I must have missed the part where people were claiming the 22 Creed is better. If someone wants to fireform, knock yourself out, but for my way of thinking, if I can achieve basically identical results and do so with, ANY, amount of less work/prep/expense, for me, that's a no brainer.
22-250AI vs 22 Creed
- Thread starter pyscodog
- Start date
Originally Posted By: B23I must have missed the part where people were claiming the 22 Creed is better. If someone wants to fireform, knock yourself out, but for my way of thinking, if I can achieve basically identical results and do so with, ANY, amount of less work/prep/expense, for me, that's a no brainer.
Don't waste your time...being a curmudgeon is a badge of honor for many here.
Don't waste your time...being a curmudgeon is a badge of honor for many here.
Originally Posted By: pyscodogWhat will a 22 CM do that a fast twist 22-250AI won't? Reason I ask, I have a 22-250AI but its a slow twist barrel. Shoots the light stuff really good but a fast twist 250AI would be cool. I have dies and tons of brass for the 22-250AI so I wouldn't have to buy everything over again. Pro's and Con's please. (And a couple grains of powder is not a deal breaker.)
Here's my original post for those that missed it. Nothing to do with fireforming brass. But I guess the forming of brass for the 22-250AI is the major Con.
Here's my original post for those that missed it. Nothing to do with fireforming brass. But I guess the forming of brass for the 22-250AI is the major Con.
Last edited:
orkan
Active member
Originally Posted By: pyscodogIts almost funny. Years ago the Creedmoor didn't exist but the 22-250 or 250AI did. The 260 and the 6.5x55 did also. Any of these do the same thing or close to the same as the Creedmoor's but they don't have the cool name and weren't Tacti-kool. I'd wager that in a year or so, the CM will be old news and a new Whiz Bang caliber will come out and you won't be able to give a Creed away and everyone will be having the same conversation about the new Whiz Bang is better than the Creedmoor and the old PITA 22-250AI will still be kicking azz and killing stuff.
It gets a little tiring reading post after post of people claiming the creedmoor is just the same as all the things we had before. Just because it's trendy and popular, people think it's ok to spread misinformation. If any of the cartridges we had before were the same, or even as good, it wouldn't have achieved the popularity it has. Fact is that it's the most technologically correct cartridge of it's size, configured to optimize ease of feeding, forgiving accuracy nodes, long VLD's at standard mag length with the bearing surface positioned in the neck above where donuts potentially form, and with a shoulder angle conducive to good powder burn with the typical components used. Many cartridges have come close, but they simply do not do all the things the creedmoor does. Not from a technical interior ballistics standpoint. Exterior ballistics, well yes it's nothing new and matched by many. However, for those that have actually owned a bunch of similar cartridges, lesser performance and/or narrower and more finicky accuracy nodes, and various other ergo and technical issues have always been present. Dealt with, but present none the less. The creedmoor is a great family of cartridges, and no amount of internet posturing is going to change that.
Long cases such as the 243win and 260, simply presented a series of issues when loading long vld's at mag length. These eventualities and issues are well documented, and had the 260 been a shorter case... the creedmoor would never have achieved popularity. If the 6.5x47 would have been a touch longer, the creed would never have succeeded. The 6.5x55 is not compatible with a short action. The reality is the creedmoor locked in on and combined the best configuration of all available cartridges to that point.
Cartridge stability and forgiveness is something that is not talked about enough. Older case designs with lots of body taper and shallow shoulder angles certainly worked for us in the past. As handloaders, we can generally tune just about anything if we work hard enough. These new lessons learned from cartridges such as the 6mm BR, Dasher, and Creedmoor, have taught case designers plenty about creating things that work "all" the time, not just in certain situations. Many new cartridges simply have more of the boxes checked than some of the old stand-by's. That doesn't all of a sudden mean you're an idiot for shooting a 260rem or a 220 swift. Just don't be fooled into thinking because you chose those things that there isn't something out there doing the job better, or at least the same with significant benefits to other logistical aspects outside of ballistics.
Regarding 22-250AI vs 22 creed. If one is already happy with 22-250AI, then I see no need to switch. Fire forming is the only drawback... but again, if one is happy, then fine. Ballistically they are within 50fps of each other, or plain identical. Usually the 22 creed will beat the 22-250 in speed by about that much, but it can vary. The 22-250AI is also very forgiving, and in fact it is usually more so, due to its 40 degree shoulder and the fact you could run lapua brass. (this is less so now that you can run lapua in a creed) The sharper shoulder tends to produce more forgiving loads with heavy bullets than the factory creed shoulder, all other things being equal.
Regarding case capacity, if you use 22-250 brass to form 22 creed... then you'll plainly see the 22-250 cases are smaller. Period. You can simply measure a 22-250 and any creed case and find that very same thing. That case capacity difference results in approximately a 25-50fps velocity penalty on average. (all other things being equal) This is not really noticeable in the real world, so can be mostly muted.
That's why the 22 creed is so awesome... it brings 22-250AI performance in a factory headstamp. Only a matter of time before we see factory loaded ammo and full factory support for the cartridge. That is something that is simply not likely to happen for the 22-250AI.
If you have such a strongly negative opinion of the creedmoor, as evidenced by your post, then why are you asking this question? If you're so averse to the fact that so many people love the creedmoor cases, why not just happily continue shooting your 22-250AI? Better still, why don't you do the work yourself? Build two identical rifles, one in 22-250AI, one in 22 creed, and put a barrels worth of rounds down each and then come tell us what you discovered. I'm speaking from a minimum of a couple thousand rounds experience with each of .223, .223AI, 22BR, 22-250, 22-250AI, 22-243, 22-243AI, and 22 Creed. (among a few hundred rounds with others) How do you expect to have any real knowledge if you don't put in the time on the reloading bench and behind the trigger?
If people want to posture and proclaim "A" is better than "B" or vice versa, then they better be able to demonstrate they have a significant batch of detailed experience with BOTH. If not, then it seems to me that people are safe, and would be advised, to completely disregard most of what is said.
It gets a little tiring reading post after post of people claiming the creedmoor is just the same as all the things we had before. Just because it's trendy and popular, people think it's ok to spread misinformation. If any of the cartridges we had before were the same, or even as good, it wouldn't have achieved the popularity it has. Fact is that it's the most technologically correct cartridge of it's size, configured to optimize ease of feeding, forgiving accuracy nodes, long VLD's at standard mag length with the bearing surface positioned in the neck above where donuts potentially form, and with a shoulder angle conducive to good powder burn with the typical components used. Many cartridges have come close, but they simply do not do all the things the creedmoor does. Not from a technical interior ballistics standpoint. Exterior ballistics, well yes it's nothing new and matched by many. However, for those that have actually owned a bunch of similar cartridges, lesser performance and/or narrower and more finicky accuracy nodes, and various other ergo and technical issues have always been present. Dealt with, but present none the less. The creedmoor is a great family of cartridges, and no amount of internet posturing is going to change that.
Long cases such as the 243win and 260, simply presented a series of issues when loading long vld's at mag length. These eventualities and issues are well documented, and had the 260 been a shorter case... the creedmoor would never have achieved popularity. If the 6.5x47 would have been a touch longer, the creed would never have succeeded. The 6.5x55 is not compatible with a short action. The reality is the creedmoor locked in on and combined the best configuration of all available cartridges to that point.
Cartridge stability and forgiveness is something that is not talked about enough. Older case designs with lots of body taper and shallow shoulder angles certainly worked for us in the past. As handloaders, we can generally tune just about anything if we work hard enough. These new lessons learned from cartridges such as the 6mm BR, Dasher, and Creedmoor, have taught case designers plenty about creating things that work "all" the time, not just in certain situations. Many new cartridges simply have more of the boxes checked than some of the old stand-by's. That doesn't all of a sudden mean you're an idiot for shooting a 260rem or a 220 swift. Just don't be fooled into thinking because you chose those things that there isn't something out there doing the job better, or at least the same with significant benefits to other logistical aspects outside of ballistics.
Regarding 22-250AI vs 22 creed. If one is already happy with 22-250AI, then I see no need to switch. Fire forming is the only drawback... but again, if one is happy, then fine. Ballistically they are within 50fps of each other, or plain identical. Usually the 22 creed will beat the 22-250 in speed by about that much, but it can vary. The 22-250AI is also very forgiving, and in fact it is usually more so, due to its 40 degree shoulder and the fact you could run lapua brass. (this is less so now that you can run lapua in a creed) The sharper shoulder tends to produce more forgiving loads with heavy bullets than the factory creed shoulder, all other things being equal.
Regarding case capacity, if you use 22-250 brass to form 22 creed... then you'll plainly see the 22-250 cases are smaller. Period. You can simply measure a 22-250 and any creed case and find that very same thing. That case capacity difference results in approximately a 25-50fps velocity penalty on average. (all other things being equal) This is not really noticeable in the real world, so can be mostly muted.
That's why the 22 creed is so awesome... it brings 22-250AI performance in a factory headstamp. Only a matter of time before we see factory loaded ammo and full factory support for the cartridge. That is something that is simply not likely to happen for the 22-250AI.
If you have such a strongly negative opinion of the creedmoor, as evidenced by your post, then why are you asking this question? If you're so averse to the fact that so many people love the creedmoor cases, why not just happily continue shooting your 22-250AI? Better still, why don't you do the work yourself? Build two identical rifles, one in 22-250AI, one in 22 creed, and put a barrels worth of rounds down each and then come tell us what you discovered. I'm speaking from a minimum of a couple thousand rounds experience with each of .223, .223AI, 22BR, 22-250, 22-250AI, 22-243, 22-243AI, and 22 Creed. (among a few hundred rounds with others) How do you expect to have any real knowledge if you don't put in the time on the reloading bench and behind the trigger?
If people want to posture and proclaim "A" is better than "B" or vice versa, then they better be able to demonstrate they have a significant batch of detailed experience with BOTH. If not, then it seems to me that people are safe, and would be advised, to completely disregard most of what is said.
Well, I guess I did sound a bit negative but I guess that comes from being "Old School". I still like alot of the "Old School" calibers. I have had and still own a CM. A 6CM that I sold and a 6.5 that I still have. No complaints with performance with either.
Thank you for your informative post Orkan.
Thank you for your informative post Orkan.
Orkan, you are 100% correct....but you are preaching to a bunch of folks who still thing slow twists and light bullets are the best thing since sliced bread. It is considered some sort of badge of honor to do things the "old school" way, even when the outcome is less, and harder to achieve.
Last edited:
The problem is some of you think you need to shoot heavy bullets in a 22 caliber rifle and those of us that don't agree with your way of thinking are wrong. The 223, 22-250 and the 220 Swift were all made to launch light bullet very fast. When you start shooting the heavies, you kill what the caliber was meant to do. But now I'm preaching to a bunch of folks that think fast twists and heavy bullets are the best thing since sliced bread. And we don't need no stinking badges.
Coyotejunki
Well-known member
It amazes me the hatred for the Creedmores. But then again I remember years ago the hatred for the 223 and the AR15.
Originally Posted By: pyscodogThe problem is some of you think you need to shoot heavy bullets in a 22 caliber rifle and those of us that don't agree with your way of thinking are wrong. The 223, 22-250 and the 220 Swift were all made to launch light bullet very fast. When you start shooting the heavies, you kill what the caliber was meant to do. But now I'm preaching to a bunch of folks that think fast twists and heavy bullets are the best thing since sliced bread. And we don't need no stinking badges.
I don't really understand this argument because back when those cartridges were designed, there were no heavy for caliber bullets, so how would you really know if they were designed for anything except what was available at the time.
I don't really understand this argument because back when those cartridges were designed, there were no heavy for caliber bullets, so how would you really know if they were designed for anything except what was available at the time.
orkan
Active member
Originally Posted By: pyscodogThe problem is some of you think you need to shoot heavy bullets in a 22 caliber rifle and those of us that don't agree with your way of thinking are wrong. The 223, 22-250 and the 220 Swift were all made to launch light bullet very fast. When you start shooting the heavies, you kill what the caliber was meant to do. But now I'm preaching to a bunch of folks that think fast twists and heavy bullets are the best thing since sliced bread. And we don't need no stinking badges.
For certain applications, a heavy bullet IS required to achieve best results.
For certain applications, a light bullet IS required to achieve best results.
However, a fast twist ensures BOTH bullets can be used with excellent success. There is an argument to be made that its possible to achieve slightly higher velocities with slow twists and light bullets, but in my testing it has been insignificant. Yet with the lightest jacketed bullets, and the big cartridges in those calibers, the slow twist is definitely required, as the fast twist will literally blow up bullets.
There is no universal right and wrong. There is however, right and wrong for specific applications.
For certain applications, a heavy bullet IS required to achieve best results.
For certain applications, a light bullet IS required to achieve best results.
However, a fast twist ensures BOTH bullets can be used with excellent success. There is an argument to be made that its possible to achieve slightly higher velocities with slow twists and light bullets, but in my testing it has been insignificant. Yet with the lightest jacketed bullets, and the big cartridges in those calibers, the slow twist is definitely required, as the fast twist will literally blow up bullets.
There is no universal right and wrong. There is however, right and wrong for specific applications.
willy1947
Active member
Originally Posted By: orkanOriginally Posted By: pyscodogIts almost funny. Years ago the Creedmoor didn't exist but the 22-250 or 250AI did. The 260 and the 6.5x55 did also. Any of these do the same thing or close to the same as the Creedmoor's but they don't have the cool name and weren't Tacti-kool. I'd wager that in a year or so, the CM will be old news and a new Whiz Bang caliber will come out and you won't be able to give a Creed away and everyone will be having the same conversation about the new Whiz Bang is better than the Creedmoor and the old PITA 22-250AI will still be kicking azz and killing stuff.
It gets a little tiring reading post after post of people claiming the creedmoor is just the same as all the things we had before. Just because it's trendy and popular, people think it's ok to spread misinformation. If any of the cartridges we had before were the same, or even as good, it wouldn't have achieved the popularity it has. Fact is that it's the most technologically correct cartridge of it's size, configured to optimize ease of feeding, forgiving accuracy nodes, long VLD's at standard mag length with the bearing surface positioned in the neck above where donuts potentially form, and with a shoulder angle conducive to good powder burn with the typical components used. Many cartridges have come close, but they simply do not do all the things the creedmoor does. Not from a technical interior ballistics standpoint. Exterior ballistics, well yes it's nothing new and matched by many. However, for those that have actually owned a bunch of similar cartridges, lesser performance and/or narrower and more finicky accuracy nodes, and various other ergo and technical issues have always been present. Dealt with, but present none the less. The creedmoor is a great family of cartridges, and no amount of internet posturing is going to change that.
Long cases such as the 243win and 260, simply presented a series of issues when loading long vld's at mag length. These eventualities and issues are well documented, and had the 260 been a shorter case... the creedmoor would never have achieved popularity. If the 6.5x47 would have been a touch longer, the creed would never have succeeded. The 6.5x55 is not compatible with a short action. The reality is the creedmoor locked in on and combined the best configuration of all available cartridges to that point.
Cartridge stability and forgiveness is something that is not talked about enough. Older case designs with lots of body taper and shallow shoulder angles certainly worked for us in the past. As handloaders, we can generally tune just about anything if we work hard enough. These new lessons learned from cartridges such as the 6mm BR, Dasher, and Creedmoor, have taught case designers plenty about creating things that work "all" the time, not just in certain situations. Many new cartridges simply have more of the boxes checked than some of the old stand-by's. That doesn't all of a sudden mean you're an idiot for shooting a 260rem or a 220 swift. Just don't be fooled into thinking because you chose those things that there isn't something out there doing the job better, or at least the same with significant benefits to other logistical aspects outside of ballistics.
Regarding 22-250AI vs 22 creed. If one is already happy with 22-250AI, then I see no need to switch. Fire forming is the only drawback... but again, if one is happy, then fine. Ballistically they are within 50fps of each other, or plain identical. Usually the 22 creed will beat the 22-250 in speed by about that much, but it can vary. The 22-250AI is also very forgiving, and in fact it is usually more so, due to its 40 degree shoulder and the fact you could run lapua brass. (this is less so now that you can run lapua in a creed) The sharper shoulder tends to produce more forgiving loads with heavy bullets than the factory creed shoulder, all other things being equal.
Regarding case capacity, if you use 22-250 brass to form 22 creed... then you'll plainly see the 22-250 cases are smaller. Period. You can simply measure a 22-250 and any creed case and find that very same thing. That case capacity difference results in approximately a 25-50fps velocity penalty on average. (all other things being equal) This is not really noticeable in the real world, so can be mostly muted.
That's why the 22 creed is so awesome... it brings 22-250AI performance in a factory headstamp. Only a matter of time before we see factory loaded ammo and full factory support for the cartridge. That is something that is simply not likely to happen for the 22-250AI.
If you have such a strongly negative opinion of the creedmoor, as evidenced by your post, then why are you asking this question? If you're so averse to the fact that so many people love the creedmoor cases, why not just happily continue shooting your 22-250AI? Better still, why don't you do the work yourself? Build two identical rifles, one in 22-250AI, one in 22 creed, and put a barrels worth of rounds down each and then come tell us what you discovered. I'm speaking from a minimum of a couple thousand rounds experience with each of .223, .223AI, 22BR, 22-250, 22-250AI, 22-243, 22-243AI, and 22 Creed. (among a few hundred rounds with others) How do you expect to have any real knowledge if you don't put in the time on the reloading bench and behind the trigger?
If people want to posture and proclaim "A" is better than "B" or vice versa, then they better be able to demonstrate they have a significant batch of detailed experience with BOTH. If not, then it seems to me that people are safe, and would be advised, to completely disregard most of what is said.
I will keep it short. I have shot a 220 Swift for 57 years.
You people waste a lot of money for nothing.
It gets a little tiring reading post after post of people claiming the creedmoor is just the same as all the things we had before. Just because it's trendy and popular, people think it's ok to spread misinformation. If any of the cartridges we had before were the same, or even as good, it wouldn't have achieved the popularity it has. Fact is that it's the most technologically correct cartridge of it's size, configured to optimize ease of feeding, forgiving accuracy nodes, long VLD's at standard mag length with the bearing surface positioned in the neck above where donuts potentially form, and with a shoulder angle conducive to good powder burn with the typical components used. Many cartridges have come close, but they simply do not do all the things the creedmoor does. Not from a technical interior ballistics standpoint. Exterior ballistics, well yes it's nothing new and matched by many. However, for those that have actually owned a bunch of similar cartridges, lesser performance and/or narrower and more finicky accuracy nodes, and various other ergo and technical issues have always been present. Dealt with, but present none the less. The creedmoor is a great family of cartridges, and no amount of internet posturing is going to change that.
Long cases such as the 243win and 260, simply presented a series of issues when loading long vld's at mag length. These eventualities and issues are well documented, and had the 260 been a shorter case... the creedmoor would never have achieved popularity. If the 6.5x47 would have been a touch longer, the creed would never have succeeded. The 6.5x55 is not compatible with a short action. The reality is the creedmoor locked in on and combined the best configuration of all available cartridges to that point.
Cartridge stability and forgiveness is something that is not talked about enough. Older case designs with lots of body taper and shallow shoulder angles certainly worked for us in the past. As handloaders, we can generally tune just about anything if we work hard enough. These new lessons learned from cartridges such as the 6mm BR, Dasher, and Creedmoor, have taught case designers plenty about creating things that work "all" the time, not just in certain situations. Many new cartridges simply have more of the boxes checked than some of the old stand-by's. That doesn't all of a sudden mean you're an idiot for shooting a 260rem or a 220 swift. Just don't be fooled into thinking because you chose those things that there isn't something out there doing the job better, or at least the same with significant benefits to other logistical aspects outside of ballistics.
Regarding 22-250AI vs 22 creed. If one is already happy with 22-250AI, then I see no need to switch. Fire forming is the only drawback... but again, if one is happy, then fine. Ballistically they are within 50fps of each other, or plain identical. Usually the 22 creed will beat the 22-250 in speed by about that much, but it can vary. The 22-250AI is also very forgiving, and in fact it is usually more so, due to its 40 degree shoulder and the fact you could run lapua brass. (this is less so now that you can run lapua in a creed) The sharper shoulder tends to produce more forgiving loads with heavy bullets than the factory creed shoulder, all other things being equal.
Regarding case capacity, if you use 22-250 brass to form 22 creed... then you'll plainly see the 22-250 cases are smaller. Period. You can simply measure a 22-250 and any creed case and find that very same thing. That case capacity difference results in approximately a 25-50fps velocity penalty on average. (all other things being equal) This is not really noticeable in the real world, so can be mostly muted.
That's why the 22 creed is so awesome... it brings 22-250AI performance in a factory headstamp. Only a matter of time before we see factory loaded ammo and full factory support for the cartridge. That is something that is simply not likely to happen for the 22-250AI.
If you have such a strongly negative opinion of the creedmoor, as evidenced by your post, then why are you asking this question? If you're so averse to the fact that so many people love the creedmoor cases, why not just happily continue shooting your 22-250AI? Better still, why don't you do the work yourself? Build two identical rifles, one in 22-250AI, one in 22 creed, and put a barrels worth of rounds down each and then come tell us what you discovered. I'm speaking from a minimum of a couple thousand rounds experience with each of .223, .223AI, 22BR, 22-250, 22-250AI, 22-243, 22-243AI, and 22 Creed. (among a few hundred rounds with others) How do you expect to have any real knowledge if you don't put in the time on the reloading bench and behind the trigger?
If people want to posture and proclaim "A" is better than "B" or vice versa, then they better be able to demonstrate they have a significant batch of detailed experience with BOTH. If not, then it seems to me that people are safe, and would be advised, to completely disregard most of what is said.
I will keep it short. I have shot a 220 Swift for 57 years.
You people waste a lot of money for nothing.
I think most people shooting the 22CM shoot heavy for caliber bullets, which is fine if thats your thing. On the flip side, many of us just go to a larger caliber. Nothing wrong with that either if that is what you prefer. Just because we/us prefer light fast bullets doesn't make us any more wrong than those defending the CM and heavy bullets. As long as you do it on your dime, I could care less one way or the other.
Utahcaller
Active member
When building my 22-250 Ackley I had no interest in a fast twist to shoot the heavy bullets. I too adhere to the “wanna shoot heavy bullets go to a bigger Caliber.” But that’s neither here nor there, it’s a personal opinion. But then again I had been shooting a 1/14 Twist standard 22-250 with 50 and 55 grain bullets. Worked good but wanted a little more bullet with my 22-250AI. So I went with a 12 Twist and have shot the Berger 60 and 64 grain hollowpoints. I have had tremendous luck with them from 0-400 yards, which is where my limits lie. It is a compromise with speed and B.C.
Good Hunting Chad
Good Hunting Chad
orkan
Active member
A 22 creed with 80gr bergers launched at 3500fps has roughly 300 ft/lbs more impact energy at 600yds than a 6.5 creedmoor or 243win with a typical 140gr berger load. Then, due to the sectional density and inherent aspects of long narrow bullets, the .22 cal is significantly more likely to transfer that energy to an animal.
So no, it's not only about personal preferences. It's about the application at hand and the configurations most likely to achieve the best results, while considering all variables present for each particular shooter. Everything from financial, ammo or component accessibility, physical handicaps, desired round count per barrel, host action/rifle compatibility, desired target and engagement distances as well as what terrain and conditions to be encountered, and many many more variables which can easily be accounted for. Well, that is IF the person in charge of making those decisions actually has any real life experience with any of it.
Pretty [beeep] sad that we live in a world where people think they can suggest what others should or need to do, and all they have to justify their opinion is often "well, it's what I like." What you like is indeed good enough for your own choices. That changes significantly on a public forum where opinions will sway others dollars and time.
So no, it's not only about personal preferences. It's about the application at hand and the configurations most likely to achieve the best results, while considering all variables present for each particular shooter. Everything from financial, ammo or component accessibility, physical handicaps, desired round count per barrel, host action/rifle compatibility, desired target and engagement distances as well as what terrain and conditions to be encountered, and many many more variables which can easily be accounted for. Well, that is IF the person in charge of making those decisions actually has any real life experience with any of it.
Pretty [beeep] sad that we live in a world where people think they can suggest what others should or need to do, and all they have to justify their opinion is often "well, it's what I like." What you like is indeed good enough for your own choices. That changes significantly on a public forum where opinions will sway others dollars and time.