223 UPDATE

  • 26K Views
  • Last Post 19 January 2016
joeb33050 posted this 15 January 2015

After 2 years, 7 molds, lotsa donated bullets I can't reliably shoot five 5-shot cast bullet groups at 100 yards under 2” average. Including NOE 277-80.   This is my second max effort, first started in 2003.  I loaded Horn 55 gr VMAX, 25/Varget and shot yesterday. 5 groups 100 yds averaged .85". (pic math wrong) It ain't the gun. Making a 22cf shoot cast is not easy, at least for me.  I wonder how the 1” guys do it. 

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Brodie posted this 19 January 2016

Newt wrote: Nice looking bullets. Is it normal for the gas checks to come off these little .22's?  I recovered two the other day from my steel targets.  One from 150 yards, the other from 200.   I wonder if using aluminum vs copper would have anything to do with it.  With these I also powder coated them and it is a lot more difficult to pull the checks off vs non powder coated bullets.

I'm not surprised that those gas checks came off.  They appear to have been turned inside out!  I have seen many bullets that have shed their jackets, and ramming into a steel plate at speed seems like a good reason to do drop your gas check or lose your jacket.  It seems to me that the gas check is probably the only solid part left of the bullet except maybe a little disk of lead alloy.  At least nobody seems worried about why the bullet “disappeared." Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Newt posted this 19 January 2016

Yea, I am not thinking I will start annealing. i was just curious if it was a common(across the caliber range) gas check issue, or one that is more likely in 22's.

I would think that a gas check coming off in flight would result in some real wild points of impact. I suppose just an inch or two off the mark would not seem likely.

On a side note, did some reading on here over the weekend and found something interesting. Seeing how this thread is entitled “223 UPDATE” maybe its fitting???

I read where someone was doing testing with the little 22's without any lube, just a gas check. How did that testing finish up? I think I might just have to run a few myself to see what happens....might hate myself for doing so in the end....

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 19 January 2016

annealing gas checks probably needs a separate thread ... maybe an old one added to ??

my buddy john g. is very persnickety so i think he needs his checks annealed ....he sends me pics of his improved targets .

maybe fix it only if it's broken ??? heh .

i myself have no iput as i haven't used gc for 15 years ...

ken

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 19 January 2016

I shoot probably 80% of 22 bullets with gas checks over a lighted Crony in a tunnel.  Mostly Hornady but sometimes coper Gaters or Al from __ ? I have never seen any indication that the gas checks are coming off and hitting the Chrony or the lights.  Also haven't found any in the tunnel. I have never annealed a gas check. Nor a case in many years.

Is this a solution looking for a problem, or are others doing something different?

John

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 19 January 2016

annealing alum. gas checks ...

my crafty friend john goodrich finds annealing his alum. checks ... adds greatly to his results. has to be done after forming not in the sheet.

they are workhardened during forming .

just a thought.

ken

Attached Files

Newt posted this 19 January 2016

OU812 wrote:One Lyman reloading manual shows how to epoxy gas checks onto cast bullet before crimping and sizing. A small syringe or toothpick should work good at applying a slow setting STRONG epoxy to gas check. Just a little dab will do.

Annealing will help also.

...

So is it normal, or just something that sometimes happens - sporadic? I am just curious as I have never had it happen that I know of, but if its a common occurrence with the .22's it makes me wonder about some of the fliers I get now and again.

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 19 January 2016

One Lyman reloading manual shows how to epoxy gas checks onto cast bullet before crimping and sizing. A small syringe or toothpick should work good at applying a slow setting STRONG epoxy to gas check. Just a little dab will do.

Annealing will help also.

...

Attached Files

Newt posted this 19 January 2016

Nice looking bullets. Is it normal for the gas checks to come off these little .22's?  I recovered two the other day from my steel targets.  One from 150 yards, the other from 200.   I wonder if using aluminum vs copper would have anything to do with it.  With these I also powder coated them and it is a lot more difficult to pull the checks off vs non powder coated bullets.

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 18 January 2016

I bet plain base 22 cast bullets (12 bhn)would be deadly accurate if velocity was kept under 1500 fps. No gas checks to fall off during flight. I may have one of my LBT cavities opened. Titegroup burns very very clean...less powder fouling inside brass and barrel I am sure.  .

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 24 May 2015

Another nice thing about the .22's:  notice how you can cast, cast, and then cast some more, and the level of the melt doesn't seem to change!  I'm going out next Tuesday with a batch of freshly loaded Swift ammo, and get started on the accuracy trail.Really looking forward to it; I've even added to my tooling.  Don't really know why; after all, 1955 really isn't that long ago, is it?  It is?  HHMMM-maybe I did need to modernize some!<G> Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

gpidaho posted this 24 May 2015

Here in Idaho, when Bullseye went extinct I could always find some TiteGroup. It worked so well for me that it is now my go-to fast powder. I've used it in everything from 9mm Luger to 444 Marlin (just a pinch not a case full lol) It seems such a good fit in my new found friends, the 22cals. My 22-250 fells like a pellet gun using 5.5gr of TiteGroup. This thread and especially Bill's work with the Swift gave me the nudge needed to move down to the 22s. Thanks guys! The economy and lack of recoil make the centerfires the perfect answer to the rimfire shortage. GP

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 24 May 2015

Glad that Titegroup looks promising for you.  Now, if I could only find some to buy.

Yes shooting small bore CBs does have its advantages along with the frustrations experienced by some.  

If you like to shoot lots of rounds, recoil is certainly one of the advantages.  Even the 270 I hunt with and 130 grain bullets seems to be much more unfriendly that it was twenty years ago - must be the new improved powder.

John

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 23 May 2015

John Alexander wrote: Strange that the usual suspects for powder didn't do as well as the slower powders.  When you run out of other variables to test (joke sign) you might try one of the fast pistol powders to look at the other extreme -- Bullseye,700X, TiteGroup, etc.  If that doesn't work at first try them with softer bullets <12BHN.

John


John, Your Tightgroup recommendation has shown verygood results so far in my rifle and just 5.5 grains per case will load lots of rounds. This little 224 bullet is very economical to shoot and easier on the shoulder. More people should shoot this Small bore.   Less powder equals less fowling....maybe?   Less lube equals less fliers...maybe?

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 17 May 2015

Hi, Ken: Having seen the groups posted here, by Joe and others, believe me, I'm fully aware that some very good work has been, and is being, done. I am envious of a lot of targets displayed. I feel that the magic word here is “Swift". If I were chambering anew, I might be tempted to go for the .219 Donaldson Wasp, (if anybody still has reamers for it) or something of the like. But, I've liked the Swift for many years, having felt it to be much maligned and spoken badly about, and, finding that my experiences were, for some reason, counter to that of many of the seeming experts who wrote about it in the magazines. (Over the years, I have found that it's much more productive to run a rifle for information about a rifle, rather than a keyboard.) In any event, I'm going to stick with the Swift for awhile, and see what can be done with it, realizing at the same time that we're not talking Industry Wide here, but about one pre-'64 M-70 with a Douglas barrel, target stock built by a 23 year old kid, with a lot of curiosity, and a perverse attitude about bucking the “established experts.” I'm a whole lot older now, but I guess I'm still as perverse as ever.

Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 16 May 2015

bill ” mr. swift ” :: re: joeb and 22 bullets .... don't forget that while joeb has not attained his lofty goal of a lot of 1 inch groups ..... he did come up with a combination that most of us more casual cast shooters would be glad to accept as just fine ...

if i grab a mold, some mystery lead alloy, and keep all the castings that don't have teeth marks on them .... drop in 5 or 10 gr. of unique, ... i will mostly get 2.5 to 4 inch groups .... sometimes at 50 yards .... ... so please don't mind if i regard you and johna and joeb ...and a few others ....as people who have already accomplished what i keep thinking i might someday see in my targets ... groups i can cover with one hand ...

keep it up, i am only a mile or so behind you guys ...

ken

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 16 May 2015

John Alexander wrote: If that doesn't work at first try them with softer bullets <12BHN.

John

I will try diluting my magnum birdshot (13-14 bhn) with pure lead to see if softer improves  consistent accuracy. I have not test my 223 lately because of another 308 project.

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 15 May 2015

Gentlemen: Thanks for your confidence and interest. I sincerely hope I don't disappoint. It will be a few days before I can fire up the ol' Lyman furnace, but, in fact, I'm pretty excited about the possibility of something noteworthy. But, I will readily admit that the spectre of joeb's work is hovering over my shoulder and breathing it's cold breath down my neck. If Joe's so frustrated considering all the skills and knowledge he brings to the table--well, I just wonder if I can pull anything like a living rabbit out of the hat. But, as Joe is careful to do, I'll tell the good and the bad. Maybe we will all learn something.

Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

gpidaho posted this 15 May 2015

Bill: It's sure fun for me to see you working with the swift. Like John said, you are most likely the worlds foremost authority. lol The 22-250 worked pretty well for me, swift is working for you. Who will step up and take on the 22 high power or maybe the 223 short mag. the tinkering about at the bench is what makes this hobby so fun for me. Thanks for your posts on this GP

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 15 May 2015

That road may not be as long as you expect when you are starting off with sub-2” 10 shot groups.  Excellent start for any caliber and many never get to that level.

Strange that the usual suspects for powder didn't do as well as the slower powders.  When you run out of other variables to test (joke sign) you might try one of the fast pistol powders to look at the other extreme -- Bullseye,700X, TiteGroup, etc.  If that doesn't work at first try them with softer bullets <12BHN.

If you are not already, you will soon be the world's foremost authority on 22 cast bullets in the Swift. Looking forward to your next results. John

Attached Files

billglaze posted this 15 May 2015

Well, I've started down the long road to accuracy with the .220 Swift. I don't really know why, but I tried a couple of totally unsuitable powders with it; IMR 4064, and IMR 3031. These powders both worked well with Sierras 50 and 55 gr. bullets, in days of yore. I was shocked and overjoyed to find that I got 10 shot groups at 100 yds. sub-2” in size. (Barely!) I used 22 gr of 4064, and 14 gr. (?!) of 3031. The latter load impacted some 5” lower than the heavier 4064 load, which also produced more recoil. (The heavier load was about like a .22 Magnum, the lighter like a .22 short.) Hardly impressive, except on the target. I'm currently out of bullets, and will cast more in a few days. They'll be different, in that I'm going to try heat-treating them to a higher Brinnell number, vice the ca. 15 I've been shooting. Funny: the powders that worked for me in the .308 (4756, 4227, 4895, etc.) were not as good, relatively, as the named. I even got a 2” group from Trail Boss, which has been pretty spotty in the .308. And so it begins again, looking at another long, long road.

Bill

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

Show More Posts
Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close