|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 3, 2022 16:06:42 GMT -7
To the regular members here it will be no surprise for me to say I like cast 22 caliber bullets especially in the smaller cases. Because of the shear pleasure I find in shooting the tiny castings we have a good selection of small case 22 caliber chambered rifles to choose from here at BS acres such as the ever so enjoyable senior to all smokeless powder varmint rounds the 22 hornet as well as a 221 fire ball, 218 Bee, and even a well mannered little 22 Squirrel and 22 Cooper. Way back when the 22 hornet was just out of larva stage all 22 caliber rifles shooting the standard .223" or .224" bullets weather center fire or rim fire used the then standard rifling twist rate of one turn in 16 inches. I am not sure about the hot Winchester offering from 1935 in the 220 Swift but since it came out at that time with a 46 grain bullet which was a pretty standard weight for the 22 Hornet it very likely could have first come out with a 1/16" twist. Since its goal was speed the 1/16" twist would have given higher velocity than any other faster twist at equal chamber pressures so it would make sense that the Winchester thinking caps would couple that tiny 46gn bullet with a twist that would yield the highest velocity with more than adiquate rotational stability. Interestingly though somewhere about the time Remington put their brand on the 22- 4000 Gebbie or the 22-250 as they chose to call it in 1967 the varmint hunters began to look at the hot 22's differently and as is so often the case their musings with faster twists and heavier bullets influenced the industry to also move in that direction and so by the time the 22-250 was no longer a bastard child somehow almost unnoticed the standard changes from 1/16" to 1/14" and there stayed for quite some time about three decades before military match shooters started to get on the band wagon and requestied from the industry faster twists and higher BC bullets. That trend has not yet stopped with 22's now available in 100+ grain bullets and 1/6" twist barrels. I mention these progressions to kind of set the background of what I am here to discuss which is cast 22 caliber bullets and in particular a cast bullet design that may well be the oldest of all designs ever offered for standard .223/.224" groove barrels in 22 center fire rifles. The bullet of which I speak is the Lyman # 225415. When this design first came out offered by the Ideal mold company the standard twist rate for 22 caliber as has been mentioned here was 1/16". But since this design has been in constant production through the transition of standard 22 cal twist rate from 1/16" to 1/14" it seems that at some point when that transition came about and the Ideal company became the Lyman company that their oldest 22 caliber design transitioned as well. Because my favorite 22 Hornet rifle has a twist rate of 1/16" it can be quite finicky about the length of bullet it will tolerate. Somewhere about 1990 I acquired a new production Lyman mold for their # 225415 and it has proven to be a wonderfully accurate bullet in my rifles with a 1/14" twist rate. My 22 Hornet though with its 1/16" twist is a whole nother story doing almost good occasionally but mostly unacceptable with the Lyman version of the 225415. I had heard whispered rumors about the early Ideal version of the 225415 being proportioned for the standard twist rate at the time of its introduction the 1/16" twist but have never spoken to anyone that had first hand knowledge that this was indeed the case or let alone had one mold from each era to use to make definite comparisons, until now. I am thrilled to say that I have just recently acquired (today) a very early Ideal version of the #225415 bullet design. Now I can say without doubt that yes the bullet design transitioned right along with the standard rifling twist rate in 22 caliber. I am more than a wee bit excited and ever so anxious to try the original version of this design in my 22 Hornet with 1/16" twist. Today for an honest comparison I cast some from each mold from the same pot of alloy. The numbers are as follows, Lyman bullet length---.6015' as cast bullet weight---52 grain Ideal bullet length---.5418" as cast bullet weight---48 grain In a side by side comparison the mid section of both bullets is exactly the same having the proportionately the same configuration of drive bands and lube grooves. The difference is at both ends where the Lyman design has a slightly longer nose but also has a gas check shank twice as long as on the Ideal design. The double length gas check shank effectively gives the Lyman design an extra lube groove because the gas check only covers half of the shank and the rest is filled with lube when sized, lubed, and gas checked. This may all seem like mindless drivel to most reading this but it has been something I yearned to get to the heart of for many decades. Now I feel so fulfilled like I want to kick back and have a smoke. Lord willing I will soon find out if my vintage 22 Hornet feels the same way about this new old mold as I do. I am pretty sure we will both be mutually satisfied. I better bring that pack of smokes along to the range.   |
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 4, 2022 3:41:50 GMT -7
That is quit a bit of length difference.... 10% !
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 4, 2022 7:30:02 GMT -7
Should make all the difference in the world in my 1/16" twist 22 Hornet. It has always puzzled me when looking through my collection of old load data books where my old Lyman/Ideal books from the 30's show the #225415 as a 49 grain bullet and my more recent Lyman books show it as a 55 grain bullet. I weighed a 22 gas check at 1.5 grain so added to the as cast bullet weights that is pretty close to what I have shown. To my way of thinking they are two different bullets and I would like to see Lyman offer both designs. At the very least at least make some mention of the difference in their load data. The older books do seem to show heavier loads and I have read that it is attributed to thinner vintage brass but perhaps not so much as to the different bullet weight. It is possible that no one at Lyman even knows there is a difference since the change must be about 50+ years old.
I am glad that at least for myself I have settled the mystery. It is also quite pleasing that the mold works splendidly dropping well filled castings almost effortlessly with just a very light tap on the hinge. Even though it is a single cavity since it runs so smoothly I was able to easily run at 7 to 8 cycles per minute which translates to about 450 bullets per hour. I was able to slightly better that production rate with my double cavity Lyman mold but not significantly because the double cavity had about a two to three second longer sprue time.
So in conclusion then for our readers having vintage 22 caliber rifles in 22 Hornet or 218 Bee or whatever having a 1/16" twist rifling pitch if buying a mold for your rifle forgo the Lyman version and hunt for an older Ideal mold for their #225415 design. I do see them quite often on Ebay but until now have just wondered about the possible difference. My general opinion was I cant afford another one of the same thing but the little mystery bug still scratched away at the back of mt mind. This time the old single cavity Ideal mold garnered little interest from others so the slight cost was worth the gamble of both being the same or more importantly perhaps not.
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 4, 2022 9:15:02 GMT -7
I would also think the 49 grain would work in most any twist rate .22 CF rifle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 4, 2022 9:46:42 GMT -7
That is true but there is a limit. As the rifling pitch gets steeper the torque on the bullet is greater. With a bullet with short bearing surface at some point the torque will exceed the shear strength of the alloy so accuracy will suffer. Consider that there are now 22 caliber barrels being rifled with a 1/6" twist for 100+ grain bullets and you get an idea of the increased torque with the faster twist. There is a kind of balance there between twist, rotational velocity, and bullet bearing length. The faster twist is required with longer bullets to maintain rotational stability and at the same time the greater bearing surface of the longer bullet is required to handle the increased torque of the faster twist.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 5, 2022 10:55:32 GMT -7
I thought it might be interesting to try and track the transition of design of the #225415 through the small collection of Ideal and Lyman books that I have available. In practice though it seems elusive because in order of copyright dates its listed weight seems to go back and fourth instead on a progression of increased weight with time. I will list here from the books I have in order of date.
Ideal # 38 from 1951 --- # 225415 @ 48gn
Ideal # 39 from 1953 @ 48gn
Ideal # 40 from 1955 @ 48gn
Lyman # 41 from 1957 @ 48gn
Lyman # 42 from 1960 @ 48gn
Lyman missing pages number and date unknown @ 48gn
Lyman data book from 1970 @ 50gn note first change
Lyman cast bullet hand book first edition from 1973 @ 50gn
Lyman cast bullet hand book third edition from 1980 @ 45gn INTERESTING !!!
Lyman # 49 data book from 2008 @ 55gn
Lyman cast bullet hand book 4th edition from 2010 @ 55gn
Lyman 50th edition data book from 2018 @ 55gn
I have to wonder about the drop in weight from 50gn to 45 gn from 1973 to 1980. I can only surmise that the person doing the testing unknowingly used an early mold for his testing which put his data a bit out of cynic.
As for the data itself changing it goes from 10.5gn of 2400 max down to 8gn max for the later data with the heavier version of #225415. So was the data change due to thinner vintage brass or increased bullet weight?
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 5, 2022 12:14:57 GMT -7
Old Manuals to me are well worth the investment.... Most are packed with all sorts of info that helps with loading for rifles back then.
I had never considered following the change in molds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 5, 2022 13:40:18 GMT -7
In my 1947 re-print of Philip B. Sharps original 1937 "" Complete Guide To Handloading "" published by The Funk & Wagnalls company of New York and London in the load data for the 22 Hornet it lists an Ideal 48 grain bullet. It does not give the bullet number but I think it safe to assume it to be the Ideal # 225415.
Each time I open this book I never tire of reading its dedication to Harry M. Pope. I have read that the development of the 357 magnum cartridge as being attributed to Elmer Keith but in reading through this book it is quite clear that it was Phill Sharpe that did the developmental work on the then to coin a phrase "" the most powerful handgun cartridge in the world."" Though Harry Callihan may not be overly impressed with the 357 mag I am and somehow the revolver shooting fraternity would seem incomplete without it. It is the magnum handgun round I shoot the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 6, 2022 5:34:07 GMT -7
I will agree the caliber 357 mag with properly tuned loads in an accurate revolver will be very accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 7, 2022 7:51:17 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 7, 2022 15:13:45 GMT -7
Very obvious differences with those. But as you wrote, with changes in barrels / calibers new designs to sell new styles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 7, 2022 21:34:17 GMT -7
That is exactly the point of this that the Lyman #225415 post about 1965 is a new style/design quite different from the pre 1965 #225415. Designating them both with the same ID number has caused some confusion during the near century #225415 has been in constant production.
|
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Nov 7, 2022 21:51:25 GMT -7
I just caught your line about sitting back to have a smoke.
Curious if that was something you actually do. I’ve picked up cigar smoking in the last couple years and enjoy relaxing in the shop with a cigar while working on projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 8, 2022 6:33:31 GMT -7
It was a metaphor referring to that moment of relaxation after satisfaction often depicted by having a smoke. I do occasionally after the work day is done enjoy relaxing in my chair by the wood stove with a pipe and good tobacco.
|
|
|
|
Post by todddoyka on Nov 8, 2022 9:58:30 GMT -7
i used to have a Backwoods cigar while sitting by an outdoor fire. of course, in my hand was a bottle of Straub beer. both of which, i gave up......  |
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 19, 2022 14:43:05 GMT -7
Today I finally got to try some of the Ideal # 225415 bullets in my Springfield 22 hornet. This was not really an official test session because it was as much a test of a new powder as for the bullet. Its been really cold but I wanted to try these quickly and informally just to see if the powder and bullet might show me anything that would indicate potential for accuracy. Well in short they did show great potential that needs explored further.
As is I only fired two three shot groups at 100 yards resting on a frozen rolled up pair of old jeans. Both groups clustered tightly and repeated an apparent pattern of two shots nearly touching and one at maybe 3/4" out.
The powder I am testing is perhaps a wee bit too slow for the 22 hornet but certainly in the ball park but perhaps better suited to heavier bullets. The powder is from Accurate powders and is named LT-30 its intended use being for the 300 BO and other small case cartridges. It is placed next to another Accurate powder on the burn rate chart # 1680 with 1680 being # 64 and LT-30 # 65 on the chart. The big difference is that #1680 is a ball powder where as LT-30 is a small grain extruded powder looking much like Alliant 2400.
The reason I am testing this powder is to see if it is a suitable replacement for still another Accurate powder # 5744 which by that way is # 63 on the burn rate chart. Since they are so close on the burn rate chart LT-30 at # 65 and # 5744 at # 63 and both being extruded powders from Accurate powders my hope was to learn that LT-30 which is readily available may be a good replacement for 5744 which seems non existent now that Hodgdons owns Accurate powders. BTW the LT-30 container has Accurate powders on the front label but also has Hodgdons on the side label.
OK so with that little background my goal is clear and the 22 hornet is the very first test done with this powder. Since I have also wanted to at least try some of the Ideal 225415 bullets it seemed like a good pairing for a two birds with one stone thingy.
So it would seem that in this application the LT-30 performs very much like 1680 in the 22 hornet where the burn rate is a wee bit too slow but with a slightly compressed charge and a hot primer works pretty darn good. If anyone is interested I used 11gn of LT-30 powder with a CCI # 450 small rifle magnum primer. The rifles report was a pleasant consistent sharp crack indicating a good consistent burn with very little powder residue left in the barrel all good signs of potential accuracy. My old Accurate powder manual shows 1680 with a 45gn lead bullet at 1850 with a charge weight of 10.4gn and 2050 with a charge weight is 11.5gn. Using that to extrapolate velocity somewhere around 1950 is likely a good guess.
Next I intend to try the LT-30 powder in the application that made 5744 so popular in large volume BPC type cases. The 5744 is in high demand but the folks at Hodgdons seem to not be listening, or just maybe they are and leaving it up to us to figure out. So that is my quest with this powder but as good fortune would have it it has earned a place in my load data archives for use in the 22 hornet with the Ideal # 225415 bullet. Life is good !
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 21, 2022 3:40:27 GMT -7
Well I will have to roust up some LT-30 and give it a try. Thank you for all this good info !
Seen any meals on the hoof yet ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Nov 21, 2022 7:51:11 GMT -7
Brother Mike
I hope to soon start another thread about some new powders that may well be replacements for older powders. I think the industry stays focused on newer shooters than older ones, makes sense for business. Each new generation seems to more readily accept the new over what grandpa used.
Yesterday even though our temps are in single digit I tried the LT-30 in a 50-90 a cartridge that well represents large volume BPC type cases. The results were positive which I hope to outline in a new thread as I would prefer to not drift that far off topic in this thread. Oh and BTW two new powders I hope to test will be candidates to replace 2400 one of these being so new it is not even listed in Hodgdons 2022 manual. Keep watching!
Oh yea I almost forgot, the reapers roost produced once again a fine specimen of WT buck. It was only about a 150 yard drag to the skinning gambrel. Also a friend/customer from over the divide on the Idaho side brought me half an elk yesterday. He has a large ranch and gets depredation permits for the thousands of elk that winter on his ranch. When he heard my elk hunt went bust he decided to do something about it. Life is good, God is good !
|
|
|
|
Post by shootist---Gary on Nov 21, 2022 10:33:29 GMT -7
Daniel, I'm glad that you were able to get a deer, & also thru the kindness of your friend, your family will have many good nourishing meals this winter. I am getting my stuff around to go WTD hunting Nov. 28 thru Dec. 4., about 135 miles from here, back within 2 miles from where I grew up, between Akron & Youngstown, Ohio. I'm taking my T/C .45 & .50 scoped Hawken & the .45-70 Trapdoor. Also, in case I have the opportunity, the Uberti Cattleman .45 Colt. I learned many years ago, to always take a backup muzzleloader. I had a very nice whitetail doe in my sights at about 75 yards, & when I squeezed the set the trigger, it broke inside the lock, also jamming the front trigger. I didn't have another gun with me, 3 1/2 hours away from home. The daytime temp. forecasts for next week are high 30's, 40's & a couple in the low 50's, with 1 day of light rain, so it should be good weather. The farmer where I hunt had corn in the big field by the woods, so the deer should be coming out of the woods to forage.
Pastor Mike: Are you back in the states for deer hunting this year? If so, good luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Nov 22, 2022 1:34:45 GMT -7
Howdy Dan Thanks to God !! I am blessed to read that. I trust each meal will be blessed wit joy and Thanksgiving !
I could handle a 150 yard drag especially if it is not all uphill.
Praise God for friends doing God's Will who help watch over us !
Hi Gary:
No special trips north. When we return down here it is to stay the whole time. So the corn crunchers in east ILL-noise are safe from our recurves and revolvers another year.
I pray God will Bless your days afield with hours of joy and fine thoughts. Plus a couple of tasty eating corn fed field dwellers.
Same in east ILL-noise. Deer stay in the corn. Once it is cut they start traveling the river bottoms where we hunt..
|
|
|
|
Post by StrawHat on Apr 23, 2024 4:24:41 GMT -7
Today I finally got to try some of the Ideal # 225415 bullets in my Springfield 22 hornet. … Which Springfield 22 Hornet? Here is mine, a Model 1922.  I have a scope for it but have not yet put it in place. Kevin |
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Apr 23, 2024 6:47:22 GMT -7
My Springfield 22 Hornet is on an 1898 Springfield Krag action. It is a single shot that has done away with the side loading gate. It is the only Krag action I have ever seen with double set triggers. It is my favorite of the many Hornet rifles I have had and is the only one I still have. It shoots cast bullets as good as anyone could hope for. It has the 16" rifling twist of the time it was built which I believe to be the first depression but shoots great with up to a 52 grain CBE design as long as I keep velocity near top end. Not case stretching velocity but say approaching 2400 fps. That may sound anemic by todays standards but I can tell you that at 50 to 75 yards it takes a cottontail apart if hit in the body. This I know for sure because I once attempted a shot at one that was facing me and missed the top of the head hitting low centering the body. There was nothing salvageable on that rabbit.
I have always admired the model 1922 Springfield but so far have never been able to swing the purchase of one but I haven't given up yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Apr 23, 2024 11:28:10 GMT -7
I must agree with my friend once again! In my opinion the 1922 Springfield is the most attractive 22 rifle I have ever seen. Also like my friend I’ve dearly wanted one for many years now but the right rifle at the right price has eluded me thus far. I suppose if I’m really serious about owning one I’ll just have to bite the bullet (nice eh?) and purchase the best example I can possibly afford because one thing seems true for sure, they aren’t getting any cheaper and second they aren’t producing them any longer either! Its nice to dream about rifles I’ve always wanted to try, I’d rather dream about them rather than have them all and not dream.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Apr 23, 2024 15:10:56 GMT -7
Might as well add in the model 52 Winchester and the model 37 Remington.
|
|
|
|
Post by StrawHat on Apr 23, 2024 18:41:24 GMT -7
I must agree with my friend once again! In my opinion the 1922 Springfield is the most attractive 22 rifle I have ever seen. Also like my friend I’ve dearly wanted one for many years now but the right rifle at the right price has eluded me thus far. I suppose if I’m really serious about owning one I’ll just have to bite the bullet (nice eh?) and purchase the best example I can possibly afford because one thing seems true for sure, they aren’t getting any cheaper and second they aren’t producing them any longer either! It’s nice to dream about rifles I’ve always wanted to try, I’d rather dream about them rather than have them all and not dream. I agree, the Springfield Model 1922 (in all it’s variations) is a great rifle and has always appreciated in value. My rifle was reworked to handle the centerfire 22 Hornet. Because of that, Gander Mountain had it marked at about 1/3 of what a rimfire version would have brought. Mine is still a pure Model 1922, not an MKI, or later. The barrel mark indicates August 1922 and it is serial number 322. I will get more images up, if you would like. Kevin |
|
|
|
Post by StrawHat on Apr 23, 2024 18:42:20 GMT -7
My Springfield 22 Hornet is on an 1898 Springfield Krag action. It is a single shot that has done away with the side loading gate. It is the only Krag action I have ever seen with double set triggers. It is my favorite of the many Hornet rifles I have had and is the only one I still have. It shoots cast bullets as good as anyone could hope for. It has the 16" rifling twist of the time it was built which I believe to be the first depression but shoots great with up to a 52 grain CBE design as long as I keep velocity near top end. Not case stretching velocity but say approaching 2400 fps. That may sound anemic by todays standards but I can tell you that at 50 to 75 yards it takes a cottontail apart if hit in the body. This I know for sure because I once attempted a shot at one that was facing me and missed the top of the head hitting low centering the body. There was nothing salvageable on that rabbit. I have always admired the model 1922 Springfield but so far have never been able to swing the purchase of one but I haven't given up yet. Would love to see images if you care to share. Kevin |
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Apr 27, 2024 11:35:58 GMT -7
Welcome from me to the forum!! Looks like you will fit right in with the rest of us! I would dearly love to see any photos you care to share. Sounds like you got a fantastic deal on your Springfield! I would prefer the 22 Hornet! What part of the country are you in? Look forward to more of your posts!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Apr 27, 2024 15:07:29 GMT -7
Sorry I forgot about this. I will ask for help in posting some pictures of my hornet. I really like showing it off. Its a pride and joy of my guns.
|
|
|
|
Post by StrawHat on Apr 27, 2024 18:23:09 GMT -7
Welcome from me to the forum!! Looks like you will fit right in with the rest of us! I would dearly love to see any photos you care to share. Sounds like you got a fantastic deal on your Springfield! I would prefer the 22 Hornet! What part of the country are you in? Look forward to more of your posts!! I live in North East Ohio, specifically, Ashtabula County. My primary interest is S&W, N frame, 45 ACP revolvers but I enjoy a couple of custom rifles. Several custom revolvers also. Some built by me, some by others. Kevin |
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Apr 27, 2024 18:52:32 GMT -7
It must be at least 20 years ago now or more that I read in the Wolf publishing Rifle magazine an article by Layn Simpson titled " shooting the Colonel's rifle". Layn was given the opportunity to use the original 1922 Springfield 22 hornet rifle given to Townsend Whelen after using it at Springfield armory in the development of the 22 hornet cartridge. Wow !!! I thought what an opportunity! I think holding that rifle in your hands would allow you to hear it speak and oh the things it would say.
Layn used modern for the time components of powders and jacketed bullets. Bullet weight were under 50 grain in leu of it 1/16" rifling twist rate, same as mine. Being a fan at the time of Layn's writing I was disappointed with his accuracy results with the rifle and if memory serves 100 yard groups were between 2 " to 3". I was also disappointed that he didn't try any cast bullets in it because in my opinion the hornet excels as a cast bullet shooter. It almost seemed that he was in a hurry to get it done which was a disappointment in that I believe the rifle could have done better if more time was spent finding the components the rifle chose to like and also that I thought such a rifle deserved better than just a quicky to make an article deadline.
I would dearly love to be the person that gives that rifle a fair chance to prove itself. After all it was Mr. Whelen that said so long ago that only accurate rifles were interesting. He also knows what accuracy is and I think we would both agree that three MOA is not it especially in the type of small caliber moderate velocity rifle for which accuracy is its greatest virtue.
|
|
