The 30-06 Ackley Imp in the New Centry

My Dad and Charlie O'Neill built one on an NRA surplus ($12 with shipping) 1917 Enfield in 1952. With a hatfull of H4350 (that's an actual reloading term) I can push a 180 grain Hornady Interlock to 2960 fps.

My oldest son's first elk in 2006



My first elk in 1964, I was 5. No, I didn't pull the trigger 😏



It used to have a K2.5 Weaver with a 6X Varmintmaster adapter in a King Pile detachable mount, but now it has a K6 steel tube Texas Weaver on it.

Technically it's a 30 OKH as Charlie built the reamer with more rounded edges on the shoulder and neck.



RJ

The workmanship on this stock and rifle is a compliment to the unknown riflesmith
who crafted it in Colorado. The chamber is tight while there is just a tad of freebore in the 24 in barrel.. Roy Weatherby did that on some of his rifles, and the early Weatherby's used a Mauser action.
One of my more effective rifles was a pre-64 Model 70 in 375 Weatherby which actually did
give improved ballistics with a Venturi shoulder. This rifle and slight waterproofing of the stock was done by Al Biesen
in the original rifle. It worked.
My proven best wildcat agreed with Ackley: The 348 Ackley Imp is close to perfect to use the improved 348 case.
The results on moose with a 250-270 gr Hawk, Woodleigh, or AL Bullet Works Kodiak bullets confirm chronograph increases of 150-200 FPS in all bullet weights. Popular in AK-Canada.

The 30-06 Ack Imp is an interesting cartridge, George Parker of Arizona Border Patrol fame used one, and I actually saw some of his older 50-yr old brass in a gunshop near Hereford, AZ in the 1980s-close to the border.

With the large steps made by bullet makers now like Swift and Barnes, there probably is no real reason to
step up the 30-06 case except to expand its neck, which I have done with success.

This rifles slight increase in velocity was confirmed by a sky-screen chronograph, but your results may differ.
Experienced shooters can also tell the difference in slight increases in range, penetration, or target elevation impact.
But the African hunters noticed more penetration with slightly reduced velocity, but this was before the days of Swift and Nosler. But they did use solids.

Both of my early Model 70 30-06s can tell, as one is a pre-war accurate rifle. They will get no chamber modification.

In the Jan-Feb 1981 issue of HANDLOADER magazine, Earl Etter, Sr. reported on his
experience with a 30-06 Ackley Improved in a 22 in bbl Model 700 Remington.
My results mirror his with the exception that his rifle's throat is apparently longer than that
of my custom M-98 Mauser. My barrel is also 1.75 inch longer than Etters is. We both agree that RL-22 and other slow burners like H-205, H-4831 and 4350, along with the now rarer Norma MRP are best in this wildcat caliber.
His ballistic loading results are found on page 25, showing that some 30-06 Ackley rifles can do the business
with the right powders: H-205 and MRP. With Nosler 165 and 180 bullets, his rifle produced close to 300 H&H velocities of 3100 and 2990 FPS respectively-all within sane pressure limits, and safely used in both of our rifles. My Mauser 98 did have the advantage of a slightly longer barrel. My velocities were very similar with new fire- formed brass.
For those doubtful of the results-read the article-Handloader Magazine-Wolfe Publications online.

For the real doubting Thomas: build a custom 30-06 Ackley Improved 40-degree shoulder rifle, use MRP/ H-205/RL-22 extruded powders, and find out for yourself.

That is all sound advise, and it supports my point that the actual pressure for the overwhelming majority of reloaders is irrelevant. If you are not exceeding maximum pressure in your rifle then you are operating in a safe manner. If my 338-06 can handle more of the same powder as yours, and produce higher muzzle velocities without mechanical issues then my loads are safe. If the loads in Ackley's book works in your gun without pressure signs then it is safe.

Of course, I have been known to run engines far beyond the parameters envisioned by the marketing geeks that held the reigns of the engineers that designed them, others have gone far beyond what I am willing to do sometimes with disastrous results. You do have to break a few eggs if you want to learn that particular lesson. Those who load until they have signs of high pressure and then decide where they want to stay have the highest performance. They burn through brass and beat up there firearms, but I don't get the mileage others get either.

450 Fuller said:

1) Etter substantiated his results with an Oehler Model 33 chronograph in 1981 within safe pressure guidelines.

2) build a 30-06 Ackley Imp rifle on a Weatherby or equally strong rifle-then check the results with the same recent powders for yourself.
NOT 1940s-or 1960s with those powders, but modern powders available now. Check the 1981 Handloader Magazine article and duplicate them with your results.

3) Otherwise, HANDLOADER and Wolfe publications gets the credit
for a fine article with proven results. End of controversy.

Click to expand...

1) I didn't ask about a chronograph, I asked about pressure. Because you know that a chronograph doesn't record pressure...

2) This is the year 2023, and you're referring an article from 1981. 2023 - 1981 = 42 year old powder. The powders being referenced, are not the same; and in some instances have been changed multiple times already.

3) At no point did I claim it wasn't a wonderful article. What I challenged is badly out of date information about assuming pressures, and a false claim of knowledge.

noyb72 said:

. If the bolt opens, pockets are tight, case head hasn't expanded, etc. then pressures are safe. If that is 55K, 65K, 70k, no one will ever know, and everyone will be safe. 3.5 grains and an extra 5k pressure will increase velocity, if it is enough for someone to make one, then more power to them.

Click to expand...

This is false, and dangerous information.
SAAMI sets the standards. When you exceed those standards, you have exceeded standard safe practices. SAAMI info is all freely available to read, as is the pressure sticky. Anyone interested in reloading should understand, the exponential decrease in lifespan when a pressure vessel is overloaded. Simply noticing that something didn't catastrophically fail, does not allow someone to proclaim "it's safe", or that everyone should do it regularly, or that they magically know something they aren't measuring.
Members since long before I began posting about pressure measurements, have been linking an extremely accurate and inexpensive measurement system. Moreover, as every twisting manual has started for an extremely long time: If you exceed book velocities, the presumption should be you exceed book pressures. If you want to actually confirm this, you buy the tools to measure it.

450 Fuller said:

Bob Hagel, a respected gun writer
with Wolfe Publications... He always states the caveat of starting low and watching for pressure
signs. He backs his results with a chronograph. I.

Click to expand...

A "respected" writer... One of those decided to join this forum, and begin bloviating about things he rather clearly didn't understand. He ignored almost a century of ballistic study, ignored some rather elementary facts about measurements, and ignored the wonderful pressure testing being shared here by those who came before me. His nonsense, is why I put my money where my mouth is, and actually began measuring pressure and his false claims; and sharing the results with the forum.


A chronograph measures velocity, not pressure.
When a chronograph informs you that there is excessive velocity, while it is a result of pressure; it doesn't actually tell you what the pressure is.
It certainly could be the case that the peak pressure is excessive. Or it could be that the area under the curve is greater, without an excessive pressure peak. Given the number of powders which are progressive in at least one application, the bumper sticker assumption people should default to; is that the peak pressure is excessive.


I've ridden several roller coasters in my life, and it felt like I was weightless at several points. That doesn't mean I actually was weightless, nor does it show me to tell people "I know" I was weightless. The only way I can say I know I was weightless, would be by measuring it. Telling a story about how quickly my ice cream cone melted that day, isn't measuring whether or not I was weightless. 😉

Cheers

Most reloaders do not have direct access to pressure testing machines rigged to
test barrels. Powder and bullet manufacturers like Nosler, Hornady, Alliant and Swift do.
That is one reason modern reloading manuals and powder manufacturers have multiple
columns in their published data. As an example: IMR lists in their rifle data under the caliber:the powder,
bbl length, powder charge, velocity, and in the last column: chamber pressure.
They also publish the caveat on each page: " Velocity and pressure readings represent average values obtained under controlled conditions. We suggest that charge weights shown be reduced initially by 10% to compensate for possible
variations from the published the published data. The loads may then be increased as pressure indications permit."

Most powder/bullet manuf, manuals have similar statements or warnings as does the latest Nosler manual.
With all due respect, I tend to value the data in the latest powder manuals more than any actual loading data found on any forum or comparable site. That applies also to valuing the contents of Handloader Magazine above most forum contents.
There are exceptions but these are my own choices based on 50 years experience as a hunter in Alaska and
the inter-mountain West, in successful pursuit of elk, deer and moose and antelope using fair chase hunting principles.

My reloading standards also involve the value of my own firearms: an above average collection of Winchester pre-64 Model 70s, pre-war Model 71s, and smokeless-era 1886 rifles. Lever-action rifles require more attention to reloading details, as they have no sense of humor about chamber pressures in excess of their original design limits.

And then there is the value of my own hide. As a Vietnam combat veteran, I have personally seen the
damage that can occur to souls exposed to high concentrations of carelessness mixed with gun powder
and projectile velocity. Or being in the wrong place without protection...