I am looking to get a .223 howa rifle. The dealer has the older one with a 1 in 12 twist along with the newer version in 1 in 9 twist. I was wondering what twist would be more accurate or better? This rifle is the howa 1500 with 20 in heavy fluted barrel. What are the advantages or cons to either twist. Thanks
1 in 9 vs 1 in 12 twist in .223
- Thread starter green1320
- Start date
CatShooter
New member
Originally Posted By: green1320 I am looking to get a .223 howa rifle. The dealer has the older one with a 1 in 12 twist along with the newer version in 1 in 9 twist. I was wondering what twist would be more accurate or better? This rifle is the howa 1500 with 20 in heavy fluted barrel. What are the advantages or cons to either twist. Thanks
There is absolutely no way of knowing. IF you want to shoot bullets up to 60 grain poly tip, the 1:12" will be fine (and would be my choice)... if you want to shoot bullets up to 75 grains, get the 1:9".
There is absolutely no way of knowing. IF you want to shoot bullets up to 60 grain poly tip, the 1:12" will be fine (and would be my choice)... if you want to shoot bullets up to 75 grains, get the 1:9".
OldTurtle
Moderator - Deceased
I have a Rem 700 with a 1/12 twist and it handles 40-60gr rounds with accuracy and my loads...I have two ARs with 1/9 twists and they handle 40-68gr rounds equally well..I've never tried bullets over 68gr due to magazine length restrictions...I do know that the 75gr A-Max are too long for the AR magazines...
Rustydust
Active member
Originally Posted By: CatShooter
There is absolutely no way of knowing. IF you want to shoot bullets up to 60 grain poly tip, the 1:12" will be fine (and would be my choice)... if you want to shoot bullets up to 75 grains, get the 1:9".
Me too. I like the 1/12" twist. Likely you will never need a bullet any heavier than 60 grains with the .223 cartridge. Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion.
There is absolutely no way of knowing. IF you want to shoot bullets up to 60 grain poly tip, the 1:12" will be fine (and would be my choice)... if you want to shoot bullets up to 75 grains, get the 1:9".
Me too. I like the 1/12" twist. Likely you will never need a bullet any heavier than 60 grains with the .223 cartridge. Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion.
CatShooter
New member
Originally Posted By: RustydustOriginally Posted By: CatShooterThere is absolutely no way of knowing. IF you want to shoot bullets up to 60 grain poly tip, the 1:12" will be fine (and would be my choice)... if you want to shoot bullets up to 75 grains, get the 1:9".
Me too. I like the 1/12" twist. Likely you will never need a bullet any heavier than 60 grains with the .223 cartridge. Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion.
Rusty bring up an important point that rarely gets discussed.
"Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion."
Guys talk about using the 75 A-Max's in the 9" twist, but the guns are never fitted with a long throat or longer than standard magazine... so when you load with the 75 A-Max, the loaded cartridge COAL is still 2.30" to 2.35", which means the tail of the bullet is way deep in the case - maybe 1/2 way down in there - and you loose a LOT of velocity.bullet
So with a standard rifle, consider the 60 V-Mas as the biggest bullet that is practical.
Me too. I like the 1/12" twist. Likely you will never need a bullet any heavier than 60 grains with the .223 cartridge. Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion.
Rusty bring up an important point that rarely gets discussed.
"Going much heavier than that takes up too much powder room in my opinion."
Guys talk about using the 75 A-Max's in the 9" twist, but the guns are never fitted with a long throat or longer than standard magazine... so when you load with the 75 A-Max, the loaded cartridge COAL is still 2.30" to 2.35", which means the tail of the bullet is way deep in the case - maybe 1/2 way down in there - and you loose a LOT of velocity.bullet
So with a standard rifle, consider the 60 V-Mas as the biggest bullet that is practical.
coyotekillerNE
New member
Originally Posted By: green1320So if shooting a grn 60 or less the 1in 12 is a better twist? I will be using it as a Vermont only hunting gun.
I wouldn't say better, more like adequate. I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but I don't think it's really possible to over stabilize a bullet, within the context of speaking .223's and the twists most commonly associated with them. Barrel quality will have more to do with accuracy than the twist given either 1 in 9 vs 1 in 12, that is unless you decide to shoot a heavier bullet.
I wouldn't say better, more like adequate. I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but I don't think it's really possible to over stabilize a bullet, within the context of speaking .223's and the twists most commonly associated with them. Barrel quality will have more to do with accuracy than the twist given either 1 in 9 vs 1 in 12, that is unless you decide to shoot a heavier bullet.
rth1959rth
New member
Good answers to a much asked question.
Originally Posted By: coyotekillerNEOriginally Posted By: green1320So if shooting a grn 60 or less the 1in 12 is a better twist? I will be using it as a Vermont only hunting gun.
I wouldn't say better, more like adequate. I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but I don't think it's really possible to over stabilize a bullet, within the context of speaking .223's and the twists most commonly associated with them. Barrel quality will have more to do with accuracy than the twist given either 1 in 9 vs 1 in 12, that is unless you decide to shoot a heavier bullet.
Agree on barrel quality. I've had 1:8, 1:9, and 1:12. They've all shot the 55 grain pills that I prefer equally well. If one twist was any better than the other with the bullets I used, I wasn't good enough to tell.
I wouldn't say better, more like adequate. I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but I don't think it's really possible to over stabilize a bullet, within the context of speaking .223's and the twists most commonly associated with them. Barrel quality will have more to do with accuracy than the twist given either 1 in 9 vs 1 in 12, that is unless you decide to shoot a heavier bullet.
Agree on barrel quality. I've had 1:8, 1:9, and 1:12. They've all shot the 55 grain pills that I prefer equally well. If one twist was any better than the other with the bullets I used, I wasn't good enough to tell.
2muchgun
New member
The only reason to not run a 75 gr A-max in a 1-9 is because it won't stabilize. The last 3 1-9s I had wouldn't . All 3 would/will stabilize a 75gr BTHP.
I run 69s in my 1-9s. 70-75s in my 1-8. But I guess I likely don't need them.
When I hear guys saying nothing over 60gr is "needed" in a 223, and talk of 75 gr A-maxes in 1-9s, it pretty much tells me that those doing the talking are doing just that----talking. And not any of the actual shooting of said cartridge/bullet combos.....
I run 69s in my 1-9s. 70-75s in my 1-8. But I guess I likely don't need them.
When I hear guys saying nothing over 60gr is "needed" in a 223, and talk of 75 gr A-maxes in 1-9s, it pretty much tells me that those doing the talking are doing just that----talking. And not any of the actual shooting of said cartridge/bullet combos.....
kymailman98
New member
I never shoot any bullet over 55 grains in any of my 223's......with one exception. I have some surplus 62 grain stuff that's intended for the when-the-crap-hits-the-fan scenario. I want as much speed as possible out of the 223, because that what works best for me. I limit 223's to coyote sized critters and smaller, and if I want to hunt deer, I use something bigger. Despite the claims one reads on here and other places, the 223 is not an ideal deer cartridge. Yes, people kill lots of deer with it every year, and I have in the past, but there are too many better choices out there for one to use. The 22LR has been used to kill everything from a grizzly bear to an elephant, but that certainly doesn't mean it's ideal for that kind of work.
2muchgun
New member
I'm not sure what "ideal" means. But if you use the right bullet in a 223 it is an UNDOUBTEDLY CONSISTENT deer killer. A 70gr TSX will shoot through a deer length-wise. Even busting shoulder first. Penetration is more than adequate for the task, from any angle.
At one time, the 243 was considered "marginal" on deer by many. Well, I guess those people finally woke up and smelled the backstraps. Now, it seems, the .223 is the one considered marginal. Given today's bullet technology, this is no longer the case, IME. I do not feel "undergunned" when I take a 223 deer hunting. I guess that is because deer die the same way they do when I shoot them with larger calibers. Every time. Proper bullet selection/shot placement is all it takes to kill deer consistently with a .223.....
At one time, the 243 was considered "marginal" on deer by many. Well, I guess those people finally woke up and smelled the backstraps. Now, it seems, the .223 is the one considered marginal. Given today's bullet technology, this is no longer the case, IME. I do not feel "undergunned" when I take a 223 deer hunting. I guess that is because deer die the same way they do when I shoot them with larger calibers. Every time. Proper bullet selection/shot placement is all it takes to kill deer consistently with a .223.....
kymailman98
New member
I fully realize that today's choice in bullets....223 and other calibers....are not "your daddy's bullets". I also remember when the 243 was considered marginal for deer hunting....and in my opinion it still is. You have to realize that not every hunter is a good shot, who is using good equipment, properly sighted in and able to the job. The truth be known, most people who are out there deer hunting, or any other kind of hunting for that matter, are not good shots. I have seen guys shoot at a five gallon bucket at 50 yards, hit it, and proclaim they and their rifle is "shooting good enough" to kill a deer. Maybe so at 50 yards, but not at 150. That's why I don't think the average hunter should be using a 223, or even a 243. A man who knows where to place that bullet, and will not take a bad shot under any circumstance, can get away with using calibers such as the 223, a 22 rimfire, or even that vilified 17HMR. But, once again, most hunters do not know how to do that. I have deer hunted for 50 years, and most years killed at least 2. Most of my deer have been taken with a 270 Winchester. I've also used a 303 British, 35 Rem, 308, 7X57, 6.5X55, 270 WSM, 6.8SPC, 243, and have taken a couple with the 223. Most of my ammo has been handloads, and to the best of my knowledge, I've only hit one deer that I didn't find, and I'm convinced it was not a fatal wound. I'm not bragging about my deer hunting, only telling all that to say that I'm convinced the larger calibers are better deer killers than the smaller ones. Even though, the heaviest deer I've ever seen was killed with a 243, the longest shot I ever witnessed was with a 243, and the 2 best deer "killers" I ever knew both used the 243. That still doesn't mean I think it's the best choice. I plan on using a new deer caliber this year.....a 7-08 Rem. I hear it's a pretty good choice. Just my 2 cents worth.
Last edited:
coyotekillerNE
New member
Originally Posted By: kymailman98I fully realize that today's choice in bullets....223 and other calibers....are not "your daddy's bullets". I also remember when the 243 was considered marginal for deer hunting....and in my opinion. You have to realize that not every hunter is a good shot, who is using good equipment, properly sighted in and able to the job. The truth be known, most people who are out there deer hunting, or any other kind of hunting for that matter, are not good shots. I have seen guys shoot at a five gallon bucket at 50 yards, hit it, and proclaim they and their rifle is "shooting good enough" to kill a deer. Maybe so at 50 yards, but not at 150. That's why I don't think the average hunter should be using a 223, or even a 243. A man who knows where to place that bullet, and will not take a bad shot under any circumstance, can get away with using calibers such as the 223, a 22 rimfire, or even that vilified 17HMR. But, once again, most hunters do not know how to do that. I have deer hunted for 50 years, and most years killed at least 2. Most of my deer have been taken with a 270 Winchester. I've also used a 303 British, 35 Rem, 308, 7X57, 6.5X55, 270 WSM, 6.8SPC, 243, and have taken a couple with the 223. Most of my ammo has been handloads, and to the best of my knowledge, I've only hit one deer that I didn't find, and I'm convinced it was not a fatal wound. I'm not bragging about my deer hunting, only telling all that to say that I'm convinced the larger calibers are better deer killers than the smaller ones. Even though, the heaviest deer I've ever seen was killed with a 243, the longest shot I ever witnessed was with a 243, and the 2 best deer "killers" I ever knew both used the 243. That still doesn't mean I think it's the best choice. I plan on using a new deer caliber this year.....a 7-08 Rem. I hear it's a pretty good choice. Just my 2 cents worth.
So what cartridge is adequate to kill a deer with poor shot placement? I honestly don't understand the logic of your post beyond the fact that larger calibers have more power .
Personal observation, but the guys I see shooting super duper hotrod magnums at deer are typically the ones hitting a five gallon bucket at 50 yards and think they're good to 400; as if somehow all that extra power makes up for their lack of preparation.
I'm a fan of whatever someone can shoot the most accurately.
Just for reference though, let's look at the 7-08 you were talking about compared to a .243. I'm just going off Hornady's website that I ran through Strelok for these numbers so please bear with me.
A 100 gr. Interlock traveling at 2960 fps from a .243 dips below 900ft./lbs of energy(what many say is the minimum energy for deer) somewhere between 500 and 600 yards.
A 139gr. Interlock traveling at 2840 fps from a 7-08 falls below 900ft./lbs of energy between 600-700 yards.
I think I can safely say that 90% of hunters aren't attempting 5-700 yard shots on deer, so I really don't see how having a bullet that's 1mm. larger diameter is going to make up for a mediocre shot at any distance. Of course this is just my opinion. Btw, I love the 7-08 cartridge.
So what cartridge is adequate to kill a deer with poor shot placement? I honestly don't understand the logic of your post beyond the fact that larger calibers have more power .
Personal observation, but the guys I see shooting super duper hotrod magnums at deer are typically the ones hitting a five gallon bucket at 50 yards and think they're good to 400; as if somehow all that extra power makes up for their lack of preparation.
I'm a fan of whatever someone can shoot the most accurately.
Just for reference though, let's look at the 7-08 you were talking about compared to a .243. I'm just going off Hornady's website that I ran through Strelok for these numbers so please bear with me.
A 100 gr. Interlock traveling at 2960 fps from a .243 dips below 900ft./lbs of energy(what many say is the minimum energy for deer) somewhere between 500 and 600 yards.
A 139gr. Interlock traveling at 2840 fps from a 7-08 falls below 900ft./lbs of energy between 600-700 yards.
I think I can safely say that 90% of hunters aren't attempting 5-700 yard shots on deer, so I really don't see how having a bullet that's 1mm. larger diameter is going to make up for a mediocre shot at any distance. Of course this is just my opinion. Btw, I love the 7-08 cartridge.
kymailman98
New member
Originally Posted By: coyotekillerNE
So what cartridge is adequate to kill a deer with poor shot placement? I honestly don't understand the logic of your post beyond the fact that larger calibers have more power .
Personal observation, but the guys I see shooting super duper hotrod magnums at deer are typically the ones hitting a five gallon bucket at 50 yards and think they're good to 400; as if somehow all that extra power makes up for their lack of preparation.
I'm a fan of whatever someone can shoot the most accurately.
Just for reference though, let's look at the 7-08 you were talking about compared to a .243. I'm just going off Hornady's website that I ran through Strelok for these numbers so please bear with me.
A 100 gr. Interlock traveling at 2960 fps from a .243 dips below 900ft./lbs of energy(what many say is the minimum energy for deer) somewhere between 500 and 600 yards.
A 139gr. Interlock traveling at 2840 fps from a 7-08 falls below 900ft./lbs of energy between 600-700 yards.
I think I can safely say that 90% of hunters aren't attempting 5-700 yard shots on deer, so I really don't see how having a bullet that's 1mm. larger diameter is going to make up for a mediocre shot at any distance. Of course this is just my opinion. Btw, I love the 7-08 cartridge.
What I'm trying to say is that I think while an experienced guy like 2muchgun can use the 223 and not have problems, most hunters can't. There is a big difference between a 75 grain 223 and a 130 grain 270, as far as killing power goes. Now, I really don't care what a person hunts with, because that's their right, but I believe you owe it to the animal you are hunting to kill it as quickly and humanely as possible. Personally, I've just seen much better results when something like the 270 was used versus smaller calibers. And, for the record, I'm no fan of magnums.. The only magnum caliber I've ever owned was a 270WSM, and I didn't keep it long. Of course, I do have a 17HMR, but that really don't count. Also, once more, I'm not knocking what someone uses to deer hunt with, just putting in my 2 cents worth on what I think about it. To each, his own.
So what cartridge is adequate to kill a deer with poor shot placement? I honestly don't understand the logic of your post beyond the fact that larger calibers have more power .
Personal observation, but the guys I see shooting super duper hotrod magnums at deer are typically the ones hitting a five gallon bucket at 50 yards and think they're good to 400; as if somehow all that extra power makes up for their lack of preparation.
I'm a fan of whatever someone can shoot the most accurately.
Just for reference though, let's look at the 7-08 you were talking about compared to a .243. I'm just going off Hornady's website that I ran through Strelok for these numbers so please bear with me.
A 100 gr. Interlock traveling at 2960 fps from a .243 dips below 900ft./lbs of energy(what many say is the minimum energy for deer) somewhere between 500 and 600 yards.
A 139gr. Interlock traveling at 2840 fps from a 7-08 falls below 900ft./lbs of energy between 600-700 yards.
I think I can safely say that 90% of hunters aren't attempting 5-700 yard shots on deer, so I really don't see how having a bullet that's 1mm. larger diameter is going to make up for a mediocre shot at any distance. Of course this is just my opinion. Btw, I love the 7-08 cartridge.
What I'm trying to say is that I think while an experienced guy like 2muchgun can use the 223 and not have problems, most hunters can't. There is a big difference between a 75 grain 223 and a 130 grain 270, as far as killing power goes. Now, I really don't care what a person hunts with, because that's their right, but I believe you owe it to the animal you are hunting to kill it as quickly and humanely as possible. Personally, I've just seen much better results when something like the 270 was used versus smaller calibers. And, for the record, I'm no fan of magnums.. The only magnum caliber I've ever owned was a 270WSM, and I didn't keep it long. Of course, I do have a 17HMR, but that really don't count. Also, once more, I'm not knocking what someone uses to deer hunt with, just putting in my 2 cents worth on what I think about it. To each, his own.
The faster twist will give you the option of more bullet choices due to it likely stabilizing the heavier bullets. I shoot 40 grainers out of an 8 twist and a 9 twist for my main prairie dog load, so I know the faster twists shoot light bullets well. In my opinion the greater rpm's tend to help the bullets come apart, expand, upset or however you want to say it, better. This in turn will likely give you better results on smaller game with varmint type bullets, and you can still shoot the longer/heavier bullets.
2muchgun
New member
So basically, you are blaming the shooter and not the cartridge, from what I'm reading.
And as CKNE alluded to, bigger is no excuse for poor shot placement. As with any other cartridge, given proper shot placement, the 223 with a premium bullet can and does kill deer reliably. Are there more "ideal" choices? I don't really know how to answer that, as dead=dead.
The shooter, bullet selection, and shot placement are each more of a factor in successfully harvesting a deer than the diameter of the bullet, IMO.....
And as CKNE alluded to, bigger is no excuse for poor shot placement. As with any other cartridge, given proper shot placement, the 223 with a premium bullet can and does kill deer reliably. Are there more "ideal" choices? I don't really know how to answer that, as dead=dead.
The shooter, bullet selection, and shot placement are each more of a factor in successfully harvesting a deer than the diameter of the bullet, IMO.....