Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 223 Rem, New school or old school twist rate?

I had these bullets out as samples when I was revising several dimensions for a new reamer a couple days ago. They are lined up where the boat tailed section becomes the full diameter shank section. A black marker indicates where the forward section of the full diameter shank starts it's transition to the ogive. The exact full diameter shank length is noted below...the boat tail length is not included, obviously.

Top: Nosler 70 gr. BTip (.330 shank length)
Ctr: Sierra 90 gr. Game Changer (.400 shank length)
Btm: BIB 104 gr. (.450 shank length)



Clearly, the throat lengths are going be much different (longer) for the longer bullets.

If the magazine is the limiting factor then those bullet tips will be lining up and the black lines will be in different positions. It's a multivariable problem.

Respectfully, mag length restrictions aren't what was questioned....it's throat length. From my post on 3-4:

"If, on the other hand, mag. length is the dimension around which everything else has to work , then you make other compromises. Work the problem backward from that. Or do what it takes to correct the mag. length issue so you don't have to compromise on the throat."

Good shootin' -Al

For a while the 9 twist seemed to dominate over the 12 twist. Now it's the 8 twist that seems to be dominating. I like the 8 twist myself but I have no heart burn with the 9. If it's a gun with a magazine like an AR, I could see where the 9 twist would shine with 62 grain bullets, maybe even some 69 grain bullets. The magazine limiting the length of the bullet and all.

If I were the king and I could make everything to fit in my world I would eliminate the 12 twist and the slowest twist would be a 10. I'm not the king and that's probably a good thing. For those guys shooting the light weight go fasters, the 12 and 14 is right up their alley. Who am I to judge ?? It's a good thing there are plenty of choices.

kwg

I'll throw this into the fray. I cannot vouch for its validity, just something I found and saved from the 'net

Thanks for the visual, Al. As mathman mentioned, it’s a multivariable problem. What really matters is bullet body length, as you’ve described here, but bullet body length is a function not only of bullet weight and overall length, but also bullet shape. Some heavy VLD designs with long boat-tails and long ogives have very short body length, and consequently require short throats if the bottom of the bullet body is seated to the case neck/shoulder junction, assuming magazine length is not a constraint. My illustration above shows how some lighter, shorter bullets may require a longer throat than heavier, longer ones, but I think that’s really only the case with bullet weights that are somewhat similar. As both our images show, very light bullets generally have a shorter body length than much heavier ones, even with very different bullet designs. Bullet weight seems to be the dominant variable, and only if weight is similar do length and shape typically play a significant role in determining bullet body length.

Back to the OP question- I have been shooting the same load of a 53gr HP Sierra flat base, same COAL, in various 223s with twist of 7,8,9, and 12" at 100yd only . Five shot groups. Overall, I'd say this particular load shoots about the same in all these barrels. I'm not seeing much difference even between the 7 and 12" barrels. The 9" twist barrel is a DPMS, and they (Luth) state this is the best all around if you are shooting the 55FMJ AND the 62gr 855/SS109 Greentip bullets. I think the 77gr Sierra is about the longest bullet that will still fit an AR magazine? But the 77gr requires the 8" twist?

Good post. I'd vote for you to be king.. ha ha.. I have 1 in 7", 1 in 8", and 1 in 9" twist barrels on my 223's and they all work very well. Nothing at all wrong with being able to run heavier bullets in the .223 remington. It just extends your optimal range over a slow twist and lighter bullet. Why guys don't see that or realize it and don't want to let go of old notions is beyond me. Here's one with a 1 in 9" barrel I got from one of my buddies:



Here's the first 10 shot group I fired with it, to check to make sure it was going to shoot the 69's:


Then the next 3 shots to check it at 400 yards:


If you guys don't think that can kill a ground squirrel at 600 yards, you may just have some screws loose. And no, you don't need a special chamber for that bullet or load. It is loaded to fit in an AR15 magazine. That load also works great in the bolt actions I've tried it in.. Does it shoot like that all the time? No, not hardly, but most times it will keep them under 2" at 400..:



I've also shot 50 and 53gr Vmax bullets out of it and it shoots sub moa. Not quite as well at 400 yards as the 69 smk, so the faster twist is what I prefer because it shoots the bullets I want to sling way out there much better than a slow twist barrel. The same can be said for my 1 in 8" twist 22-250. There is a reason most manufactures went to the faster twist barrels and some of these old guys need to just face up to the facts and quit trying to make excuses.

Wow, old memories. Yep, that was me who made that machine. Darrik was so busy running the gun shop he never had time for me to train him on the tips and tricks I figured out on the machine and mold.

That was 10 years ago I believe. With the vast improvements in 3D printing machines I would definitely go that route nowadays. When I calculated material cost of the $240k 3DSystems printer we had back then it came out to $33 a part just in material before labor to clean it up! It has come WAY down since then. We have a new 3D Systems printer just put in this year, what a PITA it has been. $300k machine, broken more than running. Seems like the tech is out every 2 or 3 weeks. Its only benefit is running large parts, things like 18” or longer.

We have 3 different FormLabs tabletop 3D printers ($8 to $10k) along a wall at work, they run circles around that massive 3D Systems machine.

Does Ruger even make those style magazines for the RAR anymore? Ones I have seen in photos show AR or AICS type mags hanging out the bottom now.

cotis,

Thanks for the update!

I don't know if Ruger still makes that style of magazine, as I haven't gotten a new American since 2017--but am going to check out their website. (Edited to add I just did check their website, and Ruger does still make the American rotary-style magazine.)

Am down to two Americans, the 1-8 twist .223 where I installed your magazine extension, and a special-run 1-8 .22-250 from Whittaker, from 2017.

I never had as much trouble with the "rotary" magazines as some people had, and in fact the .223's magazine feeds perfectly. What I have noticed is tapered cartridges can sometimes cause trouble--which has happened with the .22-250.

John

There might be a few very light, extremely fragile designs that will come apart in a 1:8 barrel, but most will be fine. And, the 1:8 gives you the ability to stabilize the higher BC bullets, should you want to maximize the .223’s long range capabilities. I would never buy a slow twist barrel in any cartridge capable of long range nowadays. Faster twist just gives you many more options.

John

Great post, particularly about the need for compromise.............& the bigger the range of bullets to be used in a specifc scenario, the more the need for some level of compromise.

Just as a general rule, in many rifles, not 224 caliber, I've often gotten best accuracy with a given bullet with twist that just consistently stabilizes a given bullet..

As for the 223 Rem , 1-8 works fine across the range of bullets that I use at the COAL's I need, well enough, but I don't shoot bullets <52 gr in those guns either.

But if dedicating a rifle to bullets of 55gr & less, a 1-12" is a better choice.

Everything is some level of compromise unless you are dedicating a given gun to a fairly narrow range of tasks.

I think the 223 Rem is maybe a round that requires a little more compromise than some other to cover a really wide range of bullets, especially given the wide range of COAL needed by various guns.

As for the OP's question about shooting 300 yds+, why bother with LW bullets (unless you have a gazillion) when the heavier bullets (60-77 gr) all do far, far better in the wind & kill little stuff just as well?

If you have a gazillion LW bullets, then barrel a rifle dedicated to, & optimized, for them.

JMHO.

MM