PRR -
Howdy !
Winchester backed away from the .220 Swift as a factory chambering after offering it for 29yr. Their follow-on chambering .225Win was a mis-step.
Remington sealed the deal by offering the .22-250 as a factory chambering, thereby shuttling the Swift off to being a niche cartridge back in 1965.
Yeh.....commercially, the ‘Swift has been barely hangin on; encountered now & again ....thanx to Savage in the -70s w/ their 112V; and Ruger 77s.
The oft discussed barrel life for .220Swifts has been negatively impacted to a degree, by reloaders who try for 4,000fps when shooting 55gr bullets from factory-length barrel’s. The 4,000 fps load from way back used a 47gr bullet. Putting 4,000fps on a 55gr .224” cal varmint bullet takes some doing, and it don’t come free.
.220 Swift case and also custom-reloaded cartridge oal’s can influence a shooter to go w/ another cartridge. To achieve performance rivaling a Swift, shorter cases of necessity must feature larger base and shoulder diameters, especially if a sharp shoulder is used in conjunction w/ a neck that’s completely filled by the bullet’ body.
In theory..... use of long VLDs in a repeating bolt rifle chambered in.220 Swift could drive one to choosing a long action. Again, we can see the appeal of different.224” cal chamberings....ones that offer
rival case capacity and performance....while using a < 2.00” case oal for a mag- fed application.
I myself wanted something more than .22-250 level performance.
My choice was to wildcat .35 Remington by necking the case down to .224 .
My best friend shot a 112V .220 Swift during the same time I used my
.22-35 for groundhog shooting. I never once felt underserved. We both shot Hornady’s superlative 55SX
With regards,
357Mag