30-30 Ackley Imp.

[DRZ400S]

Yep - I have a bunch of 150 gr SP bullets to use up so I did exactly this. The reloads turn a lever action into a single shot but the improved accuracy & flatter trajectory are noticeable.

No single shot needed with the new Hornaday FTX bullets!

 

[Spitpatch]

If you are insisting on "improving" the gun, then go first class or stay at home: 7-30 Waters Improved. I imagine one of the "lesser than Rolls Royce" barrel makers would sell you such a barrel for just about what the gun would sell for, and I don't think any magazine/feed ramp problems would erupt.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[RVTECH]

If you are insisting on "improving" the gun

Personally with all the guns I have (and have had) I have never considered any kind of 'improvement' or Wildcat modifications. While interesting it is an undertaking I have never considered. We have plenty of great cartridges already and if something with greater performance is needed then it is available. Otherwise I load for performance and accuracy in all of my guns and spend my time shooting rather than on the workbench fiddling with parts to 'improve' something - that may not necessarily need it or result in much.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Personally with all the guns I have (and have had) I have never considered any kind of 'improvement' or Wildcat modifications. While interesting it is an undertaking I have never considered. We have plenty of great cartridges already and if something with greater performance is needed then it is available. Otherwise I load for performance and accuracy in all of my guns and spend my time shooting rather than on the workbench fiddling with parts to 'improve' something - that may not necessarily need it or result in much.

True, true.. the regular 22 Hornet etc. is plenty good enough and if not, guess what?. get a .223 or whatever.
indeed

 

[Spitpatch]

Personally with all the guns I have (and have had) I have never considered any kind of 'improvement' or Wildcat modifications. While interesting it is an undertaking I have never considered. We have plenty of great cartridges already and if something with greater performance is needed then it is available. Otherwise I load for performance and accuracy in all of my guns and spend my time shooting rather than on the workbench fiddling with parts to 'improve' something - that may not necessarily need it or result in much.

This is my mantra as well. Although I am a devotee of "Ol' P. O.", and even own a rifle built by him chambered in one of his best ideas (.276 Ackley Magnum: the heirloom seed that would beget the 7x61 Sharpe and Hart, and eventually with bastardization the 7mm Remington Magnum), I have never owned a gun chambered in one of The Master's improved cartridges. To this date I have even (probably to my detriment) ignored the K-Hornet, despite my recent and strange fascination with the regular version. ( I don't think Ackley had much if anything to do with the K-Hornet: Mister Kilbourn gets the good credit here, but it is along his train of thought.)

Once again, if you study Ackley's book(s), you'll find that he is very self-critical of his "improvements", and the ones that are worth the trouble are relatively few, even by his own admission. You don't have to sort it out: he already has done that for you. The .257 Roberts Improved may be his finest contribution. That is one superbly efficient cartridge.

Someday I may do that. But not yet.

 

[orygun]

The 280 Ackley Improved seems to be pretty popular and I've always been leaning towards an Ackley Improved 06, but I completely forgot about Ken Water's 7x30. Oh boy, that would be a great one for a rifle like this. I was just thinking about keeping the same barrel. Shoulda thought a little outside of the box, huh?

 

[RVTECH]

Purely as a 'hobby' I believe messing with wildcats or improved cartridges might be fun but for me it is not anything I would consider either practical - or a hobby. Too many good cartridges to load already and improve on with modern bullets and powder.

 

[Certaindeaf]

True true.. and also, "improving" goes both ways.. don't forget you can "have" a 22 Hornet by loading a .223 down (etc., just an example).. it seems all the "improved" cartridges just go/are for higher velocities.

 

[RVTECH]

it seems all the "improved" cartridges just go/are for higher velocities.

And higher velocity is not necessarily an 'improvement' - I typically load reduced velocities and it always results in better accuracy. The ONLY detractor to this is with my 'new' Blackhawk - it seems to prefer the higher velocity .357 mag ammo - not top end but upper velocity stuff no doubt but then that's what the Blackhawks were designed for.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Oh, and I didn't mean to seem to diss the 22 Hornet.. it was just a figure of speech or whatever. Many a fellow loves that thing such that they'll cast all kinda bullets for it.. plain, gas checked, paper patched and or whatall. I hope you understand.
It's fun though to do the same with a larger capacity .22 too, of course.

 

[Certaindeaf]

And higher velocity is not necessarily an 'improvement' - I typically load reduced velocities and it always results in better accuracy. The ONLY detractor to this is with my 'new' Blackhawk - it seems to prefer the higher velocity .357 mag ammo - not top end but upper velocity stuff no doubt but then that's what the Blackhawks were designed for.

There could be a slight issue/condition there.. which is half common and some loads/loadings are exacerbated by the condition. Perhaps your chambers are smaller than the barrel throat.
castboolits.com gets into that pretty good (well, as did Elmer etc. from the old days).
Your finding would pretty much explain the need or want to have them at full power or close to that.
You'd need to slug the chambers and then the forcing cone/bore.

 

[RVTECH]

Your finding would pretty much explain the need or want to have them at full power or close to that.

I probably did not explain this very well - and I am sure there is nothing wrong with the gun. Because of the weight of the Blackhawk I find I shoot it better with full power .357 as opposed to say Bullseye loaded .38 Special. I believe this is due to the anticipated recoil with .357 (which is not much as it is) but with the .38s is has virtually no recoil and it's like I am shooting an air gun. It just seems to shoot better when I can hear some muzzle blast and feel some recoil.

 

[MarkAd]

I hate to do this, but Ackeley himself said the 30-30 is a cartridge which would not improve much, maybe 3 or 4 %. He would do it but said the improvement was not worth it.

 

[RVTECH]

Australian short range benchrest shooters still sigh and get more gooey over the cartridge than they do Olivia Newton-John.

Most Winchesters have aged better than Olivia Newton-John

 

[Jamie6.5]

I hate to do this, but Ackeley himself said the 30-30 is a cartridge which would not improve much, maybe 3 or 4 %. He would do it but said the improvement was not worth it.

That's not at all what I've found.
When Bob Jourdan researched Ackley's work he found that Ackley judged the 30-30WCF to be the 5th best round for improvement.
Using 150grn bullets, he went from 2390fps on the standard, to 2700fps on the improved version.
That's a 12.9% improvement, and would be considered significant by any standard.
That puts the .30-30 into .300 Savage (Hornady SST) territory.

I'd sure do it if I had the gun and the coin to play.

 

[Certaindeaf]

But you could get a .308 that'd do 2710!. or perhaps 3100 depending on yadda.

 

[Sgt Nambu]

True, true.. the regular 22 Hornet etc. is plenty good enough and if not, guess what?. get a .223 or whatever.
indeed

The best thing about the .22K Hornet is that having the sholder on the case reduces brass flow, a real problem with the original Hornet. I can reload my brass virtually forever when I keep the pressures down to slightly over factory loads. I could get higher velocities but brass is expensive!
I imagine that given the Hornet's similarity to the .30-30's case giving the .30-30 a sholder might have the same effect. SRG

 

[Certaindeaf]

I remember the old days when they'd take (you could use .45acp brass) .308 brass and anneal it and neck it down etc. to like .22 and what.. for use out of a pretty much standard rebarreled 1911.. crazy bastids.

 

[Sgt Nambu]

I remember the old days when they'd take (you could use .45acp brass) .308 brass and anneal it and neck it down etc. to like .22 and what.. for use out of a pretty much standard rebarreled 1911.. crazy bastids.

I hear you, Certain! .50BMG necked down to a phonograph needle!

 

[RVTECH]

Try to find this article from the 1979 Gun Digest - pretty interesting as I remember.

The 444/308 – another 94 Winchester Wildcat by Myron Rockett