an increased mv with same load in fireformed case?

[Ackman]

You've NEVER SEEN a case formed perfectly after 1 firing? You're the first person I've ever heard make that claim. Don't know what to tell you.....I guess if you haven't, you haven't. Maybe you're doing it not quite right? I've never FF'd with reduced loads or fillers, and in more than 25yrs of shooting AI's have never had a case that wasn't perfectly formed after one firing. Not even one. People I know who shoot AI's have no problems forming brass either. Even an extreme wildcat like the 240Gibbs, one firing is all it took.

Nope.... never seen the shoulders 100% formed after 1 firing. Seen them up to say 98% formed, but never totally 100% after only 1 firing (even from stiff enough loads that wrecked primer pockets).
And have seen them considerable less then formed, when lighter methods such as pistol powders, COW, hydro-formed, mild loads, etc, have been used. Which is surprising I guess, since you say cartridge brass adheres to shape with absolute miniscule amount of pressure. But I guess I'm not alone after all, since Mac and gotcha replied with agreements !.!.!
Donovan

Well if so-and-so and so-and-so agree with you, it must be so. Or maybe the blind swallowing a load of bs.

 

[Brians356]

Funny....I've seen posts on different forums by people who thought using filler was the way to go, and complained about getting incompletely formed cases with that method. Then others would come on and say how they fireform with bullets and get perfect results. I know you guys are ex-purts...but if both you and mr. moran have had problems fireforming with bullets, sounds like - just maybe - neither of you are doing it right.

Ok let's agree either method needs to be done correctly. A couple of points in reply:

1. A subset of folks using bullets expect (as Ackley himself proposed) that any factory load should modify the case. In that case the shooter has no control of the powder used, or the charge weight. Suppose the resulting case is not 100% formed. Who is "not doing it right"?

2. Using conventional loads with bullets requires, well, bullets. And using bullets requires burning roughy ten times more powder than bulletless with pistol or shotgun powder. Assuming either metohd can be made to work, you will never compensate for all the bullets expended and extra powder burnt. I suppose you can go hunting with the forming loads, but who will trust the accuracy?

 

[Ackman]

Funny....I've seen posts on different forums by people who thought using filler was the way to go, and complained about getting incompletely formed cases with that method. Then others would come on and say how they fireform with bullets and get perfect results. I know you guys are ex-purts...but if both you and mr. moran have had problems fireforming with bullets, sounds like - just maybe - neither of you are doing it right.

Ok let's agree either method needs to be done correctly. A couple of point in reply:

1. A subset of folks using bullets expect (as Ackley himself proposed) that any factory load should modify the case. In that case the shooter has no control of the powder used, or the charge weight. Suppose the resulting case is not 100% formed. Who is "not doing it right"?

2. Using conventional loads with bullets requires, well, bullets. And using bullets requires burning roughy ten times more powder than bulletless with pistol or shotgun powder. Assuming either metohd can be made to work, you will never compensate for all the bullets expended and extra powder burnt. I suppose you can go hunting with the forming loads, but who will trust the accuracy?

Okay.
1) An Ackley chamber is from a larger than standard to whole lot larger. A std load - especially a factory load which will most likely be nowhere near max - is a wimp load for the AI cartridge. I don't shoot factory loads. Even so, PMC factory 22-250 in my AI shot surprisingly well for factory ammunition. That cartridge blows out considerably and PMC brass isn't soft.......it was slower than a normal fireform load but cases formed completely.

2) What you say is nonsense and couldn't be more wrong. People with misconceptions and no experience will parrot this crap. It's very simple.......finding an AI fireform load is exactly the same as with any other cartridge, only starting with a max load for the parent cartridge. Go up until you get best accuracy. It'll be faster than the parent cartridge and just as accurate as with formed brass. I repeat......just as accurate. There're no wasted components, no "compensating" for anything.....it's a working load for the field. Faster than the parent cartridge with the bonus of a perfectly formed case when it's fired. My guns have 1,000 cases each. Except for load workup, all of them were used in the field with bullets.

 

[Brians356]

2) What you say is nonsense and couldn't be more wrong.

I made several assertions in #2. Which part is nonsense?

Using bullets and regular powder loads does consume infinitely more bullets, and 8-10x more powder, than "bulletless", that cannot be disputed, so ...

That the forming loads might not be accurate is nonsense? Just picking a "hot" load (for good case forming) and then expecting that arbitrary load to be "accurate", that's nonsense? What do you consider accurate? As accurate as the ultimate AI load you will painstakingly develop later, after the cases are formed? Really?

I'll grant you the forming load could be developed to be accurate, through trial and error, by varying seating depth I suppose (varying powder charge might result in varying case improvement) but when all your cases are finally improved, what good is that load, except to use for more case forming? Would you expect that same load to transfer, unaltered, to the improved cases, and provide maximum accuracy (again, as you define it)? If not, then you have developed two different accuracy loads. I'd rather get the cases formed with as little effort and component expenditure as possible, then just develop accurate loads for the AI cartridge itself.

 

[Ackman]

2) What you say is nonsense and couldn't be more wrong.

I made several assertions in #2. Which part is nonsense?

Using bullets and regular powder loads does consume infinitely more bullets, and 8-10x more powder, than "bulletless", that cannot be disputed, so ...

That the forming loads might not be accurate is nonsense? Just picking a "hot" load (for good case forming) and then expecting that arbitrary load to be "accurate", that's nonsense? What do you consider accurate? As accurate as the ultimate AI load you will painstakingly develop later, after the cases are formed? Really?

I'll grant you the forming load could be developed to be accurate, through trial and error, by varying seating depth I suppose (varying powder charge might result in varying case improvement) but when all your cases are finally improved, what good is that load, except to use for more case forming? Would you expect that same load to transfer, unaltered, to the improved cases, and provide maximum accuracy (again, as you define it)? If not, then you have developed two different accuracy loads. I'd rather get the cases formed with as little effort and component expenditure as possible, then just develop accurate loads for the AI cartridge itself.

Why do you even bother posting? You have no experience with this and are completely ignorant about it. No clue and want to keep spouting the same nonsense.

 

[Brians356]

2) What you say is nonsense and couldn't be more wrong.

I made several assertions in #2. Which part is nonsense?

Using bullets and regular powder loads does consume infinitely more bullets, and 8-10x more powder, than "bulletless", that cannot be disputed, so ...

That the forming loads might not be accurate is nonsense? Just picking a "hot" load (for good case forming) and then expecting that arbitrary load to be "accurate", that's nonsense? What do you consider accurate? As accurate as the ultimate AI load you will painstakingly develop later, after the cases are formed? Really?

I'll grant you the forming load could be developed to be accurate, through trial and error, by varying seating depth I suppose (varying powder charge might result in varying case improvement) but when all your cases are finally improved, what good is that load, except to use for more case forming? Would you expect that same load to transfer, unaltered, to the improved cases, and provide maximum accuracy (again, as you define it)? If not, then you have developed two different accuracy loads. I'd rather get the cases formed with as little effort and component expenditure as possible, then just develop accurate loads for the AI cartridge itself.

Why do you even bother posting? You have no experience with this, absolutely no clue about it.

Thanks. I must have only been dreaming that I had my custom 250-3000 AI rifle built to order, formed all my AI cases, and developed 1/4" loads for two different bullets, and bagged several coyotes and marmots from distance with 87-gr TNT, and a nice antelope from 350 yards with 100-gr BT.

 

[Jay Christopherson]

Sweet, another thread bites the dust before something useful comes out of it.

Since I get to have the last word, the word is: mondegreen.

It's good the be the king.