Author Topic: 223 Rem & 16" barrel ?s (Read 3489 times)

valvesinmyhead · « **on:** March 14, 2011, 03:11:18 AM »

Hornady says a 55gr V-Max is 3240 fps with a 26" barrel. What would it be with a 16" barrel? How do you figure this out?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #1 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:38:48 AM »

Use a chrony to check it . Some say you lose 100 fps an inch others say different. Twist rate, condition of bbl, type action , weather etc all play a part.

Or contact Hornady and ask they may know and be willing to share .

pastorp · « **Reply #2 on:** March 14, 2011, 07:29:59 AM »

valves,

I think 50FPS per inch is closer to what you lose but if you have a chrony it will tell you what your getting in your gun. Otherwise I'd just subtract 50 fps per inch or about 500 fps. 3240 - 500 =2740fps

Regards,

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #3 on:** March 14, 2011, 07:33:01 AM »

some say as low as 25 fps other test show more per inch as it gets shorter .

Larry Gibson · « **Reply #4 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:23:55 PM »

Remington FMJ M193 and LC M193 run 2850 - 2880 fps (Oehler M43) out of a couple 16" ARs so I suspect a top end load like Hornady's would be in the same range.

Larry Gibson

stubshaft · « **Reply #5 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:43:53 PM »

If you use a faster burning powder to account for the shorter barrel probably about 2900. T/C loading manual shows 2800 with a 14" barrel and adding 50fps per inch.

valvesinmyhead · « **Reply #6 on:** March 15, 2011, 03:34:41 AM »

Thanks Guys. Bought a used 450 Bushmaster that comes with a complete 16" 5.56 upper. this will be used for Coyotes and Pdoggies. Could just get a 20" barrel so I can for sure get 3000 fps.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #7 on:** March 15, 2011, 03:52:49 AM »

Why is 3000 a must meet number ? just asking.
You could drop in bullet weight to a 45 gr bullet , it would work well on the critters you list as possible targets . I know they work on ground hogs

.

drdougrx · « **Reply #8 on:** March 15, 2011, 06:09:16 AM »

I agree with SHOOT....unless you will be shooting prolonged sessions or some exotic heavy round...I wouldn't worry too much about it. I have a 16" and 20" both 1in9 twists and there isn't enough difference in performance to justify either one, either way....but that's just me and I'd NEVER talk a feller outta a new and much needed toy.

valvesinmyhead · « **Reply #9 on:** March 15, 2011, 11:39:20 AM »

3,000 is what my 221 FB would shoot 50 grainers. It was really accurate so that is my base line. 223 55gr V-Max @ 3'000fps or Hornadys new 53gr V-Max @ 3,000fps. Not trying to make it a 22-250 but do want some speed.

Larry Gibson · « **Reply #10 on:** March 16, 2011, 04:49:39 AM »

With a 20" barreled AR (suggest the 12" twist for the bullet weights you're talking) you can get 3150 fps with 52-55 gr bullets. My favorite AR load is the 52 gr Speer HP over 26.5 gr H335 in LC cases with WSR primer. Runs 3160 fps out of my 20" AR and is deadly on coyotes, rock chucks, rabbits, etc. That load is within milspec psi as tested in a tight, match chambered barrel with an Oehler M43. I've been using that load quite successfuly in ARs and Mini 14s with 10 - 12" twist for 30+ years.

Larry Gibson

valvesinmyhead · « **Reply #11 on:** March 19, 2011, 12:45:46 AM »

Most of the barrels seem to be 1-9 to 1-8. Will the faster twist will slow the bullet down?

Larry Gibson · « **Reply #12 on:** March 19, 2011, 01:31:06 PM »

They seem to shoot just a tudge faster as the faster twist increases the pressure.

Larry Gibson

Old Syko · « **Reply #13 on:** March 19, 2011, 02:28:42 PM »

All my 16" barrels run 55 gr. Vmax 2900 to 2950 depending on the particular barrel. All are 1-9 and either DPMS, Rock River, or aftermarket custom jobs, some chrome lined some aren't. Doesn't seem to matter much. 193 from either Lake City or Federal runs just short of 2900. You're not going to find a critter that is going to notice 100 fps difference and I doubt you will notice either.

Comparing your 221 to an AR is apples and oranges. If you want an AR varmint shooter get a 24' bull barrel in a tight twist and shoot heavier slugs, something in the 68 to 90 gr. range. That way you can stretch the legs of the round to their fullest.

454Puma · « **Reply #14 on:** March 31, 2011, 03:20:52 PM »

XM193 55gr out of my 20" I get 3195 fps avg! Out of my 16" I get 3065 fps avg.

valvesinmyhead · « **Reply #15 on:** April 01, 2011, 02:37:51 AM »

Bought a DPMS Prairie Panther with a 20" barrel. That would be great if I only lose a 100fps.

nomosendero · « **Reply #16 on:** April 01, 2011, 05:30:59 PM »

The Military has alot of results on live targets in Iraq & Afganistan after going to the short tube. They had to make some ammo mods. to get some of the terminal results back. there is plenty of info on that if you research it & sheds alot of light on this matter.

helotaxi · « **Reply #17 on:** April 01, 2011, 07:22:55 PM »

Quote from: stubshaft on March 14, 2011, 09:43:53 PM

If you use a faster burning powder to account for the shorter barrel

Doesn't work that way. Regardless of the length of the barrel or the burn rate of the powder, the powder has all burned within the first few inches of the barrel length. If the powder is too slow for the expansion ratio (based on case volume, bore diameter and bullet rate of acceleration; barrel length has nothing to do with it) you don't get an efficient burn. Essentially the bullet is moving down the bore soon enough that the pressure never increases enough to get a full powder burn and is unable to create much velocity. If the powder is too fast, on the other hand, powder burns entirely before the bullet has really started to move and the result is a huge spike in the chamber pressure and a potential KABOOM!

If you look at most any reloading manual, the only difference between rifle and pistol data in the same caliber is a change in velocity. Certain cartridges perform best with a certain length of barrel and powder changes in that cartridge are based on bullet weight (and the effect that it has on expansion ratio) not barrel length.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #18 on:** April 04, 2011, 02:04:37 AM »

I find that all the powder burns in the first few inches of bbl hard to believe, if that were true there would be no visable flash as in most cases that is unburned powder . I suggest if burn rate had no effect there would be no need for different powders . Even black powder was used in different size particles to control detination for different weapons. As powder burns it increases pressure , in a perfect world the powder burn/pressure would peak as the bullet reached the muzzle ( not always the case if ever). If as you suggest was correct then bbls much over 3-4 inches would be of little use.

Larry Gibson · « **Reply #19 on:** April 04, 2011, 07:20:35 AM »

Quote from: valvesinmyhead on April 01, 2011, 02:37:51 AM

Bought a DPMS Prairie Panther with a 20" barrel. That would be great if I only lose a 100fps.

With 55 gr factory or quality reloads you should get 3100 - 3200 fps from your rifle. Suggest you work up to (stop if there are obvious excess pressure signs) 26.5 gr H335 in LC cases with a CCI 450 or WSR primer and that 55 gr V-Max bullet.

Larry Gibson

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #20 on:** April 05, 2011, 02:30:00 AM »

2900 is easy to do in a 16inch gun and 3000 is not impossible.

semperfi1970 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 09, 2011, 06:28:44 AM »

There is lots to be gained with a longer tube. Never had much use for a barrel shorter than 24". There is a reason they put flash hiders on short barrel AR platform guns, there not just for looks you know. That bright flash out the end of the tube is what some call incomplete burn, I call it to short a barrel. Talking high velocity with a short tube is like talking about drag racing with the e-brake on. There is a reason they put 30" barrels on .223 F-class guns and I dont think its because the longer barrel is cheaper to make or they are more pleasing to the eye. Short tubes are fast in the hands and very manuverable in confined space. I never encountered confined space hunting and taking those couple hundred yard shots. If I need fast and manuverable for confined space I choose the 12 ga 00buck, bet it will work every time. I have always believed a long gun(rifle) should have a long barrel on it not a extra long hand gun barrel with a incomplete burn hider. I carried a m16 for over 12 years and put lots of faith in it, trusty yes, but inefficient as the day is long. Anybody looking to maximize the full potential of a .223 with a AR gas gun platform there are lots of nice 24" tubes out there that will get you closer to what the potent little round can do. A short barrel with a .223 is like keeping a chetta in a little square cage. Take my 6.5x55 loaded to the minimum of Hodgon's manual for a 140 grain bullet (35 grains of 4064 24" test barrel for 2,394fps), real world out of a 29.62" barrel yields 2,740fps at 39,500cup. It takes 49 grains of 4064 to push the same bullet to 2,750fps out of a 6.5-06 with a 24" barrel with 54,000cup. Nothing like making a 6.5x55 perform like a 6.5-06 just by using a long tube. Well lets think about this for a minute, less powder, less pressure, same bullet and the same velocity within 10fps. I think I will opt for the long barrel. Just my two cents.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #22 on:** April 10, 2011, 03:23:43 AM »

might be true but i dont believe theres to many that want to hunt with a 29 inch barrel. Me i like a handy short gun. Sure i give up a little velocity and it has more muzzle flash and noise but i only usually shot it once and i carry it all day. I dont want a rifle that weights 10 lbs if im walking all day and dont want one that is snagging on brush when i have it slinged over my shoulder. Longest rifle barrels i have are 24 inch and those are just on magnums. I had a 26 inch sps in 300 mag and detested it so much i hardly hunted with it. I had a buddy turn it down to 24 and to me it made such a differnce in handling that its become a favorite rifle. Lets talk real world. My load in that gun when it was a 26 inch gun was 76 grains or re19 and a 165 nos balistic tip. It went 3125 out of the 26 inch barrel and 3095 our of the 24. thats 30fps loss and i dont know of a single instance where that would make a pinch of differnces. dont know the reason. Maybe its just luck or maybe theres something to the shorter barrel is stiffer camp but it shoots just about every load i try in it more accurately with the 24 inch barrel then it did the 26. Back to the .223. Ive got a 16 inch custom with a colt lower and a stainless m4 barrel 1-7 twist. I will shoot 1/2 at a loo yards all day long with 60 grain vmaxs at 2900 fps. I cant imagine a longer barrel making it any more accurate or the couple hundred fps i lost making a pinch of differnce on any game animal im going to shoot with a .223 or making any big difference in trajectory at the ranges i use a .223 for. I wear ear plugs all the time when I shoot so the added noise sure isnt a concern. Personaly I wouldnt own an ar with a barrel longer then 20 in. An ar may be called on to defend my family and a 24 inch gun is just to big and heavy to use as a self defense tool. You made the argument that a few inches of barrel make your 6.5x55 into a 6.5-06. Personaly id rather take a 22 inch gun and run a 6.5-06 reamer in it or better yet just break out my 264 mag and leave them both in the dust

semperfi1970 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:05:16 AM »

Lloyd, I think we are saying the same thing of sorts. I am to old to hunt with any verocity and seldom venture far from the road. I like the long tubes as I tend to stick to the hood of the truck or a bench. I have toyed with the idea od a 264 mag but settled on a 6.5x284 Norma in the hopes of retaining some sort of barrel life. Do you shoot the 264 mag or do you hunt with it? What kind of barrel are you running? I have a Hart 30" 6.5mm 1 in 8" bench taper being made as we speak and I have a few weeks to decide on the chamber ream. Just wondering what kind of barrel life you have seen with the mag. As far as the gas guns go I got that out of my system years ago due to pure necessity.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #24 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:49:28 AM »

my 264 is a ruger hawkeye. Its a gun i picked up ealier this year and will be one of my main hunting rifles for shooting crop damage deer this year.

semperfi1970 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 10, 2011, 10:26:09 AM »

Love a Ruger Lloyd, here is my 220 swift improved derived from a M77 MKIIVT that I road hunt with. Cant realy call it road hunting as I drive into the fields a bit. In upstate ny I have a few bean and corn fields I can hunt. One field in paticular is around 300 yards wide by 2,400 yards deep. I do not shoot at deer with the swift or any gun for that matter any further than 300 yards away due to my own aging ability. You should be mighty pleased with the Hawkeye, they are one fine rifle and I swear by the Ruger actions. I have many Mauser actions, small and large ring that I aspire to barrel in various chamberings. Here is a pic of my 1916 unissued 6.5x55(ghost rings, only mod), with minimal loadings she will put a 140 grain accubond way out there due to the long tube. I have a 1895 7x57mm spanish cavalry carbine with a short barrel and man does it kick like a mule. Would love to read a range report on the Hawkeye.

nomosendero · « **Reply #26 on:** April 10, 2011, 04:32:15 PM »

I like the Ruger Swift's!!

helotaxi · « **Reply #27 on:** April 13, 2011, 06:27:43 PM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on April 04, 2011, 02:04:37 AM

I find that all the powder burns in the first few inches of bbl hard to believe, if that were true there would be no visable flash as in most cases that is unburned powder . I suggest if burn rate had no effect there would be no need for different powders . Even black powder was used in different size particles to control detination for different weapons. As powder burns it increases pressure , in a perfect world the powder burn/pressure would peak as the bullet reached the muzzle ( not always the case if ever). If as you suggest was correct then bbls much over 3-4 inches would be of little use.

Just because the powder is mostly burned doesn't mean that the combustion products don't continue to expand and continue to accelerate the bullet down the barrel. The muzzle flash from shorter barrels is the product of oxygen being reintroduced to hot combustion products. Shorter the barrel, the hotter the gases and the more volatile they are, but that isn't unburned powder. You still get a muzzle flash with relatively long barrels and with short barrels that still have 100% powder burn.

Blackpowder and smokeless powder aren't apples and apples. Smokeless powder burns. Blackpowder explodes. I have never dealt with blackpowder so answer me this: do you use different "grinds" for the same cartridge in different firearms, say a SAA and a Win '73 in 44-40? I don't think that you do. For smokeless, you choose powder based on the cartridge and bullet weight, that's it.

Quickload is really good at illustrating this but it won't run on my Mac. I was playing with it a few days ago looking at different barrel lengths and their effects on burn percentage. The difference between a 14" and 26" barrel with a .308 is a whole 4% and every load I looked at had a burn percentage well over 90% regardless of length. The important thing to note was that the peak pressure occurred in the first fraction of a millisecond and at exactly the same time regardless of barrel length.

jasonprox700 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 18, 2011, 08:05:16 AM »

Quote from: helotaxi on April 13, 2011, 06:27:43 PM

Just because the powder is mostly burned doesn't mean that the combustion products don't continue to expand and continue to accelerate the bullet down the barrel. The muzzle flash from shorter barrels is the product of oxygen being reintroduced to hot combustion products. Shorter the barrel, the hotter the gases and the more volatile they are, but that isn't unburned powder. You still get a muzzle flash with relatively long barrels and with short barrels that still have 100% powder burn.

Perfect explination! Some people also think that a bullet rises when it leaves the barrel too.