Custom Browning.

[Sherlock]

good morning, my reason for my comment is that 22/250 does not have any major improvement over a 223rem and .243win and the .243win will out perfom the 22.250 on every level .ie it wil use 55gr up to 105gr and wil kill any legal quarry in the uk ,I have friends who use the 22/250 as that's what their issued rifle is but many by choice use 223rem for small pests and fox and as they do not shoot deer do not wish for anything larger and other who do shoot deer and fox choose the .243 as their alround rifle.in my opinion the 22/250 and the 270 sit between calibers but as I said each to their own my own choice is 223rem for feathered pest 55gr vmax at 3117 fps and 243win for four legged quarry 87gr vmax at 3000fps does the job very well.

 

 

Banus - You just couldn't be more wrong. Obviously you haven't owned and ran a 22.250 firing the heavy stuff

 

A tight twist 22.250 - will launch a 80 grn Amax at over 3300 fps - The true BC is about 0.460.

As a long range varminter or foxing cal it beats the 243 - and thats from owning both cals at the same time.

 

22.250 uses less powder - has less recoil - is far flatter shooting and even better in the wind..

The biggest problem with the 6mm cal is it has a very limited range of very High BC bullets that will expand... basically your stuck with 105 Amax ... Similar weighted bullets simply drill through consistently without causing instant kills.

 

To get decent expanding bullets in 6mm your dropping down to around the 85 to 90 grain mark and the BC is well down compared to the 22 high BC pills.

 

Even in the light bullets - the 22.250 spits out a 53 grn Vmax ( BC 0.290) at 3900 fps without fuss ,,, the 243 cant match the ballistics here ... to get a BC of 0.290 the 243 if firing approximately 70 grain pills at about 3500 fps

 

The new 69 grn TMK's which have a BC of.375 - are launched at about 3500 fps --- these are a much better BC than the 75 grn Vmax and are travelling faster.

 

I doubt whether I will convince you .... so plug the figures in to any ballistic calc

 

> 80 Amax @ 3300 fps - BC 0.460

 

> 69 grn TMK @ 3500 fps - BC 0360

 

> 53 grn Vmax @ 3900 fps - BC 0.290

 

Its not a dick measuring contest ,, but at least do your home work before you write the calibre off

 

 

Nice rifle by the way - the owner will be very happy.

 

 

S

.

[Big Al]

 

 

Banus - You just couldn't be more wrong. Obviously you haven't owned and ran a 22.250 firing the heavy stuff

 

A tight twist 22.250 - will launch a 80 grn Amax at over 3300 fps - The true BC is about 0.460.

As a long range varminter or foxing cal it beats the 243 - and thats from owning both cals at the same time.

 

22.250 uses less powder - has less recoil - is far flatter shooting and even better in the wind..

The biggest problem with the 6mm cal is it has a very limited range of very High BC bullets that will expand... basically your stuck with 105 Amax ... Similar weighted bullets simply drill through consistently without causing instant kills.

 

To get decent expanding bullets in 6mm your dropping down to around the 85 to 90 grain mark and the BC is well down compared to the 22 high BC pills.

 

Even in the light bullets - the 22.250 spits out a 53 grn Vmax ( BC 0.290) at 3900 fps without fuss ,,, the 243 cant match the ballistics here ... to get a BC of 0.290 the 243 if firing approximately 70 grain pills at about 3500 fps

 

The new 69 grn TMK's which have a BC of.375 - are launched at about 3500 fps --- these are a much better BC than the 75 grn Vmax and are travelling faster.

 

I doubt whether I will convince you .... so plug the figures in to any ballistic calc

 

> 80 Amax @ 3300 fps - BC 0.460

 

> 69 grn TMK @ 3500 fps - BC 0360

 

> 53 grn Vmax @ 3900 fps - BC 0.290

 

Its not a dick measuring contest ,, but at least do your home work before you write the calibre off

 

 

Nice rifle by the way - the owner will be very happy.

 

 

S

.

 

I think the problem here Sherlock is most people think of what is a conventional 22-250 with a 14 twist barrel.

 

Things get better once you change the barrel and start shoving the heavies out there but thats not really what people think of when thinking 22-250.

[Big Al]

Are the speeds you mention above pretty much maxed out or do you have anything left in the tank?

 

What would you expect barrel life to be running them as you are?

[banus02]

good evening as stated each to their own I would not spend a lot of money to make a 22/250 try to be anything other than an old caliber out run by modern factory calibers. just not my choice at all when my barrel wears out I will by another factory rifle in .243

[Sherlock]

 

I think the problem here Sherlock is most people think of what is a conventional 22-250 with a 14 twist barrel.

 

Things get better once you change the barrel and start shoving the heavies out there but thats not really what people think of when thinking 22-250.

 

That's true - figures are top end ... I did the same with the 243 . .

I commented on this thread as the rifle the Baldie has build has an 8 twist barrel fitted.... same as mine.

 

Totally different ball game to the standard 14 twist barrel. I recently dispatched several rabbits at between 760 and 805 yrds all witnessed .... and a crow at 755 yrds using 75 grn Amax in my rifle.

 

As for barrel life - Well Plug in to Quick load - 35.5 grns of Reloader 17 behind either the 75 or 80 grain Amax - ( COL 2.660 ) . My first tight twist 22.250 did 1500 rounds and was still bug holing. I expect about 1800 rounds of top accuracy based on experience - Maybe more.

 

S

[Sherlock]

 

I think the problem here Sherlock is most people think of what is a conventional 22-250 with a 14 twist barrel.

 

Things get better once you change the barrel and start shoving the heavies out there but thats not really what people think of when thinking 22-250.

 

 

AL - I agree - its very similar to the 20 cals shooting 39 grn SKB's - they give flat shooting and are a ok - 450 yrd gun in mild winds..... Same a 22.250 shooting a 55 grn bullet ... both are excellent foxers.

 

Put a tight twist on a 20 cal with some grunt , like a 20 BR - then use the 55 grn Berger varmint bullet and you have just changed the whole ball game - you now have genuine 650 yrd varmint tool.

 

You would know about this.... I am guessing

[Sherlock]

good evening as stated each to their own I would not spend a lot of money to make a 22/250 try to be anything other than an old caliber out run by modern factory calibers. just not my choice at all when my barrel wears out I will by another factory rifle in .243

 

HI Banus.

Can I ask what modern factory calibres out run it .... given its designed for fox and varmint shooting.

[banus02]

Sherlock,i appear to be stuck in the dark ages ref barrel twist etc but these are not factory rifles so will never concern me,nice as the rifles may be.i have never owned 22/250 and never will but as stated each to their own.

[munkjack]

Sherlock,i appear to be stuck in the dark ages ref barrel twist etc but these are not factory rifles so will never concern me,nice as the rifles may be.i have never owned 22/250 and never will but as stated each to their own.

Go on you don't no what your missing ???

[gbal]

Guys,this is an interesting topic-revisited. Al has opened a new one for discussion of the 75/80 class high BC (224) bullerts,which seems to be where we were going here-so more on ballistics in this new post?

 

Just to comment though,on the generalities- we all make our choices,some informed.

Banus,there is little to choose historically between 22/250 and 243-not that age matters,not much is genuinely new. Remington adopted the 22/250 as a factory cartridge in 1965,though it was near identical to the older "varminter" developed by Gebby and so tradenamed in 1937/8 (others had necked the 250/3000 too in the 30's to essentially the same number).But 1965 for factory 22/250.Now thats not far off the 243 win,based on the 308 w/or it's proptotype-which emerged as the NATO cartridge about'65 too-again -of course-there was quite a bit of wildcatting -noteably by Warren Page,with his Rockchucker-and others,like Huntingdon -ending up with what was pretty near the factory adoted 243. Page publicised the 243 effectively via Field and Stream,the influential magazine,of which he was the shooting editor.

 

OK,the two hardly differen in provenance/age-both have been verry widely chambered by most manufacturers.What is newer is the range of bullet weightsfor both,esp the 224s,and fast twist barrels.

The lack of a factory fast twist 243 is being met by the Ruger PR rifle-I'm not sure offhand about the 22/250.But the high BC bullets,with fast twist (lighter bullets for 243,heavier for 224s than previously,have transformed both calibres in versatility-especially extending effective ranges of both-but much much more for the 243-in the end,capacity is the limiter.

Suitable bullets for live quarry comes in-we had an informed discussion on this with Shelock-the 243's weakness is no medium weight Amax-to avoid through and throughs. I cannot remember-so please remind me-why the Vmax (BC.330 in 75g,.40 in 87g-still a bit behind 224 75/80 Amax-.43/.45)was not deemed acceptable for long range varmint use in UK?

 

I have always had 243s,and it's a fine cartridge-yet to fulfill all it's new potential. Just as developments have favoured the good,but lesser capacity ,22/250. the 243 will no doubt catch up. It's already way ahead as a long range target cartridge,with the 115 DTACS,eg. This is all performance .of course-barrel life ,noise etc useability all differ variously. As does shooter preference,as ever.Long range shooting should not be about 'usually' OK shots-much less 'one/two /three etc' exceptional shots-on live quarry we need much much higher hit %-and terminal effectiveness.

 

But let's not be too restricted-especially in criticism-of other's choices if we base our pre-judgements on simply outdated performances in the cartridges. Neither Gebby nor Page did that-they made a better mousetrap.

 

Now- about this 22 cheetah,224 Clarke,and the Middlestead Ackley Improved....5.6x57;22/284;or maybe the 22 Banshee (5.6x68)...which is getting near the brink of sanity...

 

....on the new thread?

 

gbal

[baldie]

how about starting your own thread on 22-250 ballistics, fella,s.

 

This one,s mine....now sod off.

[Shuggy]

Though as thread hijacks go, it was pretty interesting....

[1971silversurfer]

how about starting your own thread on 22-250 ballistics, fella,s.

 

This one,s mine....now sod off.

ROTFL!!!

[gbal]

Though as thread hijacks go, it was pretty interesting....

...which is why I suggested moving the ballistics discussion to Al's new thread on the high BC 224 bullets.....(75/80 A max)....Dave has a fair point,politely made,and it would allow him to concentrate on his metric numbers course.....just in case any new "must have 224 " is not in fact arabic in designation :-)

 

gbal

[baldie]

Took it to the range today with some cobbled together loads of vhit 150 and 69 grain matchkings.

 

It shot very nicely and a real pussycat with its Wildcat mod onboard. Shot a few rounds to break the barrel in, then this 5 shot group.

 

I think this will be a shooter with some load development .

 

[fivehole]

Still wondering how much a ceracoat job is.

[munkjack]

Thanks for posting that Dave it's Looking good for the future im very keen to try some of the heavier weight bullets.

[baldie]

Still wondering how much a ceracoat job is.

 

Pick the phone up . My number is 07889 388378.

 

A mouses earhole is about a tenner, something the size of my pecker would be £300.

[MJR]

so a 24" barrel is 3 grand.....