• Basic Interior-Ballistics Fact — to increase the muzzle velocity of a given bullet from a given length of barrel, use more powder.
• Basic Interior-Ballistics Fact — to decrease the maximum average peak pressure, increase the capacity of the case.
• Basic Interior-Exterior-Ballistics Fact — the longer the powder gas propels the bullet toward the muzzle, the bullet exits at a higher velocity.
• Basic Exterior-Ballistics Fact — bullets with higher ballistic coefficients travel faster at long ranges, with “flatter” trajectories, than bullets with lower ballistic coefficients.
The .224 Laser, a scientifically engineered varmint cartridge, is designed on the basis of combining these fundamental facts of small-arms ballistics — specifically (a) to propel the 75-grain Hornady A-Max (or similar bullet) to its maximum muzzle velocity, (b) at or slightly below the maximum average peak pressure of 50,000 pounds per square inch, (c) with the net capacity of the case filled to 90%–100% (with no excess air space, and the powder never compressed or tamped tight, for the best possible burning).
As results of optimizing these criteria in the design of the .224 Laser, about 56–58 grains of a very slow powder propels the 75-grain Hornady A-Max bullet from a 26-inch barrel at more than 3,400 feet per second, at an average peak pressure of about 50,000 pounds per square inch or slightly less. This bullet, though it exits the muzzle faster than lighter bullets from .220 Swift factory loads, travels faster and faster than the lighter Swift bullets beyond about 200 yards. And of course, since it's up to 50% heavier, it delivers a good bit more energy at every point along its way.
Increasing the maximum average peak pressure to 60,000 or slightly more pounds per square inch produces very little more muzzle velocity. And until bullet-makers make 0.224 bullets with stronger jackets, this is the fastest that this bullet can travel without coming apart just a few feet from the muzzle.
There is, of course, no factory ammo or brass with the head stamp “.224 Laser” — a negligible concern for the dedicated wildcatter. Brass for this wildcat is easily formed from good .25-06 brass (Winchester, Norma, Hornady, Federal, or Nosler, for example) by either of two methods — • with form dies and loading dies from such makers as RCBS, Hornady, or Redding or • with this procedure — (a) using an 8x57mm Mauser sizing die to swage the outer (lower) ring of the shoulder back to the body-shoulder junction of the .224 Laser (b) using a 7x57mm Mauser sizing die backed-off about an eighth of an inch to swage the inner (upper) shoulder back far enough for the .224 Laser sizing die to complete the conversion. (Once the dimension of this back-off is determined, a precise spacer may be a big help for ease and consistency if resetting the lock ring on the 7x57mm sizer is undesirable for some reason.) (c) then full-length forming the case in the .224 Laser sizing die — then trimming the case to 2.400 inches long, reaming (or turning) the neck, and chamfering the mouth, as necessary.
The resulting neck will be formed from a lower part of the original .25-06 case, which is slightly harder and slightly thicker than the .25-06 neck, so it's probably wise to anneal the neck and shoulder before re-forming the case by either of the above methods. Can't hurt.
Varmint-shooters can have their barrels chambered and fitted by • Greg Cameron in Sierra Vista, Arizona (he has the original .224 Laser tooling), or by • any other qualified rifle-maker who has or can get the .224 Laser reamers and headspace gauges
The designer's detailed specification drawing (for ordering reamers and gauges) is available free of charge, for a self-addressed postage-paid business envelope, from Ken Howell, Box 28, Quemado, NM 87829.
• Basic Interior-Ballistics Fact — to increase the muzzle velocity of a given bullet from a given length of barrel, use more powder.
• Basic Interior-Ballistics Fact — to decrease the maximum average peak pressure, increase the capacity of the case.
• Basic Interior-Exterior-Ballistics Fact — the longer the powder gas propels the bullet toward the muzzle, the bullet exits at a higher velocity.
• Basic Exterior-Ballistics Fact — bullets with higher ballistic coefficients travel faster at long ranges, with “flatter” trajectories, than bullets with lower ballistic coefficients.
The .224 Laser, a scientifically engineered varmint cartridge, is designed on the basis of combining these fundamental facts of small-arms ballistics — specifically (a) to propel the 75-grain Hornady A-Max (or similar bullet) to its maximum muzzle velocity, (b) at or slightly below the maximum average peak pressure of 50,000 pounds per square inch, (c) with the net capacity of the case filled to 90%–100% (with no excess air space, and the powder never compressed or tamped tight, for the best possible burning).
As results of optimizing these criteria in the design of the .224 Laser, about 56–58 grains of a very slow powder propels the 75-grain Hornady A-Max bullet from a 26-inch barrel at more than 3,400 feet per second, at an average peak pressure of about 50,000 pounds per square inch or slightly less. This bullet, though it exits the muzzle faster than lighter bullets from .220 Swift factory loads, travels faster and faster than the lighter Swift bullets beyond about 200 yards. And of course, since it's up to 50% heavier, it delivers a good bit more energy at every point along its way.
Increasing the maximum average peak pressure to 60,000 or slightly more pounds per square inch produces very little more muzzle velocity. And until bullet-makers make 0.224 bullets with stronger jackets, this is the fastest that this bullet can travel without coming apart just a few feet from the muzzle.
There is, of course, no factory ammo or brass with the head stamp “.224 Laser” — a negligible concern for the dedicated wildcatter. Brass for this wildcat is easily formed from good .25-06 brass (Winchester, Norma, Hornady, Federal, or Nosler, for example) by either of two methods — • with form dies and loading dies from such makers as RCBS, Hornady, or Redding or • with this procedure — (a) using an 8x57mm Mauser sizing die to swage the outer (lower) ring of the shoulder back to the body-shoulder junction of the .224 Laser (b) using a 7x57mm Mauser sizing die backed-off about an eighth of an inch to swage the inner (upper) shoulder back far enough for the .224 Laser sizing die to complete the conversion. (Once the dimension of this back-off is determined, a precise spacer may be a big help for ease and consistency if resetting the lock ring on the 7x57mm sizer is undesirable for some reason.) (c) then full-length forming the case in the .224 Laser sizing die — then trimming the case to 2.400 inches long, reaming (or turning) the neck, and chamfering the mouth, as necessary.
The resulting neck will be formed from a lower part of the original .25-06 case, which is slightly harder and slightly thicker than the .25-06 neck, so it's probably wise to anneal the neck and shoulder before re-forming the case by either of the above methods. Can't hurt.
Varmint-shooters can have their barrels chambered and fitted by • Greg Cameron in Sierra Vista, Arizona (he has the original .224 Laser tooling), or by • any other qualified rifle-maker who has or can get the .224 Laser reamers and headspace gauges
The designer's detailed specification drawing (for ordering reamers and gauges) is available free of charge, for a self-addressed postage-paid business envelope, from Ken Howell, Box 28, Quemado, NM 87829.
Well,we got the answer,but who asked the question?
I shoot a 1-8" twist 220 Swift. My coyote load is a 69 grain Sierra, either MK or TMK at 3300. I love it, works great. I have tried the 75 Berger too, and they work well. I just picked up the 75 AMAX this weekend to try too. They better go over 3000 or I will be very disappointed though. Even the Berger 64 Varmint would make it up to about 3200+ before they started coming apart, AMAX should do better than that IMO.
I thought so. I hear of lots of people running them 3400+, that's why I bought them. Should be good coyote medicine. The SMK is so dang accurate in my rifle though I have a hard time making myself try other things. Good problem to have.
This sounds like my .224 MBOC. It has a 9" twist by doesn't like 75 grain A-Maxes for which it was built. It loves Nosler 55 grainers @ 4,000 feet per second; which is 200 feet from maximum, but this is where the accuracy came in.
I thought so. I hear of lots of people running them 3400+, that's why I bought them. Should be good coyote medicine. The SMK is so dang accurate in my rifle though I have a hard time making myself try other things. Good problem to have.
I'd sacrifice some accuracy in trade for the Gay-Max.
I'm running the 75 Amax out of a 22/243 Win, 26 1/2" Shilen with a .250 neck at 3550 fps. I have run em up to 3650 but it opened up, at 3550 it shoots in the mid .2s. Have shot crows from 100-450 and yotes to 700 and they do impressive things to varmints at that speed .
Didn't even consider chronographing the excessive loads that were destroying bullets, and had no interest in establishing any lower threshold of performance.
The purpose of this entire design concept was to determine the most, not less, that would produce usable performance — the maximum muzzle velocity, the maximum down-range energy, the “flattest” trajectory, the least wind drift, the shortest time of flight. The loads that destroyed bullets were clearly excessive, so there was no practical point in testing them further.
The investigation did, of course, include a number of variations in the determining factors to establish the points that could not be exceeded without entirely destroying performance.
Never was there any interest in how much less of any determinant would produce usable performance. The sole purpose of the entire investigation was finding the most that produced desirable field performance.
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit.
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullet are actually shot and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet are totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die, are all that count.
And that is the damned truth.
Steve
Steve for president and honorary King of the Campfire. I get tired of fast twist, High BC and al the other crap that still doesn't kill any deader than a hit from a good shot...
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullet are actually shot and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet are totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die, are all that count.
And that is the damned truth.
Steve
Steve for president and honorary King of the Campfire. I get tired of fast twist, High BC and al the other crap that still doesn't kill any deader than a hit from a good shot...
My friend Shrapnel,
Yep, I get tired of theory and total bullshit.
Lots of shooting and trigger time is all that counts.
For craps sakes, I've shot beside Johnny B with his little .22 Hornet and Gail Root and his silly .221 Fireball rifle and they both out-shot the sh1t out of me with my .223 Ackley.
The MAN, the damned rifleman, is way more important than some theoretical piece of bullshit. Bullets fired and trigger time is what it's all about.
I apologize if I stepped on some theoretical toes, but you KNOW I speak the damned truth. After all, I've launched more boolits than most.
Didn't even consider chronographing the excessive loads that were destroying bullets, and had no interest in establishing any lower threshold of performance.
The purpose of this entire design concept was to determine the most, not less, that would produce usable performance — the maximum muzzle velocity, the maximum down-range energy, the “flattest” trajectory, the least wind drift, the shortest time of flight. The loads that destroyed bullets were clearly excessive, so there was no practical point in testing them further.
The investigation did, of course, include a number of variations in the determining factors to establish the points that could not be exceeded without entirely destroying performance.
Never was there any interest in how much less of any determinant would produce usable performance. The sole purpose of the entire investigation was finding the most that produced desirable field performance.
You stated that any twist faster than 9 would result in the A-Max coming unglued. So I was hoping you wrote down the speeds when you saw that happen.
But at least now I know it will happen if things become "excessive."
The only downside is shrapnel belittles that poor rifle every time I manage to hit something with it.
Travis
The killingest gun on the PD Invitational firing line still ended up as a 222 Remington magnum against all the other hotrods.
Yee haw. the Invitational was closed, but Steve has just earned himself a spot. Let me know if you want to come up and do it. The best the Campfire has to offer will be there...
The killingest gun on the PD Invitational firing line still ended up as a 222 Remington magnum against all the other hotrods.
Yee haw. the Invitational was closed, but Steve has just earned himself a spot. Let me know if you want to come up and do it. The best the Campfire has to offer will be there...
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit.
And that is the damned truth.
Steve
I like this version of Steve...not that I don't like the original.
I like to use my unscientific load of 26grains of some kinda military surplus powder and 55 grain Dogtown,Hornady,Varmint extreme, what evers on sale in my 223 Wilde Rocky Varmint AR.I load up ammo in 10 lb.lots and go kill stuff with its 1/8 twist Wilson barrel.More fun than a barrel full of puking monkeys!@!!!
The 220 Laser and 220 Howell are the same thing for those who didn't know. I didn't like the effort it took to make brass from 25-06 so I quit trying. It becomes a labor of love rather than a matter of practicality. I chambered a total of one rifle in this caliber and decided I would be better off with a faster 6 than trying to make 22 bullets do something they really weren't intended to do. I get using 75 grain Amax and the ilk when forced to use a service rifle to shoot 600 yards. I don't get it when you can use any rifle in any caliber you want. If you want to shoot coyotes at 600 yards with moderate recoil it's hard to beat a flat shooting 6 such as the .243AI.
The 220 Laser and 220 Howell are the same thing for those who didn't know. I didn't like the effort it took to make brass from 25-06 so I quit trying. It becomes a labor of love rather than a matter of practicality. I chambered a total of one rifle in this caliber and decided I would be better off with a faster 6 than trying to make 22 bullets do something they really weren't intended to do. I get using 75 grain Amax and the ilk when forced to use a service rifle to shoot 600 yards. I don't get it when you can use any rifle in any caliber you want. If you want to shoot coyotes at 600 yards with moderate recoil it's hard to beat a flat shooting 6 such as the .243AI.
Had you gone the easy route you'd have more love for the .224 heavies.
About a half mil worth here. Launched from a 22-250 for those interested in the short way around the barn:
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit.
And that is the damned truth.
Another damned truth is that several veteran varmint-shooters with beaucoup hours of trigger time in prairie-dog villages have proved — in the field — that the .224 Laser with real 75-grain Hornady A-Max bullets consistently does exactly what it was designed to be — an ultimate long-range varmint cartridge.
There's no imaginary fantasy or empty Internet theorizing in this report.
I've killed dozens (if not hundreds) of prairie dogs, marmots, and other varmints, at ranges in the hundreds of yards, with .223s, .22-250s, .220 Swift, even a .250 Savage and a .257 Roberts, and several of us with comparable experience have proved that the .224 Laser is a better long-range varmint cartridge than any of the others.
In the immortal words of Pepe LePew, "Eef you 'ave not tried eet, do not knock eet!"
The 220 Laser and 220 Howell are the same thing for those who didn't know. I didn't like the effort it took to make brass from 25-06 so I quit trying. It becomes a labor of love rather than a matter of practicality. I chambered a total of one rifle in this caliber and decided I would be better off with a faster 6 than trying to make 22 bullets do something they really weren't intended to do. I get using 75 grain Amax and the ilk when forced to use a service rifle to shoot 600 yards. I don't get it when you can use any rifle in any caliber you want. If you want to shoot coyotes at 600 yards with moderate recoil it's hard to beat a flat shooting 6 such as the .243AI.
Had you gone the easy route you'd have more love for the .224 heavies.
About a half mil worth here. Launched from a 22-250 for those interested in the short way around the barn:
Dave
22 seconds until the jug was hit, I could sneak up on an elephant faster than that and I have a BC .0003...
I set back an 8 twist barrel that was dedicated to the 80 grain SMK three times,....and the guys at sierra TOLD me that those long, snaky, "grey smoke" prone bullets WOULD be hard on the throat. Moly plated with tremendous coaching and steering from the gent who fired up NECO,.... Or plumb naked,....that Israeli 2520 , or Varget ,....driving em' at 2750 to 2850 FPS looked to be generating .0001" of erosion per shot. Yup,....that out of the humble and ubiquitous 223 case. 2950 FPS was right there, and do-able,....but yielded no improvement in real world accuracy, and were obviously pushing the limits, pressure wise.
That barrel's history, and I'll be running in the replacement with the AMAX 80s, and hopefully 75s when those are gone.....in the same "velocity window."
I like the way that particular combination bucks wind, and pulls it all together way out there, and have just not felt tempted by higher velocities
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time. You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team. Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit. And that is the damned truth. Steve
Have no idea how good I am - paticularly in someone else's terms - but I do have a good-shooting .223. For that matter, also have a good shooting .222R - and a good shooting .22/250, a .220 Swift and .220 HLaser, etc. All seem to work well for me.
In all truth, every one of those cartridges was once merely an idea, then a design to be dicussed/built/tested and then a good shooter in the hands of a marksman. There is no replacement for skill and expertise with the firearm, and sometimes the differences between cartridges are slim, but don't see how a truly knowledgeable shooter would say that theorizing/discussing (even on the net) and testing new cartridge ideas/designs toward improved performance is total BS. Something does not add up there.
There is no replacement for skill and expertise with the firearm, and sometimes the differences between cartridges are slim, but don't see how a truly knowledgeable shooter would say that theorizing/discussing (even on the net) and testing new cartridge ideas/designs toward improved performance is total BS. Something does not add up there.
Really, there's a statement that might need fallen back on, and re-grouped around. ....put me in the like (love) em' all camp.
....and keeping pressures down, while getting better FPS, thereby keeping barrel life UP, is not now, never has been, and never WILL be total BS.
Lots of shooting and trigger time is all that counts. …
The MAN, the damned rifleman, is way more important than some theoretical piece of bullshit. Bullets fired and trigger time is what it's all about.
I apologize if I stepped on some theoretical toes, but you KNOW I speak the damned truth. After all, I've launched more boolits than most.
Steve, ol' buddy, if I remember correctly, I told you about my project 15–20 years ago, at one of the Varmint Hunter Association jamborees in South Dakota. It's far from a recent mushroom from the darkest and dampest cellar in the world.
Old Wrangler may as well jump into this fart-storm of BS and dance the methane minuet. Now I been hunting, if you can call exterminating ubiquitous little rodents speckling the landscape hunting, since back when when Rosy was a foal and LBJ was air-expressing scrap aluminum to North Vietnam. That's a long time. Fired about every cartridge possible at those little buck-toothed pests, even the .45-70, which made them appear as if they caught a bowling ball in mid-flight before unraveling. It was quite a display, reminded me of playing the Frog in a Blender video on the Joe Cartoon site.
Now what I discovered about barrel twist, big old long bullets and high velocity, came most recently in 2007 when California banned lead core bullets in the condor zone. Up until then I really liked the .257 Roberts Ackley Improved and the .22-250 Remington, and a really stupid .220 Swift I built for long ranges. But none of my rifles would shoot the lead free Varmint Grenades, and there wasn't any in .257 caliber. So I learned that these only shoot in fast twist barrels. Now my favorite long range rifle wears a 1:8" twist 24" barrel in .243 WSSM. It shoots the 6mm Barnes Varmint Grenade at a sedate 3,585 fps, and kills better than an old Asplundh wood chipper with sharp blades. If I miss a little low at 300 yards, that Varmint Grenade explodes on the soil and frags the squirrel like a fractured buzz saw blade. Great little cartridge, even better bullet.
What I discovered is that these jacketed compressed powdered metal core bullets are pretty much immune to puffing-out at high velocity or from spinning as fast as Pecos Bill's whirlwind. Same with the little 26 grain .204 bullets at 4,110 fps from a 1:8.5" twist, or the .224 50 grain 3/4" long Varmint Grenades making 3,600 fps from a 1:9" twist in my .22-250 Ackley. I really like the Hornady 24 grain NTX Ballistic Tipped Boat Tail in my .204 Colt M-4 leaving at 3,900 fps from a 1:9" twist Hart barrel. The cores of these bullets are a solid, they have the quality of stick chalk, when they impact the jacket flies apart and the powdered metal looses its cohesion and acts like a kinetic bomb. Meanwhile, back at 100 yards they all are capable of iddy-biddy groups, usually better than even the best lead core jacketed offerings, including match bullets.
Seems that what kills most lead core stuff, is heat, spin and the qualities of lead. Drive a lead bullet down a barrel and heat from the powder burn and friction from the barrel softens the lead core, while rifling engraving of the jacket places neat "Please tear here," lines in the copper. Drive 'em too fast and it's like shooting frozen water balloons, they last a while until they thaw out then - Puff! Even my old friend in Oregon has switched to lead free varmint bullets, for the reason they are just more accurate, don't ricochet, and are cheap. Not to mention he lives down the road from Nosler that makes really good BT Lead Free bullets. So there you have it. I gotta go see a man about a horse, so ya-all take care.
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit.
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time.
You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team.
Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit.
And that is the damned truth.
Another damned truth is that several veteran varmint-shooters with beaucoup hours of trigger time in prairie-dog villages have proved — in the field — that the .224 Laser with real 75-grain Hornady A-Max bullets consistently does exactly what it was designed to be — an ultimate long-range varmint cartridge.
There's no imaginary fantasy or empty Internet theorizing in this report.
I've killed dozens (if not hundreds) of prairie dogs, marmots, and other varmints, at ranges in the hundreds of yards, with .223s, .22-250s, .220 Swift, even a .250 Savage and a .257 Roberts, and several of us with comparable experience have proved that the .224 Laser is a better long-range varmint cartridge than any of the others.
In the immortal words of Pepe LePew, "Eef you 'ave not tried eet, do not knock eet!"
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that Steve Timm has fired no telling how many thousand more rounds down range at a variety of critters large and small than anybody that buys into this .224 Laser BS has ever even thought about.
Can one of you guys that shoot a lot tell me how many more rounds you get out of a .224 barrel by keeping pressures @ 50K as opposed to 60K?
Travis
Back when speed was all the rage, and everyone was trying to hit the 4K fps mark I had a .22 Cheetah built. It really liked Sierra 52 Grain HP BT at about 3900 fps and hits were impressive. Crows were simply vaporized.
But with less than 400 rounds through it, the barrel was toast. But it was fun.
I have a nice little .223, and I shoot it a lot. I really like shooting it. I bought it with the express purpose of practicing my rifle shooting enough to burn the barrel out of it. I already have the replacement barrel for it sitting on the shelf. And it is a dandy little coyote rifle out to 250 yards too. It is not a rifle I would get ever get rid of, at all.
But I have owned a Swift since the early 90's, and I love that cartridge too. After I shot the original one out, I decided next time around I wanted something that would buck the wind better than those 50/55 bullets. That is why I went with the fast twist. And I love it. A .223 kills coyotes fine, but not with the authority a fast-twist 22 hotrod does as the range stretches out. That is mainly what my Swift gets used for, as a calling rifle and occasionally banging steel plates. I am not concerned with shooting out the barrel on it either, because due to a screw-up at the Shilen factory I already have the replacement barrel for it on the shelf too. If it is gone in 3-4 years, so be it.
Skill does trump theoretical ballistics, any day. However, each one of us has the amount of skill we have. I am constantly trying to improve mine. But there are also times I will take every ballistic advantage I can get.
High performance rifle are like high performance race cars if you run them hard you have to rebuild them . Speed comes at a price . When the barrel goes just stick another one on the action, it is that simple. It is just money and you ain't going to take it with you when you go under.
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time. You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team. Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit. And that is the damned truth. Steve
Have no idea how good I am - paticularly in someone else's terms - but I do have a good-shooting .223. For that matter, also have a good shooting .222R - and a good shooting .22/250, a .220 Swift and .220 HLaser, etc. All seem to work well for me.
In all truth, every one of those cartridges was once merely an idea, then a design to be dicussed/built/tested and then a good shooter in the hands of a marksman. There is no replacement for skill and expertise with the firearm, and sometimes the differences between cartridges are slim, but don't see how a truly knowledgeable shooter would say that theorizing/discussing (even on the net) and testing new cartridge ideas/designs toward improved performance is total BS. Something does not add up there.
Yeah. An extra 25 grains of powder with no gain should be explored further.
Interesting that in the competitive world you typically take every advantage you legally can, and that usually nets you the least mistakes over time.
I don't know why shooting at PDs would be any different, heck shrap would do do better with something faster/higher bc than the 222 mag. Because he is a top shot.
Thats pretty much common sense.
Yet sometimes there are reasons not to go the full distance.. harder to shoot consistently as rounds get larger, there is so much more affect on groups that the body is guilty of on higher recoiling rounds. The cost of the rounds and extra barrels/powder etc...
I'd take someone that shot 223 all day every day over the weekend warrior with the 220 Howell or such. But with no strings attached give the Howell to the day in day out shooter, and assumign the accuracy levels are the same as the 223, the Howell would win.
Yet I do not care for the negativity around this place when discussing ideas. Especially with someone that has had a few years of experience and should net some respect.....
Yet I do not care for the negativity around this place when discussing ideas. Especially with someone that has had a few years of experience and should net some respect.....
In total truth, it is really hard to beat a good man with a .223 Remington. High capacity cartridges are fine, high BC bullets are excellent, but what is above all else is a superb marksman with many hours of trigger time. You can design all you want and make all the theories you can, but the truth comes out when bullets are actually shot, animals are killed dead and the marksman learns his both the rifle and the cartridge. The three become a deadly team. Theoretical shooting of non-existent bullets on the internet is totally useless. Bullets in the air, bullets actually killing things that bleed and die ... that's all that counts. Anything else is total bullshit. And that is the damned truth. Steve
Have no idea how good I am - paticularly in someone else's terms - but I do have a good-shooting .223. For that matter, also have a good shooting .222R - and a good shooting .22/250, a .220 Swift and .220 HLaser, etc. All seem to work well for me.
In all truth, every one of those cartridges was once merely an idea, then a design to be dicussed/built/tested and then a good shooter in the hands of a marksman. There is no replacement for skill and expertise with the firearm, and sometimes the differences between cartridges are slim, but don't see how a truly knowledgeable shooter would say that theorizing/discussing (even on the net) and testing new cartridge ideas/designs toward improved performance is total BS. Something does not add up there.
Yeah. An extra 25 grains of powder with no gain should be explored further. Travis
You or others might explore further - I would not.
I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that Steve Timm has fired no telling how many thousand more rounds down range at a variety of critters large and small than anybody that buys into this .224 Laser BS has ever even thought about. And I do not care whose toes it steps on.
Well, seems like there need not be any worry about stepping on toes. You willingness to bet a lot of money, as stated, might seem impressive - until one considers that quantity of effort and certain experience might add little or nothing when it comes to breaking new ground - even small ground.
Can one of you guys that shoot a lot tell me how many more rounds you get out of a .224 barrel by keeping pressures @ 50K as opposed to 60K?
Travis
Don't matter to me at all. I shoot a load solely based on accuracy within safe pressure limits. Usually the most accurate load(s) are somewhere below published maximums. When a barrel wears out I twist it it off and screw in a new one. Barrels are like brake pads, they are wear parts and get tossed in the scrap pile when accuracy goes to pot. I don't mess around having them set back, but may someday send them out for a reboring to a size larger and rechambered in something that'll scrub out the old chamber. One thing I did notice is that the .223 Remington is a really great cartridge, and even better in a Pac-Nor 1:9" twist Polygonal rifled barrel. In fact I'm really becoming quite a fan of polygonal rifling. That first barrel required a new ball bearing rod so patches would follow, but what the heck. These barrels clean up easily and SEEM to last longer, but then I don't tally shots till wear out.
Here is a relatively mild load, a tad over 3,100 fps, ten shots at 100 yards - good enough for government work.
Now when that little 40 grain Nosler BT Lead Free bullet hits Oregon sage rats at anything beyond 200 yards, it makes squirrel jelly of their innards, and in every case pops a little hole near their skull. These were hit mid-chest, but note the little goo eruption near their heads. I finally concluded that the polycarbonate tip was responsible. Maybe all that super-duper velocity and magical runes about B.C. isn't really necessary, if you know your rifle and have really good trigger discipline.
Educated guess here... I ran 223, and like I was typing... inside my competition parameters I took every advantage I could legally so to speak with equipment. Then if I messed up it was my fault for loosing. Yet if a single shot I made due to hihger pressure/mv/bc was a half or quarter inch closer to the bull, it could mean the difference between win and loose, talent being equal if htat makes any sense.
On that note, I ran the 50 psi or so loads, likely more around 53 or so psi(ish) and then after reading, researching etc... I decided on my own, right or wrong, that 60 psi, was not going to be a danger and could be a slight advantage... so I ramped em up, and was actually checked by a friend on ammo pressures via strain gauge IIRC... Chris knows what he did better than I...
Bottom line I was probably around 7-8 more than most folks were shooting. And above what I started shooting.
Barrel life... on cut Kriegers, virtually no life difference. Buttoned PN tubes, some, but it was enough variable that I just was not confident that it made any real life difference really.
I would say on short lived buttoned tubes in 223, the difference was less than 1000 rounds of life. On cut barreled tubes I just flat did not see a difference on average.
I also used to believe what I was told that NTIT rattle battle rapid fire guns would die quicker than none... NTIT is as many rounds as you can fire in 50 second time slots, and not enough time between strings to cool, still that time had to be at least 5 minutes or more between strings..
What I found, is that wiht the M14/M1A it was more often the life of the bedding, not the barrel and that traveled over to the AR also, though with it I'm pretty sure we saw a slightly less life of in the 500-maybe 1000 round range. Not enough to really matter, and as stated above, barrels are cheap enough compared to life, and if its what you want to do, why not?
A lot of this I can compare in my meager pea brain, as the same as one one hand I'll tell you I could kill almost ever deer I've killed with a 22lr, or a 223 surely... yet on a trophy hunt, I"ll take a handy fast twist, high bc, fast round every time, because its win or loose for a one time chance very possibly and I have no control of the conditions etc... on those types of hunts.
I can see that just dinking with PDs, what the heck, 223 would be just as good as anything.
The other note.... I don't personally feel that the difference between 50 and 60 psi is a matter, but that its mostly the amount of powder burned in a diameter of barrel. It actually almost makes sense... burn lets say 30 pounds of powder in a .224 barrel and you are likely about done give or take, ( other factors do come into play like button or cut etc...) Whether that 30 pounds is burned 50-60 grains at a time or 25 or 10, it still ends up being relatively close...
I did not stay at Holiday Inn last night.
One last comment, as to most accurate loads below max... that is not the case with some powders, and N500 series made me scratch my head until I ended up towards the very top and over... I should have listened as a big family name in palma told me that... but I was being safe to start with...
I learned a good time ago the finer points of the 222 family of cartridges and my all time fave is the 222 mag. Having said that I do have a 8 twist barrel on the bench beside my lathe that needs a job and a ample supply of A maxes in the reload room however the prospect of three or more separate case manipulations on some 25-06 brass does not sound too appealing. A little research shows if a fella should want to burn more powder in an endeavor such as this (that is anything other than the 222 kinda brass) the two most obvious case choices that would require little to no forming operations would be the 22-250 or the 220 swift or slight variations of the two. Case capacity, powder selection and easy brass availability should be the question. Lets compare...What is the case capacity of the Laser with a bullet seated to the bottom of the neck?
okie - nice post. Maybe not the optimum powder and type for the cartridge, but have used Reloader19 and it's what's in my measure right now. I read 34.7 grains of the Reloader19 with bullet seated as you describe. The designer probably can give you the case volume in water - maybe measured to the bottm of the neck - maybe not.
I wanted this rifle/cartridge for a special reason - started with a good used barrel - and agree that getting to the proper case dimensions can be a challenge. As you would probably opine, the specific dies make it easier. But, have also gone the described multi-step route from 25:06 brass. On some days I maybe can be concentrated and patient.
I do not know the complete history of that line of cartridges. But, as for basic case selection, have a hunch that one intent may have been that most - if not all - would be founded on the basic 30:06 case. I may be way off there.
There is room for both. Different goals favor different systems. I've built and love my Steve Timm inspired 1 in 14 twisted 223AI. Nothing but 40 gr. NBT's have ever sullied it's throat at 4000 fps with 30 grs of powder at 22". I also have 1 in 8 twisted 223 WSSM and 22-250 AI and shoot the 75 gr. A-max' in the 3400ish fps. range. Actually a 223 too but like the higher launch speeds of the others. Shooting tons of rounds a day at prairie poodles I'd take the 223AI every time. But I mainly shoot woodchucks and coyotes so other than paper/steel don't fire high round counts. The 223AI is great to 400 yards and certainly works further. But the the other two big brother it soundly beyond that both in whomp and making hits in conditions As to what velocity and when the 75 gr. A-max's blow up I've pushed em to 3500 without issue. Seems throat checkering and groove # have affect when this happens. Seen others mention issue with three grooves at some pretty low round counts.
As to Ken's cartridge it would be neat to see bore scope pics every 50 rounds until all there was to see was seen between a balls to the wall loaded 22-250 and Ken's cartridge.
With the advent of more better high BC bullets and cartridges in the .244 caliber Ken's cartridge might not be as attractive as the time he designed it.
Steve's kinda gruff with Ken as Ken has offended him in the past. I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is.
I get Steve's point. Becoming intimate with one cartridge's ballistics and putting in the required trigger time to do so will make one a "sharpshooter". Buying more performance won't.
But then again I've never seen a one rifle hunter to be beware of Just some of my thoughts on this thread
"Steve's kinda gruff with Ken as Ken has offended him in the past. I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is."
The overriding mark of intellectual honesty is the practice of "putting principles before personalities".
Letting a dispute about religious matters influence a conversation about rifle cartridges is definitely NOT an example of that principle.
But has anyone ever really tested all this theoretical stuff with the .224 Laser over a sufficient number of barrels, shots, and field use to see if the theory tests out?
Has there been any real pressure testing done either by an individual or manufacturer?
okie - nice post. Maybe not the optimum powder and type for the cartridge, but have used Reloader19 and it's what's in my measure right now. I read 34.7 grains of the Reloader19 with bullet seated as you describe. The designer probably can give you the case volume in water - maybe measured to the bottm of the neck - maybe not.
I wanted this rifle/cartridge for a special reason - started with a good used barrel - and agree that getting to the proper case dimensions can be a challenge. As you would probably opine, the specific dies make it easier. But, have also gone the described multi-step route from 25:06 brass. On some days I maybe can be concentrated and patient.
I do not know the complete history of that line of cartridges. But, as for basic case selection, have a hunch that one intent may have been that most - if not all - would be founded on the basic 30:06 case. I may be way off there.
CCCC I believe you are correct about the case selection being from the 30-06 family being an original strong point with the same applying to Fred Zeglin's "Hawk" line of cartridges. That and a seemingly endless supply of actions with that bolt face laying around should keep a fella wanting to do this on the same general track. The 5.6 x 57 RWS case looks like it could be a contender for this type of project, maybe improved in the Ackley fashion and therefore able to fire factory loaded ammo. The brass is expensive but available and very little work involved... Hmmmm.
"Steve's kinda gruff with Ken as Ken has offended him in the past. I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is."
The overriding mark of intellectual honesty is the practice of "putting principles before personalities".
Letting a dispute about religious matters influence a conversation about rifle cartridges is definitely NOT an example of that principle.
"Steve's kinda gruff with Ken as Ken has offended him in the past. I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is."
The overriding mark of intellectual honesty is the practice of "putting principles before personalities".
Letting a dispute about religious matters influence a conversation about rifle cartridges is definitely NOT an example of that principle.
And it appears as if that is what happened here.
You'd have to be a Texan to make that leap.
Travis
That is a pretty big leap even for a Texan. I am thinking severe anal/cranial inversion is the real cause.
I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is."
His public language doesn't sound like a mature believer to me. He sounds like the typical unbeliever I used to work with.
I never thought you could be more wrong than you have been about various scientific matters. It appears I was mistaken, and you have outdone even yourself in wrongness and stupidity.
I thought you had a .220 Howell and could explain the advantages of the cartridge. Travis
OK - good - I do have one, but have been otherwise occupied and have not yet done nearly enough with it to give knowldgeable comments about such advantages. It does look advantageous in the data, but I have way to go. The initial experience with the 75gr was good - tight grouping and flat. Now need to do some chrono work - and need to improve the brass process.
I thought you had a .220 Howell and could explain the advantages of the cartridge. Travis
OK - good - I do have one, but have been otherwise occupied and have not yet done nearly enough with it to give knowldgeable comments about such advantages. It does look advantageous in the data, but I have way to go. The initial experience with the 75gr was good - tight grouping and flat. Now need to do some chrono work - and need to improve the brass process.
Hey guys - Am thinking we have seen some folks on here reach what looks like religious fervor about various cartridges, or rifle makes, etc. Maybe some of that mixed in here - maybe not to be taken very seriously.
"Steve's kinda gruff with Ken as Ken has offended him in the past. I'm always surprised how passive/aggressive/easily offended Steve is considering the mature believer he is."
The overriding mark of intellectual honesty is the practice of "putting principles before personalities".
Letting a dispute about religious matters influence a conversation about rifle cartridges is definitely NOT an example of that principle.
And it appears as if that is what happened here.
You'd have to be a Texan to make that leap.
Travis
That is a pretty big leap even for a Texan. I am thinking severe anal/cranial inversion is the real cause.
My post was aimed at the discerning and intelligent reader.
Hey guys - Am thinking we have seen some folks on here reach what looks like religious fervor about various cartridges, or rifle makes, etc. Maybe some of that mixed in here - maybe not to be taken very seriously.
So...has anyone shot critters(big or small) with the new Tipped 77gr Matchkings? They group decently out of my Daniel 1 in 7". And the bullet ogive is usable at AR mag length.
So...has anyone shot critters(big or small) with the new Tipped 77gr Matchkings? They group decently out of my Daniel 1 in 7". And the bullet ogive is usable at AR mag length.
So...has anyone shot critters(big or small) with the new Tipped 77gr Matchkings? They group decently out of my Daniel 1 in 7". And the bullet ogive is usable at AR mag length.
No, but I'd like to do so.
I may give them a whirl out of the Daniel AR, and try to knock over a whitetail or two with it. The first load with CFE223 did 2 inches at 200. Have to try Varget as well.
This year Ruger is supposed to be running the #1V in .223 with a 26" 1 in 8" barrel. I'll probably grab one when they come out. Or I might have it punched into something else, like a .224 Laser
So...has anyone shot critters(big or small) with the new Tipped 77gr Matchkings? They group decently out of my Daniel 1 in 7". And the bullet ogive is usable at AR mag length.
Not quite, but I've been wrecking critters and rocks with 69 tipped matchkings in my .223 for about a month now and I'm very, very impressed.
So...has anyone shot critters(big or small) with the new Tipped 77gr Matchkings? They group decently out of my Daniel 1 in 7". And the bullet ogive is usable at AR mag length.
Not quite, but I've been wrecking critters and rocks with 69 tipped matchkings in my .223 for about a month now and I'm very, very impressed.
His public language doesn't sound like a mature believer to me. He sounds like the typical unbeliever I used to work with.
Originally Posted by Ringman
You hijack a thread for personal attack?
Ya just can't make this stuff up.
Nope.
Now, don't forget to add in the pièce de résistance:
Originally Posted by Ringman
He is not stupid. He is inconsistent.
All three of those quotes, by the same poster, on the same thread, and in less than 36 hours.
hillbillybear is dead right; Ringman has to be one of, if not the dumbest, ignorant, most stupid, and down right WRONG individuals ever to disgrace this forum with his presence.
—![[Linked Image]](http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2250/777751/13525437/322867884.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2250/777751/13525437/318164788.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff364/RichCoyle/004_zpsmpzixesx.jpg)
GFY ![[Linked Image]](http://s273.photobucket.com/user/deflave25_2008/media/P1010062_zpsb29905d6.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s274.photobucket.com/user/Wrangler-John/media/SavageGroup.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s274.photobucket.com/user/Wrangler-John/media/IMG_0015.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2250/777751/1527241/410147538.jpg)