• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Who Knows the 222 Remington?

Question that I have is can you over stabilize a bullet? I had a Savage, 9 twist in .223. I shot 55 grain bullets in it and it would k-hole. Sent it back to Savage and they said to use 69 grain bullets. They sent me a target and it was fine. I thought a 9 twist would stabilize any light bullet.

BTW, the .222 was the first bench gun that I had. Used 40X with a Unertel 2" scope on it. Later had it re barreled to a .222 x 35*. Used Sierra bullets in it until I found out that someone named Berger made bullets. May have used BLC2 in it at the start. One fine cartridge!
 
Question that I have is can you over stabilize a bullet? I had a Savage, 9 twist in .223. I shot 55 grain bullets in it and it would k-hole. Sent it back to Savage and they said to use 69 grain bullets. They sent me a target and it was fine. I thought a 9 twist would stabilize any light bullet.

The answer is NO...you were intentionally Misled. A 1:9 twist should stabilize almost everything, except heavy bullets. For a comparison most AR15's are now barreled with a 1:7.5 twist or thereabout, which provides capability to shoot the heavy 77gr military projectiles that fits into magazine. However, the most common projectile shot through an AR15 is a 55gr FMJs, and they do not keyhole. The slowest twist I have on any of my 223 (bolt or AR15) is 1:9, which is guaranteed reliable from 40gr through 69gr SMK bullets. The 55gr bullet is the mainstay workhorse of most .223/5.56 cartridges and the most common factory ammunition sold.

Go buy a box of Hornady 55gr FMJ's (factory loaded ammo) and if the gun won't shoot them then you have a legit issue based on use of industry accepted factory ammo. Savage can't argue with this.
 
Roger Schuppe. Rob Seelye shot a 222 one year and won a lot at 100 yards Not so at 200 yard winds. Randy when I sat next to him at 200 yards I could watch the bullet go and hit at 200 yards. It took forever fo the bullet to get there. You know the kind of conditions we shoot in. Merry Christmas, Randy.
I am sure Rob's 222 was a 1 in 14 twist.
 
Question that I have is can you over stabilize a bullet? I had a Savage, 9 twist in .223. I shot 55 grain bullets in it and it would k-hole. Sent it back to Savage and they said to use 69 grain bullets. They sent me a target and it was fine. I thought a 9 twist would stabilize any light bullet.

BTW, the .222 was the first bench gun that I had. Used 40X with a Unertel 2" scope on it. Later had it re barreled to a .222 x 35*. Used Sierra bullets in it until I found out that someone named Berger made bullets. May have used BLC2 in it at the start. One fine cartridge!
IMO your problem was not so much the twist, but the bullet. With the velocity that you can generate with a light bullet combined with your twist, it is possible that the high rotation speed would over stress a particular bullet, generating more centrifugal force than the bullet can handle. A long time ago, not long after the advent of the Savage nine twist barrels for their .223s I ran across a friend shooting some 40 grain plastic tipped bullets in one. I asked him if the fast twist caused accuracy problems, and he told me that it was not a problem as long as the jackets were of good quality, and had me look through his spotting scope to confirm that.
 
Go buy a box of Hornady 55gr FMJ's (factory loaded ammo) and if the gun won't shoot them then you have a legit issue based on use of industry accepted factory ammo. Savage can't argue with this.[/QUOTE]

That is exactly what I did. Factory 55gr FMJ. Tumbled.
 
Within this thread it seems a minor argument has come up concerning the 53 grain V-Max and 14-twist rifling

The picture is of the bullets I've tried in my 222. Left to right, Nosler Varmegeddon 40 grain flat base tipped, Hornady 40 grain V-Max, Sierra 52 grain HPBT Match King, Hornady 53 grain V-Max, Hornady 55 grain SPSX.

The 55 grain SPSX is the only one that shot with any semblance of accuracy. All others, despite extensive work, failed to meet my hopes. The 53 grain V-Max went sideways at 100 yards. All the others at least flew straight and punched perfectly round holes, if failing to meet expectations of accuracy.

As is often the case, there is a little more to the story, which I'll reveal in a bit.

I got this rifle (Rem 788) and went to work early last spring. I started with the 40-grainers, trying several different powders, many different charge weights and seating depths (working methodically) before finally realizing I was wasting time and components. I have always had good luck with SMKs in various calibers...tried to get 53 gr. Flat base SMKs but couldn't find them locally so went with the 52. Same deal...different powders, charges, seating depths...no luck. All of the bullets and various combinations seemed to shoot no better than 2.5 MOA even after methodical load development and only responded minimally to efforts to improve.

I had the 53 grain V-Max on hand so tried it. You already know the results. I didn't even bother to try to work anything up on that one. After the first range trip I pulled down the rest of my incremental loads.

As a last ditch effort I went and got the 55 grain SPSX because I knew 40 some years ago, in my “old” 222 that projectile shot well. The best I squeaked out was 1.25 MOA, after much development most groups hovered around 1.5 MOA. I had really hoped for better. At this point, the summer was gone. Autumn had arrived and all the woodchucks had gone to sleep for the long winter without my 222 ever getting a chance.

Meantime, I ordered some chamber casting alloy, something I could do myself, and started searching for a gunsmith with a bore scope I could take or send the rifle to in order to see if any diagnosis could be arrived at. It was that search which landed me on Accurate Shooter and the 50 dollar Teslong bore scope.

Here's the “little more” to the story:

A quick look with the bore scope showed...well, I'll attach the pictures below in another post. I figure there's no sense trying to get better accuracy out of this barrel, hence the decision to re barrel.

So, maybe, the crooked chambering job is a factor is the dismal performance of the 53 V-Max, and maybe it won't shoot even with a good chamber. I guess the only way to find out is shoot it in a known-good 222 barrel and see.
 

Attachments

  • 20191213_102013-1.jpg
    20191213_102013-1.jpg
    398 KB · Views: 63
Last edited:
I'm guessing that all you 53g V-Max 14 twist naysayers don't have or have never read Hodgdon's reloading chapter on the .222 Remington. It clearly states that their 14 twist test barrel would stabilize 53g V-Max as well as 55g V-Max. Their only caveat was the 60g MIGHT NOT stabilize @ 3000 fps. Perhaps more powder? dedogs

What do not understand about seeing bullet instability that i witnessed ? 53 max. I probably shot the rifle myself.
 
What do not understand about seeing bullet instability that i witnessed ? 53 max. I probably shot the rifle myself.

OK...let's get back to the math. The Hornady 53 gr VMax is .830 long, so the Sg is in the low .7's. No big surprise that it doesn't stabilize in most instances.

Again, several factors are in play:
-The actual, measured twist of the individual barrel
-Any chamber or barrel condition issues that hurt the bullet
-The IBY (In Bore Yaw) of the bullet as it travels up the bore

It's shootings version of the Swiss Cheese theory. If you shuffle slices of Swiss Cheese around long enough, pretty soon the holes will lline up and stuffs gonna' fall through.... :D

Good shootin'. :) -Al
 
It has been reported thru the years that barrels manufactured by the button rifling process can vary in twist due to the button slipping when pulled thru.

A barrel made by the cut rifling process is more exact in the twist rate.

Please correct me if i'm missinformed

Thanks.
 
It has been reported thru the years that barrels manufactured by the button rifling process can vary in twist due to the button slipping when pulled thru.

A barrel made by the cut rifling process is more exact in the twist rate.

Please correct me if i'm missinformed

Thanks.

In general, that's correct.

Good barrels are good barrels, no matter if they are cut or buttoned. For example, I won the I.B.S. Hunter National Championship with an excellent Lilja 1:17 three groove....just one of the many Lilja's I had that were outstanding. Later on, I moved to cut rifled barrels from Rock, Bartlien and Krieger for various reason and won with all of them.

For what it's worth.... -Al
 
Same barrel, two pics taken roughly 160-180 degrees apart.

OK, now I'm curious how it would shoot set back.

Also . . .
The posts that mention the mfrg truth that button rifled bbls can and do have a variability that doesnt match mfr published specs.
That may suggest we check our ACTUAL tw rates before taking umbrage w another poster's statement of fact about THEIR experience...before letting our knickers get knotted.
 
That may suggest we check our ACTUAL tw rates before taking umbrage w another poster's statement of fact about THEIR experience...before letting our knickers get knotted.

Yep. ;)

And when you're dealing with factory barrel, all bets are off. Hammer forged barrels twist rates are generally spot on...a result of the barrel interior being formed against a mandrel.
 
Last edited:
I have thought about setting the barrel back. What I don't know is exactly how bad the factory chamber is out of alignment, and where most of the misalignment is. While the amount of misalignment visible in the throat doesn't appear to be a whole bunch, is the body out of alignment too? I assume it must be. How much? To me it would be not worth trying to set up and measure.

Setting back would require, in my estimation, cutting off 3/4 to 1 inch at least, cleaning up what remains of the factory chamber with a boring bar and then rechambering. What I need to look at is the barrel profile. The barrel begins a steep taper right at the recoil lug and there may not be enough diameter remaining after set back to have a decent shoulder.
 
I have thought about setting the barrel back. What I don't know is exactly how bad the factory chamber is out of alignment, and where most of the misalignment is. While the amount of misalignment visible in the throat doesn't appear to be a whole bunch, is the body out of alignment too? I assume it must be. How much? To me it would be not worth trying to set up and measure.

Setting back would require, in my estimation, cutting off 3/4 to 1 inch at least, cleaning up what remains of the factory chamber with a boring bar and then rechambering. What I need to look at is the barrel profile. The barrel begins a steep taper right at the recoil lug and there may not be enough diameter remaining after set back to have a decent shoulder.
Take a close look at your bore scope picture. The left picture shows the leade to be about half as long as the opposite side of the barrel. Most 22 barrels measure .218 x .224 so each land height is .003. It appears that about half of the land has been reamed so that would mean that the chamber is .0015 off center. I think your assessment of the potential for a set back is right on the money.
 
Take a close look at your bore scope picture. The left picture shows the leade to be about half as long as the opposite side of the barrel. Most 22 barrels measure .218 x .224 so each land height is .003. It appears that about half of the land has been reamed so that would mean that the chamber is .0015 off center. I think your assessment of the potential for a set back is right on the money.

I agree. In fact I had guessed .002" to be safe.

There IS a take-off Remington heavy 26" 223 barrel available, supposedly unfired, for 50 bucks...might be fun to play with.
 
I agree. In fact I had guessed .002" to be safe.

There IS a take-off Remington heavy 26" 223 barrel available, supposedly unfired, for 50 bucks...might be fun to play with.
Doing it yourself or having it done still takes as much time effort and money. Chanceing a take off and then a rechamber is a gamble.
I have bought a few take off Savage barrels for cheap. I knew going that way I was taking a chance.

Been there done that thinking I was going to save some money and ended up costing me as much as a new blank.
You pretty much get what you pay for. End results are no better than what you start with.
I waited wayyyyyy to long in life to have a truly good rifle, that was “blue printed” and square with the world the best it could be done. A PURE pleasure to work with and with boring accuracy.
Don’t take this wrong. I have had and have some really good factory rifles. But, I had to “weed” out more than I kept to get there. It was a good learning experience if nothing else.

You want off on the cheap. I have heard pretty good things on green mountain barrels. I would throw my $50 and a few more that way.
 
I've used a number of Green Mountain blanks over the last 10 years or so. I have been there recently on the web looking to see what they have; both 12 and 14 twist 27" turned blanks in carbon steel and stainless steel, something like 110 bucks and 154 bucks respectively IIRC.

No final decision yet but I will probably go with an already profiled blank from somebody, Hart, Lilja, Douglas...some supplier in that tier as this will be "my rifle" if you know what I mean!
 
Just looked at it and measured. The barrel diameter one inch in front of the recoil lug is 1.063" so if I set it back an inch I'll only have a shoulder of about .031-.032" (barrel thread of 1.00"X20).
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,812
Messages
2,203,100
Members
79,110
Latest member
miles813
Back
Top