I would prefer a 28-30" barrel which is fairly long and heavy since it would be only shot from a bench or bipod and not carried in the field. My purpose would be to experiment in a narrow corner of ballistic performance for .224 cals.
I am interested in 69-80 bullets in a 1-8 twist since the fast twist and velocity would probably destroy the heavy 90+ ones. A conventional fast .224 might include those up to a 22xc, 22 creed. A step up would include the .22-243, 22-6mm, and their improved versions. The nich I would be in is the .22-284 and the saum/prc versions.
My concern is acquiring the powders. Everything else is available. It would be an interesting project and I'm happy to hear nakneker is also thinking about it. It would't be that much different than the .22-284 experiments years ago but powders have changed. The conclusion that it is badly overbore and a nich cartridge will remain unchanged.
Wboggs -
Howdy, again !
There is a chart still " out there ", that listed a variety of cartridges; and showed a shaded area where .224" calibre case capacity started to go " over-bore ". I DK who put the chart out ? At the time I first saw it 4+ decades ago, the .220Swift was right @ the edge of going into over-bore territory. This would not be any great concern to a lot of shooters, when the ( example ) .220 Swift gives them the desired level of performance.... just as you eluded to for your proposed wildcat.
* Since expansion ratio is a ratio of powder charge to total " capacity " of the rifle ( chamber + bore ), it might prove useful to run some ER calculations.... for purposes of wildcat design study / performance trade-offs ? This would show at what point a postulated power charge would result in an undesirable expansion ratio for the rifle.... given a chosen barrel length. *
I have already had 2 chambers cut, for my ".22-35 Remington " wildcat.
The first.... a 24" SS 1-14 Hart. The second.... a 28" SS 1-8 K & P . For the latter,
I shot Hornady 75 "A"-Max, exclusively. I wanted a dual-role' capable rifle, and needed the rifle / chambering to give me reliable one-shot kills on groundhog... which it did at all distances I got to try. I myself was leery ( and still am ) about using longer / heavier .224" cal bullets on groundhogs @ any distance. But hey... that's just me.
The idea of using longer barrel lengths to " boost " rifle' expansion ratio holds a lot of appeal ( IMHO ). It can provide a means for obtaining higher velocities without complete dependence on an overly huge chamber capacity. The chamber size can be moderated then, to at least some degree ( again.... IMHO ).
I have looked on-line for a copy of Homer Powley's " expansion ratio " chart, to no avail.
Right now, all of my re-loading / wildcatting paperwork is packed for a move across 3 states. If and when I can find the chart, I'd be happy to send it along.
If memory serves...... I made a response to Fredo's .220 Redline post series, wherein I quoted the Max powder charge for .224" cal wildcat ( and 28" barrel ) at which point an expansion ratio of 4 would be reached. That drill showed that Fredo's .220 Redline rifle had a total volumne that gave an expansion ratio slightly better than 4 ( 4.5 ).
IF in can find that powder charge number taken from Powley's expansion ratio chart, I'd be happy to pass it along. It would perhaps give one and idea @ what point wildcat' internal ballistics would become grossly impractical ?
With regards,
357Mag
