Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Predators and Varmints Most accurate long range varminter?

I'm considering the purchase of a 25-06 to set up for long range varminting (not prarie dogs, only occasional shots).<P>I was wondering how accurate this cartridge is. Knowing that the .308 Winchester is more inherently accurate than the 30-06, I wonder if the .260 has the same advantage over the 25-06.<P>Other caliber suggestions appreciated. I'll be buying dies, brass, bullets, etc along with the rifle, so I don't want to make a mistake. Thanks for the help,<P>Wizard

Wizard:<P>I would not really want to suggest a cartridge for you, that is an individual choice, and a lot depends on what you call long range. But, in general, the shorter fatter cartridge cases are inherently more accurate than the longer ones with the more gradual shoulder angles based on the .30-06. If it were me, and this is really just for varmints, I would consider one of the 6mm rounds. If Dr. Howell is reading, he can give you some more insight. Before going whole hog and jumping in, I would become a member of Varmint Hunters and check out what the guys who are really doing it regularly have to say. Good shooting. CAT

I would ask how long a range your planning on shooting ? My information is that for 300, even to 400 yds., the .22's like the Swift work fine. Just use soft points, not match bullets. You can go beyond 400 with them, but wind becomes a real problem. But, you can do it. I've got a buddy, who dotes on the Swift for ranges all the way to 600 yds. He tells me, however, that that is really too far for that round. It appears that accuracy, and resistance to wind, are more important than flat trajectory. If you can handle a 7 mm Mag., use that. I don't like'em for that. I have used them, and they do work, but they aren't alot of fun to shoot. The main concern I have with the .25-06 would be accuracy at extentened ranges. I suspect that the .308 has an edge there. Whatever you decided, plan on lots of long range practice. Good luck, E.

On a quiet day, the Swift is difficult to beat, even way out there. As has been observed, though, the 6mm's shine when the breeze is up, although the difference is not quite as great as is often assumed. Check your charts [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] Obviously there is a lot of choices that make great long range rigs, I have a couple of acquaintances who like light bullets in their 270's. But if any amount of shooting is done, particularly when prone, the ones with any substantial recoil will wear you down over time. JMHO,Eagleye. [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img]

since the handle might give away my prejudice toward the 243, I will say I've had a couple of 25/06 that worked real well with lighter bullets, most notably a Ruger if you believe that. Guess it all depends on what ya want, a friend has one and it will reach out....

I'm with short243 as far as my handle goes. I love and shoot a 220 Swift. I'm with Eagleeye as the 25-06 will have less bullet drift in windy situations. YOU have to define long range ta yourself. The Swift according ta my Rem ballistic tables is much flatter shooter out ta 500yds, dropping 12 in less than a 25-06. I on calm days have NO problem taking groundhogs out past 400yds with the Swift. Do some research, define what type of shooting you will be doing then in the long run BUY WHAT YOU WANT or I promise you will be forever second guessing yourself and never be really happy. Remember that'ws my opinion.

It's really a matter of shooting ability<BR>rather than caliber or gun make or model<BR>but no matter what you go with, for long<BR>range shooting you have to a Quality scope!!<BR>I personaly shoot pdogs out to 600yds with a Ruger 77vmt in 243 it handles the winds in KS<BR>ok, with my handlods-(58gr v-max) pushing a little over 4000fps and i've shot yotes over 700 out with the same gun. I deer hunt with a Howa 243 and both have (GREAT scopes) and i have shot deer with it over 400yds. IT JUST TAKES A LOT OF PRACTICE.

"On a quiet day, the Swift is difficult to beat, even way out there."<P>No longer true. The Swift is still as great a cartridge as it ever was, but now there's a bigger, stronger, and smarter kid in that family. There's now a .220 cartridge that was specifically designed to outdo the Swift, and it does exactly that. Its case capacity is about 29% greater than the Swift's, but it isn't intended for either the lighter bullets or the higher pressures of the Swift. It uses a 50% heavier bullet, with a larger charge of a slower powder.<P>It isn't a scaled-up Swift. It's more like a scaled-down .25-06.<P>The muzzle velocity of the factory (Remington) Swift with a 50-grain Hornady is (IIRC) 3,780 ft/sec, presumably at the SAAMI maximum pressure � about 60,000 lb/sq in. The muzzle velocity of the .220 Howell, with the 75-grain Hornady A-Max, loaded to the much gentler 50,000 lb/sq in. for longer barrel life and generally better performance, is about 3,500-3,600 ft/sec. At about 180-190 yards, the velocity of the 50-grain from the Swift and the 75-grain from the Howell is the same. Beyond that range, the 75-grain from the Howell is increasingly faster than the 50-grain from the Swift.<P>The 75-grain has a significantly higher ballistic coefficient than the 50-grain and is 50% heavier, so its trajectory, resistance to wind deflection, and delivered energy are far better than the Swift's 50-grain � or any other bullet at Swift velocities. The Swift, obviously, can't drive the 75-grain at anything near the velocity that it gets routinely from the 29% larger case.<P>Designed around the 75-grain Hornady A-Max (or 80-grain Berger or Sierra) and IMR-7828, the .220 Howell turns out to be at its best with IMR-7828 or Ramshot Magnum (formerly "Big Boy") powders. IMR-4831, for example, is too fast.<P>The grand old Swift stands up to the .220 Howell pretty well at short range (except in delivered energy) but rapidly falls behind at long ranges.<P>And remember, the .220 Howell outperforms the Swift at peak pressures 10,000 lb/sq in. LOWER than the Swift's � for longer case and barrel life and usually better round-to-round consistency. Your rifle is more likely to be accurate at 50,000 lb/sq in. than at 60,000 lb/sq in.<P>BTW, although this cartridge bears my name (because I designed it), I have not, do not, and will not ever get a cent out of it. My satisfaction with my .220 Howell rifles and your satisfaction with yours are my only returns on this cartridge.<P>Which suits me just fine.

Ken,<P>I found your posting most informative. Where can I get more information regarding the .220 Howell cartridge? I went to my book and found nada. Any information you could send me would be most helpful. My e-mail address is donmonroeadelphia.net. Thank you in advance.

Hi Ken; Nice to hear your comments on the .220 Howell. You'll note I didn't say impossible, only "hard" to beat the Swift. In deference to your vast experience and knowledge, and also having spoken to you on the phone, I know that you don't speak from empty spaces, but from your backgound and accomplishments. Couple of minor points though. Since the 220 Howell is, at least for now, a handloaders proposition, comparing the rather anemic 50 gr Swift factory load is not really fair. Any 26" Swift I have ever owned will easily break 4000 FPS within safe pressure limits with the 50 grainer. Now I know that this only stretches out the meeting point a few dozen yards, but it would be a fairer comparison. As well, those long bullets in the Howell require very quick twists to stabilize, which often create rather quick pressure rises if one isn't careful with load development. All said, it's obvious that the BC of that looonnnggg 75 grainer will take over as ranges get out there. Will this ever become a factory cartridge, Ken? It would be interesting to see who picks it up and runs with it. Regards, Eagleye [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img]

"Since the 220 Howell is, at least for now, a handloaders proposition, comparing the rather anemic 50 gr Swift factory load is not really fair."<BR>--- Yes, it is fair, since the factory Swift load is an established and published safe standard for comparison. It is indicative of what SAAMI maximum pressures produce with a 50-grain bullet in the Swift. As for its being "a handloader's proposition for now," two points:<BR>(a) Any varmint cartridge that gets much use is sooner or later a handloader's proposition, even though factory ammo is available.<BR>(b) The .220 Howell is a factory cartridge. I prefer handloading it, and I believe that most who shoot it are also handloaders, but it IS, indeed, a factory-loaded cartridge.<P>"Any 26" Swift I have ever owned will easily break 4000 FPS within safe pressure limits with the 50 grainer."<BR>--- I must contest this claim. Loads that produce 4,000 ft/sec are NOT within safe pressure limits. Also, loads that depend on maximum and over-maximum pressures erode barrels MUCH faster. In the .224 barrel, these pressures erode throats 8.9% faster than the same pressures in a .244 barrel. Longer barrel life is one of the basic reasons for the design of the .220 Howell � to use pressures no higher than about 50,000 lb/sq in. instead of the 60,000 lb/sq in. of the SAAMI maximums and the 70,000 lb/sq in. (and higher) of the handloads that produce 4,000 ft/sec.<P>"... those long bullets in the Howell require very quick twists to stabilize,..."<BR>True but not a liability. Nine inches is about right.<P>"... which often create rather quick pressure rises if one isn't careful with load development."<BR>--- Not at all. With the powders best suited to the .220 Howell, the pressure curves rise less steeply, peak more gradually and longer, and diminish less abruptly. With the faster powders in the Swift, the pressure curve rises more steeply, peaks sharply, then drains rapidly. Besides, with the pressure peak 10,000 lb/sq in. lower than the Swift's, there's a much wider margin of safety above the Howell's curve, enough to absorb any weird peak much more safely than would be the case with the Swift.<P>"Will this ever become a factory cartridge, Ken?"<BR>--- It already is. Always has been, from Day One. Rifles, cases (headstamped "220 Howell"), ammo, and dies are available from American Hunting Rifles (AHR) � see <A HREF="http://www.hunting-rifles.com" TARGET=_blank>http://www.hunting-rifles.com</A> � but I prefer to make my own brass from new Winchester .25-06 cases. Reamers are available from a number of companies (Pacific Precision Grinding and Manson Reamers, to name two, and I can provide dimensioned drawings to any other reamer-maker at no cost on request), and a number of gun-makers are already making .220 Howell rifles and rebarreling customers' rifles for this cartridge.<P>I planned and designed this cartridge very carefully, relying on interior-ballistics basics not usually considered by cartridge designers these days. I designed it to be exactly what it is, and fortunately, it works exactly as I planned it. Unfortunately for shooters who are just becoming aware of it, its interior-ballistics basics are not familiar, not obvious, not repeatedly printed in the sporting-arms literature. So it defies a lot of "conventional wisdom" that's based on other criteria (much of it wrong to begin with). Yet it's very simple, very straight-forward, once you get past the haze of "conventional wisdom."

Another point � in which I'm speaking from only what I've heard in the industry, not from any personal experience with the Swift (which I've avoided in favor of my beloved .22-.250s):<P>Within the industry, the .220 Swift is an uncomfortable cartridge � tricky and quirky to load, especially to give it the velocities that in the beginning gave it its reputation. I don't have any of my Winchester ammo catalogs handy at the moment, but IIRC, Winchester doesn't load it any more. It used to be a Winchester-Western standard-bearer. And Remington loads it to somewhat less than the velocities that made it famous.

Accuracy is a seperate issue from speed. The trick is to meld both traits(accuracy AND speed)in order to perform the task at hand. I'm a huge Swift fan,it is a great cartridge,in my estimation.<P>Typical Remington factory loads are most sedate(in the Swift especially),they barely rival like weight 22-250 fodder,from the same Manufacturer. Norma loads it as intended and the differences are substantial(as is performance).<P>For years,the masses were afraid of the Swift,due to some hair-brained bad press. That is/was a shame,as it is undeserving. When loaded to it's potential,it is a real contender. Especially,when one considers the excellent brass available for it. It is pretty hard,to "out Swift,the Swift".<P>A noteable exception and a worthwhile project,is the 220Swift Ackley. It readily increases capacity,addresses the case stretch issue and gives it an honest boost in performance. Combine the Improved case design,with a quick twist barrel and push the high BC projectiles to the cases potential and it may suprise you. It is a very straight forward design and formed cases are a press of the trigger away.<P>Nooooow,back to the original subject of the thread..... The 25-06 is a superb cartridge and absolutely excels in the role mentioned(my opinion of course). It is both capable of extreme accuracy AND sizzling speeds. It has the capacity to squirt the higher BC offerings at most respectable velocities,or to purely scream with lighter weight projectiles. I very much like the 75gr V-Max out of the 25-06(and my 25-284's and 25-06Ackley),for ranges to 600yds. Depending upon barrel length,3700fps,should be realistic with that particular weight. Higher BC bullets will fend atmospheric conditions better,at extended distances,but can't be propelled fast enough to unravel critters in the manner of the V-Max. For visual satisfaction,the 75's are king.<P>Everybody has their own notion of "long range" and accuracy. However,I'm firmly of the opinion that the 25-06 is capable of delivering both,in spades,when housed in a capable rifle. I've had five seperate 25-06's and have yet to be disappointed,on any level of expectation.<P><BR>You want extreme accuracy and great speeds? 25-284.............(grin)

Well Ken; I have in fact owned at least 12 Swifts over 3-1/2 decades. I have toned down my handloads some, especially after checking some with the transducer several years ago, but let me assure you, it IS possible to reach 4000 FPS within SAAMI pressure limits, particularly with some of today's fine powders, with the 50 grainer. In fact the 55 grainer will go 3900 and stay inside the envelope with a couple of these propellants.<BR>Again, I know you have lots of experience in the field, but by your own admission, the Swift has not been your "pet" but rather the 22-250. Now if I wanted a 22-250s, I would have bought them, but there is enough difference between it and the Swift that I simply prefer the latter. As far as being "Quirky' to load, I have not seen evidence of this and categorily dismiss that claim as being started by some disgruntled souls who ran into trouble by failing to use common sense. As for Factory loadings for the .220 Howell, I guess that we, living in your neighbor to the North, do not always have the access to the newbies or the information that you do, so please accept my apologies there. Regards, Eagleye. [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img]

You made me curious � wondered how my .220 would compare with a Swift shooting a 50-grain at 4,000 ft/sec. Here's how the figures compare at 1,000 yards � Swift 50-grain at 4,000 (first figure) versus my .220 75-grain at 3,550 (second figure):<P>� deflection in 10-mi/hr cross-wind � 153" versus 72"<BR>� velocity � 1,005 ft/sec versus 1,630 ft/sec<BR>� drop � 350" versus 239"<BR>� time in flight � 1.62 sec versus 1.25 sec<P>The two bullets slow to the same velocity at about 215 yards.<BR>_______________<P>I also have a .25-06 � not my first � and prize it highly. I've used a different one, back east, for woodchuck. If I were there now, I'd use the .220 Howell. The .25-06 has been my antelope and deer rifle for many years. Today, I'd give serious consideration to the .220 Howell and don't honestly know, right now, which one I'd use for deer and antelope � and caribou too, if I ever got that chance again.

"apologies?"<P>What the heck for? I haven't seen anything here that anybody needs to apologize for � even if we were whispering this stuff in church. �o)

Ken, I would be most curious to hear numbers crunched,employing identical projectiles,at like pressure levels? Those numbers regarding the Swift,it's 40 degree Improved version and your 220 Howell offering.<P>That would be an interesting tidbit,added to the discussion. All assuming 26" of barrel length........

Just did that, 'Stick. Used the 50-grain Nosler and H-414, and stopped at 60,000 lb/sq in. in 26-inch barrels.<P>� .220 Swift � 44.2 gr, 3,996 ft/sec,* 60,000 lb/sq in.<BR>� .220 Ackley Improved Swift � 44.3 gr, 3,999 ft/sec, 60,000 lb/sq in.<BR>� .220 Howell � 54.9 gr, 4,365 ft/sec, 60,000 lb/sq in.<P>*(apologies for my earlier comment on this score. I was remembering older loads with the old faster powders, which were quite a bit higher than 60,000 lb/sq in.)

Now let's look at all three, loaded the way I load my .220 � 75-grain A-Max, 50,000 lb/sq in.<P>� .220 Swift: 43.7* gr Ramshot Magnum, 3,254 ft/sec, 50,000 lb/sq in.<BR>� .220 Ackley Improved Swift: 43.9* gr Ramshot Magnum, 3,260 ft/sec, 50,000 lb/sq in.<BR>� .220 Howell, 54.2 gr Ramshot Magnum, 3,551 ft/sec, 50,000 lb/sq in.<P>*compressed charge<P>The bug in the beer is that the twists in most if not all Swift barrels won't handle the 75-gr A-Max.

Ken,most interesting findings.<P>How may the results differ,when employing the optimal propellant,for each respective cartridge? (Point being,the increase in capacity,from Swift to Swift Improved,would net more than a 3feet per second increase in velocity,assuming optimal powder selection). <P>My QuickLoad Program is on the blink,or I'd crunch data,myself. My troubles lie,with H-414 specifically as applied to the Swift. I greatly favor Re-15,with both the 50 and 55gr projectiles,in this cartridge. As per both Nosler #3 and #4,the 55gr will generate 3900fps,in a conservative manner(though Norma's Factory offering,will give 4000fps).<P>In all the Swift's I've owned,I've found that 39.5grs of Re-15,will generate 3900fps and very good brass life. That load and it's brass longevity,are indicative of realistic pressure levels(as per Nosler's test data and my individual rifles).<P>However,all that is moot... The data I was most curious about,in comparison of the three mentioned cartridges,is their down range performance. With all zeroed at 2.5" high at 100yds and using like scope heights and equal BC's,what are the down range performance differences?<P> Specifically,trajectory at 300,400,500 and 600yds and of course the resulting wind-drift,assuming a 10mph full value crosswind. I believe that to be a fair comparison,regarding a realistic application......