why not the .222 anymore?

If you have a 22 and a 6mm bullet with the same BC at the same velocity, how much more wind deflection does the 22 show at 200 yards?:confused:

Ray
 
if one shoots a berger 68 at 3300 fps its 1.1" at 100 and 4.6" at 200, 10 mph wind at 90 degrees.

with a beger 52 at 3300 fps , its 1.3" at 100, and 5.7" at 200.......

so one can see that the problem develops at 200 with about 20% more drift.

edit( my 26" 223 will do 3600 fps ...that is still 1.2 and 5.1....close, but the 6 still wins at 200)


mike in co
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tobybradshaw said:
This question might be relevant if a .222 could push a bullet with a BC=0.280 at 3300+fps, but it can't.

Toby Bradshaw
baywingdb@comcast.net
Click to expand...

Toby

This started out about the 222R. I'll agree that it cannot equal the 6PPC in a wind at 200 yards.

My question was aimed at Big Al who was talking about a 22 PPC which I know can equal and beat a 6PPC in the wind, simply because of velocity. Even the little Waldog will easily do 3500 fps.

Ray
 
Cheechako said:
Toby

This started out about the 222R. I'll agree that it cannot equal the 6PPC in a wind at 200 yards.

My question was aimed at Big Al who was talking about a 22 PPC which I know can equal and beat a 6PPC in the wind, simply because of velocity. Even the little Waldog will easily do 3500 fps.

Ray
Click to expand...

see above....close..but not beat
 
I concede. All of those 22 shooters who have kicked butt against the 6PPC were just lucky. There's no other way to explain it.:rolleyes:

And, shooters build 6PPCs so they can compete in the Sporter Class.

I concede.

Ray
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheechako said:
I concede. All of those 22 shooters who have kicked butt against the 6PPC were just lucky. There's no other way to explain it.:rolleyes:

And, shooters build 6PPCs so they can compete in the Sporter Class.

I concede.

Ray
Click to expand...
ray,
what i have put up is just data/numbers...then there is the quality of the shooter and as all know the ability to read the wind....where i fall apart...lol

dont give up...i'm gonna build a 222....i have norma 222 brass to use up

mike in co
 
If you want to shoot a weather report, the .224 is sure the way to go, the wind can sure as heck blow the unaware around, and a let off will really catch a shooter. I do not know what a calculator has proven to any shooter? I do know what putting it on the paper does prove to any shooter.:D
 
why not the 222 anymore

The 222 can drive the 52 gr sierra with about a 270Bc at 3200\
If we use the new powders available , also at 3200 your not giving up much.
Now we have easy access to better case primers etc.
If you can shoot a duce well then when you change over to the 6ppc all you have to do is get use to the recoil.
I would say it's the best to learn . wind drift and hold over.
 
Ray

Yeh, that is the cruel truth. (not your first statement, but the second).

The majority of group shooters in The NBRSA and IBS do not want to put up with the hassle of shooting two different calibers, so the easiest thing to do is simply build a 6PPC.

At the World Championships, where a 22 could be fired in both classes, only one shooter shot a 22. Every body else shot a 6PPC.

It was mentioned that shooters could just skip Sporter Matches. Well, if you want to compete for Region, State, and National Three and Four Gun Championships, you have to have a legal Sporter.

I doubt that the NBRSA ever envisioned this when the "larger than .23 caliber" rule was instituted way back when. But that was before Mr Palmissano and Mr Pindell came up with their idea..........jackie
 
why not the 222 anymore

Sierra
manual page 53 BC 270''
Copy write 1971 the only one that give the Bc of the 52 and 53 gr sierras
Check it out"
 
why not the 222 anymore

The 222 has simply lost popularity.
I don't think the loading is the issue either.
You have to remember that at that time there was alot of experimenting
Going on. When someone asked ferris if he would build a rifle again he stated he would go with the 6br case.
Both stekl and walker, and pindell and palmasono were working on basicly the same ideas.
Had Remington given Stekl the necessary funds to work on the cases i seriously doubt the ppc would have taken off as well as it did.
Remember that the fist ppc to win a new record was a 22/ppc.
Today in long range the br is winning and setting records again.
Now they have modified it to make it longer change the shoulder al la dasher etc etc. who knows what may be next.
Now that we have the 6br brass problem solved.
Still i really believe that the duce has a place for new shooters.
 
why not the 222 anymore

Remember i said it was from 1971 and i still have those bullets.
Do you know the Bc of the remington benchrest bullet ?
I have a die that makes them so i'm curious .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gerry, all 52gr .224 FB bullets are going to have a BC in the 0.220-0.225 range. They all have the same sectional density, and the form factor isn't very different among these bullets. Sectional density and form factor determine BC.

Your 1971 bullets don't have a BC=0.270. The old Sierra manual was "optimistic," as Boyd pointed out. If you don't believe that, shoot them over a pair of chronographs and see for yourself.

Toby Bradshaw
baywingdb@comcast.net
 
Yes. It's amazing how closely current BCs & ballistic table calculations correlate with real shooting results - and how the old published information didn't.
 
why not the 222 anymore

Great eye opener/
Now how about a heavier bullet that will stabelize in the 14 twist.
I have made 56 gr pills on the 705 j4.
 
why not the 222 anymore

I see the 55sbt is closer .
Pressures should be close also at a 250 Bc.
Looks like i need a BT die,
 
Well that settles that then I am looking to get into benchrest shooting and was thinking of doing a .222 to start off with, but going all the way with it. Looks like I'd just be better off with a 6mm PPC.

Pitty

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top