Author Topic: 22-250 barrel on 1997 frame (Read 1021 times)

lendar · « **on:** January 02, 2008, 03:54:16 PM »

I have a 1997 frame that I would like to put a 22-250 barrel on. Is this safe? The factory will not do it as the frame is older but it is still an SB-2 frame. The original barrel was a 223.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #1 on:** January 02, 2008, 04:21:09 PM »

Pre '99 frames aren't heat treated to the same strength level as later frames, that's why they won't put any * marked high pressure barrel on them. I won't shoot any that way either, I have several of the older frames, but only with low pressure chambered barrels on them. One of em is a '96 RMEF 35 Whelen Ultra, but I put the barrel on a late model frame to be safe.

The 22-250 has a SAAMI max pressure of 65kpsi and the same case head size as a 30-06 or 270, using the 22-250 on an older frame would be very dangerous IMO, that could lead to a ruined frame at the least, or something much worse.

Tim

lendar · « **Reply #2 on:** January 03, 2008, 02:37:19 AM »

What calibers did they have in 1997? What is the SAAMI max pressure for the 223? I thought it was just a little lower but with the bigger case head of the 22-250 it might be OK.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #3 on:** January 03, 2008, 04:59:07 AM »

The 223 is 55kpsi, but the case head is a lot smaller than the 22-250.

Tim

http://www.frfrogspad.com/miscellk.htm

lendar · « **Reply #4 on:** January 03, 2008, 06:51:23 AM »

I thought the larger case head would spread the pressure out a bit. Next question, I have a 308 barrel that should fit, if I put that on and keep the pressure down a bit would that work. I reload and I don't think I ever loading at the Max with anything. I sure would like that frame to work but I sure don't want to put my face next to something that may blow up. I still would like to know what barrels they had in 1997. That link at the end of your post was nice thanks for that and all the info.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #5 on:** January 03, 2008, 09:19:26 AM »

Case head thrust or bolt thrust, is dependent on the internal case head surface area and the pressure, basically, the larger the case head, the lower the pressure needs to be for a given level of receiver strength.

The .308 has the same case head size and close to the same pressure as the 22-250, keeping the loads in the start data would help prevent a problem most likely, that would be a wise choice if you're intent on using that frame. Pre- '99 offerings were pretty much the same as the basic offerings that are available today, there have been many posts by members with high pressure original chamberings that wanted another barrel of the same that was originally on their rifle but couldn't get one fitted due to the weaker frame. $:-\$

Tim

http://www.riflebarrels.com/articles/custom_actions/bolt_lug_strength.htm

lendar · « **Reply #6 on:** January 03, 2008, 11:51:58 AM »

Then some of the older pre 99 frames came with barrels such as 270, 308, 243 and so on, is that correct? Are they safe to shoot? I am real confused here.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #7 on:** January 03, 2008, 12:13:41 PM »

Not in my opinion and H&R's position, that's why they won't fit them with the * marked barrels, and why I won't use a high pressure barrel on them either, frames are too cheap and readily available to take the chance of one failing. You can give Gordon a call and discuss it with him and see what he tells ya, toll free (866)776-9292.

Tim

PartsMan · « **Reply #8 on:** January 04, 2008, 05:39:14 AM »

I read once that the older high pressure barrels had a lot of freebore (the lands were even farther out)
to lower (releave) the actual pressure in the chamber.

The old barrels are made for the old receivers.
New barrels are for newer stronger frames.
You can get a good frame for <$100.
It's not worth the risk.

lendar · « **Reply #9 on:** January 07, 2008, 02:07:35 PM »

I hate to keep bringing this up but I did a lot of checking on this and found the answer right in my own gun safe. Approx 2 years ago I had a 243 handi. I sold the barrel and sent the frame in and the factory fitted a 243 bull barrel to it. I remember it well as it went back 3 times as it would not group. I also remember the one who worked on it was Gordon, and after 3 tries it shoots great. The first 2 letters of this one is NG. I think that's a 93 rifle that came originally as a 243 and had a 243 barrel put on at the factory. Now is this 243 safe to shoot? This is still very confusing to me, but if the above 243 is safe then my 1997 frame with a 22-250 barrel should be fine. If I am missing something I would sure like someone to point it out to me.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #10 on:** January 07, 2008, 02:13:02 PM »

I don't know how to make it any clearer, give Gordon a call and ask him. (866)776-9292 or email hr1871@hr1871.com

Tim

Spanky · « **Reply #11 on:** January 07, 2008, 02:13:54 PM »

Well, there's one way to find out!

Spanky

Sourdough · « **Reply #12 on:** January 07, 2008, 10:07:57 PM »

Except for my Ultra, all my Handi's are pre 99. My 30-06, .35 Whelen, and .243. Now you make me nervous Tim. The 30-06 has the second barrel on it from the factory. Yet they would not install a high pressure barrel from the start on these frames, even thou they came from the factory with one.

carbineman · « **Reply #13 on:** January 08, 2008, 09:17:20 AM »

Sometime back a relative had a .308 and a 30-06 that would both at times have a stuck spent case problem. He ran into the same thing when he questioned about the validity of installing a "higher" pressure barrel on these older frames. It appeared that "The Truth Was Out There" but it was buried somewhere in the X files.

Because of the stuck case problems he traded went with a 30-30 Topper like I have and bought a 30-30 Handi as well. These topper barrels fit on a number of frames we have. Those and with the Tracker II's we now use are all the sporting arms we need for our situation.(I do have a .223 Ultra) Being left handed I am a big fan of the H&R/NEF platform, but some things that the company does or states is perplexing to me.

MTGlass · « **Reply #14 on:** January 08, 2008, 10:55:24 AM »

Has anybody asked Gordon if the pre '99 frames can be reheat treated to current specs?

Probably not a service H&R would want to offer. They'd get flooded with requests. On the other hand they have a product in consumers hands that they recommend against using.

lendar · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2008, 07:41:55 AM »

Just to let you know after much thinking on it, I fired the 22-250 on the older frame. About 10 Rd's with no problem. The scope held to the same point of aim while changing frames.

backstrap · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2008, 01:23:46 PM »

It might shot good for the 10 rounds you shot or 10,000 rounds but all it takes is 1 shot, to put a eye out or lose a finger or what ever i dont think a 300 doller gun would be worth loseing a eye over or a finger over or any bodily injure for that matter

quickdtoo · « **Reply #17 on:** January 18, 2008, 02:15:54 PM »

Suit yourself, it's your life and limbs, a late model SB2 frame can be picked up for $100 or less.

Tim

njanear · « **Reply #18 on:** January 18, 2008, 04:06:12 PM »

There have always been those guys that would shoot modern shotshell loads through old damascus shotgun barrels or even stout smokeless loads through "blackpowder only" firearms... the first few shots were probably fine but there could always be that very next one that sure could cause some excitement.

I am not saying that something will happen if you continue to do this... but if it does, this group will never let you live it down (assuming you can come back after a potential catastrophic failure or such occurs). $:-\$

myarmor · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2008, 04:49:58 PM »

I don't want to get into the debate of if or if not, but only to relate what I know with my experience. It doesn't by any means mean, well ...any thing.... Just putting it out there

I bought a 280 Handi with an extra 204 barrel at a local gun shop that had an Sb-2 dated back to around 97 or 95... I don't have it near at the moment.... I do not believe the 204 to be the original barrel, as the chambering hadn't been availible yet :p , but the 280. Either way both shot fine and with no complications. I understand the warning here, but I also understand H&R being put in with a few lawsuits and NEF picking up the trail and putting a warning as they had no way of underseeing the work done prior so can only ensure what they have been overlooking.
Perhaps I am oversteping here, as I don't claim to know all the answers. But it seems to make sense. Still no harm in being careful. To each his own and warning.

-Aaron