220 Swift or 22-250?

[MEHavey]

Just ran the drop tables for a 55gr Sierra SPBT for the Swift, the 22-250, and a nominal 223Rem. Velocities were SAAMI pressure-limited/max. I'll post the actual tables tonight.

Common target was center-aim/impact ±5" (point-blank) on a 10" western "dawg".

Swift's range was 435
22-250 range was 400
223REM range was 310

So to giving the devil his due, the Swift and the 22-250 are neck & neck for practical results within ranging uncertainties. The 223 was distant third.

For equal velocities:
Advantage to the 22-250 in higher efficiency/but at higher pressures
Advantage to the Swift in lower pressures/but lower efficiency

.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Just ran the drop tables for a 55gr Sierra SPBT for the Swift, the 22-250, and a nominal 223Rem. Velocities were SAAMI pressure-limited/max. I'll post the actual tables tonight.

Common target was center-aim/impact ±5" (point-blank) on a 10" western "dawg".

Swift's range was 435
22-250 range was 400
223REM range was 310

So to giving the devil his due, the Swift and the 22-250 are neck & neck for practical results within ranging uncertainties. The 223 was distant third.

For equal velocities:
Advantage to the 22-250 in higher efficiency/but at higher pressures
Advantage to the Swift in lower pressures/but lower efficiency

.

Pretty interesting stuff in this thread. I have not thought about the .220 Swift in years. How much of a gain do you think you are getting in practical and measurable benefit from the .220 Swift reloaded at lower pressures but equal velocity to the .22-250?

 

[Art Eatman]

Lower pressures = better length of time before burning the leade. For prairie-dogging, the Swift would be better.

For "just" coyotes and jackrabbits, there's not enough shooting through the years for it to really matter.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Lower pressures = better length of time before burning the leade. For prairie-dogging, the Swift would be better.



For "just" coyotes and jackrabbits, there's not enough shooting through the years for it to really matter.

There is no meaningful difference in internal capacity betwixt the two

Therefore the same velocity with the same powders in the same bbl length is going to be the same pressure


I am confident this myth of lower pressure at higher velocity stems from the fact the Swift data is based on the old and utterly worthless CUP system of pressure guessing

 

[MEHavey]

Therefore the same velocity with the same powders in the same bbl length is going to be the same pressure

Quickload disagrees with you.

...and short of new pressure tests that use modern transducers instead of copper crusher -- which was outdated
50 years ago -- I'm going to stay with QuickLoad in comparing the two. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3216048

Incidentally, depending on whose books you read and whose brass you use, there is at least 7.5% and as
much as near 12% difference in case capacity between the Swift and the 22-250. Given the real-world non-linearity
of internal ballistics/powder burn rates as pressure builds in an enclosed volume, that is a significant difference.
http://www.kwk.us/cases.html

Someone w/ a 22-250 do a real water measurement on their own cases, I and I will do same on my (yucky)
Norma Swift cases. PM me and I will run the calcs on both for tonight.

Now if you'd said the 22-250AI .....

.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Lower pressures = better length of time before burning the leade. For prairie-dogging, the Swift would be better.

For "just" coyotes and jackrabbits, there's not enough shooting through the years for it to really matter.

Sure, but is that length of time significant and readily measurable for the average hunter? I think if you have a Swift and plenty of cases to reload there really isn't any gain to be had by changing to a .22-250. For someone who is going to buy a rifle I think the convenience of having a .22-250 makes more sense.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Quickload disagrees with you.



...and short of new pressure tests that use modern transducers instead of copper crusher -- which was outdated

50 years ago -- I'm going to stay with QuickLoad in comparing the two.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3216048



Incidentally, there appears to be near 12% difference in case capacity between the Swift and the 22-250.

Given the real-world non-linearity of internal ballistics/powder burn rates as pressure builds in an enclosed volume,

That is a significant difference.

http://www.kwk.us/cases.html

The difference diminishes to as little as 7% depending on who's cases you compare.

And quick load is NOT pressure tested load data. Please refrain from treating its ESTIMATIONS like it is. Actual pressure tested load data does not back up what quick load is getting (see post above)

 

[R.W.Dale]

We need to take some actual case capicity measurements as Google is all over the map

These guys claim only 4 grs difference

http://forum.nosler.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27891

http://forum.nosler.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27227

 

[MachIVshooter]

There is no meaningful difference in internal capacity betwixt the two

Therefore the same velocity with the same powders in the same bbl length is going to be the same pressure


I am confident this myth of lower pressure at higher velocity stems from the fact the Swift data is based on the old and utterly worthless CUP system of pressure guessing

We get it. You don't like the Swift. But using cherry picked data, red herring arguments and ridiculous corollaries to support your position doesn't change what is. The Swift's advantages over the .22-250 are real. So are the detractors. Why not stick to the truth?

 

[R.W.Dale]

We get it. You don't like the Swift. But using cherry picked data, red herring arguments and ridiculous corollaries to support your position doesn't change what is. The Swift's advantages over the .22-250 are real. So are the detractors. Why not stick to the truth?

No I don't like mythology and hyperbole based on 50 yo un tested gun writer BS

What are these advantages in actual PRESSURE TESTED numbers?

 

[murf]

don't listen to all the "nattering nabobs of negativism". the swift is still king of the 22s, and the 22-250 queen. what ever you do, don't trade that pre-64 in for a queen!

the two cartridges basically do the same thing; the swift just does it a bit better. both are excellent and i would not get rid of either one i own.

so, argue all you want; they are both fine cartridges.

murf

 

[MEHavey]

"...actual PRESSURE TESTED..."

Get me some real pressure numbers (newer than 50 years ago) and we'll talk.
Meanwhile, simple comparitive case volumes and parallel internal/external ballistic calculations rule the day.



(...and of course my own empirical hard data w/ a Swift exceeding 4,000 for a 53gr SMK without even breaking a 'soft' case sweat.)

 

[MEHavey]

Over five Norma Swift cases: 49.9 ±0.3 water capacity

Can someone give me (measured) 22-250 capacities ?

 

[R.W.Dale]

Fired or sized?

ETA: the average for five WIN 22-250 cases fired unsized was 45.76grs of h2o

Varget has only been out about 15 years so the pressure tested data for it is reasonably modern even if in cup for both and a good start to make valid comparisons. A far far cry from 50yo data

 

[R.W.Dale]

"Metallic reloading" 3rd edition gives the usable capacity for swift as 49.0

Vs

42.5 for 22-250



Both with 52g hp bullets

 

[redneck2]

ETA: the average for five WIN 22-250 cases fired unsized was 45.76grs of h2o

42.5 for 22-250

interesting that the post above yours shows so much difference, which I guess explains why there can be so much variation in loading manuals

Also note that a 10% increase in powder capacity typically increases velocity by 2 1/2% given equal pressures

 

[jmorris]

I went through the same thing a number of years ago, went with the 22-250 once I had a bunch of free brass.

After I played with it for a few years I traded it off when I was looking for a trencher and another guy was looking for a rifle.

It was the only one I had that wouldn't leave an empty spot in my heart. For what I use .224 bullets for, the .223 has always been plenty.

Still have all the dies, cases and what rounds I had loaded at the time. Never know if I might get another wild hair or the right deal again.

 

[MEHavey]

Using Dale's (unsized) case volumes as well as my own (unsized) for the Swift,
Quickload tells me I can equal the 22-250's max 65,000 psi velocity performance
for a 55gr SPBT for only 57,500 psi. (26" barrel in both cases, and recommended
OAL for that bullet in each cartridge.)

In the end, none of us are taking the position that terminal performance for
either cartridge is all that much different at extended range -- just that the Swift
might actually be more flexible (`Bet nobody ever said that before.)

For 300 & under for small/medium varmints, I'll take one of my (3) AR's.
For much beyond that I'll take (either) the 22-250 or the Swift.

 

[Art Eatman]

I don't have either at the moment, but I've had a couple of each, and reloaded for them. Again, six of one, half-dozen of the other for feral house cats at 300 to 400 yards in my pasture. I doubt that the Recipients of Happiness either knew or cared, in these one-time events.

 

[R.W.Dale]

You could claim it might be more flexable....

Were it not for factory 1-9twist 22-250's

;-)~

 

[Bobson]

Agreed! That's plenty of splatter.

 

[MEHavey]

You could claim it might be more flexable....
Were it not for factory 1-9 twist 22-250's

Did I mention I have a 243 (w/ a 20 power Unertl)
for those "heavy" bullet times?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Since there are two pages of everyone saying how both are very closely matched I won't add to that. (I agree)

The 2 things that would push me into the 22-250 camp:
1. Factory ammo cost and availability for those who don't load their own.

Most importantly and I don't think I've seen it mentioned:
2. How many current rifles are chambered in 220 Swift compared to the almost countless quality rifles available in 22-250?

Don't get me wrong, the Ruger No.1 is chambered in the 220 Swift and that is an extremely high quality rifle. I think there is one Remington Model 700 in 220 Swift but most of the Model 700 variations are chambered in 22-250 and Marlin and Winchester and Savage and Weatherby and Sako and Howa rifles and... and... and... (too much?)

 

[andym79]

I do desire a Ruger 1 in 220 swift, do I desire it enough to parts with a hole heap of dollars, that is the question.

I am a sucker for the odd calibre, I love my 375WIN and 38-40 and am lust after a whole range of the unusual, including the 218, 32-40, 25-35 etc etc I only the pockets were as big as my dreams!

Part of me says get the Ruger 1 220 swift but then another part of me says the 223 does the job, if I want more then I should buy a .243, it would be a more logical choice. For that matter, why not just pull out my 6.5x55?

I am no nearer to deciding which I should get. If I wanted a bolt repeater the 22-250 would be the winner on choice of rifle, I want a single shot though!

The swift appeals to me, not because it is king of speed, but because its less common and because I believe with slow powders I could match 22-250 velocities with lower pressure.

One possibility would be to get a rifle of choice with a standard .473 head size and re-barrel it to 220 Swift, an viable option if the bolt repeater does tickle my fancy.

I am considering this rifle a Browning 78 in 22-250 (I had another 10 photos sent to me) the workmanship looks fantastic! If It was in 220 Swift I think I would have succumb by now.

There really isn't much in it is there!

If I didn't reload it would be a simple choice, but only the 22lr gets factor ammo.

 

[MEHavey]

-delete-