above the problem is in the angle of the boattail. This leads to dynamic instability at extended ranges. This is a product of the mass balance and the particular dimensions of the boattail. This is a ‘bullet problem’ not a ‘gun problem’. In otherwords it is a problem that can NOT be solved by altering the muzzle velocity or using a different twist rate.

Essayons,
I agree that the boattail concept is aerodynamically superior; again my comment is on the design of the boattail on the 168gn SMK. However I do not believe boattailed bullets (of any design) are as accurate as flat based bullets at short ranges (inside say 300yds).

If a BT could be made to the same standards of the FB bullet as you suggest, the FB would be inherently more accurate because the muzzle blast effects are more detrimental on the BT bullets. With BT bullets the high pressure escaping gasses has the tendency to cause the bullet to pitch and yaw early in flight. This is not the case with FB bullets. At extended ranges the aerodynamic benefits of (a properly designed) BT bullet overcomes the atmospheric variations better than the FB.

Now excuse me while I put my soap box away and I’ll tell you my story.

I have invested a LOT of time and energy trying to get the 168SMKs to shoot at extended ranges (mainly because I had 5k of them and wanted to use them). They were shooting lights out excellent between 500-800yds and typically held .3MOA or better. At 1K they were opening up to .8-1.2MOA. Out at 1200 they just fall out of the sky.

On a cool crisp morning with no wind in W TX me and a buddy sat up on a mesa overlooking our range. Conditions were perfect. We were shooting steel and had targets set up at 500, 750, 1k, and 1200. The trace was a very easy read with the bare eye and even better through the spotting scope. You could call hits before the impact splashed the paint off the steel.

I moved from the 1k to shoot the 1200. Clean trigger break and all felt good with the shot. Buddy says “the wind must have kicked up out there, that was wide left by about 4feet”. Humm, I didn’t see any wind, I’ll watch closer and try again. Wide right 6ft. Next one was high then low, everywhere but on the 16” steel.

I put my buddy behind the rifle and I put the spotter a ½ turn out of focus to watch the trace. I didn’t understand what I saw as at that moment I didn’t know about this inherent flaw in the bullet. What I saw was this flaw in action. The trace showed a nice long gradual rise and fairly rapid decent toward the target (as expected). However about 150yds from the target the smooth curve broke and the bullet veered right and UP! “*** Shoot again” I said. This time it was similar but broke left and down. The bullet lost stability.

I had him shoot another 8 rounds so I could watch this strange occurrence. I then grabbed my 168gn Berger bullets and re-zeroed at 500yds and proceeded to ring the steels at 1200.

I still have about 2k of the 168SMKs, I love them for anything inside 800yds. THEY JUST DO NOT WORK WELL PAST THAT DISTANCE.

Thanks for reading my rant. If you have had dissimilar experiences PLEASE tell me.

~z

Well, though flat based bullets can be plenty accurate as short ranges I haven't found them to be more accurate than boat tailed bullets as long as the twist is fast enough.

As for 168 gr. bullets becoming unstable at long range; I believe it but I don't think it's a bullet flaw. In my opinion, it is because of inadequate velocity and/or barrel twist to stabilize them at extended range. I would agree that heavier bullets would be stable at longer ranges since the ballistic coefficient will be better and they won't lose velocity as fast. Of course, the longer the bullet, the faster the twist will need to be for stability.

The velocity seemed sufficient 3190 fps at the muzzle and about 1400fps when the bullet went all wonky at about 1050yds. The twist was 1:10 so the problem was not there. All the calculations indicate it should work. I surmise the problem was in the 13 degree angle of the BT of the 168gn SMK (see attached). Drag is optimally reduced at angles of 7-9 degrees. Angles >or< than that cause silly things to happen as the velocity decays.

I should retract my previous statement that it was a ‘flaw in the bullet’. The bullet is not flawed it was just not designed for that range. Just as using a hammer for a wrench and not getting the desired outcome does not mean the hammer was flawed. It just means I used the wrong tool for the job.
~z

View attachment 168gnSMK.pdf