25-06 Ackley advice

"Trueing actions" will always be controversial. A lot of people put alot of emphasis on the threads of the action, If the barrel tennon shoulder is perpindicular to the bore. The action face, bolt face, lugs and lug abutments are all parralel to each other with 100 percent bolt lug and abutment contact you would have a perfectly square action. The threads are only a mechanical device to hold action face and barrel tennon together, they create no squaring or trueing of anything.

With 100 or so foot pounds of torque applied, the barrel tennon and action are held parallel through mechanical lock.


Extremely sloppy thread junction could create a strength problem or a centering problem where firing pin might be hitting a few thousands off of center but only in extreme sloppy thread condition would they have any negative effect.

Bottom line is blueprinting a ruger would be like putting a spoiler, traction bars and racing slicks on a toyota prius. It just wouldn't make any sense.
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: JerrySchmitt
"The reason Eric, and many other Gunsmiths won't rebarrel an action that hasn't been trued is because he doesn't want a rifle with his name on it that won't shoot well. He has enough work doing it right that he can reject jobs that, in his opinion, aren't worth doing. Having a customer come back with a rifle that won't shoot to his expectations is just trouble that a good Smith doesn't need."


Jerry...

I kinda agree and I kinda don't agree. A decent smith can tell if an action is poor - and even the good companies let a dog slip through from time to time.

The smith simply says that the action is not good enough for him to rebarrel, and gives it back to the customer.

There are very good smiths that are truly 6 months behind in work, and they don't need to create work for themselves.

But most gunsmiths are hurting for work - and truing an action is a very labor intensive job (it's really a betch), so they will make more on the truing the action than they will on fitting the barrel.

For the shooter, they need to decide what level of accuracy they need, and what level of accuracy are they willing to pay for. ("How fast do you want to go? How fast can you afford"
smile.gif
).

We all would like a 1/10" grouping rifle to whack woodchucks with, just from a point of pride (mine shoots better than yours)...

... but in the field, the guy with a 1/2" rifle will kill as many 'chucks at 600yds, as the guy with the 1/10" rifle.

On the other hand, the guy with the 1/2" rifle will be laughed off the local benchrest range after his first match.

This a little off topic, but when we (the collective) pick a smith, we need to be realistic about what we want - you don't take your Mustang to the Porsche dealership for a tune up (if you have half a brain)... especially if you are on a budget.

To send a field rifle to a top smith is not the wisest decision a man can make.

Now would I throw a lot of money in a Ruger 77?

You gotta be kiddin' - It's money down a rat hole.
cry.gif


.

No argument from me.
 
Suppose anyone would enlighten me as to why a Ruger isn't worth putting money into and a Rem 700 is? I must be missing something here.
 
Their QC with them has been known to be lacking. The way I've understood it from a few gunsmiths is some work well and some take more work to shoot well and repeatable to be cost effective.
 
Well, as I have said before, for the puposes of this rifle I cannot justify the expense of truing of the action. As is it shoots satisfactory groups without any tinkering of handloads. I simply want a little more speed and the brass life of an ackley improved. Once again, not building a benchrest rifle on this one. Albeit there is a wealth of info on these pages if one were persuing ultimate precision. Thanks for all the input so far everyone!
 
Originally Posted By: ackleymanThis has been the best discussion on Ackley Improved chambers that I have ever read on the internet!

It has probably been the longest
lol.gif


I think Ackley chambers and wildcats in general, are the most misunderstood facet of handloading. I went to the link about Ackley chambers on YouTube, which referred to the Clymer website - the Clymer catalogue has it wrong - they say that the 30-06 Ackley headspace (0.375 Datum line) is 0.004 SHORTER than the standard 30-06 - but the shoulder moves FORWARD in any improved cartridge... it cannot be shorter.

The misinformation that is handed on is incredible - people look at this stuff and NEVER actually think about the numbers and what they mean... they just parrot them on.

.
 
In fairly rough math, here is something to ponder:

30-06 Springfield, case dimensions, Sierra loading manual, Edition V.

Bottom of base to start of shoulder = 1.948

Bottom of base to shoulder neck juncture = 2.109

Start of shoulder diam. = .441

Outside neck diam. = .340

Shoulder angle is 17 degrees, 30'.

The difference between the two length measurements is = .161

If we divide .161 in half we get = .0805

We then add .0805 to the start of shoulder length 1.948 = 2.0285 would be a length measurement to mid point on the shoulder.

30-06 Ackley Improved, Same Sierra edition V manual:

Bottom of base to start of shoulder = 2.000

Bottom of case to shoulder neck juncture = 2.109

Shoulder diam. at it's start = 4.54

Outside neck diam. = .340

Shoulder angle is = 40 degrees.

Difference between 2.000 and 2.069 = .069

Divide that by 2 = .0345

Add that to the base to shoulder length of 2.000 = 2.0345

So 2.0285 is mid way measured on the shoulder of the 06

2.0345 is mid way measured on the shoulder of the 06 AI.

Difference between the two 2.0345 minus 2.0285 = .006

So your right CatShooter, the Improved case is longer.

I realize that these measurements are not to the datum line of .375, but they are the middle points of the two shoulders angles.
 
Originally Posted By: SmokelessIn fairly rough math, here is something to ponder:

30-06 Springfield, case dimensions, Sierra loading manual, Edition V.

Bottom of base to start of shoulder = 1.948

Bottom of base to shoulder neck juncture = 2.109

Start of shoulder diam. = .441

Outside neck diam. = .340

Shoulder angle is 17 degrees, 30'.

The difference between the two length measurements is = .161

If we divide .161 in half we get = .0805

We then add .0805 to the start of shoulder length 1.948 = 2.0285 would be a length measurement to mid point on the shoulder.

30-06 Ackley Improved, Same Sierra edition V manual:

Bottom of base to start of shoulder = 2.000

Bottom of case to shoulder neck juncture = 2.109

Shoulder diam. at it's start = 4.54

Outside neck diam. = .340

Shoulder angle is = 40 degrees.

Difference between 2.000 and 2.069 = .069

Divide that by 2 = .0345

Add that to the base to shoulder length of 2.000 = 2.0345

So 2.0285 is mid way measured on the shoulder of the 06

2.0345 is mid way measured on the shoulder of the 06 AI.

Difference between the two 2.0345 minus 2.0285 = .006

So your right CatShooter, the Improved case is longer.

I realize that these measurements are not to the datum line of .375, but they are the middle points of the two shoulders angles.



And note the there is 0.040" of crush, not 0.004" - and for those of you that live in Rio Linda, that is TEN times as much crush as quoted for Ackley chambers.

---

To see the Clymer catalogue, go here:

http://www.clymertool.com/catalogue/ClymerCatalogueVol11.pdf

... and look at figure #6.

How does this happen??? Probably a technician or someone in the art department - they don't shot, and they don't know what the subject is - they never did this stuff - don't know how it works, so when the drawings are done and someone "scans" the whole catalogue, the scanner is looking for grammar and spelling errors. The technical stuff goes right over their head.

Same with some gun people (especially those than have never had a few Ackleys)... they read something somewhere that is an error or typo, and they go to war over it, cuz they don't really know what is going on inside of the chamber.

Anyone that has owned an Ackley, and especially if it was a poorly done one, know exactly what I am talking about.


 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SmokelessUh, that "math" is more rough than mine.

You are purposing a "wildcat" Ackley Improved? As the way to do it better?

Did I make a mistake?

I have numbers running out of my ears?

I got my lengths from Sierra V:6



Yup... number overload - it is 0.006".

But the "Crush" number is right!


 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CatShooter

and for those of you that live in Rio Linda, that is TEN times as much crush as quoted for Ackley chambers.

LMAO, CatShooter like your thinking! lol
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: SmokelessUh, that "math" is more rough than mine.

You are purposing a "wildcat" Ackley Improved? As the way to do it better?

Did I make a mistake?

I have numbers running out of my ears?

I got my lengths from Sierra V:6



Yup... number overload - it is 0.006".

But the "Crush" number is right!






Yup, that neck juncture is 0.04. Hard crush, but other Improved cases such as the 22-250, and .257 Robert's are much, much less. [In Sierra, 5, 6.] Any clue as to why?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Smokeless

Yup, that neck juncture is 0.04. Hard crush, but other Improved cases such as the 22-250, and .257 Robert's are much, much less. [In Sierra, 5, 6.] Any clue as to why?



Well, Smokey, I'm not sure.

To confuse it even more, there are differences in the measurements depending on where you get them from - kinda like everyone has "there own version" of their favorite Ackley cartridge.

I also think that often, then numbers are typed in error, and are not caught... like the Clymer catalogue.
cursing.gif


Keep in mind that there are still "smiths" that make Ackley chambers like PCAmmo described earlier in this thread - by just running an Ackley reamer in the old chamber without setting back the barrel
frown.gif


One of the nice things about SAAMI is that there is some standardization. The only Ackley cartridge that has standards set is the 280 AI, because Nosler decided to make it commercially, and petitioned SAAMI to accept it.

Back in the day of Ackley, smiths were all over the place and every rifle was a chamber "unto itself" you fired a few cases (if you could) and sent them to Fred Huntington to make a set of custom dies - there were no "over the counter" wildcat dies like today.

When the Remington 22-250 came along, no one with the other "non-Remington" 22-250s, could use the Rem dies - there was that much difference!!.

Things were a mess
lol.gif
 
Lots of nonsense being thrown around on shooting forums. People who don't know read/hear stuff by other people who don't know and post it. The blind leading the blind.

All the crap about Ackley cartridges. The cream o wheat thing....? Sheesh. These aren't complicated, they're just not real difficult. But it's amazing how many "gunsmiths" haven't a clue about cutting an AI chamber. Everytime "crush" comes up, people throw out the same old stuff. As has been pointed out, the .004" figure is just not right. New brass can vary by more than twice that much, longest to shortest and between different headstamps. Crush will vary depending on your brass and .004" isn't anywhere near enough. Headspace fireforming is on the neck/shoulder radius and can be whatever you and the riflebuilder want it to be. There's no law about it, no rule. My chambers are anywhere from .015" to .025" short. The .223AI is .015" short and chambering there's very little felt bolt pressure. The 22-250AI's are .025" short.....fireforming 2,000 cases, bolt pressure was mostly moderate but some closed noticeably harder. That's brass variation. The other chambers are between those two and around .020". They could just as easy be .030 - .040" and work fine.

This crush thing will come up again, and the same bs will get thrown around.

 
Here's a problem I ran into a few years ago with an Ackley. I was at a gunshow looking for a 700 Remington action for a 6MM BR I wanted to build. I found, what was displayed as, a .243 Remington 700 with a benchrest stock, 2 ounce trigger no safety, and a 28 inch barrel including a muzzle brake with no markings. The guy didn't know much about the rifle other than it came from an estate sale with a bunch of other guns and he wanted $650 for it. As we were getting ready to pack up, the dealer stopped by my table and offered it to me for $500. I figured the action was worth $400 and the stock and trigger were worth more than $100 so I took it planing to rebarrel to 6BR.

I had some .243 rounds loaded for another rifle and decided to shoot it just to see how it shot. Chambered a round, pulled the trigger and nothing happened. Primer showed a light strike so I removed the firing pin and it checked out OK. Cleaned everything up and tried again. Same result. Took it to my smith and we made a chamber cast. Looked like a .243 Ackley. The bolt would close on his no go gage and we checked the barrel with his bore scope. The barrel was a 13 twist and looked unused. The trigger turned out to be a Shilen.

Back to the reloading bench. Necked up a few rounds to .26 caliber and then back down to .243 leaving a false shoulder that would just allow the bolt to close. 10 grains of Unique with COW and a cotton filler. Out came a .243 Ackley long. I made up 50 rounds by putting a false shoulder on the case then loading them with Reloader 15 and some 75 VMAX bullets. The load shot so well I decided to take it on my upcoming prairie dog shoot.

Everything is wrong with this rifle. A 13 twist long barreled .243 Ackley? Should have been an 8 twist to take 105 bullets. Whoever chambered it didn't know squat about how to do it but the chamber job did work, after a fashion.

I'll shoot it, as is, for another season or two but then it's going to be a 6X47 Lapua. In the meantime, I liked the way it shoots and it convinced me to build an 8 twist .243 Ackley on another action I had.

gunshow1-23002.jpg


243AI003.jpg


243ai.jpg
 
I don't know about 243AI "long". There's not much left on that case to do a long version. That case in the picture looks like an AI only with the reamer pushed in a just a little too far. Like something a home gunsmith might do.....someone who also doesn't bother to stamp the barrel.

There's nothing at all wrong with a 13 twist barrel. Not everybody cares about shooting 105's. Benchresters have been using 14's for years. One of my 243AI's is 13twist. I shoot 70's and they're just godawful accurate.....it's a rockchuck/prairie dog gun. Another one is 9-1/2 twist, same barrel and chamber. It's also very accurate but much fussier about what it likes to shoot.....took a lot longer to get the load dialed in.

My .240 Gibbs is 13 twist. Shoots 70's very fast and unbelievably well. The 6BR is 14 twist......extremely accurate. Both 6-250's are 12 twist - varmint guns - and they're also very accurate.
 
Back
Top