F
freebullet
Guest
Nice rifle, Ben.
Wonder what they cost when new...
Wonder what they cost when new...
SAKO .222 Remington
- Thread starter Ben
- Start date
Nope.
Ever since I was a kid it's been a particularly popular mantra. I like them for cast, but I can't prove there's a difference. I've had better luck getting the 222 to shoot cast MORE EASILY than getting the 223 to shoot cast, but that could be my guns and components.
My own take is that I believe it may be possible to get a long neck off center or crooked, just like a short neck, but I may be wrong. Maybe it's just harder to mess up a longer neck? I can't prove anything either way, but I do personally like the long 30-30 and 222 necks, especially for cast bullets. I like having all that neck surface touching all that bullet surface because it does seem to help hang onto the bullet without a crimp and without severely undersizing the neck for the sake of more "neck tension. It's a convenience thing for me and just seems to make it easier to get everything working well.
I know that "believe," "like," "seems" and "I feel" are pretty ambiguous, but that's the stance I take on long necks on cases for cast bullets.
I have no particular preference regarding beer bottles, but I refuse to drink out of a can. That's not a matter of sophistication, but of facial hair.
Uncle Grinch
Active Member
The more I reflect back on this thread, the stronger I’m wanting to rebarrel or replace my Rem 700 in 223 AI for another 222 Rem.
Oh, what you guys do to an old man’s mind...
Oh, what you guys do to an old man’s mind...
L Ross
Well-Known Member
Long neck covers the grease grooves and prevents dust and lint from sticking? I know I tend to only fill the bottom grease groove now, but back in the day as they say, it was fill em all. Oh and of course seating the bullet so the base stays in the neck and does not extend lower than the shoulder.
Last edited:
Ian
Notorious member
Hmm. I've never experienced any accuracy degradation from a gas checked bullet extending below the neck and am inclined to say that's a myth unless there is another factor at play of which I'm unknowingly avoiding somehow through my loading techniques.
I also tend to think that a long neck alone isn't going to do much to support the bullet after the primer goes off unless the neck is thick, hard, and has a fire-formed ring at the base and enough flare left on the mouth to scuff the chamber neck...and also the launch pressure peak is less than that required to blow the neck out to the confines of the chamber neck walls. A thin .30-30 or .39-40 neck? Doubtful it supports the bullet much in the middle of the empty space around itself in the chamber.
I'll also offer for consideration the loading technique which John Ardito used to such good effect in competition: Throating the rifle to take almost all of the bullet and leave only the gas check in the case neck for handling; a technique which is about as close to breech seating as possible with fixed ammunition. If using the brass to support the bullet in-line with the bore was of any great accuracy benefit, wouldn't he would have used that method instead to win matches?
My personal theory on the long neck belief is that most of the "long neck" cartridges are from antiquity and are from low-pressure cartridges which require very little chamber neck clearance for safety in releasing the bullet. In modern, high-pressure bottleneck cartridges there is often .008-.010" or more total loaded neck clearance with a groove-diameter bullet. Compare that to a .30-30 and SAAMI drawings and then add a couple thousandths to the loaded neck diameter when using cast bullets and the tolerances decrease substantially....to the benefit of accuracy.
Consider the 222 Remington, topic of this thread. SAAMI indicates a maximum loaded cartridge neck diameter of .253" with a minus tolerance of .008", and a chamber neck of .254 X .255" with a plus tolerance of .002". A max cartridge and minimum neck would actually have .001" interference at the case mouth.
The .30-30 Winchester has a maximum loaded cartridge neck diameter of .3301 X .3331" minus .008" and a minimum chamber neck of .3307 X .3337" plus .002". Again, there could possibly be interference with minimum chamber maximum cartridge, and if dead-on spec for both is achieved, a half-thousandth TOTAL neck clearance will exist. Most .30-30 brass is about .0115" to 0120" thick giving up to a .334" loaded neck diameter with a .310" bullet. Easily an interference fit with even a maximum chamber....and most people load .311" bullets in their .30-30s. Short version....IT'S A VERY SNUG FIT with the case neck and chamber neck taking up most of the space where the back half of the bullet could possibly get crooked at launch. Launching bullets straight into the bore is one of the essential keys of cast bullet accuracy.
Now, compare those tolerances to the .308 Winchester cartridge. The SAAMI .308 Win cartridge neck maximum is .3435" (no taper) minus .008" and chamber of .3442 X .3462" plus .002". Still possible for a .0003" interference, but in reality necks are no thicker than .014" for a loaded diameter of .336" with a .308" bullet and .338" with a .310" cast bullet, leaving .006-8" total clearance with a .310" cast bullet. It would take a .315" bullet to get close to the same fit with a .308 Win as with a .310" bullet in a .30-30, in other words A VERY SLOPPY FIT with typical components and chambers.
Again, I believe it's this tolerance reduction which makes some of the legendary cast bullet calibers work rather than their typical long necks.
I also tend to think that a long neck alone isn't going to do much to support the bullet after the primer goes off unless the neck is thick, hard, and has a fire-formed ring at the base and enough flare left on the mouth to scuff the chamber neck...and also the launch pressure peak is less than that required to blow the neck out to the confines of the chamber neck walls. A thin .30-30 or .39-40 neck? Doubtful it supports the bullet much in the middle of the empty space around itself in the chamber.
I'll also offer for consideration the loading technique which John Ardito used to such good effect in competition: Throating the rifle to take almost all of the bullet and leave only the gas check in the case neck for handling; a technique which is about as close to breech seating as possible with fixed ammunition. If using the brass to support the bullet in-line with the bore was of any great accuracy benefit, wouldn't he would have used that method instead to win matches?
My personal theory on the long neck belief is that most of the "long neck" cartridges are from antiquity and are from low-pressure cartridges which require very little chamber neck clearance for safety in releasing the bullet. In modern, high-pressure bottleneck cartridges there is often .008-.010" or more total loaded neck clearance with a groove-diameter bullet. Compare that to a .30-30 and SAAMI drawings and then add a couple thousandths to the loaded neck diameter when using cast bullets and the tolerances decrease substantially....to the benefit of accuracy.
Consider the 222 Remington, topic of this thread. SAAMI indicates a maximum loaded cartridge neck diameter of .253" with a minus tolerance of .008", and a chamber neck of .254 X .255" with a plus tolerance of .002". A max cartridge and minimum neck would actually have .001" interference at the case mouth.
The .30-30 Winchester has a maximum loaded cartridge neck diameter of .3301 X .3331" minus .008" and a minimum chamber neck of .3307 X .3337" plus .002". Again, there could possibly be interference with minimum chamber maximum cartridge, and if dead-on spec for both is achieved, a half-thousandth TOTAL neck clearance will exist. Most .30-30 brass is about .0115" to 0120" thick giving up to a .334" loaded neck diameter with a .310" bullet. Easily an interference fit with even a maximum chamber....and most people load .311" bullets in their .30-30s. Short version....IT'S A VERY SNUG FIT with the case neck and chamber neck taking up most of the space where the back half of the bullet could possibly get crooked at launch. Launching bullets straight into the bore is one of the essential keys of cast bullet accuracy.
Now, compare those tolerances to the .308 Winchester cartridge. The SAAMI .308 Win cartridge neck maximum is .3435" (no taper) minus .008" and chamber of .3442 X .3462" plus .002". Still possible for a .0003" interference, but in reality necks are no thicker than .014" for a loaded diameter of .336" with a .308" bullet and .338" with a .310" cast bullet, leaving .006-8" total clearance with a .310" cast bullet. It would take a .315" bullet to get close to the same fit with a .308 Win as with a .310" bullet in a .30-30, in other words A VERY SLOPPY FIT with typical components and chambers.
Again, I believe it's this tolerance reduction which makes some of the legendary cast bullet calibers work rather than their typical long necks.
Last edited:
462
California's Central Coast Amid The Insanity
The 7.5X55 Swiss is notorious for having gas checked bullets that extend well past the case neck.
I no longer have the Swiss K-31, but it and several designs of cast bullets, seated with the gas check down into the case body, were more accurate than I could shoot its iron sights.
I no longer have the Swiss K-31, but it and several designs of cast bullets, seated with the gas check down into the case body, were more accurate than I could shoot its iron sights.
OK, I've held my tongue long enough, deferring to a peaceful environment over kindling debatable topics inciting heated discourse. I'm just going to go ahead and make a concrete statement/bold assertion regarding an absolute absolute regarding long necks on cartridge cases for lead bullets:
Long necks on cases loaded with cast bullets are better looking than short necks loaded with cast bullets.
Please forgive me. I've been trapped in the house for two days with nothing to do but read, re-read, cook, eat, sit, pace,........
Long necks on cases loaded with cast bullets are better looking than short necks loaded with cast bullets.
Please forgive me. I've been trapped in the house for two days with nothing to do but read, re-read, cook, eat, sit, pace,........
Arlon
Member
Beautiful SAKO. That's kind of a dream rifle to me. I've lusted over a few of them.
Had a 788 in .222 that I traded off, ended up finding a Remington 722 in .222, have a 1968 vintage Ruger #1 in .222 and a couple of .222 barrels for the Contender. The old Ruger is the prettiest, the 722 the best shooter but none of them are even in the same league with that SAKO!
Had a 788 in .222 that I traded off, ended up finding a Remington 722 in .222, have a 1968 vintage Ruger #1 in .222 and a couple of .222 barrels for the Contender. The old Ruger is the prettiest, the 722 the best shooter but none of them are even in the same league with that SAKO!
The .222 Remington cartridge was responsible for thousands of shooters first 1" group at 100 yds. It may still hold the single group benchrest record(Mac McMillan). It's a sweet little cartridge that was revolutionary for 1950. I had the Sako Forester big brother to yours in .244 Remington and young married broke, I had to let it go sadly. The 8x57 and .358 Win have disproved the "short neck handicap" IME. I've been a 22-250 man since I was a boy; but a .222 would have done for 75% of the shots I've taken in 46 years of hunting. We're down to one Sako- a custom(by me) Browning round top Sako action rebarreled to .250 Savage and that belongs to my better 3/4s!
Thanks for the memories, OP.
Rushcreek aka Texas by God
Thanks for the memories, OP.
Rushcreek aka Texas by God
RBHarter
West Central AR
I had a 222 in a 340 Savage . It came with one box each of 50 gr sp from RP (early green and yellow box circa 75-80?), Win (Westerns) , and Hornady factory loads I scared up a brand new FC Blue Box (HyShok ?) and went out to shoot it . Four 5 shot groups (my bench skills leave room for improvement without augmented tools) of .8 CTC at 100yd they were in different places , 6:00 , 8:30 ,11:00 by 3-4" , and about 2.5 high at 12:00 .
It turned in almost identical 10 shot groups with the NOE 225-55 at 2620 fps .
I only have a picture of the load starting to open on a 5 shot now ...... 1" grids . The high one there is all on me , quality truck for a bench and all .
The rifle was an ugly red headed step cousin but the cartridge seems to be sound .
It turned in almost identical 10 shot groups with the NOE 225-55 at 2620 fps .
I only have a picture of the load starting to open on a 5 shot now ...... 1" grids . The high one there is all on me , quality truck for a bench and all .
The rifle was an ugly red headed step cousin but the cartridge seems to be sound .
Nice work, nice gun, RB.
Three years ago, I was set up at a show to move things superfluous to my needs and to acquire those things I did need/want/would use. I saw a few things I'd have jumped on before I made my mind up to have/feed/maintain only what I could and would use.
There was a Rossi M720, fluted, like new on the table next to me. I resisted. A fella kept walking by my table saying "Savage 222, two-fifty, Savage 222, two-fifty...). I resisted but thought I could help, so I asked to see it. It looked like it had rarely been shot. I tried to sell it for him as well because it was a Savage 340 in 222 in excellent shape. No takers. Seriously?! Yeah, I should have bought it to see that someone who could appreciate it would eventually get it, but I've done my time in that gig.
I just remembered another neat little 222 that was once available - Browning BLR.
A friend of my dad owned it and it was a cool little rifle. My brother had one in 257 Roberts which shot very well and I always wondered how that 222 shot.
Three years ago, I was set up at a show to move things superfluous to my needs and to acquire those things I did need/want/would use. I saw a few things I'd have jumped on before I made my mind up to have/feed/maintain only what I could and would use.
There was a Rossi M720, fluted, like new on the table next to me. I resisted. A fella kept walking by my table saying "Savage 222, two-fifty, Savage 222, two-fifty...). I resisted but thought I could help, so I asked to see it. It looked like it had rarely been shot. I tried to sell it for him as well because it was a Savage 340 in 222 in excellent shape. No takers. Seriously?! Yeah, I should have bought it to see that someone who could appreciate it would eventually get it, but I've done my time in that gig.
I just remembered another neat little 222 that was once available - Browning BLR.
A friend of my dad owned it and it was a cool little rifle. My brother had one in 257 Roberts which shot very well and I always wondered how that 222 shot.
Even some published data shows longer barrels for 222 while they show shorter 223 barrels. When they've used a 722 (26" barrel), it really diminishes the differences until you get into the 60+ grain bullets. Not to boast on the 222 as being "better," but it's not a mere matter of the case size when you have a preferred platform/barrel length.
Most 223 stuff I have loaded myself and shot has been right there with the 222. That's jacketed. When it comes to cast, I shoot mostly between barely sub-sonic to less than 2kfps in either, so they're dead-even at my house. My 222 is my dedicated 22 cal. cast gun and my 223 is my dedicated jacketed gun. That way, I don't get copper cooties in my cast gun. I don't know by personal experience just how much (if any) difference that makes, it's more like not letting beet juice get into my mashed potatoes. My gran'pa always told me "hit don' make a nit o' diff'rnce - 'tall goes t' th' same place anyway."
Guess which one gets used exponentially more.
No, not mashed potatoes - the 222.
IF I end up inheriting my mom's 223 (24" barrel), I'll load that to the potential of the 223 as she did - or had my dad do. I want him to take his time and decide if he'd rather keep it for himself before I make any plans. He offered it to me but it was too soon to think about that.
His/hers was a classic case of the 223 being "better" than the 222 because he bought her a 222 and had it rechambered to 223 because of the ballistic difference. Incidentally, he was a 222 Mag fan but saw the writing on the wall when the 223 came out and abandoned it.
Rootmanslim
Banned
Sweet rifle but why is the scope mounted so high up ?
Rootmanslim
Banned
That's why God made ATMs, A $1500 rifle escaped you !