Solid Copper Bullets

barnetmill

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 16, 2022
Messages
207
Your correct out to about 400-500 yards then they fall out of the sky rapidly.
Kenetic energy with heavy bullets is your friend when in the long range game.
With 220 grain bullets I doubt that the velocity with the 300 blackout will be very high. But yes it will carry a lot further and be more effective relative to what it impacts at extreme ranges. But there is quite a rainbow trajectory. The 150 grain is more practical, but in the 300 blackout it is not a practical long range cartridge.

For a 16 inch barrel about 2050 fps is the top velocity according to https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-data-center
2000 fps is about 30-30 territory. For hunting, about 200 yards for humane killing.
 

Gunflint1

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
314
I love copper bullets. Used Barnes in the Muzzleloader with perfect expansion and 99% weight retention to take many whitetail. Use the Barnes TTSX in the 30-06 to take 10 elk in 12 trips. They rarely take a step with the last at 590 yards. Complete pass through.
I've moved from a .44 mag revolver to a S&W 10mm pistol for bear defense. Since penetration is more important than expansion, went with the Underwood 200 grain copper monolithic bullets. Hopefully never have to use them.
Agreed, been shooting 375 H&H copper for years. Accurate & consistent.
 

Gunflint1

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
314
Just returned from Az. My Uncle 92, a Vet, and an Old School wild cat. He gave me three rifles all pristine, but what do I do with them?
First a Beautiful model 70, with 26" Douglas Barreled 22-6MM that Uncles says will shoot 1/4' MOA all day long. Next is a Interarms Mark X (mini mauser) in a .223 with a 24" Douglas barrel 1/14. Last is a Savage 340C with a 24" Douglas barreled .225 1/14. . It appears I'II have to start reloading again.
 

Gunflint1

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
314
22-6MM shells are extremely expensive, but the rifle is too nice to rechamber. The
Savage 225 shells he reloaded are resized 30-30's. The mini Mauser 223 is interesting. The twist is 1/14 out of it's 24" barrel which =varmint only. I see in his notes he was shooting 30gr-40gr with very accurate results. It should be fun shooting these old timers.
 

dennishoddy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,701
Location
Ponca City, Ok
22-6MM shells are extremely expensive, but the rifle is too nice to rechamber. The
Savage 225 shells he reloaded are resized 30-30's. The mini Mauser 223 is interesting. The twist is 1/14 out of it's 24" barrel which =varmint only. I see in his notes he was shooting 30gr-40gr with very accurate results. It should be fun shooting these old timers.
I'm a huge 6mm fan. I have two, .243 WSSM'S. One in 1:12 twist for 55 grainers and another in 1:8 for the 80-108 grain bullets. Both on the AR platform which it should have came out in when introduced vs the bolt rifles where it had feeding issues because of the staggard rounds coming out of the mag.
I'm getting chrono speeds of 4150fps with the 55 grain Noslers and 3400 fps with 80 grain Barnes TTSX.
Hand lapped Shilen match grade barrels that print cloverleaf holes at the range.
Not showing pressure signs with those loads so I could step them up but I'm happy with the accuracy on these. A deer or coyote won't know the difference in another 100 fps.
 

barnetmill

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 16, 2022
Messages
207
I'm a huge 6mm fan. I have two, .243 WSSM'S. One in 1:12 twist for 55 grainers and another in 1:8 for the 80-108 grain bullets. Both on the AR platform which it should have came out in when introduced vs the bolt rifles where it had feeding issues because of the staggard rounds coming out of the mag.
I'm getting chrono speeds of 4150fps with the 55 grain Noslers and 3400 fps with 80 grain Barnes TTSX.
Hand lapped Shilen match grade barrels that print cloverleaf holes at the range.
Not showing pressure signs with those loads so I could step them up but I'm happy with the accuracy on these. A deer or coyote won't know the difference in another 100 fps.
I assume it is some sort of AR10 set up. What kind barrel life are you expecting at those velocities?
 

dennishoddy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,701
Location
Ponca City, Ok
I assume it is some sort of AR10 set up. What kind barrel life are you expecting at those velocities?
The cartridge is short enough to fit the AR-15 frame with some modifications to the upper. The ejection port isn't large enough for the fat round so some milling has to be done which eliminates the dust cover.

There were early rumors before the caliber even came on the market that it was going to be a barrel burner, but Winchester/Browning did a test showing the stainless barrels they used ran thousands of rounds before throat erosion was noticed.

I stole this from the internet because they can explain it better than I:
The engineering of the Super Short Magnum maximizes science to get better performance. Better powders have reduced heat and reduced heat equals lower erosion potential in the throats of the barrels. That covers Thermal and Chemical erosion concerns.

Lastly, better available steel for barrels busts the myth of barrel erosion from a mechanical perspective. Quality barrels commonly of a stainless-steel variety, are better, are harder, combined with improved technology, simply do not produce excessive barrel wear.

In fact, Tom Spithaller, Director of Sales, Olympic Arms, Inc., told me their .243 WSSM demo rifle, made in 2004, is still used regularly, and has approximately 8,000 rounds thru it. It is still holding tight groups with beautiful performance and no erosion issues from a barrel made of 416SS. I am pretty positive that far exceeds what a normal hunter or recreational shooter would put thru their barrel in a life time (in this caliber).
 

barnetmill

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 16, 2022
Messages
207
The cartridge is short enough to fit the AR-15 frame with some modifications to the upper. The ejection port isn't large enough for the fat round so some milling has to be done which eliminates the dust cover.

There were early rumors before the caliber even came on the market that it was going to be a barrel burner, but Winchester/Browning did a test showing the stainless barrels they used ran thousands of rounds before throat erosion was noticed.

I stole this from the internet because they can explain it better than I:
The engineering of the Super Short Magnum maximizes science to get better performance. Better powders have reduced heat and reduced heat equals lower erosion potential in the throats of the barrels. That covers Thermal and Chemical erosion concerns.

Lastly, better available steel for barrels busts the myth of barrel erosion from a mechanical perspective. Quality barrels commonly of a stainless-steel variety, are better, are harder, combined with improved technology, simply do not produce excessive barrel wear.

In fact, Tom Spithaller, Director of Sales, Olympic Arms, Inc., told me their .243 WSSM demo rifle, made in 2004, is still used regularly, and has approximately 8,000 rounds thru it. It is still holding tight groups with beautiful performance and no erosion issues from a barrel made of 416SS. I am pretty positive that far exceeds what a normal hunter or recreational shooter would put thru their barrel in a life time (in this caliber).
I am guessing that the magazine is single stack with such a fat cartridge
[Base diameter .555 in (14.1 mm)]. Must required a very modified bolt and bolt carrier. Sounds like quite a feat of engineering to fit all into an upper that will mate with AR15 lower.
.243 WSSM vs .243.
1671852970414.png
 

Gunflint1

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
314
The cartridge is short enough to fit the AR-15 frame with some modifications to the upper. The ejection port isn't large enough for the fat round so some milling has to be done which eliminates the dust cover.

There were early rumors before the caliber even came on the market that it was going to be a barrel burner, but Winchester/Browning did a test showing the stainless barrels they used ran thousands of rounds before throat erosion was noticed.

I stole this from the internet because they can explain it better than I:
The engineering of the Super Short Magnum maximizes science to get better performance. Better powders have reduced heat and reduced heat equals lower erosion potential in the throats of the barrels. That covers Thermal and Chemical erosion concerns.

Lastly, better available steel for barrels busts the myth of barrel erosion from a mechanical perspective. Quality barrels commonly of a stainless-steel variety, are better, are harder, combined with improved technology, simply do not produce excessive barrel wear.

In fact, Tom Spithaller, Director of Sales, Olympic Arms, Inc., told me their .243 WSSM demo rifle, made in 2004, is still used regularly, and has approximately 8,000 rounds thru it. It is still holding tight groups with beautiful performance and no erosion issues from a barrel made of 416SS. I am pretty positive that far exceeds what a normal hunter or recreational shooter would put thru their barrel in a life time (in this caliber).
I believe the .225 will make a comeback. But then why? The three I have 22-6MM, .223, & the .225 can pretty much be covered with what's out there.
The Ledger in my uncles handwriting indicates the .223 with a 25.5 gr cooks out at 4198FPS, 24"Douglas barrel 1/14 twist. 31gr @ 4000FPS. He used this setup up to a 50 gr Nosler EXP -Blitz with good results. Now the hot .225 wildcat, Douglas barrel 1/14. His notes state using 34gr 4064 powder shot at a blistering 4895FPS. Can't say this is possible, but going by his notes????? Needless to say, I'm also a big fan of the 6MM family. 243/244 are some of my favorites.
 

dennishoddy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,701
Location
Ponca City, Ok
I am guessing that the magazine is single stack with such a fat cartridge
[Base diameter .555 in (14.1 mm)]. Must required a very modified bolt and bolt carrier. Sounds like quite a feat of engineering to fit all into an upper that will mate with AR15 lower.
.243 WSSM vs .243.
View attachment 29873
There is a little bit of offset in the mag but not much. The parent case which has been argued around the internet is either the .300 Win Mag or the .300 RUM which requires a different bolt face for the BCG.
 

barnetmill

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 16, 2022
Messages
207
There is a little bit of offset in the mag but not much. The parent case which has been argued around the internet is either the .300 Win Mag or the .300 RUM which requires a different bolt face for the BCG.
It requires a very large face. It sound like an interesting cartridge. I wonder if they make in a .25 cal or 6.5mm version. it would certainly beat my 6.5 grendal.
 

dennishoddy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,701
Location
Ponca City, Ok
It requires a very large face. It sound like an interesting cartridge. I wonder if they make in a .25 cal or 6.5mm version. it would certainly beat my 6.5 grendal.
There were rifles chambered in .223WSSM, 243WSSM and .25WSSM. The AR platform came out the winner over the bolt guns.
The .25WSSM produced the same velocities as the .25-06 and was the least popular of the three. The .223WSSM produced the highest velocities with very light bullets. I read a magazine once that stated some wildcatters had hit the 5000 fps mark, but I never had an opportunity to read the article to see what they had produced to perform at that level. That cartridge came out second in popularity.
Both of the aforementioned calibers died out pretty quickly but the 243WSSM carried the cartridge on for a few more years before it's popularity waned as well because of the bolt gun feed ramp issues.
Had it been introduced in the AR platform it would likely still be around.
One can compare it to the current long range 6mm calibers. It beats every one of them in velocity. The 6mm BR, 6mm Dasher, 6mm Arc and others out there.
Winchester does occasionally come out with some factory brass, so when I see it, I buy it.
 
Top