Neil, Looking forward to some results on hogs! That 135gr is such a great little bullet to work with. Easy at the loading bench with the shorter tail, easy on the shoulder, slick in the air, and heavy on the business end.

Huntnpack, Great job on pushing this to fruition. I just browsed some of the other sites where you got this over the major hurdle of a minimum order buy, and with the much harder to convince 300, no doubt. All in all, I think these efforts will help the sustainability of all three of the major SAUMs in use, the 300, 7mm, and 6.5. Nice work!

Everyone interested in a fantastic 30 cal long range setup that’s ideal for the medium actions out there, the 300 SAUM is the perfect factory case to build that off of with throating optimized for whatever bullets you plan to run (hopefully the 187 or 194 Afterburner). The 300 WSM, a fantastic case, really needs a 3.400” magazine to be effective, while the SAUM can do it in 3.200”, which most medium actions are. This provides for a well-behaved, recoil manageable, and accurate setup with a very favorable barrel life and overall balance. If this is of interest to you, please follow the link above (Long Range Hunting is a forum I used to sponsor, it is not spam) and feel free to join in on a group buy if that makes sense for your future builds. Thanks!

So happy for you and your son! What a great shot on an outstanding buck!

Congrats, Aaron! I can’t believe the bases on that deer. Amazing! Glad you were able to catch a shank. It looks like a little bit of luck lined up so the shank ran down the length of the skin instead of across it.

With the Afterburner design, we won’t be able to get anywhere near a 120+gr in 6.5mm for a 1:8” twist. Just not enough rotational inertia to provide the stability needed with the way the Afterburner is sculpted and constructed. Our yet to be released 1:7” twist isn’t even that heavy but should do really well in any 6.5 with that twist or faster for serious long range. We know a little more since the last time we looked at a maximized 1:8” twist for the 6.5. I don’t think it provides enough of a difference from the current 102gr, which even though it’s nose length is restricted by and the velocities to stabilize it with a 1:8” are set by the Grendel, it’s not giving up much versus one optimized for a 6.5 Creedmoor or faster in a 3.00” magazine. We will circle back on this though, and provide details of what we think we can do if anything. If we see a step change in performance, we will definitely consider it.

Thanks for your input, Gerry! On the .264", if I assume that's not a typo as a 1:8", do you mean a 1:8" design that's more dedicated to the higher capacity cases with less restrictions on nose length? In other words, the current 1:8" works in the high capacity cases as well as the 260 Rem and 6.5 Grendel with their relatively short nose requirements, and in the case of the Grendel, its relatively low muzzle velocity. Or, did you mean a different twist than the 1:8" listed? I'm definitely interested in your thoughts on this. On the .277" and .284", we definitely hear that calling loud and clear. They will be in the next batches of bullets released. We were a little torn on the twist for the .277", but I do think the 1:8" will be the first one done to accompany our current 1:10". It makes the most sense and will be outstanding in a 6.8 Western or any fast-twist .277" allowing for a long nose. For the .224", I think conceivably, the 1:7" may be the only one we will want to do in that caliber. We will cross that bridge when we get there, but for sure if we take the Afterburner down to .224" cal, a 1:7" will be first. We want to be cautious of terminal performance parameters, and the margin for error progressively decreases as the caliber size gets smaller. That's with any bullet design, not just Apex's. We pride ourselves in top-tier terminal performance, and we want to ensure all our offerings do so in their respective windows of operation. Definitely .257" and .243" will be put out first to observe any trending as we continue in smaller calibers. Luckily, to this point, the current 1:8" 6.5mm, the smallest bullet we have at the moment, has proven to be a monster terminally speaking. That's very good news for the smaller sizes.

Thanks for the awesome testing! Always appreciate your work! Looks like some of the pictures didn’t come through. In the future, you can post them directly here and don’t need to link them. They're posted below. Thanks again!

Received another set of pictures today from yesterday's successful hunt. This time a ram at 198 yards with the same 6.5 PRC and 102gr Afterburner. The shot was slightly quartering away with the exit on the front left as seen below. The exit was enormous with bone fragments from the front shoulder contributing to the size and shape. Congrats again!

Congrats on your success! Glad these worked out well for you and thank you for the very thorough and professional write up!

Thanks for the request, and noted. That’s actually one of our favorites and is fully designed. You’re not the first to ask for that one, and I’m a big fan of the 358 Norma. It won’t be in the very next batch, due to its diameter, but there’s a very good chance it will be just after that.

This may surprise you a bit, but we already have that bullet released internally, and it would fall in line right with where your interests are. It's BC, while better than competitors' bullets in its same weight class by a substantial margin, would still limit its long range potential, if we're really looking at the numbers. But really, the design of a 1:10" twist .257" lived in a different time where long range means something very different than it does today. Loaded in rifles designed for yesteryear, this bullet will be outstanding! At the end you mention high BC in the Afterburner in 25 and 27 cal. We have those ready as well (1:7" for the 25 and 1:8" for the 27). 😁

You've definitely looked at them all. Just don't be shocked if your velocities are quite a bit higher than expected, in combination with the pressure being lower than predicted (merely a function of the weighting factor in QuickLoad for those unfamiliar and wondering why I'm saying that). That 2800 fps reference I gave with the 153gr out of an 18" barreled 308 Win with TAC, the limiting factor was powder capacity, not pressure. Extrapolating that into what the 135gr could/would do, especially out of a 24" barrel, the velocity should be much higher than the number predicted above (2943 fps). Like you, I do not like heavily compressed loads for seating depth consistency.

One thing I just thought of. If you do venture into using ball powders at some point, since they're so common at the burn rate you're looking for, I think temp sensitivity will be far less if you move up to large rifle primers. I personally haven't validated that, but the physics/chemistry behind that should support that, since ball powders typically need a good flame to ignite consistently. Furthermore, the faster burn rate profile that you need lends itself better to spherical shapes than if the powder were of a slower burning nature. They should, in theory, prove much closer to the consistency of an extruded powder at that faster burn rate than at the slower burn rate of the H4350 class of powders. It's theory, but sound theory, and got me thinking, putting myself in your shoes and tinkering. If you went that route, I don't think you'll struggle to hit 3100 fps, and possibly more, with an accurate load profile with several different powders. At that point, in reference to trajectory, wind drift, and effective range, your 308 Win is superior to a 270 Win shooting streamlined 130gr bullets like the Barnes TTSX (I've radared that bullet at a G7 of .209, compared to the 135gr you're shooting at .216). Not to mention you get the benefit of a "30 cal hit" on an animal with the superior terminal performance of the Afterburner. Kind of makes the good old 308 Win look even better than it normally does! Hard hitting AND flat shooting! Below are a couple quick references to look at in your testing. I trust the Hodgdon/Western information more than the Barnes info (having the pressures listed is very helpful and will help answer any QuickLoad formulated pressure/velocity discrepancies), but the Barnes is still a great reference. You may be able to get away with some of the loads below that show a compressed charge, since the Afterburner is 5gr heavier and may require a little less powder at the top. Hard to say, but I would try and consider something not showing as compressed. Benchmark, one of your preferred I believe in extruded form, is showing as a viable option (QuickLoad shows it compressed pretty substantially, but the Barnes info does not).

I don't use Quickload for what you're setting it up for anymore, but I see you have your WF up there pretty high. I'm sure that's based on your experience. Let's see how that lines up after you shoot. I wouldn't be surprised to see velocities a little better than what's predicted in the notes. The question will be if you run out of case capacity with 8208 XBR before you see visual pressure signs.

Looking forward to your results! We had an ammo manufacturer testing our 153gr prototype in their 18” barreled 308 Win and got to 2800 fps with a compressed charge of TAC as a point of reference.

At Apex, we plan to keep it at the component level only. However, we do have early interest from a premium ammunition manufacturer, and we will see how that progresses as we launch. We want to be sensitive to both customer bases if we can. If we establish commercial agreements with any key ammunition manufacturers, we will update our site and push out a notification accordingly.