Accuracy International AE MkII good option for anyone thinking of a custom rifle.

Status
Not open for further replies.

MCMXI

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
9,233
Location
NW
A friend that I shoot with bought an Accuracy International AE MkII and a Premier Reticles Heritage 5-25x56mm scope recently. We shoot matches together so we'd discussed the PRH scopes and he knew that I have been very pleased with mine. We went to the range this past Sunday and he proceeded to zero the scope and "break in" the barrel (it's his rifle so he can do what he wants). After he'd shot 25 rounds or so, he asked me if I wanted to "have a go". He had ten rounds left so I shot the center target first assuming that he'd want to shoot the last five. I shot that group in less than 1-1/2 minutes. He told me to shoot the remaining five rounds, no arm twisting required, so I shot the left target in about the same amount of time. Had I shot on the same target, that'd be a 10-shot group into less than 3/4" in around 3 minutes.

The AE model is a bit different from the AW model and I'm no expert and hope that Zak chimes in to give a more educated analysis of the salient differences since some may not be obvious. Regardless, the owner of the rifle was shooting reloads that he uses in another .308 Win so these are not "optimized" for the AE but still performed very well at 100 yards. The load details are on the target below. I haven't run the groups through OnTarget but they're both around 0.6". Overall, I was very impressed with the rifle and given that it costs about the same as a custom rifle with similar features, I'd have no problem recommending it to anyone thinking of buying a high-end rifle. My perception is that AI wanted to offer a rifle suitable for virtually any kind of civilian use for half the cost of an AW rifle. My friend paid around $3,000 which is close to the cost of a decent action, barrel and stock plus gunsmith fees.

ai_ae_mk2.jpg
 
Just how much load development does the above targets reflect? From your description I'm assuming that it was kind of a "This load shot good in other guns" situation. If so those are some very very promising results indeed. I wouldn't be surprised if a load tuned for the gun could cut those groups in half.


ETA same on you for not posting pics of the gun
 
From all I have heard about the new MKII from AI it will eat pretty much anything and spit good results. I'm in agreement with RW here, if your buddy was to tailor a load for that weapon it should prove to be a VERY respectable grouper.
 
R.W.Dale said:
Just how much load development does the above targets reflect? From your description I'm assuming that it was kind of a "This load shot good in other guns" situation. If so those are some very very promising results indeed. I wouldn't be surprised if a load tuned for the gun could cut those groups in half.

You're absolutely right. The owner of the AE has two or three other high-end .308 Win rifles that he uses for matches. He has loads worked up for all of them and this particular load is "the load" for at least one of those rifles. His main objective last Sunday was to get the scope zeroed and put some rounds down the barrel. Once he starts serious load development, I'm sure he'll cut the groups in half. Don't forget that I shot the groups fairly fast and off the ground with a bipod and rear bag. I'm a decent shooter, but it's possible that if I'd shot slowly and off a rest front and rear that the groups would have been considerably smaller. Another thing I find interesting is that the barrel has a 1:12 twist but it seems to have no problem with the 175gr SMK bullet.
 
R.W.Dale said:
on a side note where do you get those targets?

The target is my design that I made in MicroStation 95. I shoot rifles with different optics and wanted one target that would work well for anything from 5x or 25x at 100 yards. Just PM me if you want me to email you a pdf version. If you print with "zero scaling" the target will print out with an accurate 1/4" grid.
 
Freedom_fighter_in_IL said:
From all I have heard about the new MKII from AI it will eat pretty much anything and spit good results. I'm in agreement with RW here, if your buddy was to tailor a load for that weapon it should prove to be a VERY respectable grouper.

Another thing to consider is that all the rounds were fed from the factory AICS magazine i.e. no single loading. The owner won't have too much trouble improving on these results. He likes the 155gr Lapua Scenar and is going to focus on working up a load for that bullet ... can't say I blame him given that the 178gr load isn't bad at all. We didn't use chronographs this past Sunday due to the weather.
 
1858, I'm assuming the bolt is the significant difference between the AE and the AW. I'm sure you took a look at the bolt design. Did it have the slotted machine work done?
 
blackops said:
1858, I'm assuming the bolt is the significant difference between the AE and the AW. I'm sure you took a look at the bolt design. Did it have the slotted machine work done?

There were some slots on the rear of the bolt and the firing pin hole was "tight" in terms of the diameter of the firing pin. Zak mentioned that the AW firing pin hole is oversized to prevent dust or dirt from seizing up the firing pin. The action is not bonded to the chassis like the AW and the trigger can be removed easily. Other than that, I'm not sure of the major differences. The barrel can be swapped out the same way as the AW.
 
The action is not bonded to the chassis like the AW

This is the major difference.

That said, considering the loads were not tailored for the rifle I see no difference in accuracy compared to the AW or at least a substancial difference that would reflect the price difference. Why the extra 2k for the AW then?
 
blackops said:
This is the major difference. That said, considering the loads were not tailored for the rifle I see no difference in accuracy compared to the AW or at least a substancial difference that would reflect the price difference. Why the extra 2k for the AW then?

I honestly don't know. The AE uses AICS magazines which is good,if like the owner (and me), you have a Remington action in an AICS stock. Hopefully Zak will stop by and give us his thoughts. I'll PM him and see if he can provide some information that will help anyone trying to decide between the AE MkII and an AW. I've wanted an AI for a long time and would like to know if it's worth paying twice as much for an AW.
 
I've wanted an AI for a long time and would like to know if it's worth paying twice as much for an AW.

I'll assume (though most likely incorrectly) some other manufacturing cost that lean towards the AW's reliability department. I doubt 99% of civilians will be subject to shooting at sub-zero temperatures. Though I know in Zak's SS match, dust can become a factor. I think if majority of guys out there find that rifle shooting identical groups for 2k less, it would be an eye opener.
 
I haven't handled an AE MKII, but the AE we took apart had a Remington-style lug arrangement and was not permanently bonded to the chassis. The action and safety are different than an AW. The original AE took only 5 round single stack mags. I have heard the MKII takes 5 and 10 round AICS mags and has an integral recoil lug. Both rifles should be extremely accurate. The AW will be more durable.
 
Here is a bit if info from over on SnipersHide on the differences between the AW and AE. I've been doing my homework over the last few weeks and this is kind of a compilation of what I've read (This is just info I've picked up from reliable sources i.e Zak, Lowlight and a few others). Verify with a dealer:

AW-Action permanently bonded to chassis
AE-Action bolted into chassis. Requires a couple extra steps for a barrel swap.

AW-3 position safety
AE-2 position

AW-More options for scope mounting (flat top receiver)
AE-Requires rail (round top receiver)

AW-Double stack magazine (can load from port while mag is in the rifle)
AE-Single Stack AICS Mags. (can't load mag from port but can toss a round in the port for single shot chambering)

Both have two stage user adjustable triggers. In the AE MKII that trigger is not removable without complete disassembly.

Barrels and bolt are swapable between the two.

Both allow users to change barrels at home (with the AI action wrench, Go gauge, No-Go gauge, torque wrench, barrel vice). The AE you have an extra step of removing the action from the chasis.

Barrels can be ordered directly from AI or Border Barrel Co. (AI uses Border barrels from the factory). You can also order barrels from gunsmiths with AI specs like George at GAP and you don't have to send them the gun or action. Just call in your specs and they will turn, chamber and send out. Slap it on and off ya go.

There could be more things to tell but that's pretty much what I can remember.
 
Quoted from pose above:

"Zak mentioned that the AW firing pin hole is oversized to prevent dust or dirt from seizing up the firing pin."

And we're expected to wonder why real shooters laugh at firearms forums?
 
"Zak mentioned that the AW firing pin hole is oversized to prevent dust or dirt from seizing up the firing pin."
I don't think I've posted this comment publicly*, and I don't think I've said it privately. If it came across that way, it was either a mis-statement on my part or a misunderstanding.

Here's how I have described it in articles
The 6.5x47 Lapua case is very strong and the brass is excellent. None of my loads were limited by pressure signs on the case head, and even with nuclear loads, the bolt was easy to open. I was able to meet and beat velocities achieved in my .260 with the 6.5x47 Lapua; however, pressure was prematurely limited by primer cratering and an occasional pierced primer. Remember that the AI-AW is designed to reliably ignite 7.62 NATO ammunition in field conditions. Its firing pin protrusion and firing pin hole are not optimized for a high pressure small rifle primer. Normally, the way to solve this is to bush the firing pin hole, use a smaller-diameter firing pin, and control the firing pin protrusion, and this is easy to do on a Remington-style bolt head. A new bolt head assembly on the AI runs about $850, and it wasn't something I wanted to have modified. Even with this limitation, my final load was the 123-grain Lapua Scenar at 2930 fps using RL15 and BR4 primers, about 110 fps faster than Lapua's factory load. At similar pressure, the 130-grain Berger VLD would be going about 2850 fps, and the 139-grain Lapua Scenar a little over 2700 fps.

It is inaccurate to say the AI firing pin hole is oversized because the AI firing pin fits it perfectly. Thus, the system is what it is, and since we know what it was designed to do as a system (and it was designed well), we can infer that this was done to support that purpose.

At this point I am convinced that primer piercing in the AW is due to a difference in firing pin dynamics while the shot is fired (compared to a Remington style bolt), in concert with the rather large firing pin/hole setup. To call it piercing is somewhat misleading because the assumption may be that the firing pin is doing the piercing. What is actually happening is that the primer cup is being pressured into the firing pin hole after ignition and the primer cup material only has so much stretch before the plug breaks off.

-z


* http://www.google.com/search?q=+"fi...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
http://www.google.com/search?q=+"fi...=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=9bef8cda26d1a6ec
 
Zak,
My apologies for misrepresenting you. I had read your excellent article over a year ago when I was in the process of trying to decide on the cartridge for my latest build. I remembered reading something about primer peircing and this part ...

"Remember that the AI-AW is designed to reliably ignite 7.62 NATO ammunition in field conditions. Its firing pin protrusion and firing pin hole are not optimized for a high pressure small rifle primer. Normally, the way to solve this is to bush the firing pin hole, use a smaller-diameter firing pin, and control the firing pin protrusion, and this is easy to do on a Remington-style bolt head."

... left me with the impression that there was more clearance around the firing pin compared to a Remington. Thanks for the correction.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top