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
Nosler .280 A.I. Brass
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="elkaholic" data-source="post: 478294" data-attributes="member: 13833"><p>That is the conclusion I've come to as well. Let me back up a little and explain why this bugs me a little. I am trying to help a 19 yr. old kid get started in long range hunting. He wants to build a rifle based on my Sherman case which is a little longer bodied and has less taper than the A.I. case. I don't have a .280 reamer but I do have a 6.5 and a 300. It has proven very effective for velocity, accuracy, and case life. The gunsmith he is working with did not want to work with my case since it measures 2.525 to allow for shrinkage when fire forming either the .270 or .280 case. As you eluded to, he is very concerned about the safety factor of someone firing a loaded std .280 round with the shorter chamber. This all makes perfect sense. I asked him why he couldn't use his .280 A.I. reamer first and then clean it up with my 6.5 Sherman reamer since it is dimentionally larger in every way except length. He said that would work and that was probably what he would do. We have kind of gone around about the 2.560 neck because it seems unnecessary to me and probably not condusive to the best accuracy possible. Why could he not just run the A.I. reamer in .020" short of normal leaving a 2.540" total length and clean it up with my 6.5 Sherman which I designed for 2.525". It seems to me this would take care of any safety concerns and would be a much more reasonable fit for my case. I am not a gunsmith, however; so am I missing something?.....Rich<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="elkaholic, post: 478294, member: 13833"] That is the conclusion I've come to as well. Let me back up a little and explain why this bugs me a little. I am trying to help a 19 yr. old kid get started in long range hunting. He wants to build a rifle based on my Sherman case which is a little longer bodied and has less taper than the A.I. case. I don't have a .280 reamer but I do have a 6.5 and a 300. It has proven very effective for velocity, accuracy, and case life. The gunsmith he is working with did not want to work with my case since it measures 2.525 to allow for shrinkage when fire forming either the .270 or .280 case. As you eluded to, he is very concerned about the safety factor of someone firing a loaded std .280 round with the shorter chamber. This all makes perfect sense. I asked him why he couldn't use his .280 A.I. reamer first and then clean it up with my 6.5 Sherman reamer since it is dimentionally larger in every way except length. He said that would work and that was probably what he would do. We have kind of gone around about the 2.560 neck because it seems unnecessary to me and probably not condusive to the best accuracy possible. Why could he not just run the A.I. reamer in .020" short of normal leaving a 2.540" total length and clean it up with my 6.5 Sherman which I designed for 2.525". It seems to me this would take care of any safety concerns and would be a much more reasonable fit for my case. I am not a gunsmith, however; so am I missing something?.....Rich:D [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Nosler .280 A.I. Brass
Top