P.O. Ackley - Was He a Genius or Wannabe?

12 January 2002, 15:58

<Don Martin29>

Neither, Parker Ackley was a down to earth rifleman.

Here is what he had to say about the .243 AI

"The Ackley "improved" .243 Wincheser is quite similar to the Mashburn version with little or no preference between the two. The Ackley version was created by popular demand, not with the idea of greatly improving upon the orginal .243 Winchester which itself might be termed an "improved" cartridge. The following loads are a combination of tests made by the author in a 26 inch barrel, and results from tests made at the Hutton Rifle Ranch by Bob Hutton of "Guns and Ammo".

Now that's honest.

12 January 2002, 17:14

Ku-dude

Who are you to question Ackley's qualifications? He, as stated above, is one of the "early" geniuses in 'smithing, reloading and wildcatting. He is dead now for a number of years and you want to question is credentials. Get a life. Ku-dude

12 January 2002, 17:41

<auto>

Genius or Wannabe?
I can't think of a single other person who's name come more often when discussing firearms. The guy ran explosive tests on all the gun available. He experimented continuously. He blew guns apart just to see how much they could withstand. He kept notes along the way. Who else is credited with an "improved" cartridge? It has become so common that it is hardly ever referred to as "ackley improved", but just AI. He was definitely a one of a kind.

12 January 2002, 19:05

<sure-shot>

The reason I posted this question is it seems there are some "Ackley Bashers" on this forum who seem hell-bent on making out every "improved" cartridge to be a waste of time. I read awhile back while surfing another forum(sorry I did not bookmark that trash)a thread in which a poster was trashing Parker, stating he was an old man who wanted a few cartridges to his name etc. Just totally trashing Mr Ackley, you get the picture.

Now on this forum every time a member asks a question about an "improved" cartridge the " Anti-Ackley Mafia" comes out in full force!(And you know who you are!)I know everyone has an opinion but how much experience do these naysayers have? One poster even went so far as to falsely quote my custom AI rifle as having a rechamber job and knew the exact pressures(CUP) of my loads!(I only stated fps and bullet weight)

I will say this to the AA Mafia, you obviously do not know the benefits and rewards of a "Ackley Improved" cartridge! If your experiences were less than favorable then you did not build or spec your AI rifle or AI handloads correctly! sure-shot

12 January 2002, 19:12

Atkinson

P.O. Ackley was an amazing man, the father of wildcatting on this side of the world and even more amazing is the publications that he left behind..I refer to them daily..

The best thing about him is his honesty..After all his experiminting he freely admitted in writing that the only real sho nuff improved calibers were the 257 and 7x57 Imp. for the most part, or that is my impression based on his writings. He certainly wasn't a wannabe.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

12 January 2002, 19:30

Atkinson

Sure shot,
I have never heard any Ackley bashing on this board...to believe that wildcatting has seen its heyday is not bashing Ackley.

Understand, that some of us see no use for a wildcat, me included, considering the calibers available today from the factories and that came about from the experimenting of such folks as Ackley, Mike Walker, and a lot of bench resters and god bless'em....the best of their endeavors are all factory cartridges now.

I seriously doubt that you can come up with a caliber that cannot be duplicated by a factory round, nor can you invent a wildcat that has not been invented...Many of the wildcats now coming out on the market are based on the 404 and were done by the Germans in the 1920's.

Believe me if wildcatting had any upside left I would be doing it..I did for years and I gained a lot of knowledge and had a lot of fun, but I never kidded myself about their necessity, and that was 40 years ago. It had all been done by then, so I shot the 35 Whelen, 338-06, several of the Gibbs monstrosities and a bunch of others....

Today I see no reason.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

13 January 2002, 09:10

<Big Stick>

Did my hear good yesterday,while looking at a list of reamers to see the "300Ultra Ackley Improved". Quite a feather in the cap,for a guy that wasn't even around,to see this chambering.

I believe that to speak volumes,for the respect he so aptly deserves. He was a Cartridge Cowboy.

You gotta like that.

To add to Ray's comments,I firmly believe P.O.Ackley would have had more "favorites",if he was granted today's powders in his experimentation. His imagination and realizations were short changed,due to powders available to him. Too bad..........

13 January 2002, 02:37

<1LoneWolf>

John Moses Browning was a genius.

Ackley, not bad, but not near the same class as JMB.

But, you know, his innovative improved cartridges sure makes a lot of sense. As simple as it is to do it, why not pick up the 100-150 FPS. It might just make your cartridge flat enough that you don't miss that far away mulie.

And if it was so simple to do, why was he the one to come up with that 40 degree shoulder?
If not a genius, he was damn good at figuring out the obvious, in more than one area. And that, might be as close to genius as you can get.

13 January 2002, 03:53

R-WEST

wildcat junkie -

Ackley's two volume set "Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders" is a must have. Fascinating reading. I got mine at Cabela's a few years ago.

Good luck,

R-WEST

13 January 2002, 04:21

wildcat junkie

I think a lot of people are missing the fact that the Ackley Improved cartridges are not only about "increased velocity" I read somewhere that he started out "improving" the .250 Savage to ease case extraction in M99 lever actions, and realized the increased velocity as an added benefit. I am getting excellent brass life from my 8mm-06 Imp. I am getting just shy of 3000fps with 180gr Nosler BTs , I could be getting a little over 3000fps, but I'm happy with the load I'm shooting. A little moderation so to speak (If a 180gr bullet with a BC of almost .400 @2960fps in a NON MAGNUM cartridge is moderation) I got 14+ reloads out of my last batch of fireformed cases without a HINT of case head separation. I started to loose a few to neck splitting and the primer pockets started getting a little loose. I plan to anneal the necks on the current batch every 5 loads, and Hart makes a tool to tighten up the primer pockets. I think it would be hard pressed for anyone to get that kind of brass life from a NON MAGNUM cartridge @ those performance levels! John Moses Browning WAS a genius in FIREARMS DESIGN, I vote for P.O. ACKLEY as THE GENIUS OF CARTRIDGE DEVELOPMENT!

------------------
Life is more exitin' when yer stickin' suppositories inta a wildcats behind!

13 January 2002, 07:47

<Don Martin29>

As to who was the father of wildcat or improved cartridges we can go back before Parker Ackley. Lysle Kilbourn and Harvey Donaldson were doing that in the 1930's.

But Ackley is one of my shooting hero's.

I think he pioneered a hunting bullet that was made like the Swift brand is now. It lacked quality but he had the right idea.

13 January 2002, 11:49

<.>

quote:
Originally posted by R-WEST:
wildcat junkie -
Ackley's two volume set "Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders" is a must have.
R-WEST

Well . . . the books are dated 1962 and 1966. As far as "data" there nothing in them at is current. No data at all for some AI calibers, like .223. The "gunsmithing" data is mostly stuff you can find online.

Mostly they're interesting historically.

They're avaialable at GI Joe's Outdoor Stores (west coast USA), but at $34 the pair, softcover, they're sorta steep.

13 January 2002, 17:59

beemanbeme

"anti Ackley Mafia".......wow. I guess when all else fails, try name calling. It appears that Mr Ackley has acchieved cult status. Anyone that doesn't agree is a naysayer or has made some sort of mistake. Even if, according to Mr Ackley, some improvments would be pointless.
If I were going to buy a .257, it would be in the Ackley format just as if I were going to buy a Hornet it would be a K model. Although I would most probably buy a .270 or a .223. Some cartridges lend themselves to improvement. In others, it is an exercise in self indulgence or futility. To append an AI behind a cartridge is not magic. It is not a guarentee of greatly enhanced performance. Or any enhancement at all. For one to suggest that "improving" a .243 or a 22-250 is pointless should not be considered a personal attack on Mr Ackley. Nor should it be a reason for name calling.
To answer your question, I don't think Mr Ackley was a genius; I think he was a very innovative, thoughtful gun maker. Einstein was a genius. And he had many experiments that failed..............

13 January 2002, 18:43

TomP

Hello Sure-Shot

I don't know about genius; he had a couple of very fine ideas, and put the work into them necessary to establish them as such. As Edison said it's 99% perspiration ( but the 1% inspiration gets it started, and without that you can work all you want and just make a living ).

Tom

13 January 2002, 18:50

<sure-shot>

Dear Beemanbeme,

Wow.... you bash me for name calling and then write me off as of "cult status". You insulted my earlier posting in the Varmint forum on my 243AI by using the phrase "duh" and accuse me of downloading my 243AI when I never posted the powder or charge! You need to lighten up! And so what experiments of yours have failed?...... A 243AI or 22-250AI?

Sincerely,
Cult leader sure-shot

[This message has been edited by sure-shot (edited 01-13-2002).]

14 January 2002, 05:20

<Lee S. Forsberg>

Gentleman,
I visited Mr. Ackley's shop in Cottonwood. Asked him some questions and got the answers, and heard some of the stories behind some of the cartridges in his books. The shop was very practical and down to earth, so were the answers to my questions. He knew what he was doing and how to get it done

------------------
LSF/375

14 January 2002, 06:24

beemanbeme

I said Ackley had achieved cult status. This would make you a cultist. Not necessarily a bad thing but as I posted it, it was less than an unbridled compliment. If I remember what you are ranting about, you said that you didn't motor your .243AI at top end. And I asked the logical question: Why go to the trouble to gain that miserable, little increase in performance if you weren't going to use it. The question is still valid. And unanswered. Instead you choose to go off about folks dis'ing Ackley (and, by extention, you). Mr Sure shot, you can have your barrels cut for whatever chamber you choose; and you may post any vaulted claims you choose. but every so often someone is going to ask you to explain. You know, when you talk that talk, be ready to walk that walk. Try not to take it too personal.
And too, "'cause I wanted something different" is a valid reason.

[This message has been edited by beemanbeme (edited 01-13-2002).]

14 January 2002, 07:42

<Ken Howell>

I have something less than an adoring opinion of my former neighbor, P O Ackley, for sound factual reasons (some of which I've posted, with hysterically vicious echoes from the Ackley cult). But I don't "bash" him. I just state certain simple facts that I know to be so.

Sure Shot, let me use simple facts to answer your challenge above (where you say "I will say this to the AA Mafia, you obviously do not know the benefits and rewards of a "Ackley Improved" cartridge! If your experiences were less than favorable then you did not build or spec your AI rifle or AI handloads correctly!").

FIRST:
In the mid-Fifties, I bought an '03 Springfield sporter that P O had rechambered to .30-06 Ackley Improved. I also got load data from P O. I dropped back 5.0 grains, and the load still expanded primer pockets large enough to let me drop the primer into the expanded pocket, dump it out of the case into my hand, and drop it back into the primer pocket again.
So I've never trusted his load data since that experience.

SECOND:
A friend of mine took his shot-out '06 to P O to have it rebored, rerifled, and rechambered to .35 Whelen. P O asked for five test rounds, which I loaded and provided. P O fired two of those rounds. The barrel fouled so badly that two full days (parts of three days) of hard cleaning by two of us made no discernible progress in reducing (let alone removing) the fouling. The barrel had to be lapped to remove the fouling. After drilling-out the '06 bore, P O had neither reamed nor lapped his drilled hole before cutting the grooves -- so the tops of the lands were fine rasps.
Like everything else I've seen from his shop, the work was simply shoddy.

THIRD:
Three of my friends worked for P O after World War Two, and during that war, P O worked for another of my friends. Some of these men still held him in high regard but acknowledged certain character flaws that kept me from regarding him as highly as his cult does today.

These are not the only reasons -- real, factual reasons, not uninformed or unfounded bias -- that I long ago ceased to be an ardent fan of P O Ackley. (Yes, I once was.)

I rely on my own experience and direct observations, confirmed by the testimony of reliable, honorable men who knew him well, as far more reliable foundations for my opinion than impressions formed by reading P O's writings. (Yes, I've bought all his books, and I used to read all his articles.)

I believe I can say with full confidence that my rifle rechambered by P O and the load data I got from P O were sound foundations for forming some pretty reasonable conclusions about the merits of his work.

Call this "bashing" or "AA Mafia" if you like, but any hysteria involved in this subject comes from somewhere other than here, from someone other than me.

FWIW, BTW, the "Ackley shoulder" was not always 40ï¿½. I'm not real sure that P O used a 40ï¿½ shoulder on more than half his "Ackley Improved" cartridges. Also, P O had nothing whatever to do with many of the wildcat cartridges that bear the NAME "Ackley Improved." A bunch of 'em have come about since he died, and not even the most ardent worshiper of P O Ackley should believe that his long-departed spirit yet retains the knack of introducing wildcat designs to the present day. ;o)

14 January 2002, 08:12

<Don Martin29>

I don't enjoy diatribes like the one above from Ken Howell however true it may or may not be.

As I stated Ackley is a hero of mine. Soon I will find out that Joe DiMaggio went to bed with a sexy actress.

I have to find that poem by I think Shelly. It contains the line on friendship. "To keep a friend you must keep the grain and blow the chafe away" This is a reference to milling grain.

[This message has been edited by Don Martin29 (edited 01-14-2002).]

14 January 2002, 08:37

<Ken Howell>

"Diatribe?"
Not guilty, Don! The American Heritage Dictionary defines "diatribe" the way I understand it: "diï¿½aï¿½tribe (dï¿½??-trï¿½b?) n. A bitter, abusive denunciation."
I wasn't bitter.
I wasn't abusive.
I didn't denounce anyone.
I just stated actual, known facts calmly explaining why I don't worship POA.

In the sense of your opening sentence, try this old familiar quotation on for fit: "Don't confuse me with facts -- my mind's made up."

14 January 2002, 10:28

<sure-shot>

Beemanbeme,

Perhaps this is a misunderstanding on both of our parts but I will not try to answer your question one more time. If you failed to comprehend my answer the first time on the Varmint forum then why should I post it here? I feel I have only failed in answering your question in a way that you may comprehend and I won't make any apology for that, that's your problem. My answer to your question was posted on the varmint forum under 243 or 22-250 a few days ago.

Ken Howell,

Thanks for the info. If die sales are any indicator of a cartridge's success then you have to admit the AI designs are still popular today. There is still alot of interest in the improved case concept whether or not Mr Ackley founded it. FWIW, we have far more powders today to take advantage of the improved case design, yesterday's negative findings on improving a case are no longer valid today.

Sincerely yours,
Ackley cult leader,
sure-shot

[This message has been edited by sure-shot (edited 01-14-2002).]

14 January 2002, 13:46

<Don Martin29>

Ken Howell,

Please put more effort into reading comprehension. I said that I "did not enjoy" your diatribe. Not that my mind is made up on the subject or that I ever indicated that it might be. In fact I said "however true it may or may not be"

So if your intent was that of a iconoclast then I hope your all done.

14 January 2002, 14:14

358Mark

Many years ago (~35) I visited the Ackley shop with a friend of mine, Al Pedersen. Mr. Acley and Al were old friends and I was a tag along kid.As I recal P.O. was a quiet fellow with an idea or opinion about everything related to rifles.He gave me a pair of hardcover books that I later mailed back to him to be signed.Anyway when he sent the books back from Utah he wrote a note saying the loads in his books and older magazine articles were designed for older pre WW2 powders and may be too much with powders of modern manufacture.I believe this to be true.
I had a 30Gibbs at the time and loaded a near max Ackley load and had to pound the bolt open.As in Ken's story the primer fell out and could be replaced by hand.
I also watched P.O. and Al put a cleaning rod in the barrel of an Enfield P17 and tie the rifle to a tire, pull the trigger with a string.The barrel was blown out or the threaded reciever and the stock desintigrated
but the action appeared unharmed.
He may not have done perfect work,but his ideas and ingenuity made him a man with few equals. He was not afraid to take on the establishment of the time and backed his statements with some self discovered facts.He was a fine fellow.Mark

14 January 2002, 14:15

<mike elmer>

WOW

14 January 2002, 14:55

<JoeM>

Hello,
I am shortly going to get an Encore barrel and start loading for my first ever wildcat round. As yet, I dont know what that will be.

I was interested by a comment by Mr. Atkinson, stating that wildcatting is not needed as the factories make everything. This is probably true, above .224 bore diameter. Below it, you have the 17 Rem. That's all. I think the future of wildcatting is in these small bores. 20, 19, 17, 14. And there is a lot of exciting stuff going on down there.

And it is kinda cool to own a round that is a wildcat, just to be different.

------------------
Safety & Ethics,Accuracy, Velocity, Energy
Joe M

14 January 2002, 15:04

beemanbeme

SureShot, thanks a lot for not trying to answer my question again. I owe you one. I guess the reason I missed it the first time is that I wasn't interested enough to go back to your post.
Your remark about my lack of comprehension was a real laugh. You know, you being from california and all.

14 January 2002, 17:59

<sure-shot>

Very funny Bee-Man.

14 January 2002, 18:31

JackM

Hi, 358Mark:
Your post brings back memories! I was only out to Al Petersen's once, about 1970. Never saw so many guns in so small a shop!

Bye
Jacl

14 January 2002, 20:27

<Ken Howell>

First "diatribe" and now "iconoclast!"
Not guilty of either one, Don.
But then I know what they mean.

I explained why "diatribe" doesn't fit.

"Iconoclast" doesn't apply, either -- I haven't been out to attack or to overthrow any traditional or popular idea or institution, and I'm certainly not out to destroy any sacred religious image (literal meanings of "iconoclast") -- although this thread is full of further evidence that many modern shooters consider P O to be both an institution and a sacred image. I just added facts that I happen to know, to the one-sided basket of impressions already posted in answer to the invitation that opened this thread -- also in answer to a challenge and charge in an earlier post.

Harsh words and intolerant charges don't alter the facts. I have no trouble according P O his due, but so many others have overdone that here, without any balancing fact, that I avoided adding to the worshipful adoration when I tried to provide a little factual balance and perspective.

Too bad the worshipers can't see ol' P O as a less than perfect man, certainly less than an icon. He was neither a god nor a saint, nor was he a complete ass or scoundrel. He contributed much, but both his resources and his abilities were limited by the times -- so much of what he pioneered has been found, under later scrutiny, to be flawed, some of it seriously. This should neither be ignored nor taken as condemnation of the man for his limitations. Neither P O nor his contributions should be held to be immune from the light of intelligent, responsible scrutiny.

It's safer these days to bash Jesus!

14 January 2002, 22:40

<Gary Rihn>

quote:
Originally posted by JoeM:
...stating that wildcatting is not needed as the factories make everything...

Maybe true, but if follow that logic, we probably don't need 90% of the factory rounds either. Wildcatting is not "needed", but for some guys it's fun. Some guys choose to say they don't need to wildcat, but their "factory" round is so obscure that ammo needs to be special ordered...

14 January 2002, 23:10

Bubba John

Wildcat! What an exciting word.Just makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck. Thanks, Mr. Ackley, where-ever you are.

15 January 2002, 02:37

<mike elmer>

After reading this thread, I must come to the conclusion that I am better off not knowing every little detail and character flaw of my heroes, lest they just become mortal. I think I shall just continue to read P.O.Ackley books for his experience and knowledge of reloading and internal ballistics, which is dated, but not without insight and benefit to the reloader today.

Using that limited view, I hope to avoid the personal slings and arrows that I have witnessed in this thread, share MY experience with reloading, shooting, and hunting, quote P.O. Ackley when appropriate as a source, and allow others who post to have their opinions and experiences, while not trying to fix everyone who posts.

One question that does arise concerning business ethics in general is this...as a customer, if I don't like the service or product of a gunsmith, I can always find another that I do prefer. But what of the gunsmith who doesn't like the customer?

Did I just throw my hat into the arena anyway?

Oh well.....an eternal thankyou to P.O. Ackley.