CJ6 -
Howdy !
I noted the following, after review of the ltd load data Hodgdon shows for .22-250 & .220 Swift w/ both rifles using 24" 1-14 barrels.....
For 55gr bullet wt:
- .2gr more 6.5StaBal in the .22-250 yielded 171 more fps along w/ 9,800psi more
load pressure..... than the 42.3gr 6.5StaBal charge did in the Swift. These were max charges listed for both guns. One might guestimate that .1gr increase in the .22-250 load over the listed .220 Swift charge would give approx 85fps increase in vel for the .22-250 over the .220Swift in those 2 rifles. Nothing in concrete of course, but.... Hmmm.
Comparing the .22-250 max charge data for 6.5Stabal over the max charge data for WW760 in the 'Swift..... 42.5gr 6.5StaBal in the .22-250 yielded 54 more fps than the 44gr WW760 charge gave in the .220 Swift, w/ the .22-250 load featuring 9,000psi more load pressure. This is a valid comparison for the 2 cartridges, for the circumstance where use of 6.5StaBal powder is being adopted in-lieu of WW760. One can read-in what that suggests about replacing H414 w/ 6.5 Stabal.
The higher pressure of the 6.5StaBal load listed above might also negatively impact barrel life down the road vs shooting WW760; but that would remain to be seen.
On the face of it, It might be that Hodgdon is offering a new temp-stable ball powder to supplant H414; which was not noted as being " temperature stable " ( for lack of a better term ) ? One could ask them directly, for clarification.
I have already bought a trial can of 6.5StaBal, as I had been a long time user of WW760
( and sometimes H414 ). The internal ballistics implications of potentially using 6.5Stabal instead of WW760 / H414 in my " .22-35 Remington " wildcat has not gone unnoticed.
This wildcat has case capacity between that of a stock .22-250, and a .22-250AI.
I'd have to have another barrel chambered up in .22-35Remington to ultimately know how well 6.5StaBal would work in this application.
With regards,
357Mag
