Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: .22-250 with heavy bullets

  1. #1

    Default .22-250 with heavy bullets

    I have a Savage .22-250 with a barrel twist of 1-12".
    I want to load some heavier bullets, anyone out there have any experience testing these heavy 70-90gr .224 caliber bullets in their .22-250/.223 with slower twist rates?
    Are you able to stabilize these heavier bullets?

  2. #2

    Default

    I cannot get anything over 60g to stabilize in my 1:12 twist encore barrel. The 60g bullets don't group anywhere near as good as the 45-55g heads do in this barrel. I think you'll be lucky to get anything over 65g to stabilize. All of the heavier .224 heads are boattails, except the 70g Speer, which usually means they are longer than a flat base bullet of the same weight. Length is the determinant factor when it comes to bullet stabilization.

  3. #3

    Default

    Thanks I am starting to see that...

  4. #4
    Member HCL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mat-Sue
    Posts
    267

    Default

    I have a Savage BVSS, 1-12". The 75gr Amax will stabilize but you have to push them hard. I have had my best luck with the 60gr Vmax, and 60gr Sierra. Also found that due to our temp differances in the summer and winter, Hodgdon Benchmark or H380 seams to get the best performance, Varget gives better velocity but is really dirt. Only bullets that I have had issues with is that 36gr Varmint gernade, out to 100yrds it shoots nice, but after that you might as well take a handfull and throw them by hand.

  5. #5
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    There are bullets,as in projectiles, and there are cartridges,as in loaded ammunition. What are "heads"? Can't find that in any loading manual or reference to firearms, other than screw heads....
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  6. #6
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gunbugs View Post
    There are bullets,as in projectiles, and there are cartridges,as in loaded ammunition. What are "heads"? Can't find that in any loading manual or reference to firearms, other than screw heads....

    Laughing!

  7. #7
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HCL View Post
    Only bullets that I have had issues with is that 36gr Varmint gernade, out to 100yrds it shoots nice, but after that you might as well take a handfull and throw them by hand.
    Thinking you are being misled by parallax issues or something similar, unrelated to the bullets. Bullets DO NOT destablize as they go downrange. If they are stablized at 100 yards they stay that way until they slow to subsonic levels... Despite some internet commando rumors... The little Varmint Grenades especially would not cause stability issues that soon.
    art

  8. #8

    Default

    Hap, do you have any experience with heavy .224 bullets in slower twist barrels?

  9. #9
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tailwind View Post
    Hap, do you have any experience with heavy .224 bullets in slower twist barrels?
    Lots, actually. I still have a mini-mauser 223 1:12 which is great for light bullets, but fails to stablize anything in the 60 grain range... It has a serious round count and is slowing a bit. I would never consider a slow-twisted 22 again as it leaves so much on the table.

    My son's 22-250, a Mark X mauser, is also slow twisted but does a little better on slightly heavier bullets, but is again far from optimal. I have some others that are not slow twisted and have been easily able to see the difference. And I have spent more than a little time studying spin dynamics.
    art

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    I have quite a bit of experience with twist rates in .22 cal barrels as we (4 of us) shoot alot in Montana & Wyoming for prairie dogs - First of all, twist rates is not an exact science (don't ask me why) but in general slower rates are for lighter bullets 40, 50 & 55 (sometimes) this is why there are so many .223's with 1:9 twist, because there's alot of 69 grain military ammo around - In general, it is usually easier to get a fast twist barrel to shoot "lighter" bullets than the other way around - A side benefit of faster twist barrels is the dramatic kills and I will tell you from personal experience that an old 7x57 with a 1:7 twist will kill an elk like you've never seen and a 40 grain V-max at 3700 fps at 1:9 twist rate will send pieces of PD 10 feet in the air (it is dramatic and cool to watch) - 22,250's don't usually come in those fast twists but if rebarrelling you can sure order on that way - "destabilization" and "overstabilization" are general misnomers but there's "something out there" that affects bullet flighte (gremlins I guess)

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    regarding "destabilization" that doesn't happen as the bullet never did stabilize in the first place - as any bullet's velocity slows to the point of optimal stability it will begin to "yaw" or simply wobble and will manifest on a target as an elongated hole (rather than a round hole) take a child's "top" and give it a spin then watch it as it slows down and that is pretty much what a bullet does as it slows in flight

  12. #12
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by back country View Post
    regarding "destabilization" that doesn't happen as the bullet never did stabilize in the first place - as any bullet's velocity slows to the point of optimal stability it will begin to "yaw" or simply wobble and will manifest on a target as an elongated hole (rather than a round hole) take a child's "top" and give it a spin then watch it as it slows down and that is pretty much what a bullet does as it slows in flight
    Very good points! Especially the part about never having stablized versus "destablized".

    I do think you are a bit off on the "optimal stability" thing though... and it may just be language rather than what you mean.

    All stable bullets ride a touch "nose up". That attitude can cause downrange issues as the bullet slows and fails to "nose over" which presents more of the bullet to the air which increases drag (it is trying to go through the air a little sideways). Increased drag slows the bullet but does almost nothing to slow rotation. This makes the bullet more stable than it was to start (it is moving much slower now and very little rotational velocity has been lost). The notion of seeing elongated holes at distances where this stuff happens is a little hard to agree with though.

    Elongated holes happen with bullets that never stablize, up close.

    So the part I need explained is how a bullet slows to optimal stability. Rotational velocity is not going to slow anything like as fast as linear velocity so the bullet will become more stable right up to the point of going subsonic.

    Serious benchrest shooters worry about over stablization when they shoot great distances and the scenario I laid out comes into play. They also think the extra spin above what is needed causes wobble early and opens groups. Most tests have had a tough time proving it.

    Bringing the precession of a top into it creates problems... But I really like the Gremlin angle... I wonder if there could be a grant to study that?
    art

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gunbugs View Post
    There are bullets,as in projectiles, and there are cartridges,as in loaded ammunition. What are "heads"? Can't find that in any loading manual or reference to firearms, other than screw heads....
    I beg of your forgiveness for using a slang word. I will try my best to meet your standard in the future.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    you are obviously more of an engineer than me but that was explained to me by a technician at Hart barrels so I'll defer to them - the rotational comments were not as much in terms of "stability" as in energy delivered to the target and it happens as witnessed but I will still differ with you, albeit in friendly tones, about what a top does as it slows being similar to what a bullet does but not having gravity pulling it to complicate the issue - we all know that what is "supposed" to happen sometimes does and sometimes doesn't and we'll be darned if we can figure out why ? I guess it's the stuff campfire debates are made of ...

  15. #15
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ANGCorsair View Post
    I beg of your forgiveness for using a slang word. I will try my best to meet your standard in the future.

    The only time I have ever heard the term used was when eBay banned bullet sales and called them "bullet heads." Thankfully it has not caught on... much...

  16. #16
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by back country View Post
    you are obviously more of an engineer than me but that was explained to me by a technician at Hart barrels so I'll defer to them - the rotational comments were not as much in terms of "stability" as in energy delivered to the target and it happens as witnessed but I will still differ with you, albeit in friendly tones, about what a top does as it slows being similar to what a bullet does but not having gravity pulling it to complicate the issue - we all know that what is "supposed" to happen sometimes does and sometimes doesn't and we'll be darned if we can figure out why ? I guess it's the stuff campfire debates are made of ...
    Certainly intend no illl will with the coments, just trying to clarify your points. Are you referring to "optimal stability" as when a bullet "goes to sleep?" I have trouble understanding when you said "when the bullet slows to optimal stability"... It really is more of an issue of getting past muzzle effects and any sort of crown problems tossing the bullet to one side or another and velocity is not the issue.

    Tops' stability work under some different laws than bullets because of the velocity. For one thing a top's stability is based on center of mass and a supersonic bullet's stability is based on center of gravity... Explaining the differences would likely not be worth the effort for anyone... but there are meaningful differences.
    art

  17. #17

    Default

    Modern rifling has a twist, to impart spin to the bullets leaving the barrel. This spin helps to make bullets in flight more stable in two ways:

    First, the spin causes gyroscopic stabilization; which is just like how it sounds. A spinning mass resists being disturbed off the axis perpendicular to the direction of rotation due to gyroscopic inertia; which is rigidity in space induced by radially symmetric (which means the forces are the same along all radii - i.e. identical all the way around in all directions) centrifugal forces.

    This is the primary component of spin stabilization for pointed bullets (ball bullets are primarily stabilized aerodynamically, because they tumble as well as spin), and it's force component significantly outweighs most of the aerodynamic components of ballistic stability.

    In simple English, bullets spin like a top, and they don't "fall over"; just like a top doesn't.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    what tailwind said .... it just works ... okay ??

  19. #19
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    tailwind, back country,
    Believe me, I understand your desire to simplify this... But it is far more complex than you understand. I am happy to drop it if you do not want to know, but will go as far into it as you like.

    As a teaser "...radially symmetric (which means the forces are the same along all radii - i.e. identical all the way around in all directions) centrifugal forces."

    Okay, that statement and fragment creates a Physics impossibility on at least three points... there are likely more. As I already posted a top is stable when it spins on its center of mass.

    And for the record there is no such force as centrifugal... Note the word "apparent" in every technical definition...

    Would be happy to answer questions.
    art

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    If you guys want to learn how bullets fly, go here:

    http://www.nennstiel-ruprecht.de/bul...tm#Top_of_page
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •