280AI Nosler brass alert

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't know yet if there is a difference...but some have said the Nosler ammo might not fit just right in a traditional Ackley chamber due to the headspace being a little different.

Up to .010" headspace is considered OK (though I believe less is much better)...the alleged difference between SAAMI 280 Ackley and traditional 280 Ackley is .014"...which is a little excessive and may cause problems....I emphasize "may" cause problems....because I don't really know yet.

 

[gerry]

I can't see there being any problem using Nosler brass in a Nosler rifle or any other chamber properly cut for the factory 280 AI. All should be good......

 

[PJGunner]

Now you know why I decided to just stay with the original .280 Rem. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Paul B.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

There's no real big issue here....just a little confusion...the SAAMI approved round will become the standard 280 Ackley in a few years and all this will be just something to read about in the history books.

 

[efw]

I don't know about that.

How many of us have grandpa's old rifle?

Hopefully those gunsmiths who have .280 Rem Ackley Improved reamers will continue to Mark barrels as such, and those with the SAAMI standard .280 AI will do the same.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't know about that.

How many of us have grandpa's old rifle?

Hopefully those gunsmiths who have .280 Rem Ackley Improved reamers will continue to Mark barrels as such, and those with the SAAMI standard .280 AI will do the same.

What I meant was...over time, the Nolser/SAAMI version will become the standard/common/what people want version...its inevitable I believe...for example, look at reloading dies.

Redding has both versions...the SAAMI approved version is a standard offering...the "Improved 40" version is available only as a custom ordered die set, which are very expensive...for most people building a new rifle, that alone will make the decision on which chamber they want.

I'm not saying one is any better than the other...just that once something becomes standardized, that version will be the more popular one....its the only economical conclusion...and in a few years, when somebody says "280 Ackley"...they will, 9 times out of 10, be referring to the SAAMI approved version, as opposed to right now...nobody knows what they mean until they specify.

 

[6mm Remington]

Man I'm more confused than ever. Help me out guys. I am having a .280 Remington built and it's not too late to change up things. The barrel is not here yet to be chambered. It is going to be a .280AI and I was going with the Nosler SAAMI specs so I can buy and use their brass and won't have to fire-form 280 brass unless I want to. Question?

Should I go with the standard .280AI or the new Nosler 280AI? If I need to I want to also be able to fire .280 Remington cartridges that are loaded either hand or factory rounds just like Ackley said you could. Will I be able to fire factory .280 cartridges in the Nosler 280 without issues?

 

[Ridgerunner665]

The Nosler/SAAMi version will allow you to get dies easier (less expensive)...I just sent the first payment on my 280 AI, putting my money where my mouth is...I went with the Nosler version, in a Nosler rifle.

You can safely fire regular 280 Remington ammo in either version...if you want to use Nosler brass, most agree its better to get the Nosler/SAAMI version, though I suspect you could fire form Nosler brass in the the old chamber if you were careful (use the bullet to keep the case against the bolt)....the ONLY possible issue is Nosler brass in the old type chamber...and like I said, I "think" that could be worked around, as long as you knew about it ahead of time.

I can think of no good reason not to go with the SAAMI approved version...it will only simplify things going forward.


SOMEBODY...be it Nosler or SAAMI, needs to issue a press release on this topic...clear the air, share the facts, etc.

It can't hurt anything to do that...no risk that I can see...and it may well help sales...most folks won't spend weeks researching as I have done before buying a rifle...they'll have a 280 Ackley built (not specifying the chamber type), use Nosler brass...maybe have problems...then blame Nosler.

I think getting ahead of it is a good idea...but then, I'm no expert either.

 

[DrMike]

Ridgerunner gave you good advice, David. Nosler 280 AI is the SAAMI standard. Specify that you will be using Nosler brass and you will be fine.

 

[alaska100]

Ridgerunner gave you good advice, David. Nosler 280 AI is the SAAMI standard. Specify that you will be using Nosler brass and you will be fine.

+1

David, I dont want to over simplify this, but it is as simple as what Ridgerunner has stated. You will have no problem using regular 280 Rem loads. We have two totally different 280 AI rifles that use Nosler Brass and everything works just fine and they can both use the 280 Rem with no problem. I personally dont feel Nosler has done anything wrong, in fact what they did was what they should have done IMHO ,and therefore they would have no reason to put out any type of warning.

However, Ridgerunner makes a good point about the press release as a sales tool as well as an educational tool.

This exact topic has been hashed out in several different venues, each time coming to the same conclusion. What did Nosler do wrong ? Nothing

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't think Nosler did anything wrong...that was Remington/SAAMI that made that call...

And that is my point...people are blaming Nosler for something they had no control over.

I'm not saying Nosler should point fingers at whoever may be to blame either...I'm just saying somebody needs to step up and clarify this issue...loudly.

Loud enough that the word spreads and people go into the 280 Ackley with all the facts...maybe it's not Noslers place to do it...I don't know...but it is their brass, and they brought the 280 Ackley to the dance, so to speak.

I hate that the 280 Ackley has been such a pain in the butt to Nosler regarding this issue...Its such a great round, too good to be drowned in negative press like it is.

 

[Dwh7271]

Ok.
Now I'm confused.
Seems to me if you can fire standard 280s in the AI chamber and they fireform to that chamber with a heckuva gap in there until they form and you have Nosler brass that worries you why not run a non max load in the Nosler brass, shoot it and fireform it and now you're good to go.
Either that or toss it and buy some 280 brass and form off it.
I understand the irritation, believe me but I guess this is why they're called wildcats.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

http://faq.nosler.com/index.php?action= ... artlang=en

I just stumbled across that today...if I'm understanding that right...its saying the rifles that have problems with Nosler brass were not chambered right to begin with...

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Ok.
Now I'm confused.
Seems to me if you can fire standard 280s in the AI chamber and they fireform to that chamber with a heckuva gap in there until they form and you have Nosler brass that worries you why not run a non max load in the Nosler brass, shoot it and fireform it and now you're good to go.
Either that or toss it and buy some 280 brass and form off it.
I understand the irritation, believe me but I guess this is why they're called wildcats.

There is no "heckuva gap"....standard 280 ammo headspaces just fine in either chamber.

Its the Nosler brass/ammo that has issues in the old style Ackley chambers...but yes, it can be fire formed and work just fine.

 

[Dwh7271]

Sorry, I misspoke.
I meant around the cartridge, shoulders and such.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I also want to add that if all this is in fact true...and the SAAMI/Nosler round is .014" shorter at the shoulder...it is just further proof that Remington could, and will, tear up an anvil with a Q-tip.

Bad choice...following Remingtons lead on this...just look at their history with the 280 Remington, they loaded it weak from the start, they re-named it it a couple of times...the round could have been a lot more popular than it is had they made good decisions then.

I would not have trusted them to do any better with the Ackley version...

That said...I don't guess there's any real damage done...the .014" in capacity won't be missed (not enough to matter)...but it sucks that all the confusion had to play out, and that most folks seem to be blaming Nosler.

Maybe Nosler should try to get it renamed "284 Nosler" :mrgreen:

I believe I owe both Nosler and Remington an apology for the above....when I posted that, I just hadn't done my homework...so, I apologize.

I now know that all of the Ackley rounds are prone to not spacing right with only a .004" crush fit...thats why Remington dropped it back another .010"...to ensure the round spaced right and blew the shoulders out instead of stretching at the web after the firing pin knocked it forward.

So I'd like to take this opportunity to say Thank You to both Nosler and Remington for a job well done!

 

[SJB358]

So I'd like to take this opportunity to say Thank You to both Nosler and Remington for a job well done!

Man, I'd probably have to have a shot of something strong to choke down that Thank you to the 2nd one... :shock:

 

[Ridgerunner665]

So I'd like to take this opportunity to say Thank You to both Nosler and Remington for a job well done!

Man, I'd probably have to have a shot of something strong to choke down that Thank you to the 2nd one... :shock:

Yeah...it took me a few minutes to work up the fortitude... :lol:

 

[rick smith]

I have fired Nosler 280AI brass in three different old chambers without a problem. They fire form to the old chamber just fine. To me it is a non-problem. Just forming regular 280 brass to either chamber isn't a problem. Much ado about nothing IMHO.Rick.

 

[longrangehunter]

Wow has this been spoken about so many times over various forums I'm scratching my head thinking what is really going on?

Well I looked over the printed data from SAAMI for the chamber and the ammo, basically it is the point at which the measurement is taken on the shoulder (it's taken at .375 the datum line on the shoulder) vs. the neck/shoulder junction as on the traditional Ack. Imp. 40 degree.

I will negate the .014" and just look at the measurements from brass to brass.

So I measured (5) pieces of new Nosler Brass (bought in 2008) vs. (5) twice fired that had already been fire-forming to the Ack. Imp. case (3x), as well as (5) once fire-formed 280 Remington in a 280 AI Traditional chamber done by Kenny Jarrett. All the Remington brass in 12-14 years old, not that it should matter.

So here's the measurements using a Head N' Shoulder's gage (which mine may produce a slightly different number then your own only because it could have been cut differently and taking the measurement from a slightly different point along the shoulder)? :

New Nosler unfired 280 AI brass 2.1380"-2.1400"
3x Remington 280 Fire-formed brass 2.1380"-2.1400" (F/F by Kenny then twice fired brass)
Jarrett Remington fire-formed brass 2.1335"-2.1350" (Kenny has a barrel just to F/F brass)
Remington brass F/F in my chamber 2.1335"-2.1355" (light load bullets into the lands)

I will say the New Nosler brass is a closer match to my chamber simply because it takes 4-5 firings for brass to form closer the the real chamber dimension, that and the COAL is much closer to my chamber (2.5535" -.024" = 2.5295 trim to length) Nosler brass is 2.5220"-2.5225" vs. 2.5110"-2.5140" COAL for Remington F/F brass..... short neck on the Remington F/F brass vs. the Nosler Brass (for my chamber).

Note: I never trim to published trim lengths, the very all over the place from gun to gun. So I measure them using a Sinclair chamber length gage when the gun is brand new, so no carbon can form and give a false reading, and use that measurement -.024" for the Trim-to-length.

I don't know about who said what or why Woods had issues in the first place but chamber reaming can be done incorrectly and/or brass manufactured out of spec or something else for that matter? I don't know but there's the comparisons I found.

I will fire-form, or should I say fire the Nosler Brass in my chamber and post the dimensions after fire-forming them in my chamber but I don't see a reason too since they match my 3x fire-formed Remington brass. I'll add that I will "WORK UP" to a known load to the same velocity since this is a different component, (brass used).

Hope that sheds some light on all the what ifs about were did the .014" go to? But maybe I don't understand the real issue and I'm missing something? Could be that I'm old and losing my mind? I don't know but they measure the exact same to my chamber. And it's been cut twice 2003 and 1999.