Author Topic: 223 AI  (Read 422 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matt3357

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 428
  • Gender: Male
223 AI
« on: May 07, 2010, 04:33:00 AM »
Anyone ever AI their 223 H&R?  Just been thinking, since it is so easy to ream out a 357 to max, how hard could it be to do the minimal changes to AI the 223.  I may be way off base hear, so set me straight. 

Thanks,
Matt
_____________________________________________________________

Matt

"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election."
-Otto von Bismarck

Offline Matt3357

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 428
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 AI
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2010, 04:35:39 AM »
Ooooo, wow I think I just answered my own question.  The AI doesn't have the taper from the base to the shoulder, so it's not just a matter of moving the shoulder forward, so a gunsmith would have to chuck it up to ream it true.  I guess I'll just stick with my 223

Thanks,
Matt
_____________________________________________________________

Matt

"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election."
-Otto von Bismarck

Offline quickdtoo

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (149)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43301
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 AI
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2010, 06:38:05 AM »
I hand reamed a 270 to Ackley with a reamer from Elk Ridge, the story started after I shot it and found it very inaccurate, learned the barrel wasn't fitted properly, and the barrel face was irregular, so I trued it up and got it fitted well, but the chamber was too shallow to load factory ammo, so it needed to be recut, instead of running a regular 270 reamer into it, I decided to rent an Ackley reamer instead, this was on a fluted bull barrel that is no longer made, so sending it to H&R wasn't an option even tho it was a factory rifle. It shot factory ammo just fine after the rechamber, but it wasn't accurate, after slugging the bore, learned it was .2795" instead of .277", so I shoot handloaded .284" bullet in it which shoot 1" so far.

My point is, you may be able to rechamber it by hand, or just have a smith do it, but if the barrel face isn't shortened first, you won't be able to shoot factory loads to fire form, you'll have to seat bullets long into the lands or create a false shoulder to headspace on, or use one of the bulletless methods of fire forming. Normally when a barrel is Ackleyized, the barrel is turned into the receiver a turn or two, then the chamber is recut, that can't be done on a fixed barrel, so you either end up with an improved-improved chamber that is slightly longer to the shoulder and will have excess headspace until loads are fire formed, or you must remove metal from the chamber face which will require the barrel to be shimmed to be fitted again which is what I did. ;)

Tim
"Always do right, this will gratify some and astonish the rest" -  Mark Twain

Offline Matt3357

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 428
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 AI
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2010, 07:00:48 AM »
So, what you are saying is that its not quite as easy as taking a 357 to max?  :o I thought it was just removing material at the shoulder, I had no clue they shortened the chamber any to do ream it.  Why is it they do that?  I guess I am not picturing it in my mind.  My simple idea went from a mole hill to a mountain.

Thanks,
Matt

After more closely examining the dimensions of both, I see that the base of the neck is lower on the AI than on the regular which means that where there is no material to remove, one cannot remove material.  I guess the final question I have is about the case taper.  I could not find the dimensions of the 270 but I would assumed it is a tapered case as well going to a less tapered case in the AI version.  How did you keep the reamer from wobbling? 
_____________________________________________________________

Matt

"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election."
-Otto von Bismarck

Offline quickdtoo

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (149)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43301
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 AI
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2010, 07:14:09 AM »
The 270 chamber is straight enough to keep the reamer straight, a chambering like the 6.5x55 with a lot of taper wouldn't be a good candidate for hand reaming, I rented the 6.5x55 Ackley reamer at the same time, after placing the reamer in the 6.5x55 chamber, the taper and amount of wobble that would be created, I sent it back unused, just too much taper to do without a lathe. The 223 has less taper than the 270, so I would think if you're careful and place the barrel in a vice so it's vertical and use a nut driver on the reamer to keep side forces to a minimum as I did, it could be done by hand. I did a chamber cast before and after, the after cast was just slightly out of round by .002".

Tim

http://stevespages.com/page8d.htm
"Always do right, this will gratify some and astonish the rest" -  Mark Twain

Offline Matt3357

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 428
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 AI
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2010, 08:28:11 AM »
Thanks Tim, I appreciate all the help.  For now I think I'll leave it as is, I have a few other irons in the fire, but It very well could be a future project.  Thanks for the link too, if I can't get my 22 hornet shooting, I might k it too.  I don't know how you hold all the information you do, but thanks for answering my questions. 

Matt
_____________________________________________________________

Matt

"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election."
-Otto von Bismarck