THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM FORUMS


Moderators: Mark
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
30-30 Ackley Improved advice
 Login/Join
 
<Jim Lawrence>
posted
Hello Folks: Like always when I am going to try a new loading idea I pass it by the vast network of experience here at this site. The following is my idea for a new rifle I had modified and I am open for any ideas you may have. If anyone has an Marlin 3030AI that would be great. However, any of your advice will be carefully considered.
I have a Marlin 3030 that had been used lightly over the past several years. I decided to have it Acklely Improved after careful ballistic research. Most of my data is from P.O. Ackleys own research so it is dated but from my experience with his work I have faith in his data. The data states that 39 grains of IMR 3031 powder behind a 125 grain Sierra bullet will produce about 2900fps. That seems pretty fast and I'm not sure of this fact. However, the case of the A.I. 3030 shell is a great deal larger than a standard 3030 case. Much more than many of Ackley's other Improved works. Another question I have is if the Sierra bullet will hold up at that velocity. The rifle will be used for Blacktail deer hunting in Oregon.
I plan on starting my first loads at 35 grains and increasing a grain at a time until I reach 39 grains unless sticky levers or other pressure indicaters occur. I am open to any advice anyone has on this experiment whether you have a 3030AI or not. This site has a history with me for providing great info. often details I may have overlooked.
Finally I wish to just add this. I have spent a good amount of money developing this rifle into a midrange deer rifle. If all goes well I can't think of a better close in deer rifle. At 125 grains of HP Sierra bullet approaching 2900fps this rifle comes close to 300 Savage, 308 Winchester, 303 British and many other fine deer rifles. I built this rifle for my son as a super light weight fast shooting weapon and if it turns out like I think it may I'm going to build myself a duplicate. As a 100 year old rifle it is truely a marvel. One last detail. I am going to mount a Pentax 1-4 power compact scope to it. It will have 7" of eye relief and mount just in front of the hammer. So there it is. If you wish to discuss this rifle (good or bad) I would love to here from you. I do not wish to make any mistakes. I will test fire it at 3:00 tomarrow. Thanks and good shooting. Jim
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of ricciardelli
posted Hide Post
Some additional loading data is at:
http://stevespages.com/page8c.htm
 
Posts: 3282 | Location: Saint Marie, Montana | Registered: 22 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Bobby Tomek
posted Hide Post
Jim-
WHile you will realize definite improvement over the standard 30-30, some of Ackley's data is quite optimistic.

You mention you feel this would be a great close range deer rifle -- and on that point I agree. But the choice of bullet for such is far from the best. A more conventional 150 grain spitzer such as the Hornady Interlock would be just the ticket. At the velocities you will be operating at, the 150 grainer will give more than ample penetration on the blacktail. And you won't give up much in terms of trajectory to the 125 grainer, either.

And one last thing to consider on bullets: since you mention "short range," even the round nose 150s are worthy of consideration. There's precious little defference in flatness of trajectory between a RN and spitzer inside of 150 yards. And true, the RNs are designed for the 30-30's velocity window, but I have used them in other calibers where perhaps 200-250 fps additional were gained, and they still held together sufficiently.

And while I am certain you have though about this, pointed bullets are a no-no is a lever gun unless using it with one in the chamber and then loading just ONE in the magazine.

Good luck...and keep us posted as to the results...
 
Posts: 9438 | Location: Shiner TX USA | Registered: 19 March 2002Reply With Quote
<Jim Lawrence>
posted
Sir: Boy, modern technology sure is a great tool. It allows almost instant data exchange between several people. It wasn't long ago that an exchange between us would have required several weeks and often important ideas would be missed. Yes, I am aware of Mr. Ackley's sometimes optimistic projections of his "improved" cartridges. I have come to accept this as just his way of presenting often very valuable data. I work carefully with the information he has shared in his writings. Over the past 40 years or so I have learned a great deal from this man and I am under no illusion that he was just a man with contributions and shortfalls like us all. I approach every modified rifle or pistol with due caution. I have made mistakes along the way most often due to my own carelessness. A person can't be to cautious when handling "shootun irons."
I currently have several A.I. chambered rifles and always approach each one in developement very carefully. Many things change over time, even things like the potency of a given powder. I'm very prone to over caution maybe to a fault. However, I still have my rifles, fingers, hands, face, and life. To some this may seem an overexageration but from your response to me I can see you understand me well. With Mr. Ackley's data I always start as much as 10% below his begining loads and work my way up one grain at a time. To his credit I have found his data to be very close to fact in most cases. Though I'm careful I think it has sort of become fashionable to imply that his data is a bit too optimistic. It really is pretty close when considering the equipment he had to work with. Much can be done with the "Ackley" ideal if an experienced person is using it. Thank you very much for responding to my e-mail and reminding me to watch my rear endSmiler If it is all right with you I would like to add you to my address book and exchange ideas with you from time to time. I wish you safe shooting and thank you for your concern. Jim Lawrence rober1400c@mindspring.com
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Bobby Tomek
posted Hide Post
Jim-
That would be fine...

By the way, I should have elaborated on the "optimistic" results I alluded to. His charges were often still remarkably close to what one may find as a max today, but his limiting factor back then was accurate measurement of the velocity. You'll occasionally find wide swings in results, and while some of that can be attributed to differences in equipment, loading technique, individual guns & powder burning rates, I feel a larger portion can be attributed to the availability of reliable chronographs back then.

Good shooting...
 
Posts: 9438 | Location: Shiner TX USA | Registered: 19 March 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia