Cheapest Centrefire Rifle to Reload

[sikasambared]

Title says it -- except that I'm not after obsolete cartridges. I know calibres like the 310 cadet (the Australian weird calibre) with cast bullets are going to be a pretty cheap option (trajectory like a rainbow though).

I've been musing about getting an extra barrel for my sako in a cheaper calibre, and swapping the barrel on for range practice. Is 223 going to be cheapest to reload for -- but how does it compare to calibres like the 17 rem fireball, which use much less powder?

I love shooting the 270, but it would be nice to be able to shoot twice as many rounds...or three times....

I see 22 calibre projectiles around here in Aus for about 10 cents each.

Any ideas on this question?

Kind regards,

Matt Redding

[DiscoRacing]

i reload .270, 30.06, .308, and 7mm rem mag..... also load .223... i like shooting the larger calibers that i have but the .223 takes half the powder of the .06 and .270... oh yeah.... and its much easier on the shoulder

[cornbush]

.17 Caliber bullets in my area are more expensive than the same brand and type of .22 caliber bullet.

I would say the .22 Hornet would be the cheapest common centerfire to reload. However, you have to plan your loads in advance. The Hornet has a short throat, and was designed for stubby 45 grain bullets. Some modern bullets don't work well, and many, if loaded to proper seating depth, won't fit in a magazine.

There are cheaper options, considering reloading cost, but even some that are still floating around would easilly fall into the 'obsolete' category. For example: .22 CCM, .22 Maynard Extra Long.

[Sevens]

When you consider that your brass supply and the cost of your bullets by far exceed every other cost associated with handloading ammo, I can't see any valid argument for any caliber on earth that's cheaper than .223.

Certainly, .223 is horribly popular, so there is great demand for the brass, but the fact is, there's more reloadable .223 brass than any other rifle caliber in the history of humankind.

And the bullets are light and small, and thus, some of the least expensive jacketed rifle bullets you can buy.

If you have to figure the cost of brass in to the equation, I can't imagine how anyone can come up with an argument that shows any true rifle caliber as cheaper to handload then .223.

I know know a lot, but this one seems like a slam dunk.

[FrankenMauser]

When you consider that your brass supply and the cost of your bullets by far exceed every other cost associated with handloading ammo, I can't see any valid argument for any caliber on earth that's cheaper than .223.

Certainly, .223 is horribly popular, so there is great demand for the brass, but the fact is, there's more reloadable .223 brass than any other rifle caliber in the history of humankind.

.....

If you have to figure the cost of brass in to the equation, I can't imagine how anyone can come up with an argument that shows any true rifle caliber as cheaper to handload then .223.

I understand the point, and agree that the cost of brass will be less for .223 than many other cartridges. However... how many reloads do you get out of your .223 Rem cases?

In my family, it is pretty common to see split necks prior to 6 reloads. If the case makes it to 8 reloads, a split usually goes all the way to the shoulder or case body.

My brother's .22 Hornet, on the other hand... I think he is up to almost 30 reloads on the first lot of brass he bought for it. No annealing, no excess trimming, only two split necks, no head separations. Add in the fact that you're using 20-35% of the powder required for a .223, and I believe the .22 Hornet is the better 'budget' cartridge.

There is still an arguement for velocity, though. The .22 Hornet has a very low case capacity. It is impossible to achieve the velocites you'll easilly get with the .223, for a chosen projectile. If velocity is important, the .223 wins.

[SKULLANDCROSSBONES65]

G'day, I just looked at my Sierra book and it shows the .22 Hornet using around 10 grains of powder, the .222 (witch I have) using just over 20 grains and the .223 nearly 30 grains, this is all using the same 40 grain (#1440) projectile. Assuming they use the same primer, the access to brass will be your next biggest cost.

[Sevens]

I make .223 rounds anywhere from 19 to 26 grains of powder given the different powders I've used.

Anyhow, damn good argument for the life of the brass. I'm trying to run through my supply rather than reload the same ones, so I can't give you a proper answer on how long they last, but good call. THIRTY reloads out of a Hornet case, that's amazing.

But I'm thinking that you can find a whole heap of once-fired .223, but Hornet brass would almost have to be a new brass purchase.

Still, it's a good argument and I didn't think of that.