Thread: 6.5x55 142gn Accubond Long Range loads

I've run out of 140gn Amax projectiles, and got my hands on some 142gn ABLR for a very good price. On further reading the stated BC seems to be massively overstated, and going with the ELDX projectiles would probably have been a more trouble free path.

Anyhoo -checking the Nosler load data on their site, some things seem to be out of whack. Namely they are getting very good velocity with very little powder, and their max loads seem very light.
My previous load in my 22.5" barreled Tikka T3, was 44.7gn AR2209 pushing a 140gn Amax at 2650fps.

I know that the max loads for these are based on the fact there are some older 6.5x55's out there that cannot be pushed as hard as a modern rifle, but if their published 43gn of 4350 (AR2209) is giving 2730fps from a 23" barrel, should I be starting below the 43gn maximum? I would not have expected such a difference between the 140Amax and 142 ABLR.

More than happy to start low, but I don't want to spend all day at the range coming up in .5gn increments, especially if someone knows any better.

Im running 143 eldx in my T3 6.5 swede with 46.5gr of 2209, very accurate and 2780 fps

@GWH That maths is exactly what I would expect, which is why I am scratching my head somewhat with the published data from Nosler for the ABLR>
Nice groupings by the way.

Nosler do seem to seat the bullets rather short could be why the loads are lighter than expected, My Sako 75 shot 140 grain bullets with 46.6 grains of 2213sc at 2650fps with no pressure signs seating was 3.142" with no regard to
jump to rifling accuracy was .5 MOA and less for 5 shot groups, I did not have much luck with 2209 in any of the six 6.5x55's I have had even the 19.75" Husky I had for a hunting rifle,
Are you sure the Accubond will expand enough at the velocity from a 6.5x55 I thought that the accubonds were designed for magnum velocities,
I load 180 gr .30 cal Accubonds for a couple of guy's shooting 300 Win Mags and they perform well but they are going up to 300fps faster than what they would in a .308, I don't think the 6.5 Swede needs
anything that tough the new Hornady ELD-X would probably be a better projectile.

The ABLR differs somewhat from the standard accubond bullets, in that they are supposed to effectively expand down to 1300fps vs 1800fps.
I don't intend to use it past 500m, so it should have plenty of velocity to get the job done.
I also like the fact they will not grenade at close ranges like the amax did.
I'll persevere with them until they either make me smile or frown, at which point I will buy more or jump on the ELD-X bandwagon.

Just a wee note, unless it has changed (which it easily could have), IMR4350 is not the same as 2209 but H4350 is.

No it hasn't changed IMR 4350 different than 2209/H4350 if swapping over pay to work loads up from a couple of grains below

I have read that the Noslar LR Accubond is quite explosive at close range but is bonded so will still hold together in the base. As stated above they are designed to open up at long range/slower speeds. I have also been told that they can be hard to get to shoot in some rifles and that the ELD -X would probably be easier to get shooting well. The only thing to do is try some.

So it would appear that nobody has loaded up this configuration.
If the weather holds out, I will get to the range and see how I go.

Plan "B" has been ordered, and hopefully will be here before the weekend. That way I can test both the ABLR and ELD-X offerings.

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Just a wee note, unless it has changed (which it easily could have), IMR4350 is not the same as 2209 but H4350 is.

Good to know. I was going off was the ADI documentation which had AR2209 equivalents as H414/H4350, IMR4350, W760, AA4350, N150/N550.

Nothing quite like personal experience to put someone on the correct track

I have just spent the wet morning at home doing some load development with the 6.5mm 142 grain LRABs.
But mine are in a 6.5x65R in a Blaser K95.
The 6.5x65 has a case capacity bigger than the 6.5 Rem mag and slightly smaller than the .264 Win mag.
Worked with
2209
2213 SC
N560
RL19

RL 19 seems to be the best option at this stage for good velocity and moderate pressure.
But now need to look further into the accuracy due to it being very wet, wild and windy here this morning ( hence on my range playing ).

142 grain Nosler LRABs @ 2970 FPS

Will try a few other powders like RL 22 when I can get some in hand.

Hi Quentin, I ran your previous load through QuickLOAD while using the QuickLOAD 6.5x55 specs, so that is the 140AMAX with 44.7gr of 2209 from a 22.5" barrel, and the predicted velocity is very close to your measured value at 2645ft/sec. Estimated peak pressure for this load is down at 48k9 PSI. This is reassuring and indicates QuickLOAD is likely (not guaranteed) to give satisfactory approximations for your rifle when we go and change things a little.

Confirming the earlier post, IMR4350 and H4350/AR2209 have somewhat different parameters and are not interchangeable. QuickLOAD then predicts that 43gr of IMR4350 would give very close to 2600 ft/sec with the 142gr bullet from a 22.5" barrel, peak pressure 49k6 PSI. Not that we think you are interested in IMR4350, but it does seem that the velocity given by Nosler is significantly high, at least for your barrel length. According to QucikLOAD a 27" barrel length is required to deliver their velocity figures.

Looking instead back at AR2209 and the 142gr; 45gr is predicted to result in 2660 ft/sec for 50.5kPSI peak, 46gr gives 2720 ft/sec for 54kPSI peak, and 47gr gives 2770 ft/sec for 57k8PSI peak, which is above the max spec for the case. And if the 2209 behaves more in line with current H4350 then the burn rate will be faster and for 47gr the pressure could be up around 65kPSI peak giving over 2800 ft/sec which is where significant web expansion is going to start to kick in, so just be cautious with other batches. With that powder anything over 2700 ft/sec is starting to get hot! If you can get what you want to get done at 45gr of 2209 then you should be good. Proceed with all the usual cautions, usual disclaimers etc etc...

Thanks @Puffin.

This is fantastic info, and gives me a much better load to start with without going ridiculously low and spending ages to work up.

I had no idea that Quickload was this close to real world results. I can see it on my list for xmas presents.

Good information all round. I have had some experience with the LRAB and although I have found them very reliable at close range and again out to 350 I have never been able to have them shoot accurately. I gave up on them quickly and I won't go back.
Very interested to hear about the R19 @akaroa giving such good accuracy.

Originally Posted by Danny

Good information all round. I have had some experience with the LRAB and although I have found them very reliable at close range and again out to 350 I have never been able to have them shoot accurately. I gave up on them quickly and I won't go back.
Very interested to hear about the R19 @akaroa giving such good accuracy.

The 150grn shoot really well in my 270wsm. Just bunged them in at magazine length (A7) and away they went. 3080fps. Hybrid V100. Only shot one deer (340 yards) with them and my mate retrieved it so don't how they perform apart from he said "it was dead". Thanks Brian.