AJC1
Member
I have a fair pile of manuals but I don't recall any AI cartridges. Is there any coverage by the big loading manuals or is there a dedicated manual I've not seen.
Handloading manual with AI cartridges
- Thread starter AJC1
- Start date
- Status
FLIGHT762
Member
Over the years, Sierra manuals have had a couple AI loading data. Current Sierra manual only has 223 AI and 280 AI. Past Sierra manuals may have had 30/06 AI and 270 AI, if I remember correctly. I believe they were discontinued due to Sierra believing they were not worth going to the AI configuration. The 223 AI and the 280 AI have both been popular lately.
If you have a particular AI cartridge in mind, most standard manuals don't have much other than 223 and 280 AI.
Barnes #4 has the 257 R AI.
If you have a particular AI cartridge in mind, most standard manuals don't have much other than 223 and 280 AI.
Barnes #4 has the 257 R AI.
OP
OP
AJC1
Member
I've seen loads on accurate shooter but Ron spomer is raving about this 280ai and I haven't recalled ever seeing data.
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,436
Ancient data - if you blow yourself up with it I'd really rather not know - but it is the horse's mouth.
<edit> I'm happy to post data from the books about any particular cartridges. Just let me know.
Last edited:
troy fairweather
Member
The Ackley books are a bit to dated to be used without Caution, many of the powders have changed. Best I've found I'd use the parent cartridges middle to max charge as your starting data.
41 Mag
Member
If you are looking specifically for the 280 ACK, Nosler has it posted here, https://www.nosler.com/280-ackley-improved
I didn't see anything else that wasn't listed here in the post already.
When I built my 25-06 AI, I researched a LOT of different sources. Some of what I used had been worked up by others that I knew were competent handloaders and shooters who had also built on the same caliber. That said, I really wasn't looking to reinvent anything just to gain some case life and a bit more velocity with heavier weight bullets.
I currently have a 223AI, 25-06AI and a 30-30AI. For the most part I usually shoot close to factory type or standard factory loads out of all of them. The 25 gets the top end loads with some 120, 125 and 130gr bullets, but it also has a 28" barrel that helps out a lot. When I worked up the loads I used a 4 digit mic to measure case heads and bases on all brass tested, and stopped load increments once I got .0002 or more expansion on the bases over what i got with factory loads. For the most part, as mentioned most of my velocity gain was from the added length of the barrel, but I was still able to drive the heavier bullets over 3K FPS with 8-10+ loads through the cases, which was my main goal. The added capacity also allowed me to use the slower powders to my advantage.
Basically though IF you're interested in building one, make sure the Smith has experience with chambering them for proper headspace, and use the standard cartridge load data to work up loads. I poured through every manual and noted the slowest powders giving the lower pressures with the highest velocities and went from standard loads up VERY slowly in .2 increments. Best part is if chambered properly factory ammo usually shoots outstanding, and you brass gets formed properly the first shot.
I didn't see anything else that wasn't listed here in the post already.
When I built my 25-06 AI, I researched a LOT of different sources. Some of what I used had been worked up by others that I knew were competent handloaders and shooters who had also built on the same caliber. That said, I really wasn't looking to reinvent anything just to gain some case life and a bit more velocity with heavier weight bullets.
I currently have a 223AI, 25-06AI and a 30-30AI. For the most part I usually shoot close to factory type or standard factory loads out of all of them. The 25 gets the top end loads with some 120, 125 and 130gr bullets, but it also has a 28" barrel that helps out a lot. When I worked up the loads I used a 4 digit mic to measure case heads and bases on all brass tested, and stopped load increments once I got .0002 or more expansion on the bases over what i got with factory loads. For the most part, as mentioned most of my velocity gain was from the added length of the barrel, but I was still able to drive the heavier bullets over 3K FPS with 8-10+ loads through the cases, which was my main goal. The added capacity also allowed me to use the slower powders to my advantage.
Basically though IF you're interested in building one, make sure the Smith has experience with chambering them for proper headspace, and use the standard cartridge load data to work up loads. I poured through every manual and noted the slowest powders giving the lower pressures with the highest velocities and went from standard loads up VERY slowly in .2 increments. Best part is if chambered properly factory ammo usually shoots outstanding, and you brass gets formed properly the first shot.
Last edited:
tightgroup tiger
Member
When I first read the OP I thought he meant Aluminum cartridges, and thought why would he think Aluminum cartridge data should be in the manuals?
I need some more coffee.
I need some more coffee.
Do those manuals have an index? If so, what Ack. Imp. calibers were included in them?
I also have those P.O. Ackley books. Interesting reading. If their's an ackley cartridge I'm interested in I usually start their and expand my research out. The 280ai is now a standardized catridge. Nosler and Hornady both have load data for it. I went with the standard 280 when I had my rifle built. There is an older lyman or speer manual that is nothing but wildcats. It may have info on other ackley's.
OP
OP
AJC1
Member
That wildcat book would be very interesting if you remember I'd be happy to have that book.
Bcwitt
Member
The general rule w Ackley's was a max load in the standard version was the start load in the improved. I have never verified it myself, ive also a large selection of manuals, only the Nosler lists them.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,317
Cornell Publications has original re-prints of Ackley's manuals.
"Handbook for Shooters & Reloaders 1959 Ackley-Wildcat"
156 pages, about 11" x 8", glossy soft-cover in full color. New re-print restored and digitally enhanced from a nice original. Printed on high quality 20# 97 bright acid free paper. Fully Illustrated.
This is the first Handbook Ackley attempted. We also reprint the 1962 version (562 pages) which is often referred to as Volume I and Volume II of the Handbook. [emphasis added]
With regard to powders changing over time, yes, every lot is different in some way from every previous lot. However, cannister powders are blended by character and performance to limit those variations as much as possible. A particular cannister of IMR 4350 from 1955 is very likely going to be quite different today than it was in 1955; but, that same cannister of IMR 4350 from 1955 IN 1955 should - and most probably is - very much like and given cannister of IMR 4350 from 2015 IN 2015. IOW: when new and fresh, each cannister will exhibit typical lot-to-lot variations but otherwise won't be very different.
I have used loading data for Unique, Bullseye, Red Dot, 2400, IMR 3031, IMR 4227, etc. verbatim from older manuals and had very similar results as the authors when care is taken to use the same guns as tested and the same components as tested, and using the proper caution of starting low and working up to an accurate, fully-functional load. WRT how powders change, a letter to IMR or Hodgdon might be in order wherever doubt exists. It's always better to err on the side of caution.
Last edited:
OP
OP
AJC1
Member
Your the man thanks
25-20 WCF
Member
Besides the known differences in powder burn rates over the last sixty years, the “data” in Ackley’s books was not pressure tested, and comes from many different sources besides him. Some of it is clearly way over-pressured, there is no way I use the data in his books, especially with modern reliable pressure-tested data available. I’ve owned my copies for 50 years, but today they make nice historical references.
Ackley was a good gunsmith, but an even better salesman. Most of his AI cartridges achieved their impressive performance through high pressures rather than their small increase in case capacity. Experienced reloaders know the fallacy of the his oft-quoted “reduced case head thrust” theory. Looking at Nosler data for the .280 AI and 160-grain bullets, the difference in velocity between them is only 21 fps. It’s a bit better with the 150s, 165 fps in favor of the AI, but with 140s the difference is just 44 fps and with 175s it’s only 16 fps.
Note that the .280 does have 2” more barrel while the SAAMI maximum pressure for the AI is higher than the parent cartridge - 65,000 psi versus 60,000 psi - they likely balance each other out. None of the above means that the AIs aren’t good cartridges, they certainly are. But they aren’t magic.
.
OP
OP
AJC1
Member
The most interesting part of ai for me is the purposed case life and brass stability. I like the look of the 40 degree shoulder and I like the look of the Weatherby shoulder despite it not really doing anything. The big problem being standardization. I have this unwarranted desire for a 280 but as the information becomes available maybe a 7 prc. I think the 7 prc may smoke barrels to fast reverting me back. If the 7x57 ran at modern pressures it would be perfect.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,317
Back in The Dark Ages when I was young and looking for a hobby that fit my work schedule I got involved with service rifle competitions at an NRA affiliated club. It wasn't really very competitive back then - shooters were competing against time and wear far more than with each other - but there was a lot of friendly ribbing of big group shooters and some back patting of the guys who squeezed palm-sized groups out of 100 year old rifles that had seen more gunfire than Howard Hawks. One of the ongoing debates was why SAAMI chose to underrate venerable 7mm Mauser (a.k.a. 275 Rigby) It was legendary Africa hunter Joe Bell who proved a properly loaded 7mm was good for the largest game - Elephants - and the accuracy of the cartridge was what allowed Bell to use it so effectively. European loads for the cartridge are considerably higher - so why did SAAMI choose to down-load it? The guys who used 7x57mm Mauser rifles - properly and legally rebuilt to arsenal standards - shot the best groups. The yokels like me who tried to force that same accuracy out of the .303 and 8x57 learned to appreciate the 7mm pretty quickly. At one time I have Remington service rifles in 7mm, .303, and .30-06. I couldn't compete with the 7mm Model of 1935 because it was never issued and sold it not long ago for about 20x what I paid for it. The Model of 1917 and Pattern 14 did well enough in my hands back then and still fare pretty well - though I did replace the Remington Pattern 14 with a Winchester No.3 Mk.1* and realized just how many short-cuts Remington took with those early war foreign sales rifles.
Long story longer - the right rifle in 7mm will easily shoot to "modern" standards at "modern" pressures.
The wrong rifle will drive you bonkers trying to find an accuracy node.
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,301
Fellas, regardless of what book you’re getting your data from, you should always start conservative.
In the absence of anything else, I would have no problem using Ackley’s 70 year old data as a starting point, with a extra dose of caution.
Once I’m at the range my own observations take over and that data trumps whatever is in the the books.
In the absence of anything else, I would have no problem using Ackley’s 70 year old data as a starting point, with a extra dose of caution.
Once I’m at the range my own observations take over and that data trumps whatever is in the the books.
rabid wombat
Member
257 Rob AI is in several manuals….never have looked for others….
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,317
Wise words here.
I agree. Especially with the last comment.
I've seen low pressure signs using max loads and scary pressure using starting loads.
Ackley was know for being nuts. So I would take one scoop of nuts off the top.
OP
OP
AJC1
Member
If diving into one of these quickloads would just be part of the cost.
Last edited:
25-20 WCF
Member
Yep, that’s finally what prompted me to have Ackley rechamber a .30-30 Winchester to .30-30 AI years ago. The job was well done, but that sharp shoulder never fed as smoothly as the original case did. No chronograph back then so I had no idea what velocities I was actually getting, but of course I imagined .300 Savage performance. Ended up selling it to an Ackley collector for too much money. I scratched the itch again in the 80s with a 7 International Rimmed Contender - loved that 38* shoulder and long neck. Used it in IHMSA competition for a year, a fun barrel.
And yes, I have two rifles in .257 Weatherby….
.
I'm still interested in a couple of ai cartridges. Looking at 7x57ai and 30-30ai in particular. I'm curious what could be done with these cartridges using modern components. Essentially components and tech that were not available to ackley. I looked at 280ai but went with standard 280 on my last rifle build. Just got it back from the gunsmith and haven't had a chance to mess with it yet. I might still go after a 280ai.
- Status
