Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


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

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


Reply

.280 AI controversy explained ...

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #43  
Old 08-06-2013, 01:30 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,091
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

You're a math major? Why would you add the bellman's tip to what the salespeople paid?

3 salespeople @ $9.00 = $27.00

Minus a $2.00 tip

$25 to the hotel.

I call FERRETFECES!

Last edited by varmintH8R; 08-06-2013 at 01:56 PM. Reason: HAVE to capitalize the barnyard analogies!!!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-06-2013, 01:49 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shangri-La
Posts: 930
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by varmintH8R View Post
You're a math major? Why would you add the bellman's tip to what the salespeople paid?

3 salespeople @ $9.00 = $27.00

Minus a $2.00 tip

$25 to the hotel.

I call ferretfeces!

Exactly! It depends upon how you look at it

But you HAVE to capitalize the barnyard analogies
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher.......if you are reading this in English, thank a soldier.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-06-2013, 04:14 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 102
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by woods View Post
So when me, cockcroft and Tnwhip all gave personal testimony to having excess headspace in our older 280AI chambers, which caused flattened primers........we were:

A. Liars
B. Mistaken
C. All have bad chambers that were reamed wrong

????
No none of the above its simply more information adding to the mix . But consider the same question from the my position and that of others that have posted in other similar threads. I have a "claimed" original ackley 280ai chamber, I can fire standard 280rem cases with no problem at all in fact Winchester 280rem supreme is a neat fit with no crush at all and yet when I use nosler 280ai brassI get zero case stretch. So am I lying , mistaken or... along side your experience it makes no sense which is why I'm borrowing some gauges to try and solve this for myself. Any thing is possible maybe a bad batch of nosler brass that was a little short?
As Iv said ealier its just interesting and makes little real world difference if we use best practise.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-06-2013, 07:52 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 102
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by J E Custom View Post
The SAMMI reamer is all you can buy now because the reamer manufactures can only make This
reamer now (Unless you want a wildcat).

The real Issue is the head space. there are two head space gages you can use. If you want to shoot
Nosler brass use the head space gage that is for the reamer you buy. If you going to shoot all other brands of ammo/brass I prefer to head space with the 280 rem Go gage.

If you are going to make your brass out of 30/06 brass you simply size it with the 280 AI dies just enough to close the bolt(That will leave a donut that Is 30 Cal to set the head space for fire forming.

If You use 25/06 or 270 brass you have to seat the bullet long to maintain head space (You Must reduce the load when seating the bullet against the lands)

The reason I like to use the other go Gage(The 280 rem) It is .014 thousandths longer,is to be able to shoot factory ammo while Fire forming (All except Nosler)with perfect head space. this also has the 280 head stamp on the ammo. (Not a real issue but nice and easy).

My concern is using ammo with to much head space. Also you are right,if you chamber and head space with the New AI you will have .014 thousandths crush on other cases and can probably close the bolt
on the for fire forming. Some times if the case is to tight it,s memory will cause it to remain larger than your chamber causing you to have to bump the case the first loading to get it to chamber smoothly.

As I said earlier, I am sure everyone that says it is OK would not tell anyone that, if it was unsafe I just have a problem building a rifle with very close tolerances and then shooting Ammo with a head space
difference of .014. and prefer to build a rifle that will/can use many different brands of cases.

We have probably beat this to death and it looks like it is a personal choice to anyone that is going to
build a 280 AI. And hopefully this debate has brought to light the difference in the two AIs

I just hope that anyone reading this debate does not decide not to build one of these fine rifles.

I think it comes down to a personal choice as to which way you want to go and that we have made something simple into something complicated.

J E CUSTOM
I just see more questions
J E CUSTOM have you actually tried the two different ai gauges in the one saami chamber to prove the difference? ie refute the argument put forward in the video and preceding description ?
Given PO ackleys intention was to use a headspace .004 shorter than the parent case so wouldn't useing standard 280 rem in a saami create an .018 crush? Iv found .018 over length is significant when trying to close the bolt? Also I believe the original design was using a headspace datum on the neck shoulder junction?
while according to the saami drawing for the chamber its clearly back along the 40 deg shoulder a little.
http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc...20Improved.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-06-2013, 09:47 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,501
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by yawn View Post
I just see more questions
J E CUSTOM have you actually tried the two different ai Gage's in the one saami chamber to prove the difference? ie refute the argument put forward in the video and preceding description ?
Given PO ackleys intention was to use a head space .004 shorter than the parent case so wouldn't using standard 280 rem in a saami create an .018 crush? Iv found .018 over length is significant when trying to close the bolt? Also I believe the original design was using a head space datum on the neck shoulder junction?
while according to the saami drawing for the chamber its clearly back along the 40 deg shoulder a little.
http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc...20Improved.pdf
In answer to your question , have I used both go gages NO.

I don't intend to because I chamber and head space the "OLD" way and have ZERO problems with head space, fire forming, case head separation and accuracy. so why would I change? all of the 280 AIs I
have built will shoot 1/2 MOA during fire forming with most factory ammo. and case life is excellent.

I have however had some of the owners of my 280 AI try the Nosler ammo with less than stellar results
and gone back to the Remington, Winchester, Federal, Hornady and any other brands with no problems

.018 crush ? Not if you chamber using the old 280 go gage I head space with little or no head space so fire forming is simple.

J E CUSTOM
__________________
"PRESS ON"
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-06-2013, 10:54 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 102
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by J E Custom View Post
In answer to your question , have I used both go gages NO.

I don't intend to because I chamber and head space the "OLD" way and have ZERO problems with head space, fire forming, case head separation and accuracy. so why would I change? all of the 280 AIs I
have built will shoot 1/2 MOA during fire forming with most factory ammo. and case life is excellent.

I have however had some of the owners of my 280 AI try the Nosler ammo with less than stellar results
and gone back to the Remington, Winchester, Federal, Hornady and any other brands with no problems

.018 crush ? Not if you chamber using the old 280 go gage I head space with little or no head space so fire forming is simple.

J E CUSTOM
I was not suggesting you use both gauges to build off only to verify any possible difference in this discussion. Seems you havnt so you have answerd my question thankyou. Yes I agree if you use the .280rem guage . My question though concerns the supposed shorter saami chamber speced with a saami gauge and using factory 280rem ammo/ brass. If the saami is .014 shorter than the original ackley which is in turn .004 shorter than the standard .280rem then 280 rem brass in an saami chamber should need an .018 crush?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-06-2013, 11:43 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Good Ol' Oklahoma
Posts: 206
Re: .280 AI controversy explained ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by woods View Post

Funny thing about math (which I have a degree in, not that it is worth much), it doesn't always explain everything

For example

3 salesmen went to a hotel and asked for rooms. The desk clerk said he only had one room available and it woudl be $30.00

They took the room, each paying $10.00

Later the deskclerk realized he had overcharged them so he gave the bellhop $5.00 to give back to them

The bellhop decided he wanted a tip so he kept $2.00 and gave the salesmen back the $3.00 left over

Each salesman got $1.00 back so they each paid $9.00

3 salesmen @ $9.00 = $27.00
1 bellhop tip @ $2.00 = $2.00

$27.00+$2.00=$29.00

Where is the other dollar?


My point is math is not always straightforward and it depends a lot upon context and application. Someone in the video is not comparing apples to apples or his gauges do not tell the whole story

It sounded like you were quoting Hillary "What difference does it make?"

3*$10=$30 - $5 = $25 + $2 (thE bell hop kept) + $1 + $1 + $1 (that each go back) = $30.

Answer is there isn't a dollar missing. They got ripped off by the bell hop, since they should have only paid $8.33 each for the room, so the "dollar that's missing" is in the bell hop's possession.

Just a misleading question.... Regarding your leading statement of 3*$9=$27. Which is math stoically correct, but not as it pertains to this math problem.

Or to put it more simply: $30-$5=$25+$3=$28+$2=$30 so no dollar is missing.

Last edited by Buttermilk; 08-07-2013 at 12:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 PM.


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