Barrel life 800-1100 rounds!

[jds holler]

So give or take, a dollar a shot for barrels. If the 800 rounds the article reported is correct. Yes, I'm in Houston and no chance of ever wearing out my .22 Hornet barrel I don't think. Maybe, if I could go 1500 miles and shoot varmints. I just thought it was a really interesting article on the Creedmoor clan and then read the expected life and that was a moment. I've apparently lived a sheltered life.

Leo, I'm gonna assume that you're a pretty good accountant.
As far as the lifespan of your Hornet barrel, I think you'll enjoy many years of fun with it. I think I mentioned above that my 218 Bee is around 70 years old, and I doubt that the accuracy is much different now than when it was new.
It was never a 'bench rest" quality firearm, and 1 MOA used to be pretty durned good for most rifles. It still preforms to that level, and that's after something like 2 or 3 bazillion rounds.

Depending on the bullet you're using, your velocity is maybe a little north of 3000 fps. Our Hornets, Bees, and even Vartargs are a kinder, gentler weapon for varmint destruction. And we will be blessed with long barrel life. Heck most varmints even prefer getting killed with shot from one of these sweet rifles. jd

 

[Leo_B]

Well, I do ok with ciphering. Me and Jethro paid attention to them lessons. Some of it I pull from thin air though, not empirical data. I agree though, I'll never wear out my Hornet and probably neither will my grandson in the half century or so he'll likely have to try. I plan to load from the left half of the page so 8.2gr 2400 over 50gr 2250fps or 9.0gr 2400 over 45gr 2400fps per Hornady XI. None of the paper I aim at is in too big a hurry for another hole. We'll see once I really get going, but that's the plan for now.

 

[KMW 1954]

3. I have said this about the 6MM ARC and it fits equally with the 22 ARC, it was designed for the AR15 and when used there is an excellent cartridge.

I'll ask this question once again.

6ARC, 22ARC Said to be designed for use in the AR. That is the standard argument. While the 6PPC and the 22PPC were both developed and primarily used in Bolt rifles for Bench shooting and have been widely successful for that purpose.

What I don't understand is both examples come from the same parent case family which also was not derived for use in an AR. So, I do not follow the correlation that keeps being made.

 

[David Milisock]

I'll ask this question once again.

6ARC, 22ARC Said to be designed for use in the AR. That is the standard argument. While the 6PPC and the 22PPC were both developed and primarily used in Bolt rifles for Bench shooting and have been widely successful for that purpose.

What I don't understand is both examples come from the same parent case family which also was not derived for use in an AR. So, I do not follow the correlation that keeps being made.

Yes Hornady tells us that they were based on the same case AND for the same platform, (AR15). In that mode they provide improvement over a standard 5.56 x 45 load, in THAT PLATFORM!
The 22ARC does not practically increase performance over the 5.56 x 45 in the AR15. I haven't explored any bolt thrust issues with the 22ARC however it does exist in the 6MM ARC and therefore it must be assumed in the 22ARC.
In field performance the difference between the 22ARC in an AR and the 5.56 x 45 (in my 20" Colt) is barely perceptual. In the case of a bolt rifle it can perform better than the 5.56 x 45.
Performance improvements of the 6MM ARC over the 5.54 x 45 are also negligible but more easily demonstrated. Comparing heavy match grade 22's in my 20" Colt against the 100+ grain 6MM projectiles I'm my Aero M4E. Both rifles are capable of nasal cavity accuracy, at 400 yards, the 5.56 about 10% of the weather conditions. The 6MM ARC about 90% of the weather conditions in my area.

The correlations are that they're the same base case, designed for the same pressures in the same platform (AR15) and when used there give minimal (in the case of the 22ARC) and reasonable performance improvements ( in the case of the 6MM ARC) depending on range and weather conditions. In the AR15 platform these two cases are near the practical performance level of the caliber and platform.

In bolt rifles you have the same things, same base case however NO MATTER what you do there are other cases in the same calibers that out perform them in bolt rifles.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Doesn't do anything as good as a 22BR?

In my opinion. That is correct.

 

[358WCF]

Yes, the cost to play. Could be golf course fees or one of the biggest joke hoaxes of all, cigars. I was just amazed initially with the article, an NRA article I think, saying 800-1100 rounds barrel life. That and learning what replacements cost. I'll just be back under my rock. :shrug:

Leo,

Dont believe everything you read on the internet. Were there any kind of qualifiers for the 800-1000 rd number? Slow fire, rapid fire, somewhere in between?

I traded into an old used & abused 700V at a gunshow in the late 80s for less than the cost of an action. It was factory barreled & rechambered (poorly) to 22-250 Ackley. This was pre borescope days, hell it was pre-internet days. After a good bore scrubbing & numerous adventures in creative handloading the rifle would shoot tiny little groups at giddy velocities. Think 'splodey headshots on groundhogs to 450+ yds. The Ackley & the 22 Crudmore are virtually the same cartridge, so this is pretty much apples to apples except with a slower twist I can shoot Horny's SX & Sierra Blitz (the 'splodey parts) without them spinning apart somewhere in front of the target.

According to my records, & the rifle came to me before I kept good records, I put well over 1600 rounds thru that barrel before it started losing accuracy a year or so back. Then it suddenly just stopped shooting at all. The rifle now has a 12 twist 22BR barrel that I'm anxious to shoot if the stars ever align. Maybe this week. The point to this whole screed is my 1600 rounds (mostly full tilt), plus the records that came with the rifle showed 5-600 rounds as an Ackley, plus who knows how many rounds as a standard 22-250. So, 2500 rounds is not out the question, maybe more. All shooting was slow fire. Cant remember ever needing a quick or any other kind of 2nd shot.

The $$ per round of barrel life is not quantifiable due to all the chuckles & WHOOAs & "Did you (expletive deleted) see thats" the rifle produced in the almost 40 years I've had it. That & the lessons learned by actually trying new things... bullets, powders, rifle refinements, loading techniques rather than reading about them on the intranut are priceless, at least to me.

I snagged another used, too cheap to pass up, 700V 22-250 last year. It's a sub 1/2" shooter too & the bore looks almost new with the borescope. The 26" barrel does nice things with the free velocity. I figure maybe spent 200 rounds thru it to familiarize & develop a couple loads & it's good to go until long after I'm dust.

There may be another 22-250 Ackley coming somewhere down the road after 2 or 3 other projects are finished if the doctors dont kill me 1st. No real need, just a fondness for the old barrel burner.

Feels like dinnertime.

 

[KMW 1954]

In my opinion. That is correct.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. It's what makes us who we are, doesn't it!

In my case I have zero experience with either, so I cannot be an honest judge, only an impression. In my case I am impressed with what I have seen with the 22ARC but am also just as impressed with what I've seen with fast twist 223's!