.223 and .30-30

paratrooper · December 20, 2001, 06:09 PM

Having carried an M-14 my experience with .223 is non-existant . I have 2 questions . What are the diameters of the shell casings ? What is the relationship of the powder in each load on the average ? That is to ask , how much more powder is found propelling the .30-30 than is used for the .223 ?
The reason I am asking is that I was wondering if the barrel was changed in the .30-30 and it was changed around to accept the .223 could it be loaded "hotter" so as to propel the .223 round at a higher velocity . My cousin in Germany is hot to trot on this idea . The logic is that the .30-30 chamber is stout enough to take the .30-30 load so the "hotter" .223 should fire with no trouble . I know there are configuration concerns but he is a Tool and Die guy with a small shop so the machining will be above reproach . Any intel ? Thanks .

Jim Watson · December 20, 2001, 06:31 PM

Dimensions and powder charges are not really relevant. The .223 is of smaller casehead diameter, takes a smaller powder charge, and still operates at about 25% higher pressure than a .30-30. You could not reasonably convert a .30-30 to .223 and load it hotter just because you have thicker steel. The action is not strong enough, nor is the brass case strong enough for any amount of use at higher pressures than are now standard for either caliber in its own gun. Known as TANSTAAFL - There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Keith J · December 20, 2001, 07:18 PM

If you are taking a 1894 Winchester to .223 Remington, it will not work. Although the case is .378" at the rim, the weak point of this action is the lock-up, not the barrel. The AR family is basically a rotary bolt with multiple, short locking lugs which provide for a rigid action. The .30-30 uses a very long bolt and corresponding receiver. At firing, the bolt shortens elastically while the receiver lengthens. Too much pressure and the case is blown out toward the bolt. When the pressure drops, the stress is locked in, preventing easy movement of the lever.

Stronger actions like the Savage 99 have been built to handle .308, .243 etc but these were still plagued with problems.

Even stronger actions like the BLR and Winchester 88 were built and handled the modern high-pressure rounds fine with thei rotary bolts al la AR style in the case of the Browning.

Converting the AR over to a larger case like something based on the .30 Remington (head diameter .416" or the same as the .40 Smith ans Wesson) has been done. This launches 80 grain MK's at 3000 FPS in a magazine-length round.

KYE-OAT · December 20, 2001, 08:21 PM

the .223, even with a smaller capacity, develops more pressure upon firing. Partly because of a smaller case, partly because of the much faster burning powder....you would have too much pressure on your hands.
Another thing that would hinder a simple rebarreling of a rifle chambered in .30WCF is the fact that the rifle would have a bolt face of .507"....while the .223 requires a bolt face of .378" .
While enlarging the recess in a bolt face is done often, I don't know of how one would go about reversing the process.
There IS an old wildcat, by the name of .22/.30-30 ....which would be an easier way to go but AGAIN pressures would remain a factor and I would only build this wildcat on a strong Bolt Action.

paratrooper · December 20, 2001, 11:01 PM

Thank you gentlemen for your expertise . It looks to me like a good way to lose half of ones head even if he could get it to work . Now If I can get him to mention me prominintly in his will I"ll tell him that you guys said it was a piece of cake . Guys do it all the time . No problem . <G> Thanks again .

December 20, 2001, 06:09 PM	#1
paratrooper Senior Member Join Date: March 31, 2000 Location: Kingman AZ Posts: 1,290	.223 and .30-30 Having carried an M-14 my experience with .223 is non-existant . I have 2 questions . What are the diameters of the shell casings ? What is the relationship of the powder in each load on the average ? That is to ask , how much more powder is found propelling the .30-30 than is used for the .223 ? The reason I am asking is that I was wondering if the barrel was changed in the .30-30 and it was changed around to accept the .223 could it be loaded "hotter" so as to propel the .223 round at a higher velocity . My cousin in Germany is hot to trot on this idea . The logic is that the .30-30 chamber is stout enough to take the .30-30 load so the "hotter" .223 should fire with no trouble . I know there are configuration concerns but he is a Tool and Die guy with a small shop so the machining will be above reproach . Any intel ? Thanks . __________________ TOM NRA LDMA AMERICAN LEGION U.S. PARATROOPER

December 20, 2001, 07:18 PM	#3
Keith J Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2000 Posts: 469	kinda confused If you are taking a 1894 Winchester to .223 Remington, it will not work. Although the case is .378" at the rim, the weak point of this action is the lock-up, not the barrel. The AR family is basically a rotary bolt with multiple, short locking lugs which provide for a rigid action. The .30-30 uses a very long bolt and corresponding receiver. At firing, the bolt shortens elastically while the receiver lengthens. Too much pressure and the case is blown out toward the bolt. When the pressure drops, the stress is locked in, preventing easy movement of the lever. Stronger actions like the Savage 99 have been built to handle .308, .243 etc but these were still plagued with problems. Even stronger actions like the BLR and Winchester 88 were built and handled the modern high-pressure rounds fine with thei rotary bolts al la AR style in the case of the Browning. Converting the AR over to a larger case like something based on the .30 Remington (head diameter .416" or the same as the .40 Smith ans Wesson) has been done. This launches 80 grain MK's at 3000 FPS in a magazine-length round.

December 20, 2001, 08:21 PM	#4
KYE-OAT Senior Member Join Date: July 6, 2001 Location: AR Posts: 121	I also thought of pressure.... the .223, even with a smaller capacity, develops more pressure upon firing. Partly because of a smaller case, partly because of the much faster burning powder....you would have too much pressure on your hands. Another thing that would hinder a simple rebarreling of a rifle chambered in .30WCF is the fact that the rifle would have a bolt face of .507"....while the .223 requires a bolt face of .378" . While enlarging the recess in a bolt face is done often, I don't know of how one would go about reversing the process. There IS an old wildcat, by the name of .22/.30-30 ....which would be an easier way to go but AGAIN pressures would remain a factor and I would only build this wildcat on a strong Bolt Action.

December 20, 2001, 11:01 PM	#5
paratrooper Senior Member Join Date: March 31, 2000 Location: Kingman AZ Posts: 1,290	Thank you gentlemen for your expertise . It looks to me like a good way to lose half of ones head even if he could get it to work . Now If I can get him to mention me prominintly in his will I"ll tell him that you guys said it was a piece of cake . Guys do it all the time . No problem . <G> Thanks again . __________________ TOM NRA LDMA AMERICAN LEGION U.S. PARATROOPER

December 20, 2001, 06:31 PM	#2
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	Dimensions and powder charges are not really relevant. The .223 is of smaller casehead diameter, takes a smaller powder charge, and still operates at about 25% higher pressure than a .30-30. You could not reasonably convert a .30-30 to .223 and load it hotter just because you have thicker steel. The action is not strong enough, nor is the brass case strong enough for any amount of use at higher pressures than are now standard for either caliber in its own gun. Known as TANSTAAFL - There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.