Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats 30-30 AI

There is no rocket science to the .30-30AI in the 20" levergun. The Speer 150- and 170-grain bullets have a good BC for deer and pigs. They hold together very well.
With the 20" barrel levergun 3,000 fps with the 100- and 110-grain bullets, 2,700 fps with the 125- and 130-grain bullets, 2,500 fps with the 150-grain bullets and 2,350 fps with the 170-grain bullets is easy with any of the medium burn powders. You do not need the super powders. to exceed these velocities with good case life. Good case life - in my experience - begins with using new cases to fireform your Improved cases using 3/4 to full throttle standard .30-30 load data.
You could start and stop your powder selection using Hodgdon 4895 or H335 depending on whether you wanted extruded or ball powder. I found the two powders to be interchangeable grain for grain with the 170-grain bullets in the 20" leverguns.

The only loading step which requires attention to detail is bullet seating. It is pretty easy to bulge the case just below the point of the shoulder even with a good chamfer on the case mouth.
.
In todays world the .308 Marlin Express is a good option if you are looking at the .30--30AI. The published Marlin Express load data is just a bit under what you achieve with high pressure .30-30AI loads. The Marlin Express brass is just a bit easier to work with and you have factory ammunition if you desire.
You can make .307 Winchester or ..308 Marlin Express brass easily from .444 Marlin cases if you need to.

If you want the .35 caliber based on the .30-30 or .38-55 cases don't overlook the .350 Maine Guide which is a pretty old wildcat type cartridge.

Why not just use 356 which is the 307 opened up to 358 and is commercially available? Cheers NC

Not too hard.
Winchester does a run every other year or so, it does sell out quickly. 444 can be used to make it, as well as 356 Win.

Just saw this post. Much of what I am writing refers to info Out of the recent Fred Zeglin book on PO Ackley.

PO did not originally conceive of improving cartridges to get more power. He did so because client were bringing him lever guns experiencing extraction problems. Straightening the case reduced back trust and significantly reduced case growth at normal pressures.

The AI design assumed the same level of pressure would happen. But as most of us know, if you reduce the back thrust against the bolt, one of the key, normal sighs of pressure has been redefined. Add to that the increased case capacity about 10 % more powder would be needed to achieve the same pressure as the parent cartridge, but the pressure signs would be absent. Human nature, would want to cram more powder in until the pressure signs return. So when the back thrust returned to the same indicators as the parent, it would actually be at a higher pressure.

Again quoting PO from the book, PO did not care what the pressure was, he only cared about the back thrust, hence the actual stresses on the action. That is why AI cartridges are loaded as they are, not by design, but by practice.

PO arrived at all of this by actual testing, not theory or opinion. Great book about a great gunsmith, who actually field tested old wives tales for the truth.

Dan

I don't think that P.O. Ackley did any scientific/professional testing of his loading data, so why would anyone believe/trust it?

I have seen a whole bunch of 30/30's, with excessive headspace, where the fired case showed a protruding primmer. This would seem to indicate that the case gripped the chamber wall sufficiently to allow the primer to back out. With this being the case, what would be the advantage to gripping the chamber even better? The fact is, AI cases do not reduce back thrust except in the immaginations of the proponents. GD

Actually yes, sir he did. I will grant you that PO did not have the benefit of modern day chronographs when he was developing a lot of his wildcats. According to Zeglins book, he was a fastidious tester developing his own momentum pendulum and having to calculate pressure manually. Additionally Zeglin devoted a chapter in his book to testing PO tests just to make sure. He prooved exactly what PO claimed a generation earlier actually happened. As I said, it is a good book and I highly recommend.

Greydog, Part of my answer was written above in the response to 260Remguy, so please read it there. Your observations are a bit different than his, so I will add to those remarks.

Interesting enough, I just bought an old Steven bolt 30/30 to play with and possibly to rechamber to AI. Took it out the other day to chonograph some 170 Remington factory stuff to get a performance benchmark. 10 rounds averaged 2150FPS out of a 20" barrel. This ammo was sticky to extract and also had raised, and very round primers.

I traced the stickiness to gunk in the chamber. I told the guy I bought it from he should have discounted because of my cleaning fee. He replied he would have had to charge me more if he had cleaned it. . Anyway the chamber was dirty. I should have clearned it before taking it the range. When it was clean, the stickiness disappeared.

Re the primers, I have seen this before with very low pressure loads is several revolvers (45LC at 700 FPS, 38 special at 700DPS). Now rifles are not revolvers, but in this case both of the cartridges in question head space on the rim. I have also seen this symptom in some low pressure rifle loads, namely very rounded primers backed out out against the breech.

I think, but can not prove this may be what we are seeing in our .30/30; the result of very low pressure loads backing the primers against the bolts of our rifles. These loads are at least 100 FPs slower than they should be. That translates to pressures about 7000 PSI lower than published specs. (Testing has shown that bumping a 30/30 from 2300 fsp to 2400 FPS, with no change in any components expect the gains of powder, adds about 7000 PSI).

The only way for me to prove this is to hand load few more rounds to see if the behavior changes as the velocity rises. I think It will, but proof is proof, not theory. So, please let me adjourn until I can report on that.

Meanwhile, Zeglin did test POs theories and it is a great book.

Thanks for the replies, gents.

307 brass is much easier to find than 356. That said, I own two Marlin 30AS’s , one rebated by JES to 356 and one rechambered by Regan Nonneman to 307. Both are great rifles in great rounds.

If pressures are increased, the primers will be seated back into the pocket and will usually be very flat. At this point, the case is still adhering to the chamber wall but is stretching at some point ahead of the web. This point will vary with brass thickness and the peak pressure. In a rifle which locks up solidly, at the front, case stretching is related only to the amount of head clearance. If the rifle action is rear-locking and stretchy, case stretch will be egual to the amount of headclearance plus the linear deflection of the bolt.
During tests I was running using a Lee Enfield, I ran into a situation where the improved cartridge did not adhere to the chamber wall as well as did the standard 303; possibly due to chamber finish.
AI cartridges increase powder capacity; they don't do anything else. GD

P.O. Ackley might have been a fastidious tester and Zeglin might have written a great book about him, but I am of the opinion that at least some of the loads that POA published run at very high pressures such that they might be dangerous to the shooter under some conditions and in some firearems.

Ackley didn't develope many, maybe even most, of the loads shown in his books. Some of the loads are ridiculously hot in most rifles. I got a set of Ackley's books when I was fifteen years old and read them constantly. In his manual Ackley says many of the loads were "submitted". By the way, it took me about a year to decide the whole bolt thrust thing was hokum. I've seen nothing in the intervening 54 year to make me think otherwise. GD

If you want a lesson in breech thrust shoot the standard .25-35 in the Thompson Center Carbine. My 24” carbine had difficulty extracting cases when using low pressure, published load data.
Switching to the .25-35 Ackley Improved case changed the rifle completely.
The TC 24” barrel chambered for the .25-35AI case will easily push various 100 grain bullets above 2,900 fps using several powders. I have pushed the 100 grain bulk Remington bullets to just over 3,000 fps using Alliant Reloder 15 but that is obviously more pressure than is prudent.
The 117 grain bullet is easily pushed above 2,800 fps. I have pushed the 117 grain Sierra Pro Hunter above 2,900 fps – again using Reloder 15 – but this is pushing things.
I have never experienced sticky extraction using the .25-35AI cartridge case.
I have loaded the .30-30 Ackley Improved quite a bit in both Marlin and Winchester lever action rifles. The .30-30AI can be loaded to high pressure in the lever action rifle.
If you need examples of the actual value of the Improved case shape these two cartridges will deliver.

Few of us have the opportunity to read a lot of PO’s writing as he wrote mainly for periodicals and the details of much of his experience are buried with little ability to found.
An easily found little article defining the Improved cartridge is this one:

Wildcat and Improved Cartridges
P O Ackley
Lyman Reloading Handbook 42nd Edition

The purpose of the improved idea is to create more powerful, longer range cartridges than their commercial counterparts by the more simple method of fireforming. Other reasons are to produce a cartridge of more modern design intended to eliminate certain annoying characteristics of some factory versions. Most improved designs take the form of minimum body taper combined with sharp shoulders. This general design results in reduced bolt thrust, reduces stretching or forward flow of brass and increases the case capacity. Any cartridge which is not already over bore capacity can be fire formed to some improved design, thus producing a case of better design and greater powder capacity which in turn makes it possible to hand-load to higher velocity. With factory cartridges with a volume too great for the bore, fireforming can result in little or no increase in velocity.

Often times, claims made for many wildcat and improved cartridges should be closely scrutinized by budding wildcatters. Certainly some small change in an existing cartridge is not going to revolutionize the business. Often velocities are quoted which have been obtained in an individual rifle which for some reason will accept loads which might reduce the average rifle of similar caliber to a pile of junk.

H P White Laboratory wrote a hit piece on PO’s .30-06 Improved case in the December 1953 American Rifleman – How Improved Is It? PO answered his critics in the October 1954 edition of the American Rifleman

Improved Cartridges
P O Ackley
American Rifleman October 1954

The word 'improved' is an unfortunate choice, and just grew up in connection with certain developments which were made with several objectives. One consideration is increased velocity. Another is mechanical improvement, which results in minimizing certain faults of standard cartridges.

My All Time Favorite Ackley Quote:
At the beginning of these comments certain things were pointed out as possible improvements, but nothing was said concerning pressure. Whether the handloader or wildcat enthusiast is right or wrong, he is interested in several things, most important of which are increased velocity and whether the bolt stays in the gun. If he can achieve these two results without serious complications, he is not overly concerned with the actual pressure readings in pounds per square inch.

Here is a picture of PO’s pressure and bolt thrust gun from the article Wildcat Pressures, Handloader 5/6 1966.

Yep. These article and quotations appear in Zeglin's book. The 25/35 is on the top PO's list of most improved cartridges. This could be because factory load were anemic and the AI loads are loaded to to SAMMI pressure. Only a guess. The picture address whether PO actually tested things for himself. I also have no doubt that data was submitted to him as well.

At any rate, my Stevens .30/30 bolt gun will be back in my hands in a week or so. Then can start testing and reporting what I see.

The improved extraction of the 25-35 AI in the T-C carbine is real enouh but is not related to reduced breech thrust. Instead, it is because the spring in the T-C action allows the case to stretch then wedge back into the chamber due to the case taper and moderate shoulder angle. The "improved" case will deflect the breech face just as much but the sharp shoulder will prevent the action from pushing the case forward and the reduced taper requires the case to be pushed forward further to achieve the same amount of adhesion. So, the breech thrust is the same but the effect is lessened.
Another thing which does not occur is the forward flow of brass upon firing, regardless of case shape. Brass will stretch if the action design is such that it allows stretching or if headspace is excessive. Case shape will have no influence on this. Brass flow occurs mostly when sizing and, again, case shape can influence this. GD

Which AI wildcats have SAMMI approved pressure specs?

I would think that the single locking lug Stevens 325, the same as the Savage 340 series, would be a sub-optimal choice to run higher pressure loads in. I've long thought that the Savage 340s chambered in 225 WIN were probably just marginally strong enough to be safe at the 225's operating pressures. For some reason Savage discontinued the 225 chambering after only a few short years.

Some folks are true believers in the gospel of Ackley and some are not.

EDIT: Since Ackely died in August 1989, he is no longer able to speak for himself and many biographers are sycophants who are less than objective in the treatment of their subjects.

Exactly.

Ackley's conclusions about breech thrust were erroneous, but became part of handloading lore.

I believe we are all aware the Contender frame stretches.
My TC rifle barrel was about useles with the standard .25-35 WCF chamber.
Reaming to the Improved case gave me a rifle which will extract cases loaded to considerably higher pressure.
Neck sized cases will chamber and trip the interupter. Case life is good with considerably more than ten loads per case.
The only difference is case shape. I will accept any explanation, and enjoy the very real benefit.

I have shot the 20" .30-30 Improved side by side with the 20" .307 Winchester, the 26" standard .30-30 and the 22" .308 Marlin Express. The .30-30AI can be loaded safetly to higher pressure to compete very favorably with the greater capacity cases.
Because the .30-30AI was not originally intended for use in the lever action rifles it is an interesting side benefit.

If not lever action rifles, what rifles was the 30-30AI intended for? The Winchester 54?

What is the actual case capacity difference between the 30-30 and 30-30AI?