Are my bullets flying sideways??

Our passion is your passion... stalk with us!

User00013

Well-Known Member
. 222 rem 50 grain blitzking I'm not sure if my bullets a going sideways this was about 75 yards I took the target out to near 200 yards but they seemed to just be pretty nice holes

I am also wondering is about 2 inch groups at 200 yards OK for a. 222 rem? They are pretty much the same as the 75 yards group I was just pointing and shooting not hold over or anything?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20200803_200042.jpg
    IMG_20200803_200042.jpg
    382.9 KB · Views: 280

Stalker1962

Well-Known Member
. 222 rem 50 grain blitzking I'm not sure if my bullets a going sideways this was about 75 yards I took the target out to near 200 yards but they seemed to just be pretty nice holes

I am also wondering is about 2 inch groups at 200 yards OK for a. 222 rem? They are pretty much the same as the 75 yards group I was just pointing and shooting not hold over or anything?

That does seem to demonstrate "wobble"...

A 2" group at 200 yards is 1 MOA - not terrible.
 

stalkerboydy

Well-Known Member
. 222 rem 50 grain blitzking I'm not sure if my bullets a going sideways this was about 75 yards I took the target out to near 200 yards but they seemed to just be pretty nice holes

I am also wondering is about 2 inch groups at 200 yards OK for a. 222 rem? They are pretty much the same as the 75 yards group I was just pointing and shooting not hold over or anything?

In my .222 cz527 I'm using the same projectile if i do my bit they shoot a ragged hole at 200 yrd
 

Farmer_J

Well-Known Member
Probably the jacket separating? If they were sideways on impact I’d expect to see a profile of a bullet or a bit more of a hole through the chipboard too.
 

User00013

Well-Known Member
Possible jacket separation, this is the same bullets at 200 yards
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20200803_201501.jpg
    IMG_20200803_201501.jpg
    300.9 KB · Views: 164

Fosbery Holster

Well-Known Member
I think levigsp is correct in his assumption, it looks very much like the chipboard is fragmenting on bullet impact causing the target paper to rip rearwards......l bet if you pressed the paper back to it’s original position you would have the correct round hole.......the projectile usually takes the paper with it through the hole.....
 

WSSX

Well-Known Member
Not sure on the rifle and twist rate, but if it's 1:14 it might not be stabilising the bullet properly. The 50gr Blitzking is pretty long and I think some of the stability calculators suggest it shouldn't work.

I don't speak from experience, just from reading up ahead of reloading for my new toy. From what I understand, with the slower twist rates you might have more success with flat based bullets in the 50gr offerings. Or maybe drop to 40gr.
 

Sonicdmb73

Well-Known Member
Not sure on the rifle and twist rate, but if it's 1:14 it might not be stabilising the bullet properly. The 50gr Blitzking is pretty long and I think some of the stability calculators suggest it shouldn't work.

I don't speak from experience, just from reading up ahead of reloading for my new toy. From what I understand, with the slower twist rates you might have more success with flat based bullets in the 50gr offerings. Or maybe drop to 40gr.
I don’t see why. My 222 is a 1 in 14” twist and it stabilises 52 Amax another quite long bullet, no problem it shoots in the .3’s or less if I do my bit.
I had trouble when I first bought the rifle getting decent groups with any bullet. It turned out that the previous owner had left the moderator on and the barrel was FUBAR. So a good look at the bore could be in order.
222 is a very accurate round and easy to load for.
 

stubear

Well-Known Member
Lousy backing board for your target.


^^ This.

I think the bullets are hitting the board and fragmenting, blowing bits of wood and jacket/core back through the target. You're noticing it more at 75y because the velocity is higher which makes the explosiveness worse. By the time you're out at 200y the bullets have slowed down some so its less explosive.

Generally if your bullets are doing something funky at 75y then the accuracy will get exponentially worse the further out you go - in this case it looks like things have calmed down by 200y which you wouldnt expect if it was an inherent accuracy problem.

2" at 200y is MOA accuracy which is plenty acceptable. The kill zone on a munty is 4" across after all.
 

WSSX

Well-Known Member
I don’t see why. My 222 is a 1 in 14” twist and it stabilises 52 Amax another quite long bullet, no problem it shoots in the .3’s or less if I do my bit.
I had trouble when I first bought the rifle getting decent groups with any bullet. It turned out that the previous owner had left the moderator on and the barrel was FUBAR. So a good look at the bore could be in order.
222 is a very accurate round and easy to load for.

Oh as I say, not personal experience or wild theory - just a thought based on what I've been reading. A-Max is indeed even longer. The stability calculators (JBM etc) are pretty pessimistic about particularly pointy things with boat tails in such rifles.

I think @Edinburgh Rifles has done quite a lot of experimenting on this front and has documented the issues presented by bullet length in 1:14 .222 barrels. A-Max was one that caused a problem if I remember rightly.

Anyway, I'd prefer the general consensus here as I'd like to try the heavier, sleeker bullets in my own at some point...
 

Sonicdmb73

Well-Known Member
^^ This.

I think the bullets are hitting the board and fragmenting, blowing bits of wood and jacket/core back through the target. You're noticing it more at 75y because the velocity is higher which makes the explosiveness worse. By the time you're out at 200y the bullets have slowed down some so its less explosive.

Generally if your bullets are doing something funky at 75y then the accuracy will get exponentially worse the further out you go - in this case it looks like things have calmed down by 200y which you wouldnt expect if it was an inherent accuracy problem.

2" at 200y is MOA accuracy which is plenty acceptable. The kill zone on a munty is 4" across after all.
While I agree with your thoughts re distance making any errors worse.
I would point out that whilst the kill zone is 4”. If your best from bench or prone groups are 2” then they will at least double in the field. The 222 was the darling bench rest round for years. If you can’t get under half a minute with it I would think something needs to improve.
Personally I don’t like any loads that don’t hold 1/2moa. I doubt many people consistently get the same accuracy from sticks and other rests as they do when testing.
 

Sonicdmb73

Well-Known Member
Oh as I say, not personal experience or wild theory - just a thought based on what I've been reading. A-Max is indeed even longer. The stability calculators (JBM etc) are pretty pessimistic about particularly pointy things with boat tails in such rifles.

I think @Edinburgh Rifles has done quite a lot of experimenting on this front and has documented the issues presented by bullet length in 1:14 .222 barrels. A-Max was one that caused a problem if I remember rightly.

Anyway, I'd prefer the general consensus here as I'd like to try the heavier, sleeker bullets in my own at some point...
I would say that the Amax was my most accurate round from my 222. 40 Vmax are not far behind, but I have only beaten that group size with a different rifle. My 20 Tac is in the 1’s and 2’s, but who knows the 222 might be better. But as I have repeatedly got the group size I did I left it alone. I will have to do some more load development as I have run out of the powder and need a REACH compliant load. A tub of N133 beckons hopefully I can come close to or better previous results.
The stability calculators (even Bergers) are a bit suspect because my 20 Tac shoot very small groups with bullets that it says it shouldn’t.
 

8x57

Distinguished Member
Possible jacket separation, this is the same bullets at 200 yards

No offence intended so please don't take it as such but Bol**CKS. Replace the flake board with a decent backing board and give it another try.
Oh and you might have a clearer target to examine if you dumb the C and Shoot target. Not nocking them but the paint does tend to flake off after a few shots so not indicating a clean shot hole.
 

Sonicdmb73

Well-Known Member
No offence intended so please don't take it as such but Bol**CKS. Replace the flake board with a decent backing board and give it another try.
Oh and you might have a clearer target to examine if you dumb the C and Shoot target. Not nocking them but the paint does tend to flake off after a few shots so not indicating a clean shot hole.
I usually use a lightweight foam board the stuff that they use for trade stands (off cuts from a firm that makes them) with a backer of old wallpaper plain side out. Topped off with one or more targets from 6mmbr.com that consist of a diamond with inch squares round it.
Or a piece of plywood as that’s good too.
However the wrong backer can b@lls up your results. I recently wanted to check some new loads. I have some off cuts of the pvc sheet you use in bathrooms etc. I ended up with jagged holes rather than nice neat bullet holes.
I have found the shoot n see’s ok for single holes but if they overlap it can get a bit unclear.
 

User00013

Well-Known Member
I never thought of the chipboard being a problem just goes to show you! I have 40 grains v max I must get some loaded up and see how they shoot, I have noticed the crown on my rifle is quite dirty il give that a clean and see how we go from there
 
1967spud Reloading Supplies Ltd - UK Suppliers for Reloading Equipment supplies, We also stock Bullet Heads and Bullet Cases Guns Cabinets, Night vision and much much more...
Top