Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Reloading

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


.280 AI controversy explained ...

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-04-2013, 04:23 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 4,495
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

When you were naming off the nom de guerres, you forgot 7mm Remington Express & 7mm Express.
"I'm just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns..." - Bob Lee Swagger

"Give me a minute...I'm good. Give me an hour...I'm great. Give me 6 months...And I'm unbeatable." - Col. Hannibal Smith

Ignore everything I say, because I have a reading comprehension and memory problem...

Originally Posted by WildRose View Post
The 284 is to the STW what a tricycle is to a Ninja.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 06:26 PM
Bronze Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 98
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Well Im still undecided. Woods that link in your post that you are using to support the affirmative position is from the same site/people that made the video that you claim is " bull chips" If you click on the link beside the illustration it takes you to their conclusion after doing some actual testing with both reamers. The other info you posted is all based on the same assumption that the datum for measuring both chambers is exactly the same so still nothing to refute the "different datum" position taken by the makers of the video. Yes your individual chamber shows some growth from nosler brass but then mine does not so we have more conflicting evidence.
I'm not confident basing the discussion simply on the reputation of the gun builder as proof that my chamber is correct as every human makes an error at times so the simplest way I see to prove this one way or the other is to try both the original ackley and the saami spec go/no go gauges in my chamber. I have been trying to do this for some time and almost have the necessary bits together and Ill post my results as soon as I can. That will tell me if I have an original ackley as claimed by the builder , a new saami or both if there is actually no difference. Im not betting on any one outcome .
Something else I was wondering about, the original ackley design was .004shorter than the parent case. If the saami is a further .014 shorter then the saami 280ai chamber would be .018 shorter than standard 280 rem brass/ factory 280rem ammo and would be quite hard to chamber and close the bolt. Has anyone seen this with a new saami chamber?
But how much of an issue is it if there is a difference? I dont see growing reports of case head seperation or any problems that could be related to excessive headsapce and this has been around for 5+ years?
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 06:42 PM
Silver Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Huntsville Tx
Posts: 115
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Five or six years ago I had a 280 AI built using a reamer and go gauge that was made many years before. My guess was minimum 10 to 15 years. Bought Nosler 280 AI brass and fire formed 50 pcs. Then went to reload them and my Redding FL die didn't even touch the shoulder area. Measured the cases and they were 14 thou longer then the new Nosler AI brass. Ended up milling the top of the shell holder down until I got the resizing dimension I wanted.
I did not watch the video, just read the posts and thought I would throw in my experience with an older reamer/gauge and new brass specs.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 07:06 PM
Gold Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shangri-La
Posts: 911
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Well my point is this; in the articles I linked to, Gunsmith Talk, Redding and Rifle Shooter they all talk about and admit that the SAAMI version has shorter headspace. My experience and Cockcroft's and others I have talked to have the same issue. Yes the same gunsmith posted the video but after several posts chronicling the .014" difference. Did he recant that or explain how he could repeatedly define the difference and then post the video? Does the video go counter to the previous explanation?

Now because of some smoke and mirrors magic trick with gunsmith gauges we are supposed to just ignore that difference? Where did that "traditional" reamer come from? Does it match all the old reamers or even a few? Is some warehouse worker gonna say "OH! You meant the OLD reamer like we used to use 15 years ago!" I am not going to buy gunsmith gauges to check it out. I get enough information from what I have.

For someone to tell me that there is not a significant change in headspace on a new piece of Nosler 280AI brass and my chamber is speaking nonsense. Now how that would fit in with his gunsmith headspace gauges, I have no idea and really don't care.
If you can read this, thank a teacher.......if you are reading this in English, thank a soldier.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 07:29 PM
Bronze Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 98
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

They are some of the questions we are looking to answer arnt they?
I see the orignal post by gun talk as being along the same lines as everything else based on diagrams and measuerments . Then it seems they did some actual testing and found no difference. I dont see how thats " smoke and mirrors"
I also don't see anyone telling you that there is no difference between your chamber nosler ai brass, youve proven that there is . The questions are do you have an exact original ackley chamber or is it a little out of spec? Do I have an original ackley chamber as Iv been told or has the builder got it wrong and I have an saami chamber? Is there in fact a third addition to the discussion where the now saami spec was adopted by gun builders long before the saami registered it therefore clouding the waters even more?
Cockrofts report is interesting as his cases got longer by .014 but he still had to shave the case holder to get the shoulder contact as if the cases where still a little short?

Its all interesting but end of the day if we check headspace,fireform correctly and set the sizing die up properly then its a non issue isnt it?
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 08:13 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Great Falls, MT
Posts: 3,907
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Originally Posted by yawn View Post
Its all interesting but end of the day if we check headspace,fireform correctly and set the sizing die up properly then its a non issue isnt it?
I agree!

C&P extract from one of the links (http://www.redding-reloading.com/tec...-280-changes):

Bottom line, don't rely on only the web.
The names many list for this cartridge can be misleading.
Remember, they are wildcat cartridges and adhere to no formal standard.

I voted for my "FREEDOM", "GUNS", and "MONEY" - keep the change - UNK.

"I am always proud of my country!"

"Leadership Rule #2: Don't be an @zzhole." - Maj Gen Burton Field.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2013, 08:22 PM
Silver Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 180
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

When I had my barrel chambered for the 280 Ackley. It was the old original ackley. I thought I would be smart and I bought Nosler 280 Ackley brass. I loaded some, one g from 280 Rem. max load and iit flatened the primer really bad. I checked and the head space was .014 longer than the Nosler brass. Then I started checking and found out what Nosler did. Are they stupid or what? No big deal now that I know what is going on. Just have to fire form my brass even if it is Nosler . Just out of spite I will never buy another box of Nosler brass just because of what they did. Got to fire form anyway.
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Current Poll
Are you on Facebook?
Yes - 46.66%
992 Votes
No - 19.00%
404 Votes
No, but I may join - 1.88%
40 Votes
No way, are you kidding? - 36.45%
775 Votes
Total Votes: 2,126
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC