Like most kids in the early ‘60s, I was spellbound by all things related to space and space travel. NASA’s Mercury program had successfully put an American in orbit around this ball and JFK had challenged us to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. On the fantasy front for me, somehow an Austin TV station had managed to air (along with the usual Saturday morning cartoon fare) a space-based British marionette program called “Fireball XL5”. The name alone was heady stuff…and would follow me down the years!

Fast-forward to the late ‘70s. I’m a single young man seeking my fortune roughnecking on drilling rigs…so there’s ample folding money to feed my growing firearm addiction. My fascination with space has dimmed somewhat, but not to the extent that I can pass up the opportunity to grab a vent-ribbed, Zytel stocked, Buck Rogers-looking Remington XP-100 pistol in .221 Remington Fireball. Topped with a Leupold 2x (basically a toilet paper tube with crosshairs) and fed a case-full of 4198 and a Sierra 52 grain HPBT, the little rig would stay at MOA or slightly under with dreary consistency. Oh, to have those eyes and those nerves once again!

Introduced by Remington in 1963 for use in their new XP-100 pistol, the Fireball is essentially a shortened .222. Originally, the XP-100 prototype had been chambered for the triple deuce…but that case capacity wasn’t needed or (I expect) wanted in the 10.75” barreled XP. Talk about fireball! Performance-wise, the stubby little .221 gave up very little to its parent round…thanks to an efficient case design and benefitted in no small way by SAAMI setting the pressure level for the .221 at 52,000 CUP (6000 CUP above the .222).

While I loved my XP for its performance, I never found it particularly convenient to tote a bench around with me in the field. As well, the mere act of CARRYING the XP around was a challenge. Oh, I crafted a full-coverage belt holster for the pistol…and an uglier, more ungainly rig you can’t imagine. No, the XP-100 Fireball was a dandy toy to play with, but other toys beckoned. After a number of years, the Fireball found a new home.

The relentless turn of the years took my shooting interests in many different directions. IPSC. Sporting Clays. Africa. Cowboy Action. Of course, the annual pursuit of local deer, turkey, hogs and varmints. For years, anytime I considered the “perfect” lightweight walkabout varminter my thoughts drifted to how the old Fireball would do if chambered in a lively little rifle. As if in answer, Remington fielded their 700 Classic in the .221 in 2002 and CZ has offered their 527 as well. As tempting as these ideas were, I couldn’t really warm to either of them. While a dandy action in its own right, the 700 “short” action is far too big to house the tiny .221 and the resulting rifle would (not unlike me) carry more weight than it probably should. While the CZ was built into a trim, lightweight package, their “backward” safety was enough to keep one out of my rack.

The “proper” answer to the Fireball rifle question has always seemed to me to reside in the old Sako L461/AI action. A true “small” action, I’ve used them for rifles built around the .222, .223 and the wildcat 6x45mm. Their wonderful triggers and a 6+1 magazine capacity make them the kind of rifle that’s easy to reach for when I feel like going for a walk. And so, when I stumbled across another L461 in .223 a few years ago, I brought it home. This L461 wasn’t original by any stretch of the imagination. It wore a 26” fluted 14 twist barrel and an aftermarket McMillan stock and it shot well enough that it took a little while before I committed to using the action and stock for my Fireball project.

After a couple of conversations with him about what I was requesting, I placed the project in the capable hands of Jon Trammel in Breckenridge, TX. Of course (like all things slated during 2020) Covid-19 had to have a hand in slowing things down, but before too much time had passed Jon was telling me to come collect her! She now wears a 22” Brux barrel, 5/8” at the muzzle. As a nod to the 1960’s vintage of the cartridge and acknowledging that this is a hunting rifle and not a benchrest rig, I topped it with an equally vintage Redfield Accu-Range 2-7x (complete with stadia wires and yardage tombstone!). Don’t giggle; this was high tech at the time!

I’ve only really scratched the surface with “The Fireball” as far as learning what she’s capable of, but she’s already shown that she’ll be everything I’ve wanted. Accurate, a darling to carry, cheap to feed, extremely well mannered as far as recoil and muzzle blast are concerned…I’m just kicking myself for not doing this DECADES ago!

Mark

The new Fireball


L to R: .221, .222, .223


Vintage Redfield Accu-Range


State of the art range-finding back in the day!


The little combo knows how!

quote:

While the CZ was built into a trim, lightweight package, their “backward” safety was enough to keep one out of my rack.

+1
That's why I don't have their .204 Ruger.

Maybe all other rifles except CZ are backwards. You pull back on hammers to shoot. Then again they may be the only one in the parade that is in step.

Nice Sako Mark!!

Now you can build it a partner.....a 20VT!!

Hmmmmmm...........

Kevin

What a wonderful project! Congratulations for seeing your whole concept through to completion. That kind of accuracy is satisfying.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Maybe all other rifles except CZ are backwards. You pull back on hammers to shoot. Then again they may be the only one in the parade that is in step.

Nah...at least not in my book anyway! And that's coming from a fella whose first SERIOUS rifle purchase back in the 70s was an Anschutz 1418 .22 LR...complete with Mannlicher stock, double set triggers and that same backward safety! I've managed to avoid an AD with it all these years, but it's definitely counter-intuitive. One is enough for me!

Mark

Oh, I couldn't agree more! You should ALL avoid rifles with those bad, bad safeties!

And leave them all for me.....

Can't add enough to Mark's praise of the little .221 Fireball. I own two of them and one will have to be pried out of each of my cold, dead hands.

As far as his choice of actions, well, the Sako L461 is the "Royal Princess of Bolt Actions". There never has and never will be a better one for the .222 family of cartridges. I own L461's in .20 Vartarg, .221, .222, .223, .222 Magnum, 6x45, and an A-I in 6MM PPC. Come to think of it, I won't have nearly enough cold, dead hands for all of my little Sako princesses.

The only thing that is better than the little fireball is when it it necked to 20 for the 20 VarTarg. I started off with hornets and 22-250's and always wanted something with the manners of the hornet with the reach and capability of the 22-250. When the 204 Ruger came out it reignited my desire and when I googled the 221 case necked to 20 the 20 VarTarg came into view in all its glory and I was smitten so bought a Rem XR-100 in 204 Ruger (rifle version of the XP) shortened the barrel and had it rechambered for the VarTarg and have never looked back.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Come to think of it, I won't have nearly enough cold, dead hands for all of my little Sako princesses.

I can relate......over four dozen, and STILL counting. Sigh.....

Kevin

Nice shooting.

I am a CZ owner and can't wait to own more. The safety is not what makes a firearm safe or not, it is the user. I know in the prairie dog towns a hunter has to be quick on the trigger. One can't be fumbling with the safety while the wily critter sits there with its fat belly on full display.

The safety on CZ's are as "safe" as any other gun. They are not backward. Think about all the different safety locations on the various guns you own.

The tang safety on my BPS is my favorite btw.

quote:

Originally posted by slim buttes:
Nice shooting.

I am a CZ owner and can't wait to own more. The safety is not what makes a firearm safe or not, it is the user. I know in the prairie dog towns a hunter has to be quick on the trigger. One can't be fumbling with the safety while the wily critter sits there with its fat belly on full display.

The safety on CZ's are as "safe" as any other gun. They are not backward. Think about all the different safety locations on the various guns you own.

The tang safety on my BPS is my favorite btw.

https://www.rifleshootermag.co...57-lux-review/374604

FWIW, it appears that even CZ is adopting "forward to fire".

Mark

quote:

The safety on CZ's are as "safe" as any other gun. They are not backward.

That's like saying that it is just as "safe" to put the gas pedal on the left and the brake on the right. No problem, right? Just remember which one to press on when a school bus pulls out in front of you.

Or maybe reverse the "e" and the "a" on your typewriter keyboard. Nothing wrong with that -- all you have to do is remember which is which.

Or randomly make some bolts right hand thread and some left hand thread. Won't take but a few minutes to figure out which is which.

By the way, there's nothing wrong with writing from right to left -- lots of languages do it.

And why does "A" always have to come first in the alphabet? Why can't "Z" come first every now and then?

Viewed in that light I'm sure we can all agree that there is nothing "backward" about the CZ safety.

218 Bee, thanks for sharing your Fireball experience. I've been lusting after a .221 for a few years now. I picked up a Sako L461 chambered in .204 Ruger a while back and thought about rebarreling it in Fireball when the barrel's shot out.

How does it feed from the McMillan's magazine? Did you have to modify the Sako follower at all to accommodate the stubby cartridge?

As for the load, are you using factory brass or are you converting .223 Remington?



Regarding CZ design, how the safety works is arbitrary, what the safety does is not. The user should know their equipment. Beyond that, for sport shooting, no harm will come to anyone not being negligent with a firearm, e.g. it's not being pointed in an unsafe direction. Sure, standards are nice, but not everyone subscribes to the same standards. How would you older Americans feel if forced to use the metric system? Afterall, the rest of the world's using it, why use a "backward" system of measurement that can cause loss of life, limb and property to those not familiar with your antique, arbitrary system? Don't be a hypocrite now... If you don't like the CZ's safety, don't buy one. It's pretty simple, really.

quote:

Originally posted by jpl:
218 Bee, thanks for sharing your Fireball experience. I've been lusting after a .221 for a few years now. I picked up a Sako L461 chambered in .204 Ruger a while back and thought about rebarreling it in Fireball when the barrel's shot out.

How does it feed from the McMillan's magazine? Did you have to modify the Sako follower at all to accommodate the stubby cartridge?

As for the load, are you using factory brass or are you converting .223 Remington?



Regarding CZ design, how the safety works is arbitrary, what the safety does is not. The user should know their equipment. Beyond that, for sport shooting, no harm will come to anyone not being negligent with a firearm, e.g. it's not being pointed in an unsafe direction. Sure, standards are nice, but not everyone subscribes to the same standards. How would you older Americans feel if forced to use the metric system? Afterall, the rest of the world's using it, why use a "backward" system of measurement that can cause loss of life, limb and property to those not familiar with your antique, arbitrary system? Don't be a hypocrite now... If you don't like the CZ's safety, don't buy one. It's pretty simple, really.

I have Sako L461's in .20 Vartarg and .221 Fireball. No modifications of any kind were necessary for the shorter cartridge to feed perfectly. The same is true of a Mini Mark X I have in .221 Fireball. I also have a Sako L46 in .300 Blackout which feeds perfectly from the single-stack detachable magazine of that model without any modification. I doubt any kind of modification being necessary for the Fireball in any of these "mini" bolt actions.

As to the CZ's safety, this is what the magazine article which .218Bee linked to has to say in part: "While the 455 was a reliable and successful platform, perhaps the biggest complaint about it was the lack of an “American-style” push-to-Fire safety. For years hunter safety instructors and 4-H shooting coaches have been begging CZ to add this to its rimfire rifles, and CZ listened.
I'm not sure where the author of the article came up with the term "American style" regarding the safety. But he is certainly correct regarding shooting instructors and their view of reverse-operating safeties. Virtually every gun safety, regardless of country of origin, which operates in a forward-backward motion uses the forward position as "fire" and the rearward position as "safe". Tang safeties, trigger safeties, "Model 70 type" bolt safeties, even pistol safeties all use this same forward motion to place the firearm in "fire" position.

Familiarity with one's firearm is essential to safety. I own dozens of rifles and am familiar with all of them. I am especially familiar with the single one I own with a backward operating safety which is why, as I said, I NEVER utilize the safety on that rifle and NEVER allow anyone to shoot that rifle without closely supervising them.

This same rifle happens to have two triggers -- one is the lever which "sets" the trigger and the other is the lever which fires the gun. As with ALL double set triggers, the rear one is the set and the front one drops the sear and fires the gun. What if CZ had chosen to reverse this order, making it different from the hundreds of thousands of other rifles with set triggers in the world? Would you then regard this as "arbitrary" and an issue only if the shooter is careless and "unfamiliar" with a particular firearm?

Let's go a step further. A bolt could be designed to operate by lifting it to lock and shoving it down to open. It is only convention (and operating convenience) which causes ALL bolt actions to lock by turning the bolt down and not up. Is this another "arbitrary" convention which is no big deal if a manufacturer chooses to ignore it?

So far as I know, and fortunately for all involved, neither Brno nor CZ has ever been sued over their backward safeties. Regardless of how you may feel about product liability, if such a case were brought it would be virtually a legal cake walk. CZ is wise to be modifying their safeties to work like everybody else in the known universe -- gas on the right and brake on the left.

"As to the CZ's safety, this is what the magazine article which .218Bee linked to has to say in part: "While the 455 was a reliable and successful platform, perhaps the biggest complaint about it was the lack of an “American-style” push-to-Fire safety. For years hunter safety instructors and 4-H shooting coaches have been begging CZ to add this to its rimfire rifles, and CZ listened."

Nowhere in this does CZ say they are making the change because they consider it safer; they're making it clear that they're succumbing to market pressure. The overwhelming majority of the people harping on about the death-trap, baby-killing CZ safety are North Americans and, like it or not, we constitute by far the largest and most lucrative firearms market in the world. CZ fears that the constant complaining about this issue is going to negatively impact their sales in this crucial market, so they're surrendering to the squeaky wheel.


"I'm not sure where the author of the article came up with the term "American style" regarding the safety."

It's a natural assumption, since this is almost exclusively a North American complaint.


"So far as I know, and fortunately for all involved, neither Brno nor CZ has ever been sued over their backward safeties. Regardless of how you may feel about product liability, if such a case were brought it would be virtually a legal cake walk. CZ is wise to be modifying their safeties to work like everybody else in the known universe -- gas on the right and brake on the left."

Even given that American society is far more litigious than, well, anybody's, I still don't see it as a cakewalk when the current safety is fully compliant with all legal requirements and, notwithstanding the oft-repeated loud opinions of many of my fellow North Americans, there is no scientific or statistical evidence extant that the current safety is in any way inherently unsafe. The woods and ranges are not littered with the dead and wounded of the CZ menace. No case. Ba-boom.

And for what it's worth, until very recently I owned a car that came from the factory many years ago with the gas pedal in the middle. Never ran over anybody.

Also for what it's worth, in the over 50 years since I first shouldered a rifle, I have owned and/or used a pretty diverse selection of firearms, the majority of which have not had the "Party-approved" safety layout, and I have yet to shoot anything I did not intend. This is one North American that's not going to be stampeded by the lowing herd into being told he must bow to someone else's pet idea of what constitutes an "proper" safety. In point of fact, I'm presently hunting down the parts to un-convert a vandalized ZKK from its' current "swinging door" Winchester safety - which I will likely beat into scrap metal with my hefty driller's hammer when I remove it, just as an act of childish defiance.

Originally posted by cdsx:
Nowhere in this does CZ say they are making the change because they consider it safer; they're making it clear that they're succumbing to market pressure. The overwhelming majority of the people harping on about the death-trap, baby-killing CZ safety are North Americans and, like it or not, we constitute by far the largest and most lucrative firearms market in the world. CZ fears that the constant complaining about this issue is going to negatively impact their sales in this crucial market, so they're surrendering to the squeaky wheel.

So whether driven exclusively by forces in the marketplace or by the equally valid need to manage their business in anticipation of potential litigation, CZ is making changes that they feel will best position them for the future.

Our agreement or disagreement doesn't appear to be required.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
I have Sako L461's in .20 Vartarg and .221 Fireball. No modifications of any kind were necessary for the shorter cartridge to feed perfectly.

Thank you, that is good news.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
What if CZ had chosen to reverse [the usual double set triggers function]? Would you then regard this as "arbitrary" and an issue only if the shooter is careless and "unfamiliar" with a particular firearm?

Yes. If the end-user can't be bothered to read the manual, or familiarize themselves with the firearm, or is mechanically incompetent with otherwise safe, but lethal devices, then it would not be the design's fault; it would be operator-error in the case of a negligent discharge. However, I am not a firearms manufacturer, an insurance agent, or a lawyer, nor am I in the business of protecting idiots from themselves. I do own a CZ though, and I haven't found fault with the safety's design.

Besides all of this is off topic anyway. Sorry, Mark.

Yes, apologies Mark, for contributing to the derailment of your thread. Our opposing views on the safety issue aside, the ZKK you commissioned from Aaron is a beautiful (and functional) work of art. You have fine taste in rifles, and your Fireball project has a great audience, too. Keep it up!

I have a CZ 527 in 221 Fireball. The safety is no issue to me. I think of it as a hammer fired rifle. To shoot, I “cock the hammer”. To make safe, I let the “hammer down”. That mindset works for me. Just don’t make the mistake of pulling the trigger to let the “hammer” down!

I had Jim Kobe make me a 221 fb on a Sako A1 action, Shilen barrel, and McMillan Sako hunter stock. It turned out great. It functions perfect and is very accurate.

I now have three rifles chambered for cartridges based on the Fireball -- a .20 Vartarg, a .221 Fireball, and a .300 Blackout. All are on Sako actions. All are splendidly accurate.

I very much doubt that Remington envisioned that its shortened little .222 case truncated to fit in a Buck Rogers-looking plastic-stocked bolt action handgun would ever become so popular for rifles and wildcats. Ya just never know.

I've seen many a coyote fall to my buddy's 20 VarTarg. I use the larger 20 Practical which is equally easy to make perform like a champ.

Like several others have said: both cartridges function perfectly in a 461 or Howa mini with no mods at all.

Yes gents, the Fireball is a wonderful case/cartridge. Well done y'all!

Zeke