1.) Swamp Fox - 02/04/2015

Sounds like a pay-per-view tickle fight...:-)


This is for use in [B]ALASKA[/B].

I try to keep up with bullet design concepts, at least for what I'll have a reasonable chance of shooting, but I'll have to ask the experts on this one: Here's a question someone asked me the other day---Would you look to Barnes or Nosler for Alaska bown bear (hunting and defense), moose and caribou? The two rifles carried would be a .280 Ackley Improved and a .338-06 Improved, the former I know a little about, the latter next to nothing. I don't have information on barrel twists, etc. but I'm not sure it matters. Everybody' rifle shoots differently, and you'll know soon enough if a particular barrel likes a particular load. However, if someone thinks it's important, I'll see if twist rate is known.

I have picked up in my reading that Barnes TSX bullet is sometimes lacking in the tight accuracy department, but they have a polymer-tipped version which Barnes says is built for accuracy. They are all-copper bullets and get dinged for barrel fouling, a need for tinkering at the reloading bench, and infrequent bullet recovery on game. Other people swear by them.

As far as I know, the other option from Barnes is their Banded Solid, built for large/dangerous game, with the added benefit of minimized pelt and hide damage. I haven't researched them at all.

Also, I imagine Nosler Partitions will be considered too light for anything that can eat you, although it's a fine bullet for a lot of other applications. I don't know about moose. Maybe light there, too. I know we have some guys that have hunted moose out there. What say you?

I think that leaves the tougher Accubond bullet from Nosler, but it's possible I'm missing something. I have no experience with it, at least that I recall. It is a relatively new bullet (2003) and it's possible I had it out on the range or out for hog hunting in the 7x57, but if so it left no impression on me, positive or negative. Not that that means anything for Alaska hunting in the first place.


[B]Here's Layne Simpson on the .280 AI...Maybe somebody can find something on the .338-06 Imp. so I can get some work done today, LOL[/B]



...
[I]
For reasons too lengthy to go into here, the headspace dimension for the .280 Ackley Improved cartridge approved by SAAMI and introduced by Nosler turned out to be shorter than headspace gauge manufacturers had established for the original Ackley version. Some reloading die makers have responded by offering different die sets for the two.

Dies made by Redding for the Ackley version prior to 2011 were marked “280 Rem Imp 40 Degrees.” They are still available. Dies for the Nosler version are marked “280 Ackley Imp,” which is the SAAMI-approved abbreviation. In the past, RCBS dies for the Ackley cartridge were marked “280 Imp 40 Degrees,” and they will continue to be so while dies for the SAAMI/Nosler version will be marked “280 Ackley Imp.”

The important difference between the two die sets is in their full-length resizers. Since headspace dimension of the SAAMI cartridge is shorter, the shoulder in a die reamed for the Ackley cartridge won’t make contact with the shoulder of the case.

If a die reamed for the SAAMI version is screwed into the press far enough to make contact with the shellholder and used to resize a case fired in a rifle chambered for Ackley’s version, the shoulder will be set back for an increase in headspace. But it can be used by screwing the die in just far enough to lightly bump back the shoulder enough for trouble-free chambering of the cartridge. So when purchasing reloading dies for a rifle it is important to know which version of the .280 AI it is chambered for.

If other companies introduce rifles in .280 Ackley Improved, they will likely be chambered for the SAAMI version, and Nosler cases and ammunition will surely work fine in them. But since the original .280 Ackley Improved is a wildcat, gunsmiths who have chambered rifles for it over the past 65 years or so have not always agreed on precisely how deeply the chamber should be reamed.

So to be on the safe side, it is not a bad idea to have the headspace of a rifle chambered for Ackley’s version checked by a gunsmith to determine its suitability with Nosler cases and ammunition. Kenny Jarrett, who has chambered more than 1,000 rifles for the original Ackley version, agrees with my opinion. So does Dave Kiff of Pacific Tool & Gauge, which makes chamber reamers and headspace gauges for both versions.
[/I]

Read more: [url]http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/new-and-improved-the-280-ackley-improved/#ixzz3QnSd80ID[/url]

2.) Swamp Fox - 02/04/2015

BTW, sorry for all the typos...I can't get the edit function to work. This is not the first post this has happened on. When you go to edit, you get a blank text box and no chance to change anything. Seems like it happens on longer posts.


Alex?

3.) Deerminator - 02/04/2015

I GET A MESSAGE FROM SPELLCHECKER THAT SAYS IT DON'T FEEL LIKE WORKING
AND THATA i SHOULD TRY LATER......:rage:

4.) Swamp Fox - 02/05/2015

I nose around or randomly land on this site fairly often: Here's a decent thread on the tipped TSX bullet vs. Accubond.


[url]http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/barnes-ttsx-vs-nosler-accubonds-68567/[/url]

5.) bluecat - 02/05/2015

Who really nos all this stuff anyway?

6.) Swamp Fox - 02/05/2015

:-)....

7.) Hunter - 02/06/2015

[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;29258]BTW, sorry for all the typos...I can't get the edit function to work. This is not the first post this has happened on. When you go to edit, you get a blank text box and no chance to change anything. Seems like it happens on longer posts.


Alex?[/QUOTE]

Isn't there a time limit to edit your posts? After that, no can do. Or, did I just imagine that?? :cf:

8.) Swamp Fox - 02/06/2015

You're right that that used to be the case. I complained about it enough that I think that has been done away with, LOL.

I don't think anyone is subject to that time limit anymore, but what do I know. I might be "special." Yeah, yeah yeah...I know. :wink

A peon, but a [I]special[/I] peon is what I say. :-)

9.) Wild Bob - 02/06/2015

"Also, I imagine Nosler Partitions will be considered too light for anything that can eat you, although it's a fine bullet for a lot of other applications. I don't know about moose. Maybe light there, too. I know we have some guys that have hunted moose out there. What say you?"

IMO, much has to do with what grain bullets are we talking about here?

- Not quite sure I follow this comment Swampy (regarding the Partitions being too light? May be I'm missing something)...there are boat loads of elk and deer killed every year with Partitions. I don't hunt elk or deer with anything other than Partitions...and the great thing is that whether a shot presents its self at 50 yards or 250 yards; I'm covered. (Ballistic tips are great for longer ranges, but I've had trouble with them performing well on closer shots on both whitetails and mule deer.

I can't offer personal moose experience (yet!) But in conversing with two friends of mine that live in Alaska; one has killed eight caribou with stellar results using Nosler Partitions. The other has killed two moose; one with partitions, the other with other with a Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullet. However, my friend that has bagged the caribou prefers A-Square for moose and Grizzly (of which he has killed one)...

Just some additional food for thought…

10.) Swamp Fox - 02/06/2015

Agreed on the point about bullet weight.

As far as bullet CONSTUCTION goes, though, I've always heard Alaska moose were tough hombres. I've been under the impression that they are tougher than elk in at least some situations.

I consider a NP a tough bullet for around here (probably overkill for our deer, LOL) but I get the sense that guys who hunt those moose out there (as opposed to Maine moose, say) really like a bomb-proof bullet.

I wasn't trying to talk down the Partition as much as investigate choices that might be tougher.

11.) Wild Bob - 02/06/2015

Oh, no problem...I hope I didn't come off too strong. It's not like I work for Nosler or anything like that. :-)

IMHO, from what I've read as well; I think Barnes has a pretty strong following. I've got some Barnes bullets for my .300 Win Mag and my .416 Taylor to reload with...but honestly, I haven't killed anything with them yet. May be this will be the year to try them out.

Also, IMO, I think bullet placement is critical. If one is trying to break down a shoulder - then yea, one better have a good stout bullet. But if the goal is a lung shot, moose are not that tough.

My buddy's wife in AK is native, and she talks all the time about her brothers and uncles busting moose with .223s. (Obviously, I don't advocate that!) But most of the natives up there kind of dance to a different beat when it comes to hunting: Years ago, when I lived up there briefly, I had an eye-opening conversation with a native guy. Me and my friend that still lives up there were black bear hunting and I got to talking to this guy about it. He was mighty proud telling me that us white guys got bear hunting all wrong. He said baiting and stalking were for guys that don't really want to kill bears...he told me the real way to do it was to load the jet boat with at least 3 or 4 guys shooting semi-autos, and blast up a river...he said that way they had plenty of fire-power to take care of the bears they'd run up on along shore.

But then again, he was coming from the point of view of someone that lived most of his life in a subsistence manner. I guess I'd have different methods if my eating depended on my hunting!

12.) Swamp Fox - 02/06/2015

[QUOTE=Wild Bob;29347]...Me and my friend that still lives up there were black bear hunting and I got to talking to this guy about it. He was mighty proud telling me that us white guys got bear hunting all wrong...[/QUOTE]


I heard that a lot about my basketball career...


LOL

13.) Hunter - 02/07/2015

I don't know crap about bullets but I watch guys here that handload and use Barnes bullets for 270 wsm. They are devestating on deer.
Like I said.......just ancedotal observation :-)

14.) Floyd - 02/08/2015

[QUOTE=Hunter;29382]I don't know crap about bullets but I watch guys here that handload and use Barnes bullets for 270 wsm. They are devestating on deer.
Like I said.......just ancedotal observation :-)[/QUOTE]

For sure. In reading about Barnes bullets on the interweb, that seems to be the way of it.

In my search, I saw a poll on a forum concerning Barnes vs Nosler. The poll depict Barnes as a clear favorite. With, of course, postings on the forum with why they liked one or the other.

Seems I read on one of the Alaskan hunting forms some time back that some guides will suggest one over the other. I'll have to go back and look. I might have gotten that one wrong.

15.) Swamp Fox - 02/08/2015

No, I think you're probably right. For whatever reason, Barnes has almost reached "magic bullet" status on the web, and Nosler gets far less in the way of fan press. At least in the realm of the question posed by this thread.

Not quite Mathews vs. Parker, but edging in that direction.

16.) Floyd - 02/08/2015

Plus, they (Barnes Bullets) are tagged as environmentally friendly.

17.) Swamp Fox - 02/08/2015

Barnes has a bit of an internet rep as having supported lead ammo bans. Here's their published position plus comments:

[url]http://www.barnesbullets.com/blog/2008/03/11/california-lead-ban/[/url]


I suppose some shooter/hunter out there supports a lead ban. I just don't know him.