338 allen express vs. 338-378 weatherby (not starting a war thread)

[B23]

I'm reacting to the implication that rifle +P throating is/was a Defensive Edge technology. If you are aware that it is not. No big deal.

Shawn Carlock was not the inventor of +P for rifles by using long throats. Roy Weatherby was doing that before Shawn was born. There may have been others trying it before Roy.

ELR Researcher can comment on whether he sent is rifle to Shawn Carlock for +P treatment after it was built by Kirby Allen of Allen Precision Rifles. I would not believe so but ELR Researcher will be along shortly to say for sure.

You too, seem to be misinformed if you believe Shawn's +P throat is nothing more than a very long freebore such as Weatherby's have. Again, the +P throat design done by Shawn Carlock with Defensive Edge IS NOT a long freebore. I doubt you could get a patent on freebore and Shawn has his +P throat design patented.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

At the moment I have a 338/26-Nosler, 338 Edge and my 338-378 is disasemble because the previous owner forgot to mention that the barrel was toast. Needs a new barrel.

You too, seem to be misinformed if you believe Shawn's +P throat is nothing more than a very long freebore such as Weatherby's have. Again, the +P throat design done by Shawn Carlock with Defensive Edge IS NOT a long freebore. I doubt you could get a patent on freebore and Shawn has his +P throat design patented.

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Perhaps not, perhaps you are just proud that you have knowledge that no one else has. Perhaps you are a "Defensive Edge" enthusiast/supporter and have a personal desire to suppress anything that would dilute the Defensive Edge branding.

There is no patent on calling something +P. There is no copy right on "+P". There are now "standards" on +P. Even if Shawn has a patent on what ever he does, that does not prevent anyone else from using "+P" as it was a common nomenclature before Shawn added it to the 338 Edge.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

I was just reading Shawn's patent. It's an improved long freebore.

 

[B23]

I was just reading Shawn's patent. It's an improved long freebore.

And again, you simply don't know what you are talking about because the length of the freebore has nothing to do with it because it is not a long freebore. I could be wrong but I believe Shawn can do his +P throat design to any length throat. No chip here at all, my name is Bryan.

 

[ELR Researcher]

Wow... My use of the "expression" of "+P" is simply MY handle for what APS did for me - two barrels. APS never used that expression and the barrels say only ".338 Allen Xpress". Exactly what APS did - no idea other than we clearly discussed that in at least included a long throat.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

And again, you simply don't know what you are talking about because the length of the freebore has nothing to do with it because it is not a long freebore. I could be wrong but I believe Shawn can do his +P throat design to any length throat. No chip here at all, my name is Bryan.

I've been reading the patent and I disagree. Additionally there is no mention of "+P" in the patent. There is no copyright on "+P". There is no industry standard on "+P".

What you implied was that if the throating was not done by Shawn then it could not be "+P". It was done in a snarky, passive aggressive way. I told you from the outset that was the case. You continue to press your point of view even with the facts presented, as such it appears that you do indeed have a chip on your shoulder.

Saying

And again, you simply don't know what you are talking

without knowing who I am is a very poor method of debating. Yes, that is what this is, a debate. An artful conversation.

Unfortunately it is a distraction from someone else's post.

 

[B23]

You may no different and that is fine but I have never ever heard the reference "+P" throat, with regard to a rifle, with the exception of Defensive Edge using it.

Also, I don't recall ever saying the term +P was patented but that seems to be your whole focal point and where you are choosing to keep your point of view.

 

[fmajor]

.....
If one were to "improve" the 338-378 Weatherby the same way the 300 Ackley Improved is an improved 300 Weatherby then the case capacity and performance would be somewhere in between the 338 AX and the 338 AM.

Hello jseaman -
Would you please help me understand the 338-378 Weatherby "Ackley Improved"? I'm not so well-versed on how this would 'look' or how it would actually be "Improved"...

Were I to guess, I'd suspect that Mr. Ackley's improvement would include steeper-angled shoulders, ditch the dual-radius, and reduce the taper on the case body?

Somewhere between the 338AX (Kirby's 338 Lapua Improved) and the 338AM (408 Chey-Tac necked down and "Improved") would be just about perfect!!!

Kirby did have the 338 Raptor, but the brass became non-existent so it had to be shelved....

THanks!!!

 

[Deleted member 46119]

Well, since P.O. Ackley has passed to the great wildcatters bench in the sky and the "338-378 Ackley Improved" does not exist, it's a common vernacular application to the technique of decreasing the body taper and increasing the shoulder angle of a cartridges while maintaining the same base to neck length so that the parent cartridge can be loaded and fired safely with no modifications. Post firing result is fully formed brass for the "improved" version.

You probably know all that. There are quite a few cartridges that have received the "Ackley Improved" treatment by someone other than P.O. Ackley. One such cartridge as you know is the 338 AX.

A cartridge that does not exist except on my "drawing board" (data in my computer) is the 338-378 "Ackley Improved". The 338-378 is a little "bigger" than a 338 AX and smaller than a 338 AM. If I/you apply all the same dimensional changes that P.O. Ackley did to the 300 Weatherby Magnum to make the 300 Ackley to the 338-378 them you would get the cartridge I am referring to. An "Ackley Improved" version of the 338-378.

Add to that there is "basic" brass that is longer than trim to length of the 338-378. Apply the dimensions to that case and make the body as long as possible and there is the 338-378 "Ackley Improved Long".

 

[B23]

Isn't the 338-378 Kubla Khan an improved version of the 338-378 Wby mag and has been around for some time.

I talked to Kirby about the Kubla Khan and he had/made one before he started doing his AX wildcats off of the 338 Lapua parent case and I believe he told me the problem was the brass didn't hold up to very many cycles before they wouldn't hold primers. It's been some time since I talked to him about it so my details are a little fuzzy but I think it was something like that.

 

[fmajor]

Well, since P.O. Ackley has passed to the great wildcatters bench in the sky and the "338-378 Ackley Improved" does not exist, it's a common vernacular application to the technique of decreasing the body taper and increasing the shoulder angle of a cartridges while maintaining the same base to neck length so that the parent cartridge can be loaded and fired safely with no modifications. Post firing result is fully formed brass for the "improved" version.

You probably know all that. There are quite a few cartridges that have received the "Ackley Improved" treatment by someone other than P.O. Ackley. One such cartridge as you know is the 338 AX.

A cartridge that does not exist except on my "drawing board" (data in my computer) is the 338-378 "Ackley Improved". The 338-378 is a little "bigger" than a 338 AX and smaller than a 338 AM. If I/you apply all the same dimensional changes that P.O. Ackley did to the 300 Weatherby Magnum to make the 300 Ackley to the 338-378 them you would get the cartridge I am referring to. An "Ackley Improved" version of the 338-378.

Add to that there is "basic" brass that is longer than trim to length of the 338-378. Apply the dimensions to that case and make the body as long as possible and there is the 338-378 "Ackley Improved Long".

Thank you! Soooo, when ya gonna breathe some life into that 'ol drawing board of yours?!?!

As B23 reminded me (i'm getting a little long in the tooth and short on the memory...), the 338-378 Weatherby "Improved" is the 338-378 Kublai Khan. I recall the discussion i had w/Kirby about it and him stating weak brass was the limiting factor.

Thanks B23!

 

[Deleted member 46119]

The 338-378 Kublai Khan sounded familiar so I looked it up. I never claimed I was original, it looks like what I have drawn up.

I will probably never build a rifle with the 338-378 Kublai Khan. There is more possibility of making a "long" version with Jamison brass. At 145 grains of H20 it is the "right" size for me for a 338 that is bigger than a 338 Edge.

Many people mention "weak" brass for the Weatherby. I have not seen this. Everyone is different.

 

[fmajor]

.....
I will probably never build a rifle with the 338-378 Kublai Khan. There is more possibility of making a "long" version with Jamison brass. At 145 grains of H20 it is the "right" size for me for a 338 that is bigger than a 338 Edge.

Hey Fred -
Which Jamison brass variant would be best to look at for the 145grns of H2O?

Bigger than the Edge or AX, but not quite to 338AM/Snipe-Tac/Big Baer size seems optimal...

 

[Deleted member 46119]

Jamison 460 Weatherby Basic.