This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
tional propellants, velocity of top-end loads with all bullets was within about 150 fps of what 223 loads at similar pressure would produce. If this gun had a 24-inch barrel, velocities probably would be about 75 fps slower so the velocity difference would be closer to 225 fps. While burning one-third less powder the shorter cartridge produces more than nine-tenths the velocity – even better than Roger had anticipated. When comparing varminting-


usefulness of the 221 to the 223, I would note the following facts as worth


considering. Muzzle blast is less than one-half as loud: Targets are not nearly as disturbed, which increases shooting opportunities. Recoil is only two-thirds as much: The shooter can better see more hits and misses. Barrel heating is significantly less: I have never had to stop shooting to let a 221-chambered barrel cool; conversely, I have had bar- rels on three 223-chambered rifles so hot that I was embarrassed to keep shooting – hot enough to brand with. In my experience, the actual ability to keep on shooting without worrying about


unduly damaging the bore is often more important than is a modest theoretical difference in useful range. THE PRIMER QUANDARY


When I did the original load


development with this gun, the batch of Remington 1½ primers that I used worked perfectly. But, when I began testing for this article, I discovered that I could not use the newer batch of Remington 1½ primers because, as the striker smashed the cup against the anvil the striker pierced through the center of the cup. The resulting gas leakage damaged (burned) the striker nose, which I had to repair by judicious polishing, to remove a few thousandths inch of the nose while making the ra- dius slightly larger. Fortunately, I had no such trouble with Federal pistol primers. Obviously, lot-to-lot variation


in cup and anvil design (at least with Remington pistol primers) is a serious concern. For this reason, as noted above, I discontinued testing with the 1½. Re- gardless of primer brand, if you detect piercing or significant incipient blank- ing, discontinue testing and discard, destroy, or tear down any remaining loads using that primer. Any ballistic advantage is not worth the potential harm to the gun and possible injury from a gas leak. THE PROPELLANT QUANDARY When I did the original load de-


velopment with this gun, I tested 2400 because it was more than likely the ideal choice of propellants that were then available for use with 22-grain bullets. In this testing I again intended to test 2400 and I also began testing with VN110. After firing many shots with each


®


of those, using both the Fed-100 and the Fed-205M with each of the tested bul- lets, I belatedly came to the conclusion that neither of those propellants seemed to work well in the 221 Fireball. Repeat- edly, I got pressure spikes. For this reason, I suspended test-


ing with these propellants. This leaves a limited number of suitable propellants but among those are several excellent choices, so omitting those two should not represent much of a loss. (I must note that it is entirely pos-


sible that the noted pressure spikes re- flect something that I was doing wrong, rather than an actual problem with


Page 56 Winter 2013


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196