Jared - the term "better waterline" doesn't carry a great deal of meaning for an F-Class target when the group extends from the center of the 8-ring on one side to the center of the 8-ring on the other side at only 500 yd. No mater how you slice it, that would add up to a lot of dropped points. Nonetheless, the A-tip target appears the better of the two by a substantial margin. As far as I can tell from the image, if you were to eliminate the sighting shots, the A-tip target grouping looks even tighter. This opinion is by no means supported by rigorous statistical analyses (i.e. n = 2), but from the two targets you've shown, the A-tip load looks to be the better load of the two. Any more detailed interpretation can only be made with major inferences and caveats. For example, you did not mention anything about the wind conditions when the two groups were fired, which could have a large impact on the interpretation of the targets. Without additional side-by-side comparisons and more details regarding the specific conditions, any interpretation beyond stating "the A-tip group looks better than the SMK group" is largely unsupported opinion.
One thing I'm curious about is the relative velocities of the two loads. You stated that both loads used the same charge weight, yet you also indicated that the A-tip load was 100 fps faster in terms of average velocity at 500 yd, even though it weighs one grain more than the Matchking. Back-calculating using JBM Ballistics and the specifics for the 176 A-tip, I'm coming up with muzzle velocities for the both 176 A-tips and the 175 SMKs of approximately 2625 fps. I have to point out that those are markedly slow muzzle velocities for a 30" barreled F-TR rifle. So my concern at this point is whether either of those two loads has really been "optimized" for your specific setup. It could make a very big difference with regard to accurately assessing/interpreting your two targets above. If you would be willing to post more details about your load development process and the details of the two loads themselves, I suspect you might get better feedback on where to go from here.
I have looked at the 176 A-tips with some interest since they first came out, although I have never actually purchased any. They basically have about the same G7 "box" BC value as a 185 Juggernaut (~0.283/0.284). The BC of the 185 Jugs can be increased a bit by pointing, whereas the the BC of the 176 A-Tips cannot. However, the A-tips will probably tune in at around 50-75 fps faster than the Jugs. All in all, I'd call it dead even in terms of ballistic performance between the 176 A-tips and the 185 Juggernauts. In other words, when loaded to comparable pressure, they will both give very similar external ballistics. In such a scenario, the only good way to pick one or the other would be based on their potential for precision. If they can both be loaded to equal precision, then neither one really represent a better option than the other.
The reason I'm bringing this up is that I generally shoot the 200.20X bullet in F-TR matches. When loaded to its full potential, it is clearly a better choice in terms of external ballistics than the 185 Juggernaut, which I shot for many years. Nonetheless, I have recently had my a$$ handed to me twice in 600 yd matches by shooters using 185 Juggernauts when I was using a well-proven 200.20X load. My point is that how "competitive" a given load may be is not always what the combination of velocity and BC indicates on paper. The two individuals behind those particular 185 Juggernaut loads are very, very fine shooters and they had them tuned exceedingly well. Certainly well enough to give myself and several other F-TR shooters a lesson, despite the fact that most of us were using 200.20X loads with a noticeable ballistic advantage on paper. Along the same line, I think the 176 A-tip bullet has the potential to be just as competitive as the 185 Jugs or 185 Hybrids, or at least close enough so that any differential would be largely on you, not the bullet. As a place to start participating, learning, and enjoying F-TR competition, there is no reason you could not use the 176 A-tips until such a time as you felt ready to move up to a heavier, higher BC bullet. Notably, that kind of an upgrade would almost certainly necessitate a new barrel and/or different chambering to accommodate the longer heavier bullets. So there is nothing at all wrong with using up what you have before making such a change.
The only major caveat to this notion is the idea of comparable precision. Regardless of the bullet you choose, a decent F-TR load needs to consistently shoot at least half a minute 5-shot groups at 100 yds, and a quarter minute would be even better. If the A-tips can be loaded to this level of precision, I think you would find yourself very happy with the results using them in matches. If not, they would be a pretty pricey option for mediocre precision. Given your setup, another option to consider might be the Berger 168 Hybrid. Like the 176 A-Tip, its BC is fairly close to that of the 185 juggernaut such that with the extra velocity you get in a tuned load, the difference in performance is essentially a wash. Likewise, it does not require a 10-twist barrel or the much longer freebore chamber that are a prerequisite for shooting the 200.20X bullet. In other words, they would also be just about ideal for your setup. Something else to consider at any rate.
Best of luck to you in your F-TR endeavors! This is a great place to get useful information, so please keep asking questions and keep us informed on your progress.
