That one never did make sense to me.

A while back I was looking at a rifle manufactures web site. Of the cartridges and configurations available. One of, if not the tightest twists. Was 223 at 1 in9". One of the slowest, 22-250 at 1 in 12". I assume they figure 22-250 buyers want top velocity with lighter bullets. But it seems to me if a 223 can benefit from a faster twists, so could a 22-250. Or visa versa.

1. Does tightening the twist reduce velocity to any great degree?

2. Is it true that over spining a bullet does not hurt accuracy?

3. Would a faster twist in the 22-250 make the lighter constructed bullets more prone to comeing apart in flight?

No
Yes
Maybe

1. No.

2. Yes. if the bullet's well-balanced, and today most are.

3. Maybe, but they'd have to be really lightly constructed and the barrel really hot. Or at least that's my experience.

The reason pushing bullets faster doesn't increase stability all that much is there are two opposing forces at work: gyroscopic spin, the force that stabilizes the bullet, and air pressure on the front of the bullet, which destabilizes it. While higher velocity increases the bullet's spin, it also increases air pressure on the nose.

Great minds.......

Apparently!

Is a terrible thing to waste...

1. No. (Nicely qualified.)

2. Yes. In absolute terms, yes. Whether it is enough to be seen with sporter rifles under field conditions ... unlikely, but in absolutes, definitely.

3. Yes. An over-spun bullet is more likely to come apart than one that is not. Add a rough throat as the barrel "ages" and it becomes even more noticeable.

Tom

Ok thanks fellows. So

4. Why don't the manufactures tighten up the 22-250.

It's primarily a varmint round, not a big game round.

Because so many people are afraid of twist.

Overspinning a bullet WILL hurt accuracy to some extent. You may not notice it in a sporting rifle but it will show up in a target rifle. The degree of overspinning (if that is a word) will make a difference too.

I don't see the point for 14 twist in a 22-250 for much of anything. Nobody uses it for short range BR so limiting it to 52 grain bullets is silly. I have found that my 14 twist 22-250 struggles to stabilize even 52 grain AMAX bullets. It shoots the 40s into .3" all day long and 52s open up to over an inch.

If the the overspinning didn't make a difference, I think all the manufacturers would just switch to faster twists and be done with it! Must be something to it no matter how trivial.

It's called being stuck.

Right, that is why my 1in8 223 shoots 3/4moa with 77SMK's and 50gr HP's and prints both groups on top of one another at 100yd.

That is also why David Tubb has been an abysmal failure in the shooting world as he always prefers a tight barrel twist.

Got a pic of your 223?

How about a pic of just one 77smk? You can use your cell phone, just one pic....

David

One of the facets of the computer age that I just don't get, is that the printed word has lost relevance. A picture is considered the holy grail. If I wanted to lie with pictures, I'd just shoot some 20 yard groups and write 200 yards on them, and post the picture. But if I say, in print, that a rifle will shoot a certain group size, it is considered a non-event unless pictures are posted. I'm a man of words and numbers...my reloading records are such. I just haven't gotten into taking many pictures, and don't have a data plan on my phone so I can send them to a computer or anywhere else. Guess I might have to get one so I can participate .

If your posts read like the Pathological Liar skit from Saturday Night Live, then yes, expect people to ask for proof.

You don't need a data plan to transfer pictures on a phone - they can send e-mail wireless just like a full size computer/tablet or can upload pictures to a device through their charger/USB cord.

David

This. The institutional inertia in the gun industry is uber.

part of it is the 'slowest twist is most accurate' train of thought left over from the days of crappy bullets.

it amazes me what people will give up for a hypothetical .001" diff in group size

The slower twists in many factory rifles are also due to machinery. It takes money to retool, especially when many companies use hammer-forged barrels these days. And as long as the vast majority of potential customers don't care whether their .223 or .22-250 has a faster twist, there's no reason to change.

the savage LRP and it has done well in some 600 yard matches. get onje and try it.

^^^^^^


This



And the vast majority of potential customers literally don't know there ARE different twist rates .

Seriously.

Makes sense, so that is why Ruger can and has made 1-9" twist 224 caliber barrels for a LONG time to become 223 but can't figure out how to do it for the 22/250? They even make a 1-8" twist 223 now.

Same with Savage I guess. I had know idea when they hammer punched a barrel it chambered the barrel at the same time. Thanks.

Smart ass.


It goes back to pandering to the ignorance of the customer. The vast majority of .22-250 buyers are looking at only one thing...speed, which they achieve with their 50 grain bullets.They don't care and cannot comprehend things like BC and SD, big words and big numbers.

The rifle loonies ( like you know who...) Buy .22-250s and rebarrel them to what they want. ( We are in the very tiny minority...)

I hear you and I feel your pain, but the gun companies don't...

If they can special runs every year in limited numbers of less than popular cartridges (think Lipsey Rugers, Remington Classics etc etc)

Maybe then can take one of those 1-8" twist barrels they just hammered out and put on a 22/250 and do a limited run too. Not like they don't have the barrels and reamers?

Scott,

I dunno why Ruger does it, but some European companies that use hammer-forged barrels DO hammer the chamber at the same time as the bore.

It also might be a matter of supply. I suspect Ruger (and every other company) sells a lot more .223's than .22-250's. I don't know how many barrel machines they have (though seem to remember having read about it somewhere), so might want to keep the 1-8 machine cranking them out. Plus, the big craze for tight twists is for .223's, not .22-250's.

Another explanation might be that they tested various twists on their .22-250's with factory ammunition and found some ammo didn't shoot all that well in a 1-8 twist. Not all factory bullets are as well-balanced as those handloaders often use, and extra velocity and twist will result in poor accuracy with relatively poor bullets. Which is exactly why so many factories used "just enough" twist 100 years ago, when the whole smokeless powder/high velocity deal was just getting worked out.

Stupidity.



Travis

You would sure think so....

I know my smith can punch a .223 barrel out to .22-250...



Hell of it is I'll bet they could sell more of them than they think....

You're using that common sense stuff again, ad that just don't go around here! (or in the gun business!)

And of course on the ammo issue, because it hasn't caught up.

If suddenly a bunch of 1-9" twist 22/250's were floating out of factory doors, then makers would begin to load some ammo to match.

I'd say there are more 1-7 to 1-9" twist 223's floating out the doors these days than anything.

So the train of thought is, shoot LONG/HEAVY bullets in a small cases GOOD. Shoot a LONG/HEAVY bullets in a bigger case, with greater velocity, BAD. Seems counter intuitive.

Same happens with the 358 Win and 35 Whelen. Lots of 1-12" twist 358's, but the Whelen gets a 1-16" twist. Which one is likely to see a LONGER/HEAVIER bullet? I'd say the Whelen, so if that's the case they say 'GIVE IT A SLOWER TWIST'

Again, counter intuitive.

You would never make it in the gun biz. I learned early you will never go broke underestimating the stupidity,and the poor taste, of the buying public.

I don't doubt that in the least. People have and will continue to baffle me.

Someone I know had a conversation recently with company about making a run of rifles in different cartridge. They sounded interested and said 'A 1-11" twist would be optimum for said cartridge'

I think he told them 'F*uk OPTIMUM', go faster.

As you know, there still exists a pervasive myth about tight twists 'over stabilizing' some of the lighter bullets...

Its like mentally over stabilizing a woman.

Cant be done.

All I know is I haven't seen any indication that bullets are getting shorter.

Good bullets plus fast twist=no downside.

I know I'd actually consider getting a 22-250 if they were easily had in fast-twist guns. A 1:9 at the slowest. I'd like to shoot the 70+gr bullets at around 3400. Seems like it would be a perfect deer/coyote rig.

Rebarreled with a 1 in 8.

Scott,

You've got it backward, to a certain extent.

At least one old-time gun writer was always whining about how shooters would buy more rifles chambered for X cartridge, if only the ammo companies offered more loadings. But the reason the ammo companies offered relatively few options in X cartridge was because not many people bought rifles in X cartridge.

In fact, in many instances, the ammo companies offer a wider variety of loadings in new cartridges, then scale them back when they find out how well each load sells. This is exactly what happened with the .260 Remington. When introduced it was projected to be the hottest hit in many years, but somehow shooters didn't buy as many as projected. Pretty soon .260 factory loads were pared to a bare minimum, because not all that many people bought rifles.

Ammo manufacturers aren't going to change what they offer just because a few companies are offering faster twists in their barrels. This is because faster-twist rifles are usually bought by rifle loonies who handload anyway, so don't buy factory ammo.

This is also why they haven't bothered to change twists in the .35 Whelen: Not enough .35 Whelens are sold to bother, and the 1-16 twist will stabilize 250-grain lead-cored spitzers. Why should either the ammo or rifle companies bother to retool when there's relatively little demand for either ammo or rifles?

Sales are also the reason Winchester dropped the 250-grain load for the .358 many years ago: Very few people bought it. So why do some companies use 1-12 twists in .358 barrels? Probably because somehow they ended up with a bunch of 1-12 twist barrels. We can bet it wasn't because of all the .358 fans who want to shoot 310-grain Woodleighs in their .358's.

Believe it or not, rifle and ammo companies are in business to make money, not to provide special rifling twists or factory loads for the few loonies who want such stuff. If demand increases to the point where it does become profitable to mass-produce 1-9 twist .22-250's and ammo to shoot in 'em, then they'll do it.

But the track record of new "outside the box" chamberings and loads is pretty abysmal. Generally, the big companies do best when they wait for demand to become obvious among MANY rifle loonies before they offer something different. This was the reason for the success of the .222 Remington, .243 Winchester, 7mm Remington Magnum and .300 WSM. Demand was already there, in the form of a lot of wildcat rifles.

Similarly, there was starting to be demand for faster-twist .223's, largely because of the rising popularity of AR-15's. Shooters didn't start buying fast-twist .223 bolt rifles because factories suddenly started making them. They bought them because the trend had already started with AR's.

In fact, the track record of cartridges and special loads the factories have thought up themselves is fairly miserable. Just look at the .256 Winchester Magnum, 6.5 Remington Magnum, and the WSSM's. There was almost no demand for any of them before they were introduced, and almost no demand afterward, either.

Right now the firearms business is starting to shrink, because the extraordinarily high demand of the past few years is starting to fade. Most companies are going to make stuff they know will sell, not stuff that might sell to a few loonies.

I hear you, but I don't believe that explains everything.

I've seen Ruger Hawkeyes in 35 Whelen, with a 1-16" twist right next to a Ruger Hawkeye in 358 Win with a 1-12" twist?

Why, because that's the way it's always been done line of thinking and that is EXACTLY why the 22/250 still has a 1-14" twist.

No, nothing ever explains everything the factories do!

Thanks! Exactly what I was had hoped for when I started this thread.

LOL, they're not however, the .224 63 grain Sierra SMP is a very short bullet(semi pointed) for it's weight. I just got off the phone with Sierra, and they assure me that this bullet will stabilize in up to a 1 in 15 twist barrel.

I'm looking for a bullet for a Savage 24 in 223 over 20 gauge that will effectively kill small to medium size deer and at the same time not destroy coyote or fox fur and I'm thinking this might be the bullet, because that Savage 24 in 223 has a 1 in 14 twist so I'm kinda limited as to bullet weight/length choices.

I also called Thompson Center this morning as their website doesn't give any barrel twist specs for Encore barrels and the .223 and 22-250 Encore barrels are a 1 in 12 twist if anyone is interested