223 performance survey redo

M

muldoon9

Guest
Hello,
I tried the search feature but no luck.

What is the best I can expect out of a 223 with Lapua brass and a Krieger
barrel ? Slow twist and 52 grainers at 100 yards and all that.

I am trying to determine if my "need " for 222 is all wet or I really have a
need for paper punching at 100 yards.
The X ring is only about .75 so I really need the bullets to fall in there.

The only feedback I have had elsewhere about 223 are people shooting
Coyote rifles that shoot a once in a life time, now I can die happy group,
which doesn't represent what I am trying to do.

So far the 222 will definitly do what I want....but there will be a big
logistics problem I am not to keen on tackleing. ( tooling, components, loads, alibis ).

Thanks for your patience ad indulgence.

Regards,
Michael
Southwestern Virginia
 
Not knowing your chamber dimensions, how your rifle is stocked, bedded, scoped, triggered, rested, or anything of your ability, let me make a general statement. I have owned one bolt action .223 and several .222s. With everything but the caliber the same, I would expect them to shoot about the same at 100 yards. Being more specific, a good custom, full house, factory action build, that left nothing out, should have no trouble shooting in the .2s at 100 yards, if the shooter knows how to load and shoot to its potential. As a matter of record between the advent of the.222 and that of the PPC there were many .222 and .222 magnum based wildcats that were used in Benchrest that had a similar capacity to the .223. Questions about the accuracy of a cartridge that do not want to be bothered with details miss the point, in most cases it is those details that determine accuracy, not the headstamp.
 
I love the little 222 rem and have a beautiful Anschutz from the late sixties or early seventies in 222. But for all pratical purposes, the 223 will do everything a 222 will but better. It's just as acccurate and has a little more velocity. I just picked up some new 223 lapua brass for a 223 build. However, I am also going to rebarrel my XP 223 and when I do that, it's going to be either a 222 or a 221 fireball. On a side note, I shoot a 22ppc-.100 short quite a bit and guess what, it's the exact same capacity as the 223.

Hovis
 
All good to see that it will shoot in the .2's.........potentially.

I plan on a no holds barred, money is no object gun, with all the details taken care of,
regardless of calibre.
But.
If the calibre is a waste, than I will make other plans. If 222 is only .001 better given all preparation, sorting of
components and correct twist, barrel length and action work are done then I will use something that will not
be a headache gathering components for, as I shoot a great deal.

Your experience is valuable to me and appreciated.

Regards

Michael
 
One area that you should pay particular attention to is reamer design and how the FL die matches that design. This is one of the core factors, and it is typical that fellows lack the knowledge to make sure that this area is done right.
 
I shoot a stock Savage 12bvss .223 that I bedded myself (just for the fun of learning how to do it). I reload and mainly vary Over All Lenght (OAL) and powder charge. I stick to H322 and assume it is a good powder, so I read on the net. I have settled on Nosler 69 gr. match bullets, and Hornady 55 gr. VMAX. Primers seem to introduce less variability than my trigger finger, so I don't worry about it. I am experimenting with sorting bullets by weight, seems to add a slight consistency to the groups (need an electronic scale for speed).

I have shot a few groups in the teens, out of hundreds of groups, (all 5 shot groups). My own real world test, 5 consecutive 5-shot groups, 100 yds., center to center measure. I can often get those 5 groups all under .6", CTC, with my pet load.

I'm kinda lazy, or you could say I have some other interests, and I don't want to put the money out for a custom gun. I tried better bullets, but the gun must be the limiting factor, so I thought I was wasting my money after I got to the Nosler match. So, that's what a lazy recreational shooter does... Not sure if that tells you anything, but I hope it provides some frame of reference. For more challenge, I go to the 200 yd. line (my fav. distance) and occasionally I go to 300. After a little work, I managed to get a 2.5" group at 300 in a stiff breeze at American Shooting Center here in Houston; I thought that was good but I did not think I could do it reliably.

I took 3 years off and I'm just re-starting. Savage came out with a 6 BR benchrest gun, I wonder how that would do at 200 and 300, hmmmmm...... I hear a call out there..... :) I understand its not a custom, I wouldn't pay up for one, but I'd like to try a new caliber....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok that sounds intrigueing......

How DO you match my Forster , or Redding die to the reamer before I start cutting steel ?

Michael
 
Get a hold of some really well used brass that has been fired in a factory chamber and size it (without the expander ball). If you are not going for a tight neck (requiring neck turning) you will have to use a bushing die, or have Forster hone out one of their FL dies. Then you can order a reamer that fits what comes out of your die. It takes a little work, and figuring, but the result is worth it. Also, pay some attention to throat design. The typical target throat has a short freebore in front of the case part of the chamber that is no more than .0005 over bullet shank diameter, and a 1 1/2 degree per side leade angle where the rifling starts. I believe that if you look up the SAAMI drawing for the .222 you will see a very tight freebore diameter. I believe that it is spec'd at .224. Of course a reamer will cut a little larger than it is. If you are going to shoot varmints, I would keep the freebore length very short so that you can shoot the 40 gr. plastic tipped bullets, with the option of seating them so that they are into the rifling. In my experience, they are wonderful varmint bullets, yielding velocities that are significantly higher than 50 grain and having a decent BC due to their plactic tips.

If you are going with a blueprinted Remington, you can do no better than Bob Brackney. He will do a good job chambering as well. Bob has shot Benchrest for a long time, and has done well at it, so he knows what it takes to make a rifle shoot. A friend has a slow twist 6BR varmint rifle that he did the action work on that thinks that it is a Benchrest rifle. The way that he sleeves the bolt works really well, as does the rest of the work.

Another good way to go is one of the Remington clones. Jerry Stiller makes the most popular of these, and I have several friends that have custom hunting rifles that are based on them. They are all well pleased with the Jerry's actions.
 
Last edited:
From my experience and when I could actually see what I was doing, a good .223 with run of the mill RP or WW brass, in a factory rifle with a 20X scope, and using 52 or 53 gr Sierra or Berger bullets a lot of the guys I was shooting with 11+ years ago in Seattle were shooting 10 shot composite groups that were no larger than an inch at 200 yards. A rifle that's got a good match barrel, blueprinted factory action, good stock and trigger, I don't think that a rifle that regularly shoots sub 1/2 or 3/8 inch five shot groups would be out of the question. The .222 may be a little more accurate for all out BR competition, but otherwise most guys couldn't tell the difference between them.

Finebead, if you're shooting 55 to 69 gr bullets you might find that slower powders produce better accuracy. Something on the order of H4895, N135, N140, Reloder 15, or Varget would likely give better velocity (to get through the wind better) and accuracy. For 50-53 gr bullets powders like H322, Benchmark, and N133 work well. It's usually best to have the powder filling as much of the case as possible (up to the base of the bullet or even slightly compressed) for more uniform ignition.
 
I am planning on shooting paper at 100 yards. It will be a semi-auto match rifle,
and since the caliber is my option, I wanted a good grouping round that feeds well.

The reduced courses we shoot on are not mathmatically correct, in that the scoring rings are smaller than
they should be. This makes reduced course shooting a much bigger
challange, hence the need for a tight shooting guns.

Common wisdom on these courses is to use the best 223 components and techniques possible.
According to you guys I can do them one better. 223 guns are not known for thier stellar accurracy.

Michael
 
muldoon9...In a SEMI-AUTO,I seriously doubt you'll see an appreciable difference in group sizes at 100yds. between the .222 & the .223. I have a Colt Match H-Bar with the factory chrome lined barrel,1/7 twist,NATO chamber. The only things done are free floating the barrel and installing a 6.5-20 Leupold. Trigger is 3.5lbs. I have shot MANY 5 shot groups of less than .5" @ 100yds using 55gn Nosler b-t...using a good bench rest. Position shooting probably won't have the same results. Semi-autos simply will not shoot with a GOOD bolt rifle. Your Krieger barrel is one of the best ,but it takes more than a barrel. By necessity,the chamber must be looser. The things you can do with a bolt action,you simply cannot do with an auto. The best you can do with a semi-auto is to single load your rounds.
You can still do very well @ 100yds even given the x-ring deminsion. Everything considered,I think the .223 is your better choice. Good luck...good shooting...gpoldblue
 
Last edited:
The problem with a NATO throat is that it is cavernous in all regards to digest dirty many different suppliers of ammo.

Thats the first thing that needs fixing on your gun, because bullet alighnment is impossible.
The second is the twist, and thirdly is the MATCH chrome applied to the surface of the barrel.

Think of the possibilities !

The chamber doesn't have to be "that loose". It simply doesnt have to be in an AR that fires at a range.

Michael
 
First off, I thought match and auto were an oxymoron.

That be as it may, I have owned both .222s and 223s in factory bolt guns and a shooter would have to be better than me to determine a difference in accuracy between the two. As far as stellar accuracy, I have a XR-100 in .223 with which I have shot a (as in single) .111 in competition. Over the long haul, however, my agg would be on the order of .5+. A better shooter could bring that down by a bit, I'm sure.
 
If you really want to rile some guys up (assuming your talking about a AR based rifle), a 220 russian is a darn fine round, maybe a little better that the 222 or 223 nowadays. The 220 beggs version would be the best bet. However, your not leaving anything on the table with a 223. A lot of people improved the 222 by modifiying it and guess what, the capacity ended up being about the same as the 223. The 223 didn't take off with the Br crowd because it was a late comer and the 222, 222mag and improved versions were already figured out and on the line. The convectional thought process back then was that the longer neck was valuable and the 223 had a short one. Not necessarily true anymore.

Hovis
 
Experience has shown that Rock River, being a third tier manufacturer, has trouble with tolerances and QC. This is not to say the
Big Three don't occasionally cough up a hair ball. But the frequency of those oopsies and how they are handled are important. All
the follies of the Black Rifle manufacturers are well documented.

The particular rifle you listed, while very nice, has a huge pig of a barrel .........rather like the old Remington 40X.
The second problem is the rather fast twist of 1/8 which is nigh useless for the short line.
The last detractor that jumps out is the Wylde chamber. Designed for 80 grain bullets which are long, and aren't great at 100 yards,
would simply be free bore for 52 grain Barts Bullets.

If it looked like a service rifle it could compete there... ( maybe ) ....nobody uses them for some reason. If it is supposed to be a match rifle then the stock needs to
adjust, which this doesn't.

But

I am not intending to pick on your kind suggestions. I appreciate the input.
I am only showing the obstacles I must overcome to make a very specialized piece
of equipment.

Since they are struggling to mass produce, and their labour goes to the cheapest bidder, you can be assured that they will be
using the " thats good enough" rule of thumb when they are pushing something out the door.

Do you buy your bench rest guns from a factory ? Nope. The factory simply cannot, and will not, put that kind of work and attention
into your competitive tool.

The agg over hundreds of shots are my biggest interest. A one time small group is a statistical anomaly and truthful, should be tossed out.
At the very least it is so far out from under the curve to be insignificant.

What I am trying to do is to take all the best ideas and roll them into this firearm so when I am shooting for score the bullet will not land any farther than
.100 on either side of the aim point. That is the goal I am aiming for anyhow.

Best Regards,
Michael
 
Have you seen the .223 Remington Match Rifle Data article in The Benchrest Shooting Primer? The test firearm was a Colt AR 15.

Tony
 
I didn't see it. ( Colt being one of the Big 3 )

Was it the end-all and be-all of shooters ......or did they end thier testing
at .5 inch ?

How many groups ?

Regards,

Michael
 
IMO you can be serious about having a rifle that is accurate "for a semiautomatic" but then you are only talking relative accuracy. There are so many things that get in your way. I thought that you were talking in absolute terms. Forget about shooting in the twos with a functioning semiautomatic. Most of the comments that you have gotten were based on bolt action reality, not AR. Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for Highpower shooters, it is just that it is a different world, and different rules apply, in rifle design, and reloading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top