Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Canada Strange Cartridge History – Remingtons, Winchesters, 225s, More

I found this in a file folder. It was from a few years ago, but reading through it made me smile. Only four or five years have passed, but what happened to Remington is prophetic. It is unedited except for some added pictures and company info.

Strange Firearms History – Remingtons, Winchesters, 225s, More
Copyright 2017, 2018 – Stephen Redgwell


My Remington 788 chambered in 222 Remington. It was bought new in 1983 by my wife.

Sometimes, firearms companies do things that are hard for most of us to understand. Here are some examples.

In 2006, Winchester (then USRAC) stopped domestic production of the Model 70 and 94 rifles. The decision was made by their Belgian owners, the Herstal Group. That decision ended a 112 year run of Winchester’s “Made in America” rifles.

Herstal said they were losing money. Okay, but why didn’t they upgrade their production facilities and pass the costs along? I mean, have you seen the cost of their Japanese made Model 94s?

Note: Herstal Group bought USRAC (US Repeating Arms Co.) in 1989.

The Model 94 wasn’t made for five years, from 2006 until 2011, when Miroku (Japan) started production, under license, from the Herstal Group. Considering what you pay for a Japanese made Model 94 lever today, I’ve often wondered why they didn’t modernize the New Haven facility and continue US production. They might have avoided a sell off, kept jobs in the US, and turned the company around. But commercial enterprises know no citizenship and I am not a graduate of business school.

Whether they made the right decision will be debated for years. My belief is that selling the company was easier than upgrading. Perhaps Winchester’s board of directors figured people wouldn’t pay an increased price and got rid of the company. Of course, everyone has seen the price a new Model 94 today! At about $1000 USD or more, it is no longer a working man’s rifle. That must have put a smile on the corporate faces of Marlin and Mossberg, makers of the Marlin 336 and the Mossberg 464.

But Winchester wasn’t the only company that got sold off. In 2007, Remington got bought out by a private equity firm. They were in financial trouble as well and needed to restructure.

What is that old adage? The only constant is change. It seems that Remington's front office isn't good at being a front office. Case in point: They haven’t been able to produce a popular economy rifle since the Model 788 (1967 to 1983). The search continues after 30+ years.


This is a modern Remington 700 SPS Tactical in 223 Rem with a 20 inch barrel
and a 1 in 9 twist. The rug is courtesy of 70s Shaggy Friends. Yuck!

Here’s what’s happened since 1983.

We’ve seen the Model 78 Sportsman – an economized Model 700 with a plain, birch wood stock, smooth bolt handle and some other cost cutting changes. It was produced from 1984 to 1988. Then there was the 710 (2001 to 2006), the 770 (2007 to present), and their latest, the 783, introduced in 2013.

It seems that every few years, Remington tries another “Model 700 and something” to compete in the low end rifle market. They haven’t quite found their econo-spot yet. Will they with the 783? They better get their corporate act together before they go out of business.

They keep trying to make over the Model 700 with new stocks, barrel lengths, and a confusing array of tactical, hunting, varmint and special purpose models. The short history lesson was a preamble to this:

Last year, I decided to build a 225 Winchester. You read it right - a 225 Winchester. I’ll bet you’re thinking, wasn’t that one of the poor cartridge and rifle decisions Winchester made years ago?

Sort of, but times have changed.

One more quick peak into the past. In the late 1950s, Winchester’s front office decided to change things up with their Model 70 rifle and ammunition. They stopped production of several older cartridges chambered for the Model 70 rifle, and were keen to try something new. They also initiated some cost cutting, and reworked parts of their Model 70. As a result, we now refer to the Model 70 as either a pre or post’64.

They also introduced the 225 Winchester in 1965.

Looking back, I don’t think the idea of a new cartridge was wrong, but they screwed up the execution. Cartridges and rifles work together. At some point, they have to be brought together, tested and tweaked, to produce something that will appeal to shooters.

Let’s start with the cartridge. Winchester announced that it would be available with three different weights – 50, 55 and 60 grain bullets. What shooters got was a single 55 grain load. No explanation was given as far as I have been able to determine, but a quick ballistic check told me the 1 in 14 twist may have been too slow for the longer 60 grain bullet. So that may have eliminated the 60 grain bullet, but what happened to the 50 grain load?

Their literature also said that the 60 grain load would produce 3500 fps at the muzzle. Well, that’s nice to say, but given the case dimensions, a maximum pressure rating of 56.5 PSI, and the powders of the day, 3500 fps wasn’t going to happen. At best, they could manage about 3300 fps. That would have required a faster, 1 in 10 twist barrel

Another problem was the 225 Winchester had a rim – but Winchester said it wasn’t a rim. They called it “semi-rimmed”. What is it that they say about marketing?

Okay. Winchester was both a firearms and a cartridge company. I’m thinking they knew that all cartridges have rims. What they might have meant, sort of, was that the 225 Winchester was rimmed, but that rim was exactly 0.473 of an inch. The Model 70 bolt head could feed and fire their new cartridge without modification. That kept production costs reasonable.

Still, the direction hunters and manufacturers were taking was toward rimless designs. The 225 Winchester would have been a tough sell, but not impossible. Shooters will forgive little things – if the rifle is accurate.

Finally, Winchester should have stuck with production of the 220 Swift, even though it was rimmed. They should have produced the 225 and offered it side by side with the Swift. There was plenty of room for the two to coexist.

Which brings me to the present day. Did I learn from past mistakes? Absolutely!

Unlike the 1960s, we have more powders with virtually no gaps in burn rates. Our bullet selection is better than ever. There are more primers around. We can buy different stocks – either custom fit to our body, or user adjustable for grip size, cheek rest height and over all length.

There are more and better barrel makers that sell to the public. Savage’s easy to change, pre-fit barrels have finally got the positive attention they deserve. Pre-fit barrels have also reduced the cost and shop time for the consumer, and helped to reduce the gunsmith’s backlog.

And of course, today’s shooter is better educated than previous generations. A smart consumer has a wide choice of accessories and more options these days.


My 225 Winchester with a Boyd AT-One stock

Still, why bother building a 225 Winchester when I could have purchased a 22-250 and be done with it? The answer was simple: I had the means to create exactly what I wanted, without worrying about the constraints of the past.

I like rimmed cartridges and could get all the components. At 56.5 PSI, it wasn’t a barrel burner. I could crank out 60 grain bullets approximately 200 fps faster, but at the same or less pressure than a 223 Remington.

Originally, I was going to build a single shot Thompson Center Encore - a perfect rifle for a rimmed cartridge like the 225 Winchester. But Wowsers! With the Canadian/US exchange rate at 35%, it was ‘spensive! I had to get the barrel imported and availability of Encore actions in Canada was spotty.


TC Encore with an aftermarket Boyd stock

I wanted a TC Encore. This is how it priced out before adding the 13% harmonized sales tax.

The Encore action - $800 CDN
The Encore barrel from Match Grade Machine in Utah - $600 CDN

Total - $1400 + $180 taxes and $60 shipping. Cost before scoping the beast - $1640 CDN. I would have purchased a Nikon 4-12×40mm for $280. Rings and bases $75 With tax, $400.

Grand Total - $2040

Hmmm. That’s a bit pricey, but I would get what I wanted. Still...

I had some donor actions, and decided to use a pre-Accutrigger Savage. I paired it with an MGM (Now, Preferred Barrel Blanks – Steve) 24 inch, 1 in 9 twist, chrome moly barrel. It was more sensible than Winchester’s original 1 in 14 twist.

I should say at this point that the build was done over two years.

While waiting for the barrel to arrive, I splurged and bought a Boyd AT-ONE stock.

The total cost:

Action - $250 CDN
Barrel - $525 CDN
Stock - $300 CDN
Trigger - $85 CDN

Total - $1160 + $150 taxes and $30 shipping, $1340 (about $940 USD – Steve)

Using the Savage with the existing scope and hardware saved me $700.

That’s the short history of how I ended up with another Frankenrifle that is better than the original.

I built a 225 Short. Actually, a 219 Donaldson Wasp, using 225 Winchester as the parent brass. The rifle was built on a 788 Remington Action. Case forming was a PITA. Accuracy was good but I re-barreled the rifle the next year (to 6PPC) and don't know what happened to the 219 barrel. GD

I always wanted a 219, but never got around to it. Too many cartridges and not enough time. 😢

I got some ooooooold 219 Wasp dies from my old man, but they were an absolute bear to form cases with. I decided not to chamber a rifle in it... ruined a lot more brass than I ever had come out good when I was fiddling with the idea.

Sometimes I wish that I could go back in time and go shopping for things like rimmed brass, a new pre 64 Winchester in the box or some Farquarson actions.

I would like to shop at a gun shop from my youth when the original owner was still alive.

What is it that the 225 offered that you would choose it over the 22-250?

Epps?

Most of us are aware of the wrong turns and mistakes of this industry. But I've seen first hand the same sort of management skill in other industries . It's why I don't have any faith in conspiracy theories, rather I attribute to sheer stupidity. We all as humans have limitations .

I liked the lines and that it was rimmed. I believe that single shots and rimmed cartridges go together like peanut butter and jam. 🙂. Originally, I wanted a 225 Encore ss.

I would like to talk with and visit Epps again. And Keith Lovett too. Both men rnjoyed talking about their passions, firearms and cartridges.


downwindtracker2,

I believe you are right. More often than not, poor decision making is the reason for much that goes wrong in the world.

All that stuff is easy. Try and get components for a Sako 7X33. The concept was after WWII and the Finns had an idea that would use excess 9mm brass. Why not stretch the case, make it a bottleneck 7mm? Try to find a 7X33 rifle...

Things are harder to find in Canada. Powder, bullets, rifles and accessories, more. It used to be that much of our firearms and ammunition imports came from Europe. We also had more industry here like cartridge and firearms manufacturing. Sadly, many of those companies like CIL, Cooey, and others closed their doors.

We are more dependent on US imports now, and have been for a while. If you guys cannot find things on your side, we definitely are SOL up here.

The brass and bullets came from England. I had to do some trading with a guy on the Sako Collectors site and he went to England and brought back the bullets and brass.

It's good to hear that you worked a deal. I find horse trading around here is becoming more commonplace. . Last year, I managed to get a few hundred pieces of unfired 225 Win brass. I guess people got to keep an eye out. You never know when a deal will come along.

Congratulations!