achosenman

I take your point gbal. Factory offered loading is crucial. That was instrumental in me going back to the 223. When I realised that factory 204 loads were not as fast as the hype, and therefore the claimed ballistics was wishful thinking. You run real world figures and discover that it drifts as much as the standard 50/55gn 22 without the advantage of being readily available, (that may have changed these days) and being lighter, bleeds energy quicker and at long range losses out to the 22's The advent of the heavy 22 bullets changed the game for me and gave a new leas of life to just about every 22 out there. I can feed factory fodder when pushed, or load VLD when I want to reach out there. Ironically my go to fox round is an Amax 52gn running at an easy 3349fps. At night the ranges are no more than 300yds and I like a frangible bullet that bleeds energy Re-inventing the wheel is good, it generates advancement / improvement. However sometimes the old calibre's just plain work. Atb

Interesting gbal. But unfortunatley reality sometimes goes astray from the sales pitch. I never saw the claimed velocity from factory ammunition in the 204. I couldn't achieve the book figures from Hornady either. The best I could do was 3600fps (25inch barrel) with a 40gn pill. This load was cratering primers and I tried all the powders on offer, nothing worked. Any faster was sticky case time and hammering the bolt open. It was however laserlike out to 250yds. The other interesting thing is my 223 tight neck, long throat and bushed firing pin seems to be better than your quoted figures. A 70gn VLD 200yds 10mph wind. = 2488fps 963ft lbs 3.1 inches drift 400yds 10mph wind. = 2065fps 663ft lbs 13.65 inches drift The wind from 9 o clock pushed the bullet a bit further to 3.3, I suspect due spin drift but generally those figures seem to work in the field for me. Of course non of that really matters if you miss, if you connect it just needs enough to do the job. 600ft lbs or 900ft lbs, Charlie won't care either way. I suppose the one thing I have learned over the years, it's all down to what you can get hold of ammo wise in the end. Wizzbang uber booming cannons are all very well, but not much cop without a ready supply of ammo wherever you happen to be. Atb

Another vote for the 223. I tried 204 for around five years and a lovely round for calm days. Iffy in the wind despite what some claim. No-one shoots 50gn bullets out of the 204 and the 40gn and less, wander about. For me trajectory is a given, the wind is the killer at range. I went back to the 223 fast twist for heavy bullets, and never looked back. IMHO the 243 is a bit much for fox, 40+gn powder burned and only a dead fox to show. However any current 6mm will soundly beat the 22's at range in wind. I'd be happy with a 22-250, probably the best of all worlds TBH Atb

Oly I’ve just abandoned H4895 in my 223. It was a cracking powder in the 204 and I had a tub left…so gave it a go. The caveats are that I was using 75grn Amax and Berger VLD. Your testing may reveal something different. N135 was what I also had left over and it looks like a stonking powder for the same bullets. Nothing beats burning some powder mate…just go with your gut and start experimenting. ATB

Ronny I was always taught that anything over 80% loading density was worth a look. Manufactures’ of powder admit to bulk density variations between lots of the same powder at +/- 10%. I reckon you might be missing out on a chance at the Holy Grail by using 90% I thought that I was at around the 85% loading density mark with the 55grn bullet and old type Lapua brass with 25.1gns and seating depth. FWIW, I’m still waiting to find out the twist rate for the rifle in question. (I sold it to a mate) I always thought it was slower than 1:8, I know it hated 60grn bullets, it used to pepper a bit of A4 at 100m. ATB

Oly, a 1:8 will stabilize heavier bullets, i.e. up to 80grn Berger. In your 1:12 that would be very unlikely. All you are likely to see is a higher velocity with your barrel than I got with the Sako, if everything else stays the same. You may even see improved groups in the slower twist barrel since it is more suited to the 50/55gns bullet. ATB

Thanks Ronny, I guess that’s down to a misspent youth, with the taxpayer picking up the bill. ATB

Oly, I went back over old records. I used Varget compressed in the 223 with a 50grn Nosler ballistic tip. It was an excellent load. I switched to Benchmark pushing a 50grn Nosler ballistic tip for accuracy and speed and I seemed to be able to buy it more readily. H335 was an absolute stunner with 55grn, but hard to find in those days. All loads were using Lapua brass and Fed GM205m primers. The CCI never returned the same velocity or ES as Federal. The rifle was a bog standard Sako 75 varmint laminate stock with a Reflex suppressor. Take your pick. Click ATB

I suspect it’s more to do with CZ wanting to increase its sales for the short barrel version. I read somewhere that Anschutz also choke their 22LR’s. I had a 1622D (I think) chopped for a mod and like Baldie says, accuracy stayed the same. ATB