22x47Lapua

Originally Posted By: fw707Hey Clancy,
are you shooting “cleaned-up” necks in a barrel chambered with a no-turn reamer?

Jeff, this reamer is pretty tight. It’s supposed to be a no turn, but without a very light shave I cannot slip a bullet in a fired case. I asked Jon if he had a print and he didn’t think so. Fit and function are fine, but after a brief experiment (first ten pieces) I decided to go ahead and clean them up. I’m taking off the high side, but not quite a full shave. As in, there’s a few patches on the average piece that are untouched.

I kinda follow where you were going, and if I’m right I’ll agree that neck turning brass in a generously necked chamber (like my 6.5) would be a real poor use of a person’s time.

There may be a minuscule reduction in runout due to sizing a neck free of high spots, but that’s pure speculation on my part, probably overthought BS, and not really something I’d spend time testing.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CZ527Originally Posted By: fw707Hey Clancy,
are you shooting “cleaned-up” necks in a barrel chambered with a no-turn reamer?

Jeff, this reamer is pretty tight. It’s supposed to be a no turn, but without a very light shave I cannot slip a bullet in a fired case. I asked Jon if he had a print and he didn’t think so. Fit and function are fine, but after a brief experiment (first ten pieces) I decided to go ahead and clean them up. I’m taking off the high side, but not quite a full shave. As in, there’s a few patches on the average piece that are untouched.

I kinda follow where you were going, and if I’m right I’ll agree that neck turning brass in a generously necked chamber (like my 6.5) would be a real poor use of a person’s time.

There may be a minuscule reduction in runout due to sizing a neck free of high spots, but that’s pure speculation on my part, probably overthought BS, and not really something I’d spend time testing.

No, I wasn’t being critical at all. Just wondering about the details.
Looks like it’s well worth your time.
Thanks!
thumbup1.gif
 
CZ, that’s one heck of a good group at 200. I believe I would call that good and be done too. Is that group shot with the 80.5 Bergers you were talking about?
 
It's hard to see a group like that and think..."I need a .22 Creedmoor instead."

To be honest I probably don't need any new rifles. That ain't never stopped me before though. I don't need a lot of things in life but that don't seem to mean much to me.
 
Originally Posted By: CZ527
There may be a minuscule reduction in runout due to sizing a neck free of high spots, but that’s pure speculation on my part, probably overthought BS, and not really something I’d spend time testing.

If you never use an expander (I don't), cleaning them up all the way is worthwhile. I mean, you're turning the necks, it's no extra work, compared to leaving high spots, so why leave any high spots? What's the point of turning them in the first place? Certainly not to intentionally leave neck thickness variation? Without an expander any neck eccentricity gets transferred almost directly to bullet TIR. Which, is the devil. I think getting rid of that is generally the whole point of turning necks.

When I go to the trouble to turn necks, even for a factory chamber, I'm not going to waste that time by halfazzing it. If just cleaning them up, I won't take a cut more than about .001 deep to do it and any necks that don't clean up 100% just get tossed in the cull pile. I used to sort brass by neck thickness variation, before turning, but I find just putting about .001 on the cutter and tossing the ones that don't clean up all the way is a lot faster and easier sorting method. If I'm going to the trouble of neck turning, brass that doesn't clean up 100% or requires more than about a .001 cut to get there, just doesn't belong in the program at all. A batch of brass that doesn't mostly clean up 100% like that, isn't worth building a rifle around.

It's different for everybody. Just comes down to why are you bothering to turn necks in the first place. There has to be some reason. My reason is usually to make getting the best concentricity I can easy going forward.. Just a part of my over all process approach and of little value as a stand alone operation. It's just a little time spent upfront getting that brass ready for its service life which gets paid back many times over in speed and convenience loading it later.

To each his own though. Some guys will gladly spend all kinds of effort making brass shiny, spending time on that every loading cycle, and laugh at guys like me who spend a small amount of effort, only once, making brass more consistent and easy to load for its useful life. Like I said, to each his own...

- DAA
 
Originally Posted By: McGrawCZ, that’s one heck of a good group at 200. I believe I would call that good and be done too. Is that group shot with the 80.5 Bergers you were talking about?

Yes sir
 
Originally Posted By: OKRattlerIt's hard to see a group like that and think..."I need a .22 Creedmoor instead."

Ahhh, the Creedmoor will do the same thing.
 
Originally Posted By: CZ527Originally Posted By: OKRattlerIt's hard to see a group like that and think..."I need a .22 Creedmoor instead."

Ahhh, the Creedmoor will do the same thing.
I'm sure it's plenty accurate enough. I just need to figure out whether I'm gonna just buy one or have my own built. I'm leaning towards having one built.
 
This weekend’s hunt was chock-full of carnage. I have decided to either back the load down or switch to a smaller bullet. Rather than to give up speed, I’ll likely swap to a lighter bullet and maybe use Varget instead of H4350.

I’ve never said this before, but the 22x47 with an 80.5 Berger is too much.

Distances ranged from 40-496 yards, exits like cantaloupes.
 
Originally Posted By: CZ527This weekend’s hunt was chock-full of carnage. I have decided to either back the load down or switch to a smaller bullet. Rather than to give up speed, I’ll likely swap to a lighter bullet and maybe use Varget instead of H4350.

I’ve never said this before, but the 22x47 with an 80.5 Berger is too much.

Distances ranged from 40-496 yards, exits like cantaloupes.
That's one reason I've thought about switching to something different for contest and such. I kinda want something that'll leave an exit like that as long as they don't get up dragging innards. I've hit too many coyotes on the run that got up and took off with the 22-250. They're always a mess anyways so I figure,why not just shoot plum through them and kill them with one shot instead of two? Most of the hunts I enter I don't get to keep what I shoot anyways. It's hard to find that bullet that packs enough punch to dump one running straight away but still fur friendly enough you don't have a huge hole in them. Seems like there's really no happy medium. For varmint hunts and things like that I don't mind blowing stuff up as much unless they're going by weight. Then I don't really want things to be missing body parts.

 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: OKRattlerOriginally Posted By: CZ527This weekend’s hunt was chock-full of carnage. I have decided to either back the load down or switch to a smaller bullet. Rather than to give up speed, I’ll likely swap to a lighter bullet and maybe use Varget instead of H4350.

I’ve never said this before, but the 22x47 with an 80.5 Berger is too much.

Distances ranged from 40-496 yards, exits like cantaloupes.
That's one reason I've thought about switching to something different for contest and such. I kinda want something that'll leave an exit like that as long as they don't get up dragging innards. I've hit too many coyotes on the run that got up and took off with the 22-250. They're always a mess anyways so I figure,why not just shoot plum through them and kill them with one shot instead of two? Most of the hunts I enter I don't get to keep what I shoot anyways. It's hard to find that bullet that packs enough punch to dump one running straight away but still fur friendly enough you don't have a huge hole in them. Seems like there's really no happy medium. For varmint hunts and things like that I don't mind blowing stuff up as much unless they're going by weight. Then I don't really want things to be missing body parts.






The rpm of a fast twist will rip hide period. Sexy bullets shoot far though, but in a call situation, by its very nature, shots are close to closer.

To save a hide at close range, reduce bullet weight as well as bullet rpm and velocity. At long range the heavy bullets being then at low velocity and solid construction pencils through. Different story though with them at close range.
 
Smokeless that’s not bad advice at all.

But, contrary to conventional wisdom, the two farthest shots yesterday left the two biggest holes. An anomaly, I’m sure.
 
Originally Posted By: CZ527Smokeless that’s not bad advice at all.

But, contrary to conventional wisdom, the two farthest shots yesterday left the two biggest holes. An anomaly, I’m sure.


Can't count the ones you don't harvest. Dead is dead. Their is no deader.
 
I shot at another one at 805. Elevation was good, missed the wind about 1 minute. That’s kinda our policy.... doesn’t matter if they’re running at 50 yards or standing still at 1,000.... ya [beeep] well better try and kill them or you won’t hunt with us long. You can’t hit what you don’t shoot at.
 
Originally Posted By: CZ527I shot at another one at 805. Elevation was good, missed the wind about 1 minute. That’s kinda our policy.... doesn’t matter if they’re running at 50 yards or standing still at 1,000.... ya [beeep] well better try and kill them or you won’t hunt with us long. You can’t hit what you don’t shoot at.


That's fact(((((((
Stay after 'em....
 
Back
Top