8x57 Ackley?

Interesting to note Case head to shoulder dim on 8x57 is 1.933.

Case head to shoulder dim for 30-06 is 1.948. Wow.A whopping .015 more boiler room for the 30-06.
Um, no.

Anyone who has actually seen a .30-06 round and a 8X57 round side by side know that is wrong.

Case head to shoulder on 8mm Mauser according to SAMMI is 1.8273" Your 1.933" is case head to neck (on the.30-06 that measurement is 2.108").

I have never measured it myself, but a list of case capacity in cc of H20 shows the .30-06 as holding 69 CC and the 8X57 holding 62 CC, so doing some quick Jethro Bodine cipherin' the .06 case has about 11% more case capacity. I really doubt the Ackley chamber increases the 8mm Mauser that much.

And you keep referring to the OP, you mean the original OP from 14 years ago?
 
I stand corrected. My old eyeball picked up the wrong number on the print.The correct case head to shoulder dim for the 8x57 is 1.827.So there is a .121 length difference.
To AI the 8x57 still narrows the difference.You said a 10% difference?OK,seems like a typical AI job is 5%..Don't forget the deeper bullet seating for the 8mm-06.
Still,if you have or enjoy the 8mm-06,have fun!!

As far as the thread being 14 yrs old,I did not resurrect it,there seems to be some discussion.
The title says "8x57 Ackley Improved."
What was it you wanted to discuss?

Mr Guffey....I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
None of my comments are about anything you posted.
Trying to read ....posts written with your style,for myself,seems like a lot of panning for darn little gold.
 
Mr Guffey....I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
None of my comments are about anything you posted.
Trying to read ....posts written with your style, for myself, seems like a lot of panning for darn little gold.


There could be a problem with your panning methods then there are members that believe they invented reloading.

F. Guffey


Case head to shoulder dim for 30-06 is 1.948. Wow. A whopping .015 more boiler room for the 30-06.

I have no ideal what your motive was for the "Wow. A whopping .015" more boiler room for the 30-06". I am sure there those that are impressed with that kind of response.

Again, I hope there was nothing I said that provoked you to respond in that manner. I have no ideal when someone is comparing Ackley with parent chambers no one compares the 8mm57 improved with the 308 W. The case body is longer, larger in diameter with less tapper from the shoulder to the case head and the shoulder is improved.
 
8mm/06 could be done w/o pulling the barrel. If you're doing a budget re-chamber, this saves money. In addition 30/06 brass was more readily available and easy enough to reform.
 
8mm/06 could be done w/o pulling the barrel. If you're doing a budget re-chamber, this saves money. In addition 30/06 brass was more readily available and easy enough to reform.


I agree, for those that have downloaded or ordered from RCBS their Special Order Catalog know when searching for forming dies the 8mm06 is a foot note *1 category die. Meaning no die is necessary, they suggest the 30/06 case be sized with an 8mm06 die with the correct neck sizing ball. Then there are those that do not have the 8mm06 die, it is possible to install the 8mm sizing ball in a 30/06 die.

And I know if the reloader is full length sizing the case with the 30/06 sizing die the neck gets a work out. I have RCBS 8mm06 dies in the old lime colored box and I have 8mm06 dies from Herter. I have liked the ideal military cases did not use the chamber designation on the case head.

F. Guffey
 
It kinda looks like this turned into a bit of a pissing match:)~ I had started shooting the 8x57 in the mid 60's after my dad bought a old FN intermediate length sniper rifle for about 8 bucks thru the mail. Sure miss those days. We turned the steps out of the barrel, reworked the bolt, d/t the receiver and I built a stock for it. It is one of the most accurate rifles I've ever shot. About that time I met Parker Ackley through my dad's Stockmaking shop. As I got to know him I asked why he never did anything with the 8x57 case and he said "I never thought much about it. Most people wanted to make the 8mm-06 so I just improved that case instead." He did encourage me to experiment with it and it 1972 I rechambered mine to the AI version. Since then I have taken it from 6mm up through .375 and they do outperform those made on the 7x57 case. As I stated earlier in the posts I called this family the "Ackley Super Improved" series.
There are so many versions of the 98 Mausers and not all the magazine lengths are the same, most of my full length 98 Mausers have a magazine length that is long enough to seat 06 length rounds without having to seat bullets to deeply so I use the full length 06 cases for them when wildcatting but the intermediate length Mausers are fun to work with and the 8x57 case is a great to work with. My 338x57 ASI is spitting out the 210 gr Noslers at 2790-2850 with H-4895, Alliant Re 16 and 17 as well as IMR LVR and Alliant Pro 2000. The 35x57 ASI will out do my 35 Whelen hands down with 225 gr bullets. I've never shot any heavier weight bullets in the 35 as I don't think there is enough case capacity to really warrant using them but I'm planning on taking both the 8mm ASI and the 35 ASI to Alaska the fall on a moose and black bear hunt...hope to find a bou with a death wish as well. Anyway, you can't go wrong with the 8x 57 case! I hope you don't mind the ramblings of an old gun nut!
 
Last edited:
I thought of this years ago when I read Ackley's books. When the time came I had the time and money to do so, I want to pursue all manner of 8mm endeavors since infind the bore expansion ratio to be more favorable than 30 cal. I dod know an elderly club member who had an 8mm improved, but it was not as aggressive as Ackley, if memory serves it was based on the RCBS method.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
With and or without the books there was a lot going on; Norma was giving chamber reamers to gunsmiths for consideration? Norma developed the 308 Norma Mag to boost case sales. Rifles chambered for the 30/06 Springfield were candidates. I have an A4 barrel that was removed from an A4 rifle after the scope mounts were removed, the rifle SR# indicated it was an A4. I am surrounded on two sides by those that put them back together.

I am not willing to give up one of my 03s or 03A3 receivers, I have a Remington rifle/receiver that was before the A3 that is one of the most accurate rifles I own. It went to Golden State and then to Sears. I purchased it from the man that purchased it from Sears with two boxed of R-P ammo. He shot the rifle 3 times.

And I have one of the old reamers and a M1917 with the 308 Norma Mag chambers. Picture this; a M1917 barrel with a P14 bolt and receiver and a modified/opened up box. And I have a M1917 barrel with a M1917 bolt and a P14 receiver, stock with a M1917 box.

F. Guffey
 
I ACTUALLY do know about the "Firing pin pushing it forward" THEORY. It does not happen in a Mauser, Arisaka, or any gun with a good claw extractor. Period. You would have to take the extractor off. I had an empty 6.5x50 case that was fired in a 6.5x55 (That ain't .015) and it stretched about .200 with a new shoulder and almost no neck. That was not the first, and probaly not the last one I will see. The firing pin knocking the cartridge forward goes back to the early days of rimmed cases mostly. Not all, but most have an area milled out at the edge of the chamber to push the extractor out of the way when the cartridge is in the barrel. We are not talking about rimmed cases here.
 
Last edited:
I've always wondered about how push round feed actions like the Rem700 and Savage 10/110 manage snap that extractor over the rim of the case. Clearly SOMETHING stopped the case from going forward, so it makes me wonder how much further the firing pin could make the case go forward if the extractor couldn't push it any further forward and had to snap over the rim.

Jimro
 
I've always wondered about how push round feed actions like the Rem700 and Savage 10/110 manage snap that extractor over the rim of the case. Clearly SOMETHING stopped the case from going forward, so it makes me wonder how much further the firing pin could make the case go forward if the extractor couldn't push it any further forward and had to snap over the rim.

Jimro, not me, I do not wonder, there are any number of test a reloader could do. The one thing a reloader has the most difficult with is the shoulder of the case. If the shoulder of the case is against the shoulder of the chamber when the case is fired there is nothing he can do with case head stretch/separation.

F. Guffey
 
F. Guffey,

My response there was a little "tongue in cheek" as the ejector button and extractor can put the cartridge hard into the chamber so shoulder touches shoulder, but still leave a small gap between the case head and the bolt face because tolerance stack or a deliberate "bump size" that pushed the shoulder a thousandths or two back.

My point was really to say that the firing pin can't push the brass any further forward with some action designs, because the brass is already as far forward as it is going to get. The brass can and does stretch backwards of course.

Whether a controlled round feed or push round feed action is "more accurate" because of this is probably something I'd like to avoid, suffice to say that either is accurate enough for my purposes.

Jimro
 
My point was really to say that the firing pin can't push the brass any further forward with some action designs, because the brass is already as far forward as it is going to get. The brass can and does stretch backwards of course.

There has to be 10 gigs of space used on this forum and all of the rest by a very prolific poster claiming the firing pin strikes the primer etc. etc. and never once did anyone disagree; well that is not true, there is one member that has killer firing pin.

A man build 4 magnificent rifles, he made the reamer etc. He called and said he had 5 case head separations out of the first 10 rounds fired. I told him I could have told him that would happen before he left the shop, I told him I could have fixed the problem before he left the shop and I told him I could have met him at the range and fixed the problem long enough for him to fire forms his cases. I also told him I could have formed his cases to fit before he fired them.

Back when reloaders were claiming you will blow up your gun if your fire it with too much head space, I chambered a round with .127" clearance between the shoulder of the chamber and shoulder of the case. Again, the shoulder of the case did not move.

F. Guffey
 
My experience with excess headspace is pretty similar to the gentleman you mention.

I made a measuring error on a 30-06 chamber once, left 0.1" of excess clearance on a long chambered barrel. The rounds stretched and cracked, as it was a Mauser action I was building on. The extractor held the brass firm enough that the firing pin did a fine job igniting the primer every time.

Odds are if I'd been using a Rem700 action the rounds wouldn't have gone off as the ejector and extractor would have pushed the cartridge too far into the chamber for the extractor to snap over the rim.

But, I pulled the barrel, cut back the shoulder and face, then torqued it back on. All was well after that.

Jimro
 
Guffey
Of course the shoulder moves. Measure it according to SAAMI and you will find the location is different....
Why do you keep playing word games?
 
ireload, while I understand your point,actually,usually it is not the shoulder that moves.
First,the brass is thinner at the neck,shoulder,and forward part of the case.
Thinner,it expands before the thicker part of the case does

The firing pin strike does drive the case forward during ignition,as far as it mechanically can go. Yes,an extractor CAN limit the travel...but,IMO,I would like tighter control over head clearance than the extractor provides.

As designed,the shoulder of a rimless bottleneck cartridge is the "anvil"that limits forward motion of the case against the shoulder area of the chamber.

So,lets look at this picture: The shoulder is against chamber steel.Its not moving.

The case head is forward,clear of the bolt face by whatever the head clearance is.

As pressure rises,the thin,forward part of the case expands(obturates) ,tight to the chamber.
So,really what happens is the shoulder stays still,the CASE HEAD moves,stretching back to the bolt face.

There are ways,as simple as using a rim or belt ,to limit the forward travel of the cartridge,and in those instances,yes,shoulders may be blown forward.
A long seated bullet,jammed into the rifling can serve to keep the case head on the bolt face.Then you can blow a shoulder forward.Necking up,over bore dia,then backdown can create a small step,a shoulder of sorts,as a headspace feature,and then,yes,you can blow a shoulder forward.
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of Coach Vince Lombardi when he took over the Green Bay Packers. He made it clear they were going to start over with basic fundamentals; he started with Gentlemen, this is a boot ball and before he could move on Paul Horning raised his hand and said; "slower coach":eek::)

F. Guffey

And I am thinking two of the players in the room included Captain Who and Joe Don.

F. Guffey
 
I agree with everything you have said down to :

ireload, while I understand your point,actually,usually it is not the shoulder that moves.

First,the brass is thinner at the neck,shoulder,and forward part of the case.
Thinner,it expands before the thicker part of the case does

The firing pin strike does drive the case forward during ignition,as far as it mechanically can go. Yes,an extractor CAN limit the travel...but,IMO,I would like tighter control over head clearance that the extractor provides.

As designed,the shoulder of a rimless bottleneck cartridge is the "anvil"that limits forward motion of the case against the shoulder area of the chamber.

So,lets look at this picture: The shoulder is against chamber steel.Its not moving.

The case head is forward,clear of the bolt face by whatever the head clearance is.

As pressure rises,the thin,forward part of the case expands(obturates) ,tight to the chamber.

Let me change the paradigm right here:

So,really what happens is the shoulder stays still,the CASE HEAD moves,stretching back to the bolt face.

You are correct if the case is nice and dry, the chamber is nice and dry, and there is a high coefficient of friction between both. The case neck stays put and the sidewalls have to stretch when internal pressures force the case head to the bolt face.

Now what if the case was lubricated?


Army Ordnance Magazine, March-April 1933
Automatic Firearms, Mechanical Principles used in the various types,
by J. S. Hatcher. Chief Smalls Arms Division Washington DC.

Retarded Blow-back Mechanism There is one queer thing, however, that is common to almost all blow-back and retarded blow-back guns, and that is that there is a tendency to rupture the cartridges unless they are lubricated. This is because the moment the explosion occurs the thin front end of the cartridge case swells up from the internal pressure and tightly grips the walls of the chamber. Cartridge cases are made with a strong solid brass head a thick wall near the rear end, but the wall tapers in thickness until the front end is quiet thin so that it will expand under pressure of the explosion and seal the chamber against the escape of gas to the rear. When the gun is fired the thin front section expands as intended and tightly grips the walls of the chamber, while the thick rear portion does not expand enough to produce serious friction. The same pressure that operates to expand the walls of the case laterally, also pushes back with the force of fifty thousand pounds to the square inch on the head of the cartridge, and the whole cartridge being made of elastic brass stretches to the rear and , in effect, give the breech block a sharp blow with starts it backward. The front end of the cartridge being tightly held by the friction against the walls of the chamber, and the rear end being free to move back in this manner under the internal pressure, either one of two things will happen. In the first case, the breech block and the head of the cartridge may continue to move back, tearing the cartridge in two and leaving the front end tightly stuck in the chamber; or, if the breech block is sufficiently retarded so that it does not allow a very violent backward motion, the result may simply be that the breech block moves back a short distance and the jerk of the extractor on the cartridge case stops it, and the gun will not operate.

However this difficultly can be overcome entirely by lubricating the cartridges in some way. In the Schwarzlose machine gun there is a little pump installed in the mechanism which squirts a single drop of oil into the chamber each time the breech block goes back. In the Thompson Auto-rifle there are oil-soaked pads in the magazine which contains the cartridges. In the Pedersen semiautomatic rifle the lubrication is taken care of by coating the cartridges with a light film of wax.

Blish Principle….There is no doubt that this mechanism can be made to operate as described, provided the cartridge are lubricated, …. That this type of mechanism actually opens while there is still considerable pressure in the cartridge case is evident from the fact that the gun does not operate satisfactorily unless the cartridges are lubricated.


Mechanisms that used greased cartridges and oilers were extensively used through WW2, but, not in the civilian world. These mechanisms have been out of service for so long, and they were never common in the hands of civilians, that they have been basically forgotten by the shooting community. Only those with an esoteric interest in antique mechanisms and the principles of operation even know about them. The very stupid and ignorant are clueless about them, and the operation of guns in general, and make up stories why they could not work.

If the case is lubricated, breaking the friction between case and chamber, than instead of the case mouth fixing the cartridge case in place and causing case stretch, the case slides to the bolt face. The shoulder however, is blown out without stressing the case. This is something World Champion Benchrest shooters do when fireforming to achieve perfect, stress free cases.

This mechanism, the cartridge was greased or oiled. This is the Oerlikon mechanism, used by the American’s, British, Germans, and Japanese during WW2. Cases were pregreased in WW2, though after WW2, the US continued to use the gun with oilers. I have a Bullseye bud who stole an Oerlikon from the USAF, in Vietnam, and used it on his river barge. His Oerlikon used an oiler.




I have been greasing my rounds so that when I fired the cases, I don’t have sidewall stretch leading to case head separations. I also have been greasing my bullets, just as our fore fathers did during the days of cupronickel bullet jackets. I am convinced that my barrel cleanup is quicker and I have no detectable fouling.



This is a 300 H&H Magnum, which has a very shallow shoulder. Also, the base to shoulder distance is not controlled as the round headspaces on the rim. The end result of firing these things dry, in a dry chamber, is to stretch the heck out of the cases, leading to case head separations in a short number of firings. I lubricate the heck out of my new cases, fireform to fit the chamber, and then, I only bump the shoulder back a bit. Even greased, they shoot well.





 
Slamfire,you can do all that.Whatever makes you happy.

I don't,very few people do.(Work with greased rounds in my gun)

A guy had a question.I tried to explain it to him.

Somebody can always come up with something to argue about.

I gave him good information,I really do not care who agrees or not.

And,actually.if you read and comprehend what I actually said:



[QUOTE/] ireload, while I understand your point,actually,usually it is not the shoulder that moves.
[/QUOTE]

You will note I said "usually" .I did not say "Always". I would suggest your practice is "unusual"



If you wish to read a tech article about it,here you go.

http://varmintal.net/a243z.htm

Al does address highly polished chambers and greased ammo.He did not seem to embrace the idea.

You do,I understand.Whatever makes you happy.
 
Last edited:
ireload, while I understand your point,actually,usually it is not the shoulder that moves.

You will note I said "usually" .I did not say "Always". I would suggest your practice is "unusual"

For me, I have found a way to use cartridges which are significantly less than the chamber headspace, more than the usually 0.006" excessive headspace condition, and not have case head separations when firing them. For me, I am moving the shoulder of the case, as the shoulder is fireformed to the chamber, once the case slides to the bolt face.

If you wish to read a tech article about it,here you go.

http://varmintal.net/a243z.htm

Al does address highly polished chambers and greased ammo.He did not seem to embrace the idea.

I think you missed the entire point of the article. Al is promoting the use of highly polished chambers and reducing case to chamber friction. I don't think he is comfortable with oil or greased ammunition, but I think that is primarily due to the shooting communities lack of familiarity and the history of the things.

Al's buddy, James Boatwright says here:


Steel Support for the Brass Cartridge Case James A. Boatright

http://www.thewellguidedbullet.com/pdfs/SteelSupportfortheBrassCartridgeCase.pdf

This practice can only militate toward stretching our brass cases Al Harral likens it to protecting the steel front bumper of your automobile by using its brass radiator core to soften impacts. In accordance with his FEA studies of plastic flow in fired cases, I join Mr. Harral in recommending that we polish out the newly installed chamber in a precision rifle barrel with crocus cloth or better instead of roughing up its walls with fresh 220 to 400 grit emery paper.

We should be aiming to reduce the coefficient of sliding friction between our clean, dry brass cartridge cases and the inside chamber walls
 
Back
Top