The 227299

17K Views
Last Post 16 July 2014

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 03 November 2013

In 2003 I spent a lot of money and time not getting a Savage 12BVSS in 223 Rem to shoot accurately. In January 2013 I bought a Savage12FV and have spent the intervening ten months duplicating the ten year old failure. I have a Lyman 225415 mold that doesn't help, and just got a Lyman 225646 that looks to continue the march. I've considered a Shilen 5.7 X 28 barrel and attendant apparatus, and a 221 Fireball barrel-but came to my senses before the cash went down the swirley. I think that the problem is the mold design. The Lyman 31X299 is the best 30 caliber gas checked cast bullet designed to date. The Lyman 22 designs aren't close. Enter the 227299. Let us design a bullet with the advantages of the 31X299, in 22 caliber. I can't draw, can't cad, (can dance), and know that there's a cad/drawer out there. Here are some numbers to get us going. 31X299 is about 1.175” long, weighs around 200 grains. In 22 caliber: 227299
BULLET MINIMUM EST. WT.B.C. WIND DRIFT LENGTH “TWIST “ GRAINS 31X299=1 31X299=1 1.175 6.4 109 1 1 1.1 6.8 102 0.94 1.07 1 7.5 92 0.84 1.18 0.9 8.3 83 0.76 1.31 0.8 9.4 74 0.68 1.47 0.7 10.7 65 0.60 1.68 0.6 12.5 55 0.50 1.98 0.5 15 46 0.42 2.37 Minimum Twist is Greenhill, Est. Wt. is my estimator. B.C. is ballistic coefficient. If we call the B.C. of 31X299 1, then B.C. of a 22 caliber version the same length is 1, and B.C. falls as bullet length is decreased. Wind drift varies as B.C., inversely. The shorter the bullet, the more the wind drift.

So, for my 9” twist rifle, a bullet .8” long weighing 74 grains would have a B.C. = .68 times 31X299 B.C., and wind drift would be 1.47 times 31X299 wind drift.

Attached Files

61 Comments

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 03 November 2013

After the nose is done, A should be .217", tapering to .220” at B. I don't know that the band at C does anything for us, maybe no band and the .220 dimension at the grease groove? C, the gas check shank, has to stay. 2 grease grooves? I don't use the top one, maybe 1 grease groove? What would a 1 grease groove, no-top-band, .8” long .227” on the remaining 2 bands bullet look like? I do like .227".

Attached Files

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 03 November 2013

Here's the table, more clearly shown.

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 03 November 2013

Joe,

Good project. I believe you are right about being frustrated with the current 22 bullet molds on the market. Although some of them can be made to shoot OK usually after a struggle but only out to 100 yards because of excessive wind drift. Trying a scale model of the successful 299 makes sense.

I agree with your thought to eliminate the front lube groove. My somewhat similar Mos bullet has only one groove and I don't even use that and only have lube in the little space ahead of the gas check.

If you have a diameter .217 at A most of your nose will only touch air and will provide no guidance ahead of the point where it is at least .219 and maybe .220 in the factory barrels I have had. I would suggest .220 all the way.

The trick will be to convince someone to make the molds but there surely will be someone out there willing to give it a try if there is interest.

John

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 06 November 2013

I think this maybe what you need.

The freebore in the 223 is .224 x .025 long. Note the first band of the bullet is designed to fill that freebore.
I can see no need at all to make the base band any larger than .226, as the largest part of the chamber throat is .224.
I gave the bore riding nose a .002 taper, starting at bore diameter to make it easier to chamber and get the .224 band into the freebore but, it might need to have only .001 to do that. Or as John suggests, .220 if that diameter will allow it to fully seat.
I did two lengths, JoeB's .8 and a .9, because it will stabilize in a 9 twist.

As you can see, with bore riders and grooves, you don't get to Determine the weight, the volume of lead alloy does that.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 10 November 2013

Thanks for the drawings, Frank. Would either of these fit in a 5.56 X whatever current military ctg. case AND fit in the gun AND fit in the magazine; without the g.c. below the neck? Thanks; joe b.

Attached Files

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 10 November 2013

Since the 31X299 as modified above is the acknowledged best bullet design in the world, what would the above designs look like in other calibers. Golly kids,imagine the “299 family” of bullet designs, from 22 to 45 caliber. I'm starting to get excited.

Attached Files

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 10 November 2013

John Alexander wrote: Joe,

The trick will be to convince someone to make the molds but there surely will be someone out there willing to give it a try if there is interest.

John

John; The nose dimensions are sorta complex, I think.Call the bore .220” and the bullet nose tapered. First is the tolerances at mold manufacture. A smallest nose nominal .220” with +/- .001” would work fine, but at the largest end-of-taper dimension? OAL gets shorter with larger dimensions. Second is bumping. Bullet noses bump up in 45/450/4500 lubrisizers.The amount of bump up depends on 1. base band/s diameter delta. From .316” to .309” vs. .312” to .309" 2. alloy hardness So, a .220” nose in softer alloy with ex .227” base bands might bump up to not fit in the bore. This bump up ain't there with Lee or other nose-first sizing. BTW, with my 311299 and 314299 mold collection and bumping I can fit a bullet to about any 30 caliber barrel. So the nose dimensions must take mfg tolerances, bump up, and OAL into consideration-and I don't know what cherry cut mold tolerances are. It seems to me that a small small end (.217"??) and a small big end (.220"??) might allow tolerances, bump up and ~good OAL. But, I don't know. Hence, here.

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 10 November 2013

Joe,

You are right unintended bumping of the nose can throw in a wild card. But you do want the nose supported ("engraved by the rifling) for as much length as possible and I don't think starting with an undesized nose and depending on bumping is the best way to get uniform results.

My Mos 85 grain (.90") bullet has uniform nose diameter and I have lapped it out to fit the usual bore diameter better (which I have seldom found to be .219".

To avoid bumping and changing the nose diameter in an uncontrolled way. I first size to .226” and crimp on the gas check in a Lee push through die lapped out to .226.” I then lube in a conventional lubrisizer with a die that has also been lapped out to .226” -- no bumping. Thus the long parallel sided nose keeps the same diameter it came out of the mold with. If you can find a combination that will shoot well with tumble lube you could avoid the extra trip through a sizer. John

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 10 November 2013

The .800 long bullet would have a COAL of 2.437 in a .223 case, loaded as it should be. The .900 lg would be 2.537 COAL.

This bullet's base will occupy .165 of the case neck, well forward of the shoulder to neck junction.

For the bullet to occupy the full length of the case neck, it would need to be .070 longer in the driving band area, making it .87 long (that includes the .015 GC thickness).

If you made both bands and the greese groove .065 wide it would do that and you could shorten the bore riding area of the nose by .187 to get it in a AR mag, giving a bullet of .673 in length.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 10 November 2013

Regarding bumping, I agree with John, It's better to have a oversize nose and co-axial size the bullet (size both the base and nose at the same time).

This design of mine will dictate that the forward band be .224 to engage the .025 long freebore (ball seat)of the 223 cartridge so, it would be a must that the forward band cast .224/.2238, not any larger or, it too would have to be sized. Your base band doesn't really need to be larger than .225 to seal the throat of the chamber unless the chamber is oversize.

John, have you considered pan lubing to avoid using the lubrisizer? I believe that it's much better to have lube in the groove before doing any sizing. The lube can not compress after it enters the sizing die and supports the grooves when sizing.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 11 November 2013

Frank,

You give me credit for more sophistication in my loading than I deserve. I don't size the nose. I understand the process but like to keep it simple and try to cast the nose the diameter needed and then avoid enlarging it by bumping.

You must be dealing with a higher class rifle than the ones I am usually monkeying with to shoot in production or hunter class or for hunting.

It has been my experience that .224 is definitely not always big enough for the front band to seal in factory throats. The limited sample of rifles that I have slugged were all over .225” and some as big as .2265"

On your design the font band is very narrow. Wouldn't a wider front band reduce the possibility of the bullet “skidding” and opening up gaps in the front band on back side of the grooves being pressed into the bullet as it is forced to spin.? This problem is worse in the quick twists needed to stabilize the long bullets under discussion.

Pan lubing 22 bullets that would rather fall over than not is frustrating. I can't see that the bands are visibly distorted by the sizing so I am not sure it is necessary -- but I could be wrong.

The big question of course is who are we going to get to produce molds for these great designs. With all the fancy gear available it should be doable.

John

Attached Files

Standard Member

lmcollins posted this 11 November 2013

You are going for “The GOLD Standard” in scaling down this projectile.

The 223 is noted for its disgusting short neck. That is why anyone with any common sense that wants to shot cast goes to the 222 case. That is why John Wooters went to the 222 case for his 222/25 Copperhead. I built myself a 221 Fireball so that I'd have a short/small case to shot some cast in for small game. I havent gotten that far yet, but that is why I did it. For hunting, I thought that I might have to use short 40 grain bullets (jacketed) for the 22 Hornet.

Are you not asking for the impossible to have these small, relatively fragile cast bullets to perhaps work through a semiauto? A gentle crimp, and single load yes. But any more than that? I have hunted with round nose jacketed bullets in my 358 bolt action, and their noses are all buggered after being in and out of the rifle a time or two.

I just state these facts out loud as I think. Experience?

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 11 November 2013

John, The narrow front band is only to help align the bullet in the 223's ball seat so, that you have the most support as possible. A one band bullet was requested but, I didn't want to neglect that one area of the chamber.

I've pan lubed a lot of 25 caliber bullet w/o trouble. If you have any bump on the base a new sprue plate with a hole no bigger that about .080 should cure it.

Imcollins, I agree about the 223's short neck but, the 223 is here to stay (just as the 30/40, '06 and 308) and you can't buy a new 222 or 222 mag.

I'm a target shooter and not even a hunter so, I have no use for magazines, at all. But, if such a bullet did exist, there would be all kinds of guys trying to get it to shoot from the mag. at 3000+ fps.

For a source, I'd try to get a group buy going at NOE with my drawing.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 11 November 2013

Here is one that will fill the neck.

Attached Files

Standard Member

JeffinNZ posted this 12 November 2013

This is a brilliant idea.

Cheers from New Zealand

Attached Files

CBA Member

RDUPRAZ posted this 12 November 2013

With some minor tweaking and scaled up to .30 cal, that's exactly the design that I have been wanting for my short necked .308's. If I could find someone to bore the mold.

Attached Files

CBA Member

joeb33050 posted this 12 November 2013

I got side tracked on the gas gun/magazine business. I'm OK with the front band of any reasonable width. Greenhill says that a 9” twist has a max .225” bullet length of ~.8435", so I'm guessing that a safe 9” twist length is ~.82” or even .8. Opinions? So, Frank,would you make a drawing with the front band as required, and a length of .8"? Or, whatever length is decided on here. Now, the mold cutter. Lyman is my choice. We're the CAST BULLET ASSOCIATION, they're in the mold etc. business, they should take our advice and make these molds. We know about cast bullets and what's lacking-and it ain't the 225415 OR the 225646. If Lyman made a decent-design 22 bullet mold, of the correct size, they'd sell them. I think.