22-250 rifle

I traded for 22-250 many years ago. Sold the 250 a year or two later after its purchasing.
"Went out a tavern door and down the road for >cash and a case of Schmidt wide mouths."
I already owned a Rem Model 7 223 before the 22-250. <Littl' cartridge is fast and a hard hitter. But its brass? you seldom find first fire 22-250s laying around.
 
But its brass? you seldom find first fire 22-250s laying around.
Click to expand...

Top end perormance is rarely cheap, and serious reloaders don't leave brass laying around unless its used up or non reloadable.

you can get 600fps or more speed from a .22-250 than a .223 and for varmint shooting speed is GOOD.
 
there is a lot of taper in 22-250 case which may lead to stacking/feeding issues. A 22-250AI or 22 Creedmoor has less case taper and may work better from the AR10 magazine.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that is exactly backwards. A case with more taper is more difficult to get stuck in a chamber. This is where the whole "steel cases vs brass cases" issue comes from. With a tapererd case, you only have to just barely budge it before it comes off the chamber walls, a straight case you have to move quite a bit before it comes off the chamber wall.
 
Scorch said:
Sorry, but that is exactly backwards. A case with more taper is more difficult to get stuck in a chamber. This is where the whole "steel cases vs brass cases" issue comes from. With a tapererd case, you only have to just barely budge it before it comes off the chamber walls, a straight case you have to move quite a bit before it comes off the chamber wall.
Click to expand...
Issue with feeding, not extraction. It is similar to AR-47.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
Tapered cases feed better, too. Straighter cartridges feed from magazines easier but are harder to feed into a straight chamber because you are trying to fit a cartridge into a hole that is about the same diameter as the as the cartridge shoulder, it has to be very precise. Tapered cartridges feed better into chambers because the shoulder is a lot smaller than the base, your mechanism can be sloppy. But they have issues feeding out of a magazine because of the larger base These are engineering/developer issues that are resolved during firearm design.
 
Note how very tapered cases in semis have very curved magazines. Works very well when designed that way from the ground up.

Fitting them into an AR type action is problematical, because the AR action requires the top few inches of the magazine to be straight up and down, not curved. Some cartridges work passably well, some don't.
 
44 AMP said:
Note how very tapered cases in semis have very curved magazines. Works very well when designed that way from the ground up.



Fitting them into an AR type action is problematical, because the AR action requires the top few inches of the magazine to be straight up and down, not curved. Some cartridges work passably well, some don't.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The tapering makes the top round lose contact with the feed lips to assume the correct attitude. It will then tend to feed low and get stuck. It is mostly resolved in AR-47 with redesigned curved magazine. But 22-250 in AR 10 is too new to have something similar. One boutique shop makes one with machined parts. It costs over $100 a mag. BCA (yeah the cheap shop) sells a Magpul .308 mag with modified follower. It is good for 5-8 rounds. Good enough for me.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
tangolima said:
Sounds like an interesting caliber to tinker with. Itching to get an ar-10 chambering that.

Does it burn barrel fast?

Thanks for your inputs.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The .22-250 is based on a .308 Winchester case, so the head-size isn't the same as the .223 Rem.
 
The .22-250 is based on a .308 Winchester case,
Click to expand...

No, it is not.

It is based on the .250 Savage case. Which was introduced in 1915. The .22-250 was created as a wildcat round in the 1930s, and was quite popular, eventually becoming standardized and adopted by Remington about 1965. It shares the same .473" head size as many other rounds, developed originally by Mauser for their 8mm and 7mm rounds and used by the .30-06 and .308 Win family of cartridges, and even the .45ACP since Mauser introduced it in 1888.

The .378" head size of the .223 Rem comes from the .222 Rem case, introduced by Remington in 1950.

Is the .22-250 a barrel burner? It can be, if pushed to the max. Lots of high performance rounds are, some worse than others.

I think an AR 10 in .22-250 would be an interesting project, if you like trying to solve problems with the AR type rifles. Mechanically, the two big issues I see are feeding from the magazine (previously mentioned) and even more important, properly timing the cycle of the action.

At a minimum, I'd think an adjustable gas system would be needed, and then there is the issue of whether or not existing stock parts such as action spring and buffer (made for larger calibers) would be suitable. Theory says they should be, but reality sometimes doesn't do what theory says it should.

Good Luck if you go that route, and please, do let us know what you encounter.
 
Both 250 savage and 308 win originate from 30-06, which was based on 8mm Mauser...

I think I can convert 308 win to 22-250 if I have to.

An AR 10 in 22-250 indeed. I'm tempted.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
IN the broadest sense everything using the same head size is "based" on the first cartridge to use that head size. But after than things often differ.

The .250 Savage was designed by Newton, and hit the market in 1915, and while it has the .473" head size, the case body is much shorter and has a lot more taper than the .30-06.

You can form .22-250 from .30-06 (or any other longer case with the .473" head size, but it is a multi stage process, needing 4 or 5 sizing dies to reduce the case taper in stanges and then, reaming the thick body brass for the case neck.

Probably annealing, perhaps more than once would be a good idea, too...:rolleyes:
 
I compared dimensions of the 3 cartridges. Looks like it is easier to convert from .308 win than .30-06. 22-250 brass is available for about $1 per. I wouldn't mind buying new at that price. But I wouldn't mind converting if the price goes any higher. It could be hard to size down the shoulder and neck. But it shouldn't be too much more than pushing back shoulder as from .30-06 to 7.7 jap. Reaming/ turning the neck is a must.

I will see when I get the rifle.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
It could be hard to size down the shoulder and neck. But it shouldn't be too much more than pushing back shoulder as from .30-06 to 7.7 jap. Reaming/ turning the neck is a must.
Click to expand...

It may be a bit more work, the .308 is actually slightly larger than the 06 at the base of its shoulder. Going from the 06 to the 7.7Jap doesn't squeeze the case at the point of the shoulder base as much as going from .308 to .22-250.

Not sure how many steps it would take to reduce the shoulder diameter and also go from a 20 degree shoulder to a 28 degree shoulder without excessive brass failure.

And, I'm certain the dies you'd need to use to do it would be on the "custom" list, and that means considerable $ these days. Give RCBS a call and ask, what you'd need and what they would cost.

Buying .22-250 brass is the way to go. Formed brass is probably going to have a different capacity than commercially made brass, so you'd need to create your own load data for those cases.

How much brass will you need??
 
I don't know. Imagine pushing back the shoulder. Body becomes shoulder, and shoulder becomes neck. It is all reducing diameter as it goes. Sizing down the body towards the shoulder is same operation but with less magnitude, is it not? I guess I will find out when I get to that point.

I always try to use sizing dies of other calibers for intermediate steps if needed. Because of my own cheapness, I won't do custom dies, unless all hope varnishes.

I usually start with no more than 50 pieces of brass. That will last me 500 to 1000 loads. On occasions (when conversion is involved) I started with even less, 10 pieces will do.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
tangolima,

I've loaded about 5500 rounds for two .22-250 rifles. One a 14:1 twist Rem 700 and the newer one a 12:1 twist Savage 110.
With Winchester brass I got 12.8 rounds per brass.
With factory brass, I got 10.8 rounds per brass.
With Lapua brass, I got 17.8 rounds per brass.

Lapua is more expensive but works out just about the same when you consider the additional number of reloads it provides. I now use Lapua for all my bolt action rifles.
With my .223, I get well over 20 to 23 reloads per brass as long as I keep the pressure below Pmax, in the high middle of the load tables.

The 14:1 twist .22-250 shoots 52 grain and 53 grain match bullets the most accurately.
I've shot 40 grain Nosler BTs with a muzzle velocity of 4200 fps and they work like grenades on prairie dogs.
55 grain match bullets, even Bergers, drop off in accuracy a bit with the 14:1 twist barrel.
Bergers more accurate than any other 55 gr bullet in that rifle but are still less accurate than 52s and 53s.
The actual twist in my Remington could be slightly slower than 14:1 and 55 gr bullets just doesn't work with it.

The 12:1 twist Savage shoots 55 grain Berger #22410 bullets the best, slightly better than the 52 and 53 grain match bullets.
 
I have 2 22-250 rifles, both with 1 in 12 twist, and they both shoot best with bullets weighing from 50 to 55gr.
I do not push the velocity to to the top end to be a bit nicer to the barrels
 
Trivia: Harvey Donaldson claimed to have been first to neck .250 to .22 but he used the .227" Savage groove diameter instead of the .224" that Gebby went with.

Remington considered basing the .222 on the .25 Remington but concluded that the .25 was not stout enough in the head for the pressures planned. Seems to me like beefing up the .25 would have been simpler than bringing out a whole new case design, but Mike Walker didn't agree with me.
 
55 grain match bullets, even Bergers, drop off in accuracy a bit with the 14:1 twist barrel.
Bergers more accurate than any other 55 gr bullet in that rifle but are still less accurate than 52s and 53s.
The actual twist in my Remington could be slightly slower than 14:1 and 55 gr bullets just doesn't work with it.
Click to expand...


Going as far back as one can go, rifling twist rates have always been expressed as "one turn in XX inches", not the other way around. 1-14" or 1 in 14" is the usual way to say it.

Would you define "drop off in accuracy a bit", and just how 55gr bullets don't "work" in your Remington?

My current .22-250 is a Winchester, book says twist is 1-14. at 100yds, 55gr SPs shoot into an inch or 3/4" with my best loads. That works just fine for me. 52/53gr MATCH bullets go a bit less, 3/4" sometimes a little as 1/2".
63gr "semi spitzers" shoot into about 2", or a bit less.

That's what MY rifle does with my handloads. All the bullets that exit the muzzle "work". Specific bullets may not work as well as you want them to, but they do work.
 
Zen Archery said:
Avoid BCA Fast twist. Went through 2 before getting refund.
Click to expand...
I thought BCA only has 1-14.

3/4" at 100yd is pretty good. An AR 10 could be a bit worse. I expect the usual 1”.

Well another caliber got my eyeballs. How about .243 Winchester? It is almost like 6mm creedmoor. But it seems more practical than 22-250. Pondering.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top