Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Has the 'Fire Changed? Read This Old Thread

The topic is one of Ken's cartridges. The main posters are, Ken, Big Stick,IIFID [CAT], with a guest appearance by TLEE.

It was on the Ask Ken Howell forum which was the forerunner of Ask the Gunwriters.

A little different tone than some of you newer guys might have expected.




#46403 - 01/11/02 10:25 AM .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
If It Flies It Dies Offline
Campfire Guide

Registered: 02/05/01
Posts: 4092
Loc: TEXAS
Dr. Howell:

As you know, I have a set of dies for the .220 Howell. I also have a worn out m700 .308 barrel that is still attached to a 700. I am considering rebarreling to one of the above. I know there was a considerable discussion on the .220 Howell here a year or so back but I can't find it. Would you be so kind as to compare the 2 cartridges and refresh my failing memory re. the .220. TIA CAT

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
CI16728
#46404 - 01/11/02 12:29 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Big Stick Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 37649
Loc: Paradise,Alaska
Those are two distinctly different animals,both in size and performance.

I would be curious to weigh the virtues of Ken's 220 vs the 220Swift Ackley Improved?.....................

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46405 - 01/11/02 05:12 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Ken Howell Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 12/14/00
Posts: 29227
The .220 Howell can (with IMR 7828 or Ramshot Magnum) propel 75-grain and 80-grain bullets at about 3,500 ft/sec without taking peak pressures above about 50,000 lb/sq in. The .223s and the Swifts can match or beat this velocity only at the risk of higher peak pressures (60,000 to 65,000 lb/sq in.) and with much lighter bullets that don't have anything like the 0.44 and 0.42 ballistic coefficients of these heavier, more drag-resistant bullets.

The significant differences in performance are retained energy, reduced drop, and reduced wind deflection at long range. IOW, flatter trajectory and greater down-range impact than any other .224 cartridge.

IIFID, send that M700 to Greg Richards in Hobbs, NM, and have him put one of his bench-rest .224 barrels on it. He has the best reamer for this cartridge and makes some of the best barrels at some of the best prices. If you want to use the .220 Howell on deer, he also makes a hunting-tough 80-grain bullet for it. (505) 392-1515

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46406 - 01/11/02 08:42 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Ken Howell Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 12/14/00
Posts: 29227
IIFID, one set of comparisons that I made -- which you may have seen on one of these boards about ten months ago -- compared my .220 Howell and the .22-6mm Remington. These two are almost the same size -- 56.6 grains of water (.22-6mm) versus 61.2 grains of water (.220 Howell). I ran several comparative simulations by computer, using of course the same criteria for both cartridges.

The same .224 bullet -- the 75-grain Hornady A-Max
One velocity -- 3,500 ft/sec
To see, in the first comparison,
(a) which powders and charges would propel the same bullet at the same muzzle velocity
(b) the peak pressure resulting from each charge in each case

In the .22-6mm,
52.0 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 56,540 lb/sq in.
48.4 gr IMR 7828 -- 56,896 lb/sq in.
49.0 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 54,994 lb/sq in.

In the .220 Howell:
54.6 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 50,465 lb/sq in.
50.7 gr IMR 7828 -- 51,299 lb/sq in.
51.3 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 49,835 lb/sq in.

For my second comparison, I used the same bullet and the same three powders to see
(a) which charge of each powder would produce
(b) which velocity
at the typical SAAMI maximum peak pressure of 60,000 lb/sq in.

In the .22-6mm,
52.8 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 3,563 ft/sec
47.9 gr IMR 7828 -- 3,459 ft/sec
50.2 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 3,596 ft/sec

In the .220 Howell,
56.6 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 3,766 ft/sec
51.1 gr IMR 7828 -- 3,631 ft/sec
53.8 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 3,794 ft/sec

For my third comparison, with the same bullet and the same powders, I checked to see
(a) which charge of each powder would produce
(b) which velocity
at my preferred maximum peak pressure of 50,000 lb/sq in.

In the .22-6mm,
50.4 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 3,368 ft/sec
46.6 gr IMR 7828 -- 3,358 ft/sec
47.6 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 3,394 ft/sec

In the .220 Howell,
53.9 gr Ramshot Magnum -- 3,549 ft/sec
49.8 gr IMR 7828 -- 3,531 ft/sec
50.9 gr Vihtavuori N560 -- 3,570 ft/sec

Since both these cartridges are significantly larger than the .220 Swift and .220 Ackley Improved Swift, the performances of both the .22-6mm and the .220 Howell are correspondingly better than either version of the Swift can produce under the same criteria. The .220 Howell, for example, is about 25% to 30% more capacious than the original Swift.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46407 - 01/12/02 11:14 AM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Big Stick Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 37649
Loc: Paradise,Alaska
So it is very close to the 22-284 or 22-240Wby,in regards to capacity?

Ken,might you know if Weatherby is still contemplating the 22-240Wby in Factory guise. I'd heard scuttlebutt to that affect,some time ago. Was curious if you had feelers in that department,that would allow you to speculate?...............


Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46408 - 01/12/02 12:29 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Ken Howell Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 12/14/00
Posts: 29227
For both questions here, I have to fall back on my all-time handiest and most accurate answer:

I don't know.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46409 - 01/12/02 12:42 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Big Stick Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 37649
Loc: Paradise,Alaska
That is my standard answer as well............

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46410 - 01/16/02 01:21 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
DB Bill Offline
Campfire Guide

Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 2578
Loc: California
Ken...you mentioned pressures of 60K to 64K psi for the hot Swifts and .223s...what does that equate to in cup?

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46411 - 01/16/02 10:37 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
T LEE Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 02/20/01
Posts: 68332
Loc: Punta Gorda, FL
Obviously I am not Ken, but as I understand it PSI (pounds per square inch) and CUP (copper units of pressure) are interchangable terms.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46412 - 01/16/02 11:05 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Big Stick Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 37649
Loc: Paradise,Alaska
They are two different units of measure and not interchangeable...........

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46413 - 01/16/02 11:36 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Ken Howell Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 12/14/00
Posts: 29227
"... pressures of 60K to 64K psi for the hot Swifts and .223s...what does that equate to in cup?"

Only very, VERY approximately, about 50,000 to 55,000 c u p -- lb/sq in. is a precise unit; c u p is a VERY loose approximation without any firm foundation. So there's no way to equate either unit to the other with any hope of precision.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46414 - 01/16/02 11:48 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Partsman Offline
Campfire Tracker

Registered: 07/03/01
Posts: 6281
Loc: PoCo, B.C. Canada
As Big Stick says, in one of my books the standard for a 7MM Remington Magnum is 52,000 CUP while the same load with the other scale would be 61,000 psi. The difference between the two systems of measurement varies from one cartridge to the next, and some cartridges like the 45-70 are the same for CUP or psi-28,000. So there would appear to be no apparent correlation between the two systems, that would allow a side by side comparison.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46415 - 01/17/02 07:20 AM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
T LEE Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 02/20/01
Posts: 68332
Loc: Punta Gorda, FL
Well thats what I get for thinkin'. I had read that somewhere in the dim past and believed it. OH well.

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46416 - 01/17/02 09:01 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
big hunter Offline
Campfire Regular

Registered: 01/29/01
Posts: 727
Loc: Alum Bank, PA, U.S.A.
psi- pounds per square inch
CUP- copper units of pressure (whatever that is)

Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#46417 - 01/17/02 11:04 PM Re: .220 Howell v. .223 Ackley Imp.
Partsman Offline
Campfire Tracker

Registered: 07/03/01
Posts: 6281
Loc: PoCo, B.C. Canada
Well as you can imagine the psi refers to pressure exerted with equal force over a square inch, and the copper units of pressure refers to the amount of pressure it takes to crush a calibrated copper cylinder of a known hardness, which then is measured and compared to a Tarage Table to convert the measurement to pressure.

Quite a bit more formal and informative than what is typically found today.

Quit being a whiney little puzzy. Get the sand out of your vagina you worthless POS, what the he!! is wrong with you? You must be one of them scum sucking low life muthas from XXX... I think I heard about you. You were so ugly when you were a kid they fed you with a sling shot and your parents told the neighbors you were a retarded orphan and they felt sorry for you...


What's not to love about todays campfire?

Well, Big Stick is held up today as being mean, hateful, insulting, etc., and the truth is, he came to earn those terms at times.

IIFID was referred to not long ago in a thread as a "rich guy who was always offering bets". Yeah, he became bad about that.

As far Ken, you can see he was treated with a lot of respect by some very contentious members. Now there's a small minority who treat him with disdain.

Things change. Schitt happens.

Not one single "GFY".

I'm thinking you are just what he is referring to.

I think the dude was offering it up in jest.

Gene, I've been a pretty prolific poster on other forums and what has happened to the Campfire is pretty typical. For one thing, there is a lot more traffic now than there was then and with more traffic you get more assclowns as well as good members. Also typically, as forums age, they typically get some hangarounds that fancy themselves somehow more entitled because they've been there a long time and know people. Generally you get a few who go to meet and greets and get to know others. They typically will DIE for each other they become so close. Whether that aspect is good or bad depends but with it comes the flaming of anybody outside the group who dares to have an opinion that is not one of the group.

I've seen Ken's stock go down here along with a couple of other people who I won't mention for fear of drawing flames to them. TRH certainly was a very respected member until about 2007 or so when people started lying about him. There are others though. Then there are some who can do some of the most heinous crap and still are beloved.

Much like in normal life.

Offered in jest or not, that kind of post should have no place on this forum.

In the beginning Ken and Stick were both treasures. Some really bad things happened in Stick's life and he changed. I had some rows with Stick after the change but there is no doubt the man knows manure from shinola.

I'm not complaining about anything or anybody.I just revisited some old threads to see if things really were the way I remembered them.

Here's a couple posts from a different thread where Ken "scolds" us because we didn't agree with him about blowing up rifles from using case head expansion.

This is about as violent as it got back then.:

Measuring case head expansion
curdog4570 Offline
Campfire 'Bwana

Registered: 02/18/01
Posts: 13873
Loc: North texas usa
Some very good points are being raised in response to my original question;How do you do it? Here are some points I[ FWIW ] keep in mind:

1.One cannot prove a negative.Therefore,one man may prove to his own satisfaction that the method-however he interprets the mic readings-has merit.Noone can prove it is without merit.

2.Strain-gaging is not without it's detractors.

3.The people gathering data for publishing reloading manuals arrive at different conclusions using the same [ in some intances ]methods of measuring for chamber pressures.

4.Anyone interested enough to moniter his cases is not the sort of guy who is likely to blow himself up by using too much of the right powder.

5.A modern rifle action is PROBABLY--I said probably--not going to destruct at even 20 percent over maximum design pressures.I say this not because I have inside information,but because the practice of using proof loads would not have had any value unless they were in that range at least.

Just the wanderings of an idle mind.


Top Reply Quote Quick Reply Quick Quote Notify Email Post
#19158 - 04/24/01 10:20 AM Re: Measuring case head expansion
Ken Howell Offline
Campfire Oracle

Registered: 12/14/00
Posts: 29227
I give up. There's too much specious* "reasoning" here for me. I've shot all these points down, repeatedly, for months and years, and so have others, and they just keep cropping up and attracting ardent followers. The support is flawed and easily disproved, but you fellows are just too many for me. I'm simply worn out from trying to warn of the dangers that I fervently hope NEVER befall you. Others have already concluded that measuring web expansion is a weed idea that can't be killed, and I've finally reached that conclusion too.

Come to your own conclusions, mike cases to your hearts' content, and pray that you're as safe as you've convinced yourself that you are.

Shalom!

* "spe�cious (sp��sh�s) adj. 1. Having the ring of truth or plausibility but actually fallacious: 'a specious argument.' 2. Deceptively attractive."
[American Heritage Dictionary]

Yea. He's endured some tough blows and I may be a minority, but I still get a lot out of his posts and enjoy reading them for the most part.

Shame I can't dig up some Christ at the Campfire posts from the 'good old days'

That's why it was laid out there. Consensus building.

A lot of members really respected his jew-baiting and the straight poop on vaccines and the CIA's bombing of the Boston Marathon.

Some of those were worse than just embarrassing. Blane mad a reply to you that nearly made me throw up. Never understood some of the crap that happened there.

Some of those were worse than just embarrassing. Blane mad a reply to you that nearly made me throw up. Never understood some of the crap that happened there.

You and I don't always see eye to eye but that was way beyond excusable and none of it was your fault.

Hey I thought I was the only one that didn't see eye to eye with Steelhead. Don't feel so bad now. GW

Ummmm.....