Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
6.5-06 Ackley Improved, Any Thoughts?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dano1" data-source="post: 249391" data-attributes="member: 14209"><p>P.O. Ackley had similar results when he did his testing on both the 6.5-06 And his improved version. I know that he first (using the same bbl, cut the standard chamber, did his testing, and then cut his Ackley chamber. His book didn't go in to much detail as to how much bbl he lost when he set it back for the 2nd chambering.</p><p> </p><p>We must also look at the fact that the slowest powder he had at the time was IMR4831 and now we have slower powders to work with. Due to the bore to case capcity ratio, it should benifit greatly by using slower powders. Only time and a chronograph will tell.</p><p> </p><p>I'm using 270 brass to make my loads because I'd rather neck down brass and the turn the necks to the proper dimentions rather than run the chance of not enough neck wall thickness by necking up. I have a bunch of 270s anyway, and no rifle so I figured I'd put them to work. If I have problems with case and neck splits, I can always use .30-06 brass, I love Lake City Match and I have a good supply and supplier. As I said, neckind down is no problem. In fact I use Lake City Match .308 Brass to make my .243 Ackley Brass. I did this after losing 5 out of 50 Virgin R-P Brass due to splits.</p><p> </p><p>I have to agree that the Ackley is Sexier. And a guy's gotta follow his dreams!</p><p> </p><p>Dan</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dano1, post: 249391, member: 14209"] P.O. Ackley had similar results when he did his testing on both the 6.5-06 And his improved version. I know that he first (using the same bbl, cut the standard chamber, did his testing, and then cut his Ackley chamber. His book didn't go in to much detail as to how much bbl he lost when he set it back for the 2nd chambering. We must also look at the fact that the slowest powder he had at the time was IMR4831 and now we have slower powders to work with. Due to the bore to case capcity ratio, it should benifit greatly by using slower powders. Only time and a chronograph will tell. I'm using 270 brass to make my loads because I'd rather neck down brass and the turn the necks to the proper dimentions rather than run the chance of not enough neck wall thickness by necking up. I have a bunch of 270s anyway, and no rifle so I figured I'd put them to work. If I have problems with case and neck splits, I can always use .30-06 brass, I love Lake City Match and I have a good supply and supplier. As I said, neckind down is no problem. In fact I use Lake City Match .308 Brass to make my .243 Ackley Brass. I did this after losing 5 out of 50 Virgin R-P Brass due to splits. I have to agree that the Ackley is Sexier. And a guy's gotta follow his dreams! Dan [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
6.5-06 Ackley Improved, Any Thoughts?
Top