Doing a little research on the Nosler accubond LR bullets. Haven't heard anyone talk about them but the seem to be interesting. They are advertised and performing properly down to 1300 fps so I just looked at a ballistic chart for 30-06. The 168 gr LR bullet fired at 2800 fps crosses the 1000 ft/lb energy level at 900 yards but the 1300 fps doesn't come until 1200 yards...

So ethically should I stick to the 1000 lb rule or will the bullet still effectively knock a deer down at 1200...

Theoretically....because I don't even have a place to shoot out to 500 at the moment....

Opening is one thing, energy another, I would be worried about penetration at those ranges.

Also, for a bullet that opens at 1,300fps I would be worried about over expansion or fragmentation/coming apart at short ranges, and I've killed a whole lot more game at ranges under 75yds than over.

the accubond LR's were(are?) grossly exaggerated in the BC department last I heard (especially 6.5mm)

as for expansion at 1300ft/sec nosler has a picture of how well it expands over a broad spectrum of velocities. although the bullet expands down to 1300ft/sec that doesn't exactly mean its maximum or ideal, also you have to remember that's the threshold in which they see expansion and it's not guaranteed.

lastly my rule of thumb is I wouldn't hunt at a distance where I cannot keep 3 shots on a paper plate (10" target) using field shooting positions. look at how much that bullet drifts at 1200 yards in the wind at say a 10mph wind. now check it again at say 7mph and see how extreme of a difference it is. most shooters couldn't tell the difference between a 5mph wind and a 10mph wind. I said 3 as a seasoned shooter may be able to gauge wind within 3mph.

That's all assuming the wind is constant. 1200 yards is a good stretch and dependent on terrain you could have 2-3 different wind directions and speeds from the shooter and target.

I closing I feel an ethical hunter would choose their shots wisely within their personal capabilities(and not based off "oh one time I did it at XXX distance so I'm golden" it should be what your capable of doing consistently)  and shot placement trumps energy always. not to say energy isn't important. so if long range hunting is something you'd like to persue I'd recommend getting a lot of trigger time and also choosing the right cartridge for the quarry. BC will be your friend as the better the bullet bucks the wind the better your odd's of putting rounds on target where you want to put them.

another thing that would further help would be to have a buddy setup a target at a unknown distance then climb a hill or jog 20 yards to the shooting position anything that will elevate your heartbeat and disrupt your breathing then put yourself under the gun. give yourself say a 2 min time frame to, laser the target, dial in your dope, find a shooting position to steady yourself calm yourself and control your breathing oh wait did you even factor in wind? and lastly make the shot. it's a lot harder than you think and I can promise you the real deal is that much more of a high and a lot of the stuff goes out the window when you have that animal in your crosshairs.

Here is the standard accubond expansion photo I mentioned. doesn't show that on the LR page. I'd be willing to bet it's very similar.

Agree with others there is not much expansion at 1300.  I would use that load to where the bullet goes bellow 1800 fps, assuming you can shoot that far. That would guarantee fairly violent expansion and you should still get solid penetration as well

They are advertising the LR Accubond  with different numbers from the standard accubond so I would think there is something different about it. Guess I'll have to wait for real world results or box-of-truth...

did some more poking around as I was curious and looking at noslers photo's you can see that the LR has a much deeper cavity below the polymer tip which would promote greater expansion over a broader velocity range but inversely potentially cause overexpansion or fragmentation at closer distances. then I found thread on another forum that a guy did some testing with and running the bullet in a .270 at 110 yards it only retained 38% of it's weight. he at one time had photo's up but lovely photobucket strikes again. he had also done similar tests and stated that the LR's appeared to have a softer core as when he tried to pull down some bullets they easily deformed where the standard accubond didn't. He also tested using trail boss and stated that expansion became inconsistent below 1500 ft/sec.

but at the day it's all theory until you pull the trigger on a animal. shoot at a distance your proficient at and put them where they count and see where the cards fall.

Surprised they lose that much weight.  My concern was they would develop a big frontal area and not penetrate nearly as well.  It's one thing the partition does well it sheds the front half when pushed fast and gives a 50 cal back half that penetrates deep.  The loss of the front half makes a wider wound than something like a Barnes ttsx

it's all give an take I guess. since the bullet is marketed for long range hunting they have to get them to expand at distance. that's all fine and dandy as long as something doesn't jump out on you. in my opinion it wouldn't be worth the hassle. the thread I read the guy who did the testing came up with the same conclusion he went back to his tried and true standard accubond.

this wasn't my data by the way. found it via google on the 6.8 forums. just paraphrased to inform his findings. this was shooting water jugs by the way so how the bullet act's on actual flesh and bone may be different. still gives us a good baseline I assume.

I'm curious for figuring out what I can squeeze out of my '06. So if I use the 1500 fps and 1000 ft/pd rule of thumb....moves the '06 out to around 900 yards.... vs my current load, 165 gr btsp hornadys....which look like they max out around 500 yards...

Again, all theoretical. My skills and I doubt my rifle are that capable...