Saw these on the hornady podcast. Thoughts?
- Thread starter mrcheesemoose
- Start date
They look interesting. I will try some eventually.
First response was very excited. Afterwards total disappointment. These bullets (so far) for the .22 cal version cannot be loaded in an AR. How stupid is that?
They said the bullet is too long for 'mag length'. Hence it can only be used in certain bolt actions that have a fast enough twist or in their new 22 ARC.
Yah I was quite disappointed in that as well. That could’ve been a big breakthrough for AR loads. A light bullet that we can get to speeds like 3000 fps plus the aerodynamics of match bullet would fit the AR bill perfectly. I hope they do come out with one that does fit that at some point.
This is one of the more monumental F-ups in gun world history. Utterly stupid if you ask me.
If you don't have a 1:7 or so twist on your bolt action it won't work either.
So basically an official bolt gun only .224 Valk equivalent offering? While it's a niche it does solve the problems surrounding that IMO.
If I understand correctly, the shape of the buller largely detirmings the BC and that includes the length. Unless someone finds some "shape that allows high BC with shorter bullets AR' are always going to be limited by their mag length. Probably why the .22ARC is a fatter cartridge to allow more powder and shorter to allow for a longer bullet.
You want it to blow up when it hits or not?
That’s why it’s long (the empty cavity).
That’s why it’s light for length but has the aerodynamics of a match bullet.
That’s why it’s long (the empty cavity).
That’s why it’s light for length but has the aerodynamics of a match bullet.
Mostly yes.
If you are willing to either buy/build a 22 ARC ARC15, and/or rebarrel a .22 cal bolt action with something 1:7 twist, then this bullet is totally useless.
I'm sure it works great in the 22 ARC though.
Here is a novel idea: How about Hornady make a 60ish grain variant that can actually be used in existing AR15s.
Then everybody is happy.
Hey man, we can't alter fluid mechanics. You need ogive length to get the BC. 5.56/223 doesn't have it at magazine length. That's why the 75gr ELD-M beats the 73gr ELDM, 75gr BTHP, 77gr SMK, etc... Some guys will be able to load it in a fast twist bolt gun .223 (same guys that already successfully load 75gr ELD-M's). We have 60gr V-max that will work in the AR-15. We have the 53gr V-max that is probably the best (bc vs. weight) .223/5.56 compatible bullet in the line-up.
These bullets are meant for the newer cartridges that have space for longer ogives. 22 ARC, 22 BR/Dasher, 224 Valkyrie, 22x47, 6mm ARC, 6mm GT, 6mm Creedmoor, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5 PRC, 6.5x47, 6x47, 6 Dasher, etc...
Will try in my 223 bolt gun loaded long to AICS mag length -
Wonder what that 22 bullet would do in the 22 Creedmoor?
FYI, these are Mach 2.25 BC's. Official media will reflect these soon.
.224 62gr
G1: .395, G7: .199
.243 80gr
G1: .410, G7: .206
.264 100gr
G1: .448, G7: .226
.224 62gr
G1: .395, G7: .199
.243 80gr
G1: .410, G7: .206
.264 100gr
G1: .448, G7: .226
Would there be trade offs?? Of course there would be. I am not at all saying that this shouldn't exist. Quite to the contrary. That said, this bullet technology should be applied to .223/5.56--with all of THOSE shooters in mind--- that specifically means 'in addition to, not a total replacement of...'
Why not make a 60 grain (or whatever) that will work in a normal AR mag? Will it have slightly less BC and all that? Yes. But they could make it for the terminal ballistics aspect weighted slightly more than a total BC monster...
Hopefully somebody at Hornady gets the message. It's not like they cannot do both. They can. But will they? Who knows.
That 62gr seems crazy high for the weight.
I for one am looking forward to trying some of the 62's in a 223 bolt gun on groundhogs
These look great for high velocity, good BC squirrel exploders launched out of my 22BR, 223AI, 22GT, and 6 dasher... unfortunately I have to use non lead bullets for all hunting in my state, including varmints. Ugh.
I'll definitely pick some up for testing and may use them on out of state hunts if they work well. Before the lead ban went info effect I had very good luck with the 75 amax on ground squirrels on breezy days, and the amax was much more "explodey" than I expected. If these provide near eld-m bc with a lighter weight and v-max like explosiveness they should be very popular.
I'll definitely pick some up for testing and may use them on out of state hunts if they work well. Before the lead ban went info effect I had very good luck with the 75 amax on ground squirrels on breezy days, and the amax was much more "explodey" than I expected. If these provide near eld-m bc with a lighter weight and v-max like explosiveness they should be very popular.
We had some barrels that were down around .380-.385 G1 but that was the worst of it. It gets better at higher Mach, worse at lower Mach, too. The 4DoF file (when it comes out if it's not out already) will be more accurate than the BC data. Pretty slippery little thing for sure.
If only the AR had been chambered in 6.5 Grendel or something similar
Why start off on a mediocre foot with a hamstrung cartridge when you can introduce a better version in your new cartridge? Odds are they tried it and due to the COAL limitations the results weren’t much better than the current .223 offerings so they shelved it and introduce the 62gr instead for a much better initial offering.
I personally am looking forward to hammering these out of an 18” .22-250 and an 18” 6.5 Creedmoor.
That 62gr .224 bullet has a crazy BC.
It's the same BC as the 75gr BTPH and should be good for atleast another 200fps.
It might change the game for medium distance 223 loads.
It's the same BC as the 75gr BTPH and should be good for atleast another 200fps.
It might change the game for medium distance 223 loads.
I wonder if I can make that .224 cal bullet work in my 9 twist 223. It shoots everything I've put through it just fine. That includes 73 eldm, 75bthp, and 77smk.
You would think you would have minimum twist rates, SD and BC tabled before listing them on the website. That's poor form.
I have developed loads for my 18” 223 with both 62gr SPBT and 75hr HPBT projectiles (3000 fps and 2760fps).
Plugging the numbers for the 62gr ELD-VT and the 75gr ELD-M, the 62gr hangs with the 75gr wind drift out to 600m then the 75gr starts to pull away (.2mil more at 700m and getting progressively worse) but considerably less drop.
If the .395 BC is accurate this might be a sweet spot of 223 projectiles if keeping the distance under 700ish yards/meters.
If it’ll feed in an AR then it’ll be the clear winner.
I’ve always thought 62gr seemed to be a sweet spot for 223, but there hasn’t been many good options.
Plugging the numbers for the 62gr ELD-VT and the 75gr ELD-M, the 62gr hangs with the 75gr wind drift out to 600m then the 75gr starts to pull away (.2mil more at 700m and getting progressively worse) but considerably less drop.
If the .395 BC is accurate this might be a sweet spot of 223 projectiles if keeping the distance under 700ish yards/meters.
If it’ll feed in an AR then it’ll be the clear winner.
I’ve always thought 62gr seemed to be a sweet spot for 223, but there hasn’t been many good options.
Last edited:
So here is another question, with the front of the bullet being hollow would that count like the plastic tip length in the stability calculator?
Yeah it's going to skew the Greenhill and Miller formulas because the weight distribution isn't "standard". Best bet will be once a 4DoF file is live to use the 4DoF app because it uses the specific bullet's physical model to determine stability. You can put in any twist rate and velocity at any conditions and it will output Gyro SG in the "table" tool.
There is an older version in the library, Proto V2 (Proto V6 is the 80gr 6mm), which is a little bit longer than the final production bullet so any stability calcs done with that bullet will be conservative. The Proto V6 was a similar situation and is shorter in the production bullet.
Maybe not... But that's what I've been told about the 70+ grainers I shoot in it and they shoot very well. Soooo...
1.05 Ballpark on OAL, .60 ogive length. There will be some manufacturing tolerance on both of those, but they should be tight within a lot.
Its a Hornady bullet bro, its going to blow up way before it gets to the target.
Thanks.
This might be a problem if you plan on running anything faster than a 7.5 twist unless you're just running them slow af.
Last edited:
I bet I can run them fast enough to blow them up from my 28", 1:7, 22 Nosler AR (loaded long, single shot sled).
.224 62gr ELDVT G1: .395, G7: .199
.224 73gr ELDM G1: .396, G7: .200
.224 75gr ELDM G1: .467, G7: .235
.224 80gr ELDM G1: .485, G7: .244
.224 88gr ELDM G1: .545 G7: .274
.224 90gr A-Tip G1: .585 G7: .295
.224 85.5gr Berg G1: .524 G7: .268
.224 90 VLD Berg G1: .534 G7: .274
.224 62gr ELDVT G1: .395, G7: .199
.224 73gr ELDM G1: .396, G7: .200
.224 75gr ELDM G1: .467, G7: .235
.224 80gr ELDM G1: .485, G7: .244
.224 88gr ELDM G1: .545 G7: .274
.224 90gr A-Tip G1: .585 G7: .295
.224 85.5gr Berg G1: .524 G7: .268
.224 90 VLD Berg G1: .534 G7: .274
Last edited:
You mean explode?
I guess there is a 30 caliber offering as well... 174 gr.
No details on BC or minimum twist yet. But the Hornady site says it's suitable for varmints 50 lbs and under. And of course match/target.
Can't really say I'm going to plunk down $40+ for a box of 30 cal bullets to blow up coyotes or woodchucks.That's a lot of powder and LR primers to do something that a .224 or 6mm option would do more efficiently.
Might breathe a little extra life into a .308 Win for LR target though.
I'm skeptically cautiously optimistic.
Mike
No details on BC or minimum twist yet. But the Hornady site says it's suitable for varmints 50 lbs and under. And of course match/target.
Can't really say I'm going to plunk down $40+ for a box of 30 cal bullets to blow up coyotes or woodchucks.That's a lot of powder and LR primers to do something that a .224 or 6mm option would do more efficiently.
Might breathe a little extra life into a .308 Win for LR target though.
I'm skeptically cautiously optimistic.
Mike
theyre saying 3300 fps in a 22 arc? which is 7 tw
I'll let you know! At 3600fps +, I'm guessing it will kill them very dead......
I have a spare 8t barrel under my bench that is begging for some of these. I'm currently shooting 64tgk's out of a 10t on coyotes but it's very hard to judge wind at night and it's eating my lunch past 400yds unless it's dead calm.
I've tried the 75 eld-m but I didn't get the expansion I wanted. I was originally disappointed when I saw the new VT was "only" 62gn. But after watching the podcast, I understand why it's light and I can't wait to get my hands on some!
Congratulations Hornady, this is exactly what a lot of people have been needing for longer range predator hunting!
That 174 30 cal might be interesting in PRS TAC divisionI guess there is a 30 caliber offering as well... 174 gr.
No details on BC or minimum twist yet. But the Hornady site says it's suitable for varmints 50 lbs and under. And of course match/target.
Can't really say I'm going to plunk down $40+ for a box of 30 cal bullets to blow up coyotes or woodchucks.That's a lot of powder and LR primers to do something that a .224 or 6mm option would do more efficiently.
Might breathe a little extra life into a .308 Win for LR target though.
I'm skeptically cautiously optimistic.
Mike
2.2.3 7.62 NATO/.308 Winchester has a bullet weight cap of 178 grains and muzzlevelocity cannot exceed 2,800 fps (+/- 28 fps for environmental factors and equipmentdiscrepancies).
Yep, they mentioned that in one of the review videos I watched. And I can see where it would be beneficial in that frame. I'd like to see some hard BC numbers on it.
Mike
You mean like a 60 grain VMax?
Push them fast enough and they will stabilize in a slower twist.
