Wanting a 223, and prefering a bolt gun.

[cwlongshot]

CW...just to be clear, I wasn't disagreeing with you.  I just wanted to elaborate in case someone under-informed or wrong informed stumbles on the thread.

Roger Copy. Kudos. 

CW

[cwlongshot]

Today, I again put all three in my hands... first the Ruger and the Savage and the Savage simply feels better... Its stock is a bit long, but otherwise its my favorite... then to another shop where they have some MVP's the Patrol and the Predator as well as Hornet's in the M25. well I have to say while the M25 still feels best, the MVP is growing on me as side by side I like it more each time I handle it and while its bolt doesn't compare to either the Ruger's fat bolt small lug or the Savage better support and three lugs, its not really much if at all worse then any in its class.

Talking with sales in both stores and none have returned for repair and neither has seen anyone looking to sell or get traded in.

I need to see if I can but the syn stock from Mossberg separately... I like lams but its added weight and not quite as durability is still a neg to me.

BOTH stores had 10rnd mags form 12 - 19$  the Savage and Rugers are each 30$+.

If I bought today... I would have bought the Mossberg.

CW

[cwlongshot]

I think I have pretty much decided on this model...  The twist is what I like.. I was concerned with the CZ and 1:12.
Today I caught up on some recorded shows... 3hree hours of Dead dog walking in particular and watching the use of the MVP pretty much did it.  That's and the 12$ mag costs.

Most guys will never even make use of these faster twist rates. But I like a 60-65G slug and the excellent 65g Sierra in particular. The Hornady 60g HP has always been a favorite in my 22-250 of years ago. My top 223 load is 322 powder and a 53g Sierra match sparked with a BR4 primer. Hope it shoots well in the mossy. I have a H&R SS that is a pin driver with 2015 powder and a 52g HP. So I have a few of those loaded too.

I will try my best to hold off on the purchase till after VK first week of June... If I can hold off. :eek:::


Watch for the pics.

CW

[sstewart]

Why not a Remington 700? There are lots of chassis systems and all kinds of fun things for that rifle.

[cwlongshot]

Why not a Remington 700? There are lots of chassis systems and all kinds of fun things for that rifle.

Well, as I said I would buy a old one in a NY Minute. New ones, I would not take as a gift. Its much too costly to convers a blind or hinged magazine to a removable... I could buy a second Mossberg and have change for coffee!

Simple English, they have become crap. The really sorry thing is they did it to them selves and thought the public would never know. H&R is gone, Marlin also turned to crap for the same reasons. Freedom group is not about guns, they are a for profit company. We all would like a company that makes us rich. I for one would NOT want that taking advantage of anyone by producing second rate, sub quality products. They are NOT a quality product company.

CW

[DenStinett]

Remember; the .223 will run thru a 5.56 chamber, but the 5.56 will not run in a .223 chamber

That's HOGWASH!  Dimentions of the two are IDENTHCAL IN EVERY WAY.

THE SINGLE DIFFERENCE is in the was the govt measures pressure compared to all other calibers. It's measured forward of the shoulder, ( After peak pressure curve) the standard measures are in the body of the case. This results in the 5.56 is higher pressured when measured traditionally.

Problems occurs in lower quality firearms that cannot withstand these increased pressures. Different is up to 15K so it can be substantial.

There is MUCH misinformation out there.
CW

You can believe what you'd like
It's your Firearm
BUT, it isn't true that they are the same / "IDENTHCAL IN EVERY WAY" (and I'm sure you mean identical)
The NATO Round is loaded to an Overall Length of 2.26 inch
Where as the .223 is loaded to an Overall Length of 2.10 inch
My reference comes from page 541, 13th Edition, Cartridges of the World
Also:
If the Chambers ARE the same, why are there two different (CLYMER) Finish Reamers ?
http://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-tools-supplies/barrel-tools/reamers/centerfire-reamers/finisher-style-reamer-fits-5-56-nato-sku184050004-17643-42596.aspx?cm_mmc=cse-_-Itwine-_-become-_-184050004-184050005-11507&gdftrk=gdfV21820_a_7c187_a_7c829_a_7c184050004_d_184050005_d_11507

Ask any reparable Gunsmith

[sqlbullet]

Where as the .223 is loaded to an Overall Length of 2.10 inch
My reference comes from page 541, 13th Edition, Cartridges of the World

I am gonna need to see a scan of that page...Every loading manual I have lists 223 Remington as COAL of 2.26 (57.40 mm)

Here is the drawing from loaddata.com:



The cartridges are different, but it is a minute difference in the radius of the shoulders.

As far as reamers, yes, the chambers are different.  Covered in my post on the previous page.

...

Cartridge dimensions are very close, but not quite the same.  There are small differences in the r1 and r2 radius at the shoulder.  Also, the 223 holds and additional .3 grains of water, due to thicker case walls on the 5.56. Drawings in the reference links below.

Chamber dimensions again are very close, but not the same.  Specifically the leade in the 223 (.085") is .077" shorter than the leade in the 5.56 (.162").  It is generally accepted, although subject to some debate, that the problems with pressure are related to the leade.

References are found here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington

...

[DenStinett]

I am gonna need to see a scan of that page...

Also, watch these vids:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG5jAJx7mr4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9usnUq1iKU
The Vid he mentioned above:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iE7E7O4vTM

Test this for yourself
Mic your 5.56 Round's OAL
Take a Bolt Action, chambered in .223 and chamber the 5.56 NATO
Mic the Round again and see just how much setback the shorter throat seated the Bullet
And here is where the issue lies
The added compression of the Powder after the setback in your Bolt Action Rifle

Not sure why I bothered to get myself involved in this....I don't even shoot the Round
Guess I don't want people to get injured, not having ALL the proper information

[rw]

It takes the same exact effort (barely any) to chamber and close the bolt on a 556 and a 223 in my savage... The 556 was a hotter loading than i normally shot in the gun and a 55 grain bullet. And it does not like light bullets so it was quite a bit off from my set zero.
I dont have anymore 556 or i would shoot a quick video showing it.

[Pinsnscrews]

Wow...I have a PDF copy of the 8th Edition (1997) that has the same information.

[sqlbullet]

I hate to break this to cartridges of the world 8th and 13th editions, but SAAMI official drawings don't agree with them:

http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc_drawings/Rifle/223%20Remington.pdf

The drawing very clearly shows 2.125" as a minimum and 2.260" as a maximum.

Further, I would ask that anyone reading this thread that wonders what the actual COAL is just google that question.  I can't find a single reference other than this one book that lists 2.100" as the COAL. 

I also re-checked my shelf.  Hornady 7th lists 2.250" for service rifle 223, and 2.260" for 223.  Lee lists 2.260".  Speer 13 lists one load below 2.100" at 2.060" for the 40 grain.  All others are above length.

DenStinett, I am gonna say this meaning no offense.  Every piece of cross reference I can find, including the official SAAMI drawings, says that the information in your scan is wrong.  You also suggest a test, but admit you have no 223 rifles in which to perform the test.  All my 223 guns have Wylde chambers to be compatible with both cartridges, so I can't either.  But I also can't find any information that suggests anyone else is having this issue.  RW's test also failed to show those results.

It sure looks to me like the information on a 2.100" COAL for 223 Remington is the information that is wrong.

[DenStinett]

Well, I still stand by the fact that there are (three) different chamberings for these cartridges
Here's a drawing showing all three (and the differences in); .223 Rem, 5.56 NATO and .223 Wylde:


It is the Chambering of the longer OAL Rounds in the shorter throated Chamber of the  .223 Rem that can cause the higher pressure issues
You yourself say you have the Wylde to handle "both" Cartridges
If there's no difference, why did you bother ?

I know Wikipedia isn't the end-all be-all, but it's still an interesting read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington

As I said:
I don't (as of yet) shoot the round, haven't the need at this time
But you have to admit, there ARE tons of posts / articles talking about over pressure, when shooting the 5.56 NATO in Bolt Guns chambered in .223 Rem
It follows that the shorter throat of the .223 Rem is the cause
So I stand by my original post:
The .223 Rem will run (safely) in the 5.56 Chamber where the 5.56 NATO maybe unsafe in the .223

[bandit3]

I like the Ruger American. I don't think you can beat it for the money, it'd be hard to beat for double the money. I have the compact .308 and the Predator .223. They are excellent shooting guns.

[sqlbullet]

I have NEVER said there were no differences.  In fact, I posted at some length about the differences.

I commented on the differences in cartridges:  Water capacity and shoulder radius

I commented on the differences in chamber:  The .223 has a shorter leade by .077"

I commented on the differences in pressure testing methodology between SAAMI, CIP and EPVAT

I don't know why you think I am saying there is no difference.  I am saying there is.

The only point of contention I have is the assertion, based on  Cartridges of the World 13th edition, that the MAX COAL for 223 Remington is 2.100".  This information is wrong.  And I provided a link to a SAAMI document to back up my claim.

I am aware enough of these differences that I always buy 223 Wylde when I have a choice.

And finally, regarding this statement:

So I stand by my original post:
The .223 Rem will run (safely) in the 5.56 Chamber where the 5.56 NATO maybe unsafe in the .223

Please compare to my post:

So, to be safe, don't run 5.56 commercial ammo in a 223 Remington chamber.

Sure seems like we agree.

[DenStinett]

OK, one or two sentences from your post support what I've said from the beginning
But I have been pushed to show proof, after proof of my OP
I give the references and get bitch slapped each time
Guess I should have just stayed out of it