.221 Fireball - Effective Range for Coyote
- Thread starter TimberDawwg
- Start date
Fitch
New member
Originally Posted By: Outlawkyote Im not an engineer, cant even spell it...lol
My data in the field is showing a difference though.
I believe you are seeing what you say, I just can't explain why the difference is so large. I can construct a credible scenarion that has them coming out about the same MV - that was in the previous post. Not a problem for anybody but me. I just like to understand things.
Quote:Ive had several chrono's over the last few years and my data is always similar between the chrono's. I purchased my own reamer ( i have two 22-243 middlested reamers now)so Ive got plenty of experience with the cartridge. Ive built barrels for some friends that are also showing +4200fps with the 55gr bullets so I know I dont have some magic vodoo going on. With the 55gr bullets Im running 40gr of rel15 to acheave those velocities and with the 80gr bullets Im running 44gr of rel22. Ive built barrels with everything from 14 twist to 8 twist from various barrel makers including factory punch out jobs. Most barrels are 26-28" and anything shorter in this overbore cartridge would be a waste of powder. Yes, the 22-243middlested and the 22-243 win have aprox the same powder capicity.
As a side note, Ive gotten the 40's to 4600 and the 35gr mef's to 5100fps.
Thats my reasoning behind going with the 22-243 as compared to the plain 243 was because the increase in velocities Ive been seeing.Ive had a couple 243's years ago and never saw the reasoning behind them excep that they can be an accurate little round. The lack of velocities was the reason Ive turned to wildcatting. Oddly even my 6mmx284 barely got the 80gr bullets past 3600fps. I just cant say the 6mm caliber has done much to impress me when my 2506 will get the 85gr bullets to 3600 and the 100gr bullets to 3440fps.Now that I purchase a 2506AI reamer I can get the 85' past 3800fps and the 100' past 3600.
With the various types of barrels, different types of powders and bullets, modeling something like this is prolly not going to be very accurate, only real world data is going to make or brake a load.
Most of the time, the models and my range performance are within a couple hundred fps of each other - usually within 5% which is remarkably accurate. It varies. I've had models that predicted witin 25 fps of what I averaged at the range, other times the model will be a couple hundred fps hi or lo. Larger cases, like .243 and .30-06 tend to model more accurately than small cases like the Hornet.
Simulation modeling, which is what QuickLoad is used for, as well as ballistics software, has it's limits which I'm more familiar with than most. On the other hand, when looking for a cartridge to match up with a hunting mission, one can eliminate a number of false starts by using the models first followed up by range testing. Modeling only takes time, range testing costs money, more these days than it used to. So I do a lot of modeling and then test that which looks most promising.
Quote:
Why your model is showing higher velocities when comparing them..... I dont know dude. Try taking both cartridges and compare them with the powder that each one will be best suited with for that bullet combo.
My model shows higher velocities for 6mm bullets and .223 brass compared with .224 bullets and the same brass. Your suggested approach is what I did with the 6x45 vs .223. I expect that prediction would prove out on the range but I'm not going to build a rifle just to prove it. The is a rather different situation. Apparently, if the relative volumes are just right for a powder, like N560 is in the .22-243, at least in models, all bets are off unless a powder that is as good a match can be found for the other candidate.
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
My data in the field is showing a difference though.
I believe you are seeing what you say, I just can't explain why the difference is so large. I can construct a credible scenarion that has them coming out about the same MV - that was in the previous post. Not a problem for anybody but me. I just like to understand things.
Quote:Ive had several chrono's over the last few years and my data is always similar between the chrono's. I purchased my own reamer ( i have two 22-243 middlested reamers now)so Ive got plenty of experience with the cartridge. Ive built barrels for some friends that are also showing +4200fps with the 55gr bullets so I know I dont have some magic vodoo going on. With the 55gr bullets Im running 40gr of rel15 to acheave those velocities and with the 80gr bullets Im running 44gr of rel22. Ive built barrels with everything from 14 twist to 8 twist from various barrel makers including factory punch out jobs. Most barrels are 26-28" and anything shorter in this overbore cartridge would be a waste of powder. Yes, the 22-243middlested and the 22-243 win have aprox the same powder capicity.
As a side note, Ive gotten the 40's to 4600 and the 35gr mef's to 5100fps.
Thats my reasoning behind going with the 22-243 as compared to the plain 243 was because the increase in velocities Ive been seeing.Ive had a couple 243's years ago and never saw the reasoning behind them excep that they can be an accurate little round. The lack of velocities was the reason Ive turned to wildcatting. Oddly even my 6mmx284 barely got the 80gr bullets past 3600fps. I just cant say the 6mm caliber has done much to impress me when my 2506 will get the 85gr bullets to 3600 and the 100gr bullets to 3440fps.Now that I purchase a 2506AI reamer I can get the 85' past 3800fps and the 100' past 3600.
With the various types of barrels, different types of powders and bullets, modeling something like this is prolly not going to be very accurate, only real world data is going to make or brake a load.
Most of the time, the models and my range performance are within a couple hundred fps of each other - usually within 5% which is remarkably accurate. It varies. I've had models that predicted witin 25 fps of what I averaged at the range, other times the model will be a couple hundred fps hi or lo. Larger cases, like .243 and .30-06 tend to model more accurately than small cases like the Hornet.
Simulation modeling, which is what QuickLoad is used for, as well as ballistics software, has it's limits which I'm more familiar with than most. On the other hand, when looking for a cartridge to match up with a hunting mission, one can eliminate a number of false starts by using the models first followed up by range testing. Modeling only takes time, range testing costs money, more these days than it used to. So I do a lot of modeling and then test that which looks most promising.
Quote:
Why your model is showing higher velocities when comparing them..... I dont know dude. Try taking both cartridges and compare them with the powder that each one will be best suited with for that bullet combo.
My model shows higher velocities for 6mm bullets and .223 brass compared with .224 bullets and the same brass. Your suggested approach is what I did with the 6x45 vs .223. I expect that prediction would prove out on the range but I'm not going to build a rifle just to prove it. The is a rather different situation. Apparently, if the relative volumes are just right for a powder, like N560 is in the .22-243, at least in models, all bets are off unless a powder that is as good a match can be found for the other candidate.
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
Bayou City Boy
New member
Post deleted....
-BCB
-BCB
Outlawkyote
New member
Originally Posted By: Fitch
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
So how can you base your model on anything and know your going about it right if you dont look around to see what other people are using and getting?
Here, I'll make it easier for you, I found more information on the 221FB that shows velocities with the 55gr noslers reaching 3300fps. Its a reputable suplyer of good loading data, I encourage you to click on the link.
http://www.accuratereloading.com/221rfb.html
Yet another location that shows similar loading data.
I dont always beleive what I see on line but I dont disgard all the information either or I would never learn anything of gain new ideas, I try to think outside the box once in a while. I spose I could pick up a cheap 223 barrel and cut it down to a FB to confirm their experiences but I dont see the need to unless Im wanting a 221FB for something other than my own experiences. Although.... A FB might be kinda fun too.
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
So how can you base your model on anything and know your going about it right if you dont look around to see what other people are using and getting?
Here, I'll make it easier for you, I found more information on the 221FB that shows velocities with the 55gr noslers reaching 3300fps. Its a reputable suplyer of good loading data, I encourage you to click on the link.
http://www.accuratereloading.com/221rfb.html
Yet another location that shows similar loading data.
I dont always beleive what I see on line but I dont disgard all the information either or I would never learn anything of gain new ideas, I try to think outside the box once in a while. I spose I could pick up a cheap 223 barrel and cut it down to a FB to confirm their experiences but I dont see the need to unless Im wanting a 221FB for something other than my own experiences. Although.... A FB might be kinda fun too.
Martyn4802
New member
The case capacity of the 223 is 43 grains of water, while the 221 Fireball is 33 grains of water. That has the 221 Fireball be 23% less capacity than the 223. There is NO way the 221 can ever equal the 223 performance at the same pressure level, with the same weight bullets.
Martyn
Martyn
Outlawkyote
New member
Originally Posted By: Martyn4802The case capacity of the 223 is 43 grains of water, while the 221 Fireball is 33 grains of water. That has the 221 Fireball be 23% less capacity than the 223. There is NO way the 221 can ever equal the 223 performance at the same pressure level, with the same weight bullets.
Martyn
Maybe not but it seems to be coming close.
Martyn
Maybe not but it seems to be coming close.
Fitch
New member
Originally Posted By: OutlawkyoteOriginally Posted By: Fitch
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
So how can you base your model on anything and know your going about it right if you dont look around to see what other people are using and getting?
Here, I'll make it easier for you, I found more information on the 221FB that shows velocities with the 55gr noslers reaching 3300fps. Its a reputable suplyer of good loading data, I encourage you to click on the link.
http://www.accuratereloading.com/221rfb.html
Yet another location that shows similar loading data.
I'd be interested in learning the process you went through to decide this was good data. I must be missing something.
I'll share my process FWIW.
My process was to look at it first for completeness of data. It's a nice looking rifle but the WEB page publishes incomplete data. They don't give the length of the cartridge (or the seating depth of the bullet), or the distance off the lands, or the water grain capacity of their fired brass. Both are needed to do an accurate prediction of pressure and velocity. I proceeded with standard values for both.
Second, I modeled the load you suggest should change my mind about web page data using standard values for the missing data and did not find it credible.
The 20.7g load of H4198 is 130.8% of what will fit in the cartridge at the SAAMI COL of 1.83". Even if I set the bullet out to a shank seating depth of 1/8" (not recommended) it is still 117.8% of case capacity. I don't see how they got it in there.
Third I tried reasonable variations of seating the bullet out to the point where it would barely stay in the brass to be chambered and still didn't get good results. I have no basis for estimating fired brass water capacity so stayed with standard values.
Seated out to the point where the bullet barely stays in the cartridge the predicted performance is 3435 fps at 86,540 psi. With out more data like the actual water grain capacity of their fired brass and the col of their cartridge there is no basis to say this is a credible safe load for any rifle but theirs.
Forth, I compared their data to reputable published sources that are available to me and find their data exceeds both by significant margins.
My Nosler manual doesn't have the .221 FB cartridge. If it did I'd certainly look to see if they tried anything like that.
Sierra's max load of H4198 for the 55g BK in the .221 Fireball is 17.4g which is a 109% compressed load. That also models pretty hot at 60,418 psi and 3056 fps but it is within the relm of the possible given QuickLoad's tendancy to read high with some powders in small cases. I'd start low and work carefully up to the Sierra manual load keeping an eye out for pressure signs.
The Hornady manual shows a max charge of 15.8g IMR4198 with their 55g bullets. That's a 105% compressed load. They show 2,700 fps out of a 24" barrel, QuickLoad models the same load at 2,848 fps and 45,593 psi. The Hornady manual looks the most rational to me.
My conclusion, based on this process, absent data that shows their 3300 fps load to be credible (their rifle not blowing up doesn't mean it is a good safe load) I wouldn't hold the suggested WEB load up as a shining example of WEB data wonderfulness, and I wouldn't try it in my rifle if I had one. But that's just me. Others might view the data differently and if they did I'd certainly enjoy reading about their process for vetting it that lead to that conclusion.
Fitch
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
So how can you base your model on anything and know your going about it right if you dont look around to see what other people are using and getting?
Here, I'll make it easier for you, I found more information on the 221FB that shows velocities with the 55gr noslers reaching 3300fps. Its a reputable suplyer of good loading data, I encourage you to click on the link.
http://www.accuratereloading.com/221rfb.html
Yet another location that shows similar loading data.
I'd be interested in learning the process you went through to decide this was good data. I must be missing something.
I'll share my process FWIW.
My process was to look at it first for completeness of data. It's a nice looking rifle but the WEB page publishes incomplete data. They don't give the length of the cartridge (or the seating depth of the bullet), or the distance off the lands, or the water grain capacity of their fired brass. Both are needed to do an accurate prediction of pressure and velocity. I proceeded with standard values for both.
Second, I modeled the load you suggest should change my mind about web page data using standard values for the missing data and did not find it credible.
The 20.7g load of H4198 is 130.8% of what will fit in the cartridge at the SAAMI COL of 1.83". Even if I set the bullet out to a shank seating depth of 1/8" (not recommended) it is still 117.8% of case capacity. I don't see how they got it in there.
Third I tried reasonable variations of seating the bullet out to the point where it would barely stay in the brass to be chambered and still didn't get good results. I have no basis for estimating fired brass water capacity so stayed with standard values.
Seated out to the point where the bullet barely stays in the cartridge the predicted performance is 3435 fps at 86,540 psi. With out more data like the actual water grain capacity of their fired brass and the col of their cartridge there is no basis to say this is a credible safe load for any rifle but theirs.
Forth, I compared their data to reputable published sources that are available to me and find their data exceeds both by significant margins.
My Nosler manual doesn't have the .221 FB cartridge. If it did I'd certainly look to see if they tried anything like that.
Sierra's max load of H4198 for the 55g BK in the .221 Fireball is 17.4g which is a 109% compressed load. That also models pretty hot at 60,418 psi and 3056 fps but it is within the relm of the possible given QuickLoad's tendancy to read high with some powders in small cases. I'd start low and work carefully up to the Sierra manual load keeping an eye out for pressure signs.
The Hornady manual shows a max charge of 15.8g IMR4198 with their 55g bullets. That's a 105% compressed load. They show 2,700 fps out of a 24" barrel, QuickLoad models the same load at 2,848 fps and 45,593 psi. The Hornady manual looks the most rational to me.
My conclusion, based on this process, absent data that shows their 3300 fps load to be credible (their rifle not blowing up doesn't mean it is a good safe load) I wouldn't hold the suggested WEB load up as a shining example of WEB data wonderfulness, and I wouldn't try it in my rifle if I had one. But that's just me. Others might view the data differently and if they did I'd certainly enjoy reading about their process for vetting it that lead to that conclusion.
Fitch
Last edited:
Martyn4802
New member
Fitch,
Good analysis.
Don
Good analysis.
Don
Outlawkyote
New member
FitchSierra's max load of H4198 for the 55g BK in the .221 Fireball is 17.4g which is a 109% compressed load. That also models pretty hot at 60 said:
Last edited:
Outlawkyote
New member
Hey guys, Im not trying to beat this thing to death, Im just intrigued by some of what Im readin is all.
My statement that its just as fast as the 223 was mostly generic meaning that it looks like its capable of higher velocities than one might think and it looks like its riding the heals of the 223.
Is it capable of coyote, sure but maybe not quite as good as the 223 is all. Close I think though
My statement that its just as fast as the 223 was mostly generic meaning that it looks like its capable of higher velocities than one might think and it looks like its riding the heals of the 223.
Is it capable of coyote, sure but maybe not quite as good as the 223 is all. Close I think though
Fitch
New member
Last edited:
Rustydust
Active member
"Frankly, I don't see the sense in pushing a cartridge to limits like the WEB page mentioned earlier seems to promote. If one want's .223 performance, buy a .223 rifle. If one wants .221 FireBall or Hornet performance, buy one of those. There is a cartridge available in a reasonably priced rifle for any varmint/predator game hunted. There is exactly zero reason to push cartridges to be what they weren't designed to be, and there are a lot of reasons not to."
That is some good advice there Fitch. Most times I load my personal varmint rifles down a bit from factory. I do load my .220 Swift up like a Swift on occasion, but that plenty enough for me.
Matter of fact, over the last few years MUCH lighter loads have been a favorite of mine for some kinds of shooting. A week ago I was at the range fireforming some .223 into .223 AI using 12 grains of Bluedot and an 35 grain Vmax bullet. Some of the 5 shot groups were less than a half inch with this mild and accurate load. They don't have to be full throttle or even anywhere close to be fun. Lots of fun even.
That is some good advice there Fitch. Most times I load my personal varmint rifles down a bit from factory. I do load my .220 Swift up like a Swift on occasion, but that plenty enough for me.
Matter of fact, over the last few years MUCH lighter loads have been a favorite of mine for some kinds of shooting. A week ago I was at the range fireforming some .223 into .223 AI using 12 grains of Bluedot and an 35 grain Vmax bullet. Some of the 5 shot groups were less than a half inch with this mild and accurate load. They don't have to be full throttle or even anywhere close to be fun. Lots of fun even.
Outlawkyote
New member
I think I'll agree with you on my last word, thanks for your patients. Im still going to cut down my 223AI barrel and make a 221FB AI out of it just for fun though. I just need to make sure I have enough room for the extra .360" of threads.