Coronavirus Claims a Virgin!

[stonecreek]

Cabin fever can cause you to do things you swore you wouldn't do, like shoot a forty+ year-old unfired Browning-Sako.

A year or two ago one of the good guys on this forum and I worked up a swap -- he got my 26" Finnbear and I got his unfired Browning Sako L461 .222 Magnum HB. Having way more varmint rifles than I can ever shoot, I decided I'd keep this pristine Browning just the way it came, indefinitely. Well, indefinitely came today.

Having loaded ammo for and shot just about every rifle in my safe during this down time (I have my own range on my ranch so didn't have to leave home), my ADHD finally got the best of me, so yesterday evening I mounted a 4.5x14 Leupold on the fine little Browning, checked its action screws, and gave its bore a swabbing.



I had two hundred bright, shiny and brand new Nosler .222 Mag cases to devote exclusively to it, so I ran a few of those through the neck sizer and loaded them with some 40 grain Nosler Varmageddons. When the sun came out around noon today I took everything down to the range, along with an Oehler 35 chronograph, and went about the delicate task of deflowering this little beauty. After bore sighting the first shot hit the 50 yard target just two inches high and two right. The correct number of clicks and the next shot landed dead center where the crosshairs met. The unadjusted trigger was breaking about 6 pounds, but was crisp, so I went ahead with my test.

Figuring I could now shoot for group, I moved to the 100 yard target. The day was muggy, but wind calm and no mirage. First shot went right in the aiming square. Next shot also right there. By the time I had fired five rounds I had a group of, as best I could measure it, only .333"! (See the LH target in the photo with the dime for perspective).

The velocities measured a just a bit lower than I wanted and pressure signs were nil, so I went back and loaded another five rounds with one more grain of powder. I also took the gun apart and adjusted the trigger. It didn't want to go below about 3.9 pounds, but that's ordinarily good enough. Several things delayed me, so by the time I got back out to the benchrest the wind had picked up to 12-15 MPH and better, quartering from my left with just a bit of mirage accompanying it. The slightly hotter loads scattered a bit in the wind and gave me a "disappointing" group of .60" (on the right with the penny for perspective.)


Now I'm feeling both shame and pride -- shame at having lost my will power and fired an unfired rifle, and pride at how great it shoots. I guess on balance it would be more of a sin to let such an accurate rifle sit for another half-century in the dark of a safe without its knowing the glory of the hunt. Now I can't help but feel sorry for all of the prairie dogs which will undoubtedly have their lives cut short due to the coronavirus quarantine.

 

[bigcountry4me]

I think you should put that shame in the rear view mirror and let the pride be your guide. That beautiful little rifle fully deserved your undivided attention. As you know, you haven’t harmed that gem in any way, what-so-ever.

I will always wish you great long lasting health, but simply put, you never know. Im my opinion the shame would be, to not experience it when you had the chance. That would be the real shame, so in this particular instance pride trumps shame, at least that’s how I see it.

 

[paulsonconstruction]

NO rifle should be left unfired, as evidenced by the results you got from shooting it. Shame on you for depriving that rifle it's true glory for so long. Promise you will never allow that to happen again!!!

 

[Furdown]

Shoot ‘em if you got ‘em!!!!!

 

[stonecreek]

At least now I've got another 190 new cases remaining to prep and load. That should take up a few more hours of the stay-at-home isolation. Glad I stocked up on Varmageddons at the last sale.

 

[Unclekax]

I am also pleased to see you have used this fine little rifle as it was intended.
No shame there at all.
I never met a girl too pretty to kiss.
Well done sir.

 

[icebear]

The only guns in my collection that I haven't fired are the ones I haven't had time to shoot, and a couple of wall hangers that I'm afraid to shoot.

Stone, that is one great-shooting rifle, and obviously you've got a good handload there.

I've noticed that several of our members are getting excellent accuracy with 40 grain bullets in their Sakos. This is consistent with the fact that Sako barrels tend to have a slower twist than some other rifles. I've always gotten the best results with 52 grain Sierra Match Kings, but I picked up a few boxes of 40 grain .222 factory ammo at a recent gun show, and when the county range reopens I'm going to take a few guns and see how they like the 40 grainers. I have to wait for the county; my ranch is only an acre and a half!

 

[mlesh]

I think you should put that shame in the rear view mirror and let the pride be your guide. That beautiful little rifle fully deserved your undivided attention. As you know, you haven’t harmed that gem in any way, what-so-ever.

I will always wish you great long lasting health, but simply put, you never know. Im my opinion the shame would be, to not experience it when you had the chance. That would be the real shame, so in this particular instance pride trumps shame, at least that’s how I see it.

well said

 

[stonecreek]

I've noticed that several of our members are getting excellent accuracy with 40 grain bullets in their Sakos. This is consistent with the fact that Sako barrels tend to have a slower twist than some other rifles.

I doubt it. I haven't measured the twist in this Browning-Sako, but the "standard" twist for the .222 Magnum with most manufacturers was 1-12" instead of the 1-14" that was almost always used for the .222. Why this difference I have no idea.

I have an A-I .223 which measures about 1-13", which I assume is some metric twist like 1-32 or 35mm.

Anyway, I think the accuracy of bullets of any weight has more to do with the quality of Sako barrels than their twist.

 

[icebear]

The relationship of barrel twist to bullet weight and shape definitely does influence accuracy. Years ago I tried out some Hornady 55-grain varmint bullets in my heavy-barrel L46, which shoots cloverleafs all day with 52-grain Sierra Match Kings. The groups looked like they were shot with a 12-gauge. Both the barrel and the bullets were top quality, obviously, and I'm sure those bullets shot fine in other barrels. The only differences were a trivial 3 grains in bullet weight and the fact that the flat-base Hornady bullets put a lot more meat in contact with the lands than the Sierra boattails. I wrote to Hornady asking for advice (this was back when people still wrote letters). I got back a personal note from Steve Hornady basically accusing me of trying to mooch some free bullets. Needless to say, that pretty much ended my relationship with Hornady products. I'm still mystified why those bullets shot so badly, but all of my .222 Sakos shoot 50-52 grain bullets better than 55's. The quality of the ammo is more important than bullet weight, though - Remington .222 ammo is crap no matter what the bullet weight. I use it for plinking and for zeroing scopes.

And, of course, the preference of AR-15's with fast twist barrels for 77-grain bullets is well known. My homebuilt AR with a Faxon 8" twist heavy fluted barrel shoots the 77-grainers into an inch quite nicely. With lighter bullets, just ordinary military accuracy. I once did some experimenting with different bullet weights in a pair of AR's with different twist barrels by the same manufacturer. The tests were inconclusive, in part because one of the test rounds was M855, which I later learned is notoriously inaccurate due to variations in the penetrator core. I got bored with it and sold both guns, so that was that.

I agree that any given barrel twist will shoot a range of bullet weights accurately, but there's no doubt that the twist to weight relationship is significant.

 

[stonecreek]

Of course bullets of greater lengths/weights/shapes may require a faster twist to fully stabilize them than lighter/shorter bullets. But there are lots of factors which determine how accurate a given bullet may shoot in a given rifle. Twist is only one of them, and so long as the twist is adequate to fully stabilize the bullet it is the least of accuracy's worries.

With the advent of extra long bullets, used predominately in the paramilitary black guns, "twist" seems to have become an obsession with a generation of shooters who are quick to blame any and every accuracy problem on "the wrong twist". If it were only that simple.

Using a .224 centerfire with a twist of ~1-14", any conventional cup-and-core bullet between 40 and 60 grains will be adequately stabilized. A given bullet within this weight range may or may not perform well in a particular rifle, but the twist rate of the barrel is highly unlikely to be either the problem or the solution.

 

[icebear]

With the advent of extra long bullets, used predominately in the paramilitary black guns, "twist" seems to have become an obsession with a generation of shooters who are quick to blame any and every accuracy problem on "the wrong twist". If it were only that simple.

Agreed. I wonder why the military went all the way from a 12" to a 7" twist when they switched from the 55 grain M193 round to the 62 grain M855. To speculate a bit, it may have to do with terminal ballistics rather than what happens in the air. The small-caliber military bullet gets its effectiveness from the way it tumbles inside the target. Maybe the excess spin helps the bullet to destabilize on impact? I don't know, but I do know that my AR's with 7" and 8" twist barrels shoot best with bullets heavier than 62 grains.

Do you know what the standard twist rate is for .22 Hornet barrels? They typically shoot 40-45 grain bullets, and sometimes even 35, compared to the 50-55 grain typical of a .222. I have one rifle in that caliber; I'll try to remember to check the twist and post.

 

[CVCOBRA1]

Its not just the paramilitary black guns and it certainly isn't limited to the 224 caliber bullet. The 6.5 Creedmore had a lot to do with it although there were a few experimenters way before the CM. All caliber bullets mostly from the 284 and up are getting longer, heavier and with greater BC's. These are for the people who are shooting 1000 yards minimum. Up to two miles even. Manufactures are listening and supplying bullets, slower powders, faster twists in premium barrels and longer magazines for these handloads. What used to be the normal 10 or 11 twist can easily be 7.5 or 8. Check out some of the non-lead bullets now. To get the weight, they are long.

 

[stonecreek]

The original L46 Hornets, along with some early L46 .222's, were 1-16". Most makers' Hornets traditionally used that twist, but I suspect that most later ones were probably 1-14" like most other .22 centerfires so that they didn't have to make a special barrel for their Hornets.

There was also the notion that Hornets used a .223" groove diameter instead of .224 inch. Although bullet makers apparently believed this since they made .223 bullets for the Hornet, my several Hornets shoot both the old .223 bullets and .224 bullets such that you can't tell the difference. It doesn't take much to swage one one-thousandths of an inch off the diameter of a bullet with 40,000 pounds of pressure behind it.

I have a LH safety L46 in .222 which has the 1-16 inch "Hornet" barrel. I can't recall shooting anything heavier than 55 grainers in it (Nosler Shots, their conventional economy bullet), but it does an excellent job with those. On the other hand, they group somewhat poorly in a couple of other rifles of mine with faster twists. As I say, once twist is adequate to stabilize the bullet it is the probably the least important factor in accuracy.

 

[paulsonconstruction]

In the Bench Rest world it has always been believed that the slowest possible twist that will stabilize the bullet in question will offer the best accuracy potential. Unfortunately, the fast twist, heavy bullet craze has made it difficult to buy a 223 Rem rifle with a twist suitable for the "normal" varmint bullets most people shoot. The 223 shines with a 12 twist & bullets from 40 to 55 grains for PD & predator shooting, yet finding a bolt action rifle without an insanely fast twist rate for ridiculously heavy bullets has become nearly impossible. I don't get it!!!

 

[stonecreek]

The 223 shines with a 12 twist & bullets from 40 to 55 grains for PD & predator shooting, yet finding a bolt action rifle without an insanely fast twist rate for ridiculously heavy bullets has become nearly impossible. I don't get it!!!

Finding any kind of bolt action .223 is nearly impossible. There are just no buyers for them among shooters under the age of 40 or so.

Too many younger shooters are enamored with black guns and even (try to) use them for colony varmint shooting from the bench -- or their preferred position -- lying on their bellies with a bipod propping up the front end of the gun and pretending to be special ops snipers taking out gooks and rag heads. They are also convinced that 65 or 70 grain bullets traveling at .30-30 speeds from their 16"-barreled guns are great "thousand yard" killers. After all, using a couple of dozen rounds to walk the shot in is no problem when you've got a 40-round magazine.

Sorry for that; I will now step down off of the soapbox and relinquish it to another speaker.

 

[icebear]

There was also the notion that Hornets used a .223" groove diameter instead of .224 inch.

When it was introduced in the early 1930's, the .22 Hornet used .223 bullets. This was later changed to .224; I have been unable to verify exactly when that happened but it was quite a ways back.

 

[stonecreek]

When it was introduced in the early 1930's, the .22 Hornet used .223 bullets. This was later changed to .224; I have been unable to verify exactly when that happened but it was quite a ways back.

Right. But I'm not sure if the actual groove diameter was 1/1000 smaller than other centerfires or if the practice was simply to use slightly undersized bullets to keep pressures low.

The standard groove diameter for the .22LR is .222", while that for the .22 WMR is .224". Regardless, there are thousands of handguns on the market with interchangeable cylinders to shoot either through the same barrel.

Besides, I'm told that it isn't uncommon for barrels to vary in groove diameter from one end to the other by as much as .002". So, when you "slug" a barrel you're only finding out what its smallest diameter is, not how large it might be some place else.

 

[icebear]

The original L46 Hornets, along with some early L46 .222's, were 1-16". Most makers' Hornets traditionally used that twist, but I suspect that most later ones were probably 1-14" like most other .22 centerfires so that they didn't have to make a special barrel for their Hornets.

The barrel twist on my .22 Hornet CZ 527 is around 1 in 13-1/2 inches or 340 mm. It shoots well with quality 45 grain ammo. My one experiment with 35 grain ammo was unsuccessful, but the ammo, bought cheap at a gun show, was of suspect quality. Seller claimed it was factory, and it was in a factory box, but when I examined it closely it turned out to be reloads.