I would like to hear each of your thoughts of what you would pick as the "Ideal Cartridge" for a Contender/G-2? for LR shooting. This is for target not hunting on steel or paper without needing to knock over steel (group shooting). Maximum range would be 880 yards, with most shooting done from 300-700 yards. I would also like to hear your suggestions on types of fore-ends/grips and the type of rest you would use. I will be purchasing a G-2 this year (It has been about 6 years since I have owned a TC product). Standard or wildcat chambering. Feel free to even mention the brand of barrel, twist, type of dies, and even potentail weight/brand of bullets you would use.
Looking forward to your input.
Ernie

Hi Ernie,

I would think that a 6.5x30-30 or 6.5x444 in a 16" barrel would be the ticket for what you are after. I personally prefer the 30 calibers and would want a 30x444 with a short neck and sharp shoulder using 168 Sierra MK's. I have thought about building one of these several times....

I see i left some info out so....

On my ideal LR round,

• Caliber 30x444 tight neck
• Forend would be a HEAVY (as in the kind Wes sells) forend with hanger bar.
• Twist would be 1-10" in case i decided to jump up to the 175 or 190MK.
• Barrel would be 16.5" long full bull stainless.
• Dies would be obviously custom, i would have the full length sizer modified for bushings.
• Barrel blank would probably be Shilen or similar.
• Scope mount would be a steel (VVCG?) base with with Leupold Mark 4 rings.
  

Will add more as i thik of it, LOL! BTW, this would be someone else pickin up the tab, RIGHT??
If this were an Encore project, it would be 300 Win Mag without a doubt!

[ 08-03-2003, 09:48: Message edited by: MSSmagnum ]

xphunter, considering the ranges that you have in mind, why not buy an Encore? You would have more options for higher pressure long range calibers - without the need to craft your own brass. I love my G2, but for what you have in mind, I'd go for the Encore.

XP,
I'll still think the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. should be right up there near the top of potentially best rounds.

Reasons.

Small diameter chamber, so no risk of stretching a frame as is inherent when trying to get the max out of the larger rounds, something most folks try to do.

Capacity is ample to push the 80 gr. Sierra bullets to a solid 2800 fps from the 16 3/4" barrel I had at Alliance last year.

Low recoil makes the .22s easier to shoot most accurately, plus the accuracy of .22s is legendary.

In my opinion, large diameter cases combined with small diameter bores is a step backward. Some mathmetician/physicist can graph it out, but as the chamber diameter goes up, the allowable pressures go down. And as the bore diameter goes down, so does the surface area the pressure pushes on. So with a given diameter bore, higher sectional density bullets of course lower the potential velocity, increase the time of flight.

Using the 6.5x50 R Bellm and 6.5 JDJ based on the larger diameter .225 Win case as an example, with the same 120 gr. bullet, the higher pressure permitted by the smaller diameter chamber permits about 100 fps more velocity than you can safely get from the larger diameter chamber.

You have to optimize the potentials of pressure, case capacity, sectional density, and time of flight for the optimum long range round, then factor in the human element and the ability to minimize movement and variations in movement of the gun during recoil while the bullet is still in the barrel.

My theory regarding the .222 Rem. Mag Imp., fast twist (1-7") and high sectional density bullets has not been thoroughly studied from a ballistics science approach, but rather by "intuitive feel" and experience with a myriad of rounds over many years.

If you skip over the .22 cal., then my opinion is that something on the order of 165 gr. bullets in .30 cal. using a case on the order of the .307 Win Imp., aka, .30 Bower Alaskan, is about optimum.

There is no reason whatever for the full sized .307 case being used with the smaller cals. Nor is there any reason whatever for a full bodied .444 Marlin case in any caliber up through .30. The capacity is simply not utilized and does not gain anything in handgun barrels that cannot be done more efficiently and more accurately in a lesser capacity case.

The fallacy I see with the larger diameter cases is that too many people try to push them too hard, and while the G2 will stand more than the Contender will without stretching, the next thing to fail is the barrel lug by bending the lower lip of the lug under the locking bolts. While the G2 can be pushed harder, no doubt, still the principles above do apply, and the frame is limited. It is better than the old Contender, but the system overall is not the equivalent of the Encore, so don't expect it to handle Encore level rounds on par with the max. potentials of the Encore. It just won't completely bridge the gap.

The smaller the case diameter the better so long as the capacity is up to what needs to be done.

Back to the .225 Win case v. .222 Rem. Mag. Imp......a good test would be to max out an improved .225 Win case, ala .226 JDJ, and see if it will hit the 2800 fps mark with 80 gr. bullets like the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. will. I doubt it will.

With lighter bullets in an experiment Howard Tilford and I did several years ago, a .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. barrel rechambered to .224 Weatherby failed to reach the velocities he got from the smaller diameter .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. And, the .224 Weatherby case is essentially the same diameter as the .225 Win. case and also essentially the same strength of case with a minimal body taper.

I just have not had time to test the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. & heavy bullets any further than the brief shooting I did with it last year at Alliance.

The .22s, as I understand it, are making their mark at long range, and with the restrictions imposed by the small Contender and G2 frames, I still think the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. is the way to go.

Tell ya what, Ern, if you have time to test it out, I will box up my .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. barrel, wide forend for the 1" diam. barrel, dies, and brass and send it to you to play with...... we'll call it Ern's test lab or my vicarious experience. How's that?

NOW..... YOU GOTTA GET A G2 OR CONTENDER! Your first barrel to play with.... and you can play for free!

Mike

Ferdinand,
Point well taken. I have 3 custom center-grip XP-100's which do the job quite nicely. Two of the three (284 Win. & 7.82 Patriot) were built with hunting in mind in the mountains and the third (6.5-284) was built for bench shooting and or stand hunting at lower elevations. The first two are Shilen select match tight neck chambered XP's and the third is a Krieger barrel which is also tight-neck. The Contender/G-2 is a smaller frame, light weight specialty handgun which of course cannot handle the pressures of the XP's, my MOA, or the Encore. My curiosity and desire is to consider what especially the G-2 can do @ these ranges in spite of having to shoot cartridges @ a level that is within it's ability safely. I want to find the best catridge(s) for the Contender/G-2 and herald those carridges for those who will only use a Contender/G-2 and have no intention of buying and Encore or other types of stronger action. on top of that what is even more fun will be to take a Contender/G-2 and then see how close you can be competitive with with actions that are noticeably stronger.

Ernie

Back to the 6.5 comparison I made above using the 6.5x50 R Bellm and 6.5 JDJ examples, the SAFE potential with a 120 gr. bullet is only 2500 fps, compared to 2800 fps with the 80 gr. Sierra bullet coming out of the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. I don't have any books handy, but compare the sectional densities and ballistic coeficients of various 120 gr. 6.5 bullets against the 80 gr. Sierra .22 with a 300 fps higher velocity and thus shorter time of flight assuming the ballistic coeficients are similar or favor the 80 gr. Sierra. It has been awhile since I have studied it out.

Mike

Mike,
I would love to experiment with that 222 Mag. Imp. of yours. Still don't have a G-2 though, yet. Have some other financial needs that are taking priority at the moment. Will write more later. "Honey Do's" are calling.

Ernie

Mike,
I will see what I can sell. About the only things I have that I would let go of is 9mm Glock and a Remington 22-250 rifle (sporter barrel). Of course, you know that I will be doing a two barrel test comparision with the 30 Alaskan (307 Imp.) in the future. Let's see a 222 Rem. Mag. Imp., a 30 Alaskan, and a 6.5 (6.5x50R Bellm, 6.5 Super Bower, _______)? That rounds it out pretty good for me for what I would use a Contender/G-2 for: LR shooting & PD's through deer sized game. Still open to other thoughts/cartridges on LR cartridges for the Contender/G-2.
Mike did you chrono that load (222 Mag. Imp.) at Alliance last year or at your place? Usually, the higher the elevation the more you will pick up on MV. Just think how much faster it might go at the field shoot in Laramie, WY come this October.
Ernie

Ernie - I would sort of echo Mike B's comments, but I have a personal preference of the .223 Ackley Improved for this purpose. I have a 15" barrel in a 1-8" twist set up to shoot silhouettes and it does a great job. Drop me an email, I might have something you would be interested in that is almost ready to go.

Bret K.

Bret,
Sent you a e-mail.

Ernie

B_Koes,
There is little difference in capacity between the .223 Imp. and .222 Rem. Mag. Imp.

I know you are talking a 1" slower twist rate, which is good for a little more fps, and a 1 3/4" shorter barrel, but what are you able to push the 80 grainers to?

Couple points, Hart recommended the 1-7" twist when I asked for their input in regard to the smaller case, but for the second blank I bought at the time for a .22-250 Imp. they recommended the 1-8" twist.

Does the 1-8" twist stabilize the 80s (at the velocities you can reach) well enough in your opinion?

One thing that surprised me about the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. was the fact that you can get enough WW760 in it to crater primers more than desireable for continued use. Which suggests that the capacity of the .223 Imp. is maybe sufficient for the task.

While I do not rely on the case neck for much, it is somewhat better to have a longer case neck than the .223 Rem. case offers. And of course you have to be selective about what .223 Rem. brass you use. Much of it is worthless throwaway stuff.

On the other hand, some will argue that the .222 Rem. Mag. brass could be better, and I won't debate that, there is no choice of maker.... it is Remington or nothing unless you opt for making cases from 5.6x50 rimless brass, and RWS is the handsdown better choice, but at over $2 per MT case.

The rimmed variants of .223 Rem. Imp. and .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. using the 5.6x50 R brass are an option also.

Trouble is the Rem. 222 Mag brass is only around $20 per hundred, and is not all that bad. It may or may not be fully competitive in benchrest circles, but does an excellent job and with sorting cases by weight and benchrest prepping, it should be up to the most demanding shooting at long range.

I did nothing to mine.... I don't think I even deburred the flash holes, which are quite jagged, btw.

Regarding the 6.5 bullets.... this is the catch.... to get the preferred ballistic coeficient for this cal. you have to jump to 140 gr., then the velocity potential drops out the bottom in the Contender.

You have something of the same problem with the .30 cals. Even if you stretch things farther than you ought to in the Contender, 165 gr. bullets start out at something under 2500 fps.

Again, I have not looked at all the drop figures for some time, but with about a 300 fps headstart with an 80 gr. .22 match bullet, it takes quite a ballistic coeficient for the larger cal. bullets to catch up with the 80 gr. .22 at long range.

And I am not so sure the 69 to 75 gr. bullets wouldn't shine well at long range also.

For reference, at 2800 fps from a 16 3/4" barrel, I am shooting 80 gr. bullets at about the same speed as 75 gr. bullets from full length rifle barrels according to the Hornady manual.

I rubbed elbows with Don Bower for several years when we set up together at gunshows around Colorado, and we put on the long range clinic at Claremore, OK in '99 together. Don, in my opinion, pushes the Contender harder than it should be by quite a bit. At Claremore, for example, everyone was excited about getting around 3600 fps from his .22 Super Bower (technically a .22-250 Ackley Imp.) from a 21" carbine barrel.... one I chambered for him I believe.....funny thing. The owner of the barrel later was scratching his head about the loose lock up and asking me if maybe he stretched his frame. Hmmmmm. Imagine that.

It is quite easy to achieve a WOW! factor, but much harder to find a regimen everyone can live with reliably without ruining their equipment.

The small diameter of the .222 Rem. Mag. Imp. case does just that. You can blow primer pockets and still not hurt the frame. Yet what looks like reasonable pressure to most folks in larger diameter cases can and will stretch the frame. Therein lies the rub.

Bottom line: After hob knobbing around with Don and doing a lot of head scratching, my crystal ball (read, fine intuitive feel) told me that the 80 gr. .22s were potentially the best bet in Contenders.... unless you go to the other extremes Don has gone to with full length rifle barrels and a handgun grip hanging off the back end.

16 3/4" is pushing the definition of a "handgun," imho, and to go to full length rifle barrels is not consistent with the long range sport as Don started it using 14" barrels.

Yes, the longer barrels ARE more effective. And,YES, reaching way out and touching something far, far away is fun no matter what the tool used, but it is quite a departure from "handgun" shooting using 20" and longer barrels, some of which are essentially unturned 1 1/4" barrel blanks.

I guess what I am saying is, define the sport. Is it long range handgun shooting or is it long range rifle shooting without a buttstock? You have to factor that in as well in determining what the best round is. OK?

Ernie..... pass the plate a second time next Sunday so you can get a frame..... all in the spirit of keeping the pastor in tune. Seriously, find an FFL holder to receive one of my frames, and I will even loan you a frame.... Contender that is. I don't have a G2 yet either.

Mike

Mike,
I can find an FFL holder. Will let you know the particulars soon.

Ernie

Have a couple of more cartridges to add the list that people have suggested as an ideal cartridge for long range shooting from some other forums.
one wrote that if he had to pick 3 it would be:
".22, 6.5 and a .30 caliber, and would use a RWS 5.6X50R case for them all."
The 257JDJ, 6.5 JDJ, and 309 JDJ have also been mentioned. The 30-30 AI has also been mentioned. Oh, and there was a post about the 250 Sav. AI based off of the 307 win. case.

So far the ones that have been mentioned the most is: 222 Rem. Mag. Imp., 6.5 Super Bower, 6.5x50R Bellm, and the 30 Alaskan. Not a bad list of cartridges.
Ernie

A little late, but my 3 choices would be:

22mag AI,

6mm-223

300 savage

in no particular order.

The 300 savage, from the load data I've seen regarding the 308 JDJ, is close enough to being equal that I wouldn't want to go through the forming process. Currently, I am pushing a 130gr hornady out of a 15" barrel at 2450-2500fps.

Could anyone tell me the maximum (safe-I know that can be different in each barrel) velocity differences between a 15 inch 30-30AI, 309JDJ, 300 Savage, 30 Bellm, 30 Alaskan, 30x50R Bellm?
If your barrel happens to be a 14 inch or 16 incher that would be fine too, just please give the length & type of barrel.

Bullets to choose from: 150, 165-168, 175, 180

Does anyone have a 30x50R Bellm? Specifics

Also curious about the difference between the 6.5 Super Bower and the 6.5x50R Bellm.

SD Handgunner sent me some 30-30 AI data in the past but I don't have it handy.

Appreciate any and all input.

Ernie

Here is some info off the database at Specialty Pistols Group.

30-30 AI Contender 14" 130 Hornady SSP 2588fps

Wonder if anybody has tried a 7X50R Bellm?

Hopefully, Mike B. will know if anyone ever had a barrel chambered in these 2 cartridges. I'm getting more curious if the 30x50R Bellm would be the equal to the 30 Alaskan while at the same time have a better safety margin.
Ernie

Mike B. has never chambered a 30X50 R Bellm because of just a few sets of 30 TCU dies. He said, he thought it would not be the equal of a 30 Alaskan. But he has never tried it yet so we really don't know where it will fit in. Who is going to try it?

Ernie

I would have to go along with some of the others.
A 6.5 JDJ is a very nice long range shooter. The B/C may be better in a 7mm or .308 .
SSK Industries Have some good ones most smaller cal are based on the 225 win Mother case while the larger (308. and above -Ithink???)
are based on the 444 marlin case.

Drop them a line

Good shooting
12.9

I have been giving this some thought lately as my wife has been bugging me for a Contender barrel for shooting out at 600 yards.

I think my choice would be a 16" 6mmX30-30 Imp.. I would have it barreled with a 1:7" twist. This would allow you to shoot the heavier high B.C. bullets on the market. Sierra makes a 107gr. HPBT Match bullet that I think would be ideal for this.

Just my 2 cents.

Mike you are lucky for all my wife thinks of is GUN SHOW's.

With more time to ponder about long range cartridges for the Contender/G-2 I have come up with three for me. They may not be the ones you would choose, but I would not feel out classed by any other offerings that are out there. These barrels would be somewhere in the 15-17 inch range and I wouldn't hesitate using them for big game (the 6.5 & 30 that is).

222 Rem. Mag. Imp. with a 1-7 or 1-8 twist.

6.5x50R Bellm

30 Alaskan

Well, these are my three choices. I enjoyed the mental gymnastics!

Ernie

opps!

[ 09-04-2003, 21:18: Message edited by: wildcat51 ]

I think those are some pretty darn good rounds to go in the Contender. If you're really thinking about using the 50R wildcats I see no reason that you couldn't just use the 5.6x50R instead of either the .222 Mag Imp or the .223 Imp. You would gain a significant amount of powder capacity and MSSMagnum has apparently found another source of brass (albeit about $1/round). This would even allow you to launch some JLK 90gr bullets at velocities just shy of 3000fps. I would think that 1-7" would be the minimum twist there and possibly require a 1-6" twist. Just another nugget for you to consider now that you've made up your mind!

Brett,
I know you are right, I was just trying to think a little cheap when it comes to brass on a couple of them. I just may reconsider on the 22 cal. good thoughts there! I wasn't thinking 90 grain VLD's--but I should have.
Do you know what the BC at that velocity would be?

Ernie

I've read somewhere that the BC on the 90gr JLK bullets is around .53. That would seem inline with the figures for a 75gr AMAX of .44 and a 80gr Berger VLD of .489 but this is all theoretical. I'm most interested in hearing about your findings as this project comes to fruition.

[ 09-05-2003, 00:27: Message edited by: B_Koes ]

The other thing that might be expensive is getting a hold of a barrel in 1-6" twist. I tried to find something like this for my .223 Imp project, but I could only find blanks from Hart and Pac-Nor (I think). Both were going to add another $100+ onto the cost of my project so I settled for a 1-8" twist and 80gr bullets. If you press forward with purchasing a blank in 1-6" twist then I might be interested in sharing an extended length blank with you that could be turned into a couple barrels. Just an idea...