|
Post by twomoons on Dec 21, 2011 10:55:16 GMT -5
I will quote Harry Pope here, "If you need to lap my barrels I didn't make them right". Read what Gale McMillian has to say about break in, too. I shooot it and clean it after each session, period.
|
|
|
Post by Purebred Redneck on Dec 21, 2011 22:32:48 GMT -5
wow, you have to do more work to a remington than a ruger to get it to shoot halfway decent ;D
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Dec 22, 2011 7:44:18 GMT -5
You break in a barrel not so it shoots better but so it does not get as copper fouled as fast.
|
|
|
Post by jmarriott on Dec 23, 2011 7:12:44 GMT -5
I had a rem 700 in 17 rem. Was a classic model. It shot great for 7 shots and then the copper and-or moly fouling would make those little groups open up into large groups. Not only was the fouling happening quickly it was hard to remove. We were not talking cleaning but scrubbing and setting and then cleaning every 5 shots.
That rifles barrel i had inspected with a bore scope at my gun pushers. You could see sharp razors at the edge of the lands. Like little edge ridges. I asked him what to do about them as he felt they were the cause of the fouling. He said in 17 rem the machining can get screwed up and the barrels are much harder to make. He said that a new barrel was most likely cheaper than lapping and such because he would have to order in the stuff in 17 cal.
It got traded for my model 700 .222 rem. It does not shoot as flat, the hole going in is a bit bigger and i get some exits with most ammo. The accuracy is much better and i could use it all winter and into the spring without copper fouling.
I love the idea of the 17 rem for coy dogs and fox even the ground hog. On little hole in and an explosion. I can get close with the .222 but it just does not start out fast enough and the weight of the bullet is twice the weight. I just chose a controled expansion load. Two holes to patch up.
|
|
|
Post by deputydon on Dec 23, 2011 8:37:15 GMT -5
I know a guy who had a .17 Rem. He also had problems like you talked about. I think he kept his for a collecter. Or did you get it away from him 2M's ??
|
|
bounce
Royal Member
Posts: 5,727
|
Post by bounce on Dec 23, 2011 8:54:08 GMT -5
Fussy old men just love to fuss fuss fuss, personaly I still take the young mans attitude with my F's Merry Christmas
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Dec 23, 2011 9:15:20 GMT -5
By the time i am ready to actually shoot dogs with a rifle i have had it to the range 20+ times and have cleaned and shot it each session. In addition I usually JB's lap a bore first thing to make sure any blue from the factory process is smoothed out. Maybe thats why I never did any real break in.
|
|
|
Post by jmarriott on Dec 23, 2011 9:50:44 GMT -5
I tried to get that old 17 rem running for 3 years before i gave up.
One summer i spent so much time on it my girlfriend said she took a backseat to the rifle in my heart.
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Dec 23, 2011 10:17:24 GMT -5
Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I had a 17-223 wildcat rifle on a Remington 700 action. That was before Remington brought out the 17 Remington. Hornady didn't make 17 caliber bullets back then. As I recall, I used Sisk bullets. The 17-223 did have a flat trajectory. However, cleaning it was a nightmare. 17 caliber cleaning rods and brushes weren't available then, or I didn't know where to find them. I used patches pushed through the bore with a piece of brazing rod. I spent much more time cleaning it than I ever did shooting it. I finally got rid of the rifle, and I haven't ever regretted doing so. A few years later, I felt the need for another varmint rifle, and I found a used Sako in 222 magnum- a much better set up than the 17-223. I still have the Sako.
|
|
|
Post by jmarriott on Dec 23, 2011 11:29:47 GMT -5
Yes the 222 mag is a real neat round. I know of one and it is owned by a friend at work. I often ask if he would sell it. Most likely to often.
SO far he will not let it go. He said he shot his last 4 rounds of ammo several years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Dec 23, 2011 12:20:06 GMT -5
Remington still makes ammo, and brass. The 204 Ruger is a 222 magnum case, necked down and slightly blown out, so in a pinch you could reform 204's into 222 magnum brass. The Sako action sized for the 222 family of cartridges is really beautiful. I always keep an eye open for the small Sako's, but you never see them without a high price tag.
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Dec 23, 2011 14:49:47 GMT -5
The only problem with the 222 Mag now days is that iit is a seasonal production run and for 50 fps increase over a 223 it probably isn't worht the price difference. I can remember when the 222 Mag came out and it was just 1/2 way between the 222 and the then wildcat 22-250. It offered significant improvment over the standard 222 and was nearly as accurate.
I don't much care for the 17's as every one I have had to work on was fouled up and was a bear to clean. My friend shooots a 205 and loves it but he had to buy dies, brass, cleaning equipment and bullets before he could load up and that cost him what a good rifle runs. He has made some real long shots with the little gun though, dogs in excess of 400 yards.
|
|
bounce
Royal Member
Posts: 5,727
|
Post by bounce on Dec 23, 2011 18:18:48 GMT -5
22-250 can do that all day long and not nearly as expencive I'm thinking.
|
|
|
Post by deputydon on Dec 23, 2011 21:10:46 GMT -5
22-250 can do that all day long and not nearly as expencive I'm thinking. I'd have to side w/ Bounce on this one......
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Dec 23, 2011 21:15:56 GMT -5
The 22-250 is a great round. Not really comparable to the 222/223/222 magnum cartridges. Actually, a 222 magnum (or 223 or 222) is a little cheaper to feed than a 22-250. Less powder in the smaller cases. I think, too, you can burn out a barrel in 22-250- it's a hot cartridge. Burning out a barrel in one of the smaller ones is pretty hard to do, unless you're a tactical wannabe, rapid firing a black rifle.
|
|