[/quote] Just like the fiasco that happened when they started selling 68 and 77 grain bullet loads in 223. People rioted because their 1:12 rifles wouldn't shoot that schit. Let's not ever do that again.
[/quote]
That was essentially the opposite situation: The heavy-bullet .223 ammo was actually a RESPONSE to customer demand, due to more and more faster-twist .223s showing up on the market, mostly AR-15s--not introducing a new cartridge "concept." Many of those new rifles were also marked 5.56--many in combination with .223, such as .223/.5.56 or 5.56/.223.
As a result, more people started shooting heavier-bullet .223 ammo, whether factory or handloads, and demand eventually rose for faster-twist .223 barrels even in bolt-action hunting rifles. And of course lighter-bullet .223 ammo also worked fine in the faster twists.
Can't remember many shooters with 1-12 twist .223's trying the heavier-bullet ammo back then, though no doubt some did. But during that transition most hunters still thought of the .223 as a varmint cartridge, especially for prairie dog shooting--and also still believed that higher muzzle velocity with lighter 50-55 grains bullets (or even 40s) was the answer to longer-range PDs--whether in the .223 or .22-250.
It took a while for some of those guys to discover that a fast-twist .223 with heavier, high-BC bullets worked better than the .22-250 with 50s at longer ranges--though of course quite a few never learned, either because they never heard of the concept, or wouldn't believe it. In fact I have gone on PD shoots with several supposed rifle loonies in the past few years who brought brand-new custom rifles built with 1-12 or even 1-14 twist barrel for the same cartridges their fathers and even grandfathers used, from the .222 to .220 Swift.
