.223 barrel reamed to 5.56/.223 Wylde
- Thread starter Nester
- Start date
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
^I thought you were asking about carbines, not the reamer itself.
I gotta say I almost hate talking about this as I know people are going to read WAY to much into this whole discussion, it always happens. If this occupies 5mins of consideration for most people that is 5 mins you won't get back. Buy an AR, buy Ammo, shoot it, enjoy it.
I've run about 10 different types of ammo of all specs through the 223 barrels with 0 issues and excellent accuracy, and just left it at that. There are lots of them out there and no one has reported anything other than they're very accurate. I don't want to say that for fear that the powers that be who are reading this will think, hmm... what else can we do?
For shooters, the newer regs really should be a non issue other than the cost and 10 minutes of time swapping in a stock for those wanting a collapsable, and the sky has hardly fallen on that front either.
I gotta say I almost hate talking about this as I know people are going to read WAY to much into this whole discussion, it always happens. If this occupies 5mins of consideration for most people that is 5 mins you won't get back. Buy an AR, buy Ammo, shoot it, enjoy it.
I've run about 10 different types of ammo of all specs through the 223 barrels with 0 issues and excellent accuracy, and just left it at that. There are lots of them out there and no one has reported anything other than they're very accurate. I don't want to say that for fear that the powers that be who are reading this will think, hmm... what else can we do?
For shooters, the newer regs really should be a non issue other than the cost and 10 minutes of time swapping in a stock for those wanting a collapsable, and the sky has hardly fallen on that front either.
Last edited:
Walt, I was originally reffering to barrels chambered in .223 Wylde. But if those are banned from US export than it would only be logical that the reamers would be prohibited as well. Of course no has has ever accused bureaucrats of logic.
Woohoo! 1,000th post.
ETA: WTF!! Now I've dropped like 75 posts back down to 925.
Woohoo! 1,000th post.
ETA: WTF!! Now I've dropped like 75 posts back down to 925.
Last edited:
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
^Don't give 'em any more ideas! 
Congrats on your Goat there Big Mouth. Have fun with her.
Congrats on your Goat there Big Mouth. Have fun with her.
Wylde Chamber
Please bear in mind in reading the below that I am an American that loved shooting in Canada. I was helping develop the AR (and .223) for many uses in the US, while competing mainly in Canada. You must understand the games and situations were somewhat different, and that I could test things in Canada before I could hope to here in the states. Several Canadians were involved. Perhaps they will have additions.........
This chamber was designed (early 1984) with several uses in mind. One of those uses was a ball-type round. Thinking back, I'm not sure I had any C77 ammo at the time that was good enough to shoot through a gas pipe. The C77 was horrible until late 1984. The FN SS-109 garbage of the day was even worse.
The main thought at the time, as I remember now, was the possibilty of a ball-type (AR mag length) match round produced for U.S. competition in the future. Later, there also was thought of possibly having only C-77 "issue" ball for Canadian fullbore matches if free ammo was to remain a part of the game. That is yet another interesting chapter.
Anyway, I was into so much .223/5.56 at the time that it all runs together. AR's, bolt rifles, special little rifles for unknown uses, etc. Bullet makers from all over creation were sending bullets faster than I could fit proper twists to handle them. Geez, this is a long story, and many people to thank for the quick development of good heavy bullets and fast twists. The experimentation had started at least three decades earlier, but there were many erroneous theories (and horrible bullets) that got in the way.
The Wylde chamber was designed for use in a semi-auto as well as any bolt rifle. Behind the throating was basically a NATO case body. From there forward it was something that Keith Francis (JGS) and I cooked up in a pretty short telephone conversation.
Never in my wildest imaginations would a google of the Wylde .223 chamber produce about four dayz reading. Neither can I imagine that a foreign country might, for any reason, ban it from import. I find it all amusing, as so little time was invested in this chamber design. The real time was spent in making things work downrange for the 5.56/.223. Many were involved in that.
For history:
The first real LR test of the 62 grain (C77) NATO round to 900M was at Connaught in 1989 or 1990. The DCRA made four ranges available for the test, and about a half dozen competitors were involved. We shot ranges of 500Y thru 900M. I had an AR in U.S. SR configuation and a 28" bolt rifle along for the test. The AR remained supersonic thru 800M and the 28" bolt rifle made it all the way. Both were still shooting good scores @900M and these rifles took the first two places. A few still look at me strangely when I mention shooting a 62 grain ball round to that range in competition. I'm afraid to tell them that several years later I made and shot the Governor General's final (900M) with the same round and came through it in (I think) 15th place against 49 7.62's. What a hoot !
Please bear in mind in reading the below that I am an American that loved shooting in Canada. I was helping develop the AR (and .223) for many uses in the US, while competing mainly in Canada. You must understand the games and situations were somewhat different, and that I could test things in Canada before I could hope to here in the states. Several Canadians were involved. Perhaps they will have additions.........
This chamber was designed (early 1984) with several uses in mind. One of those uses was a ball-type round. Thinking back, I'm not sure I had any C77 ammo at the time that was good enough to shoot through a gas pipe. The C77 was horrible until late 1984. The FN SS-109 garbage of the day was even worse.
The main thought at the time, as I remember now, was the possibilty of a ball-type (AR mag length) match round produced for U.S. competition in the future. Later, there also was thought of possibly having only C-77 "issue" ball for Canadian fullbore matches if free ammo was to remain a part of the game. That is yet another interesting chapter.
Anyway, I was into so much .223/5.56 at the time that it all runs together. AR's, bolt rifles, special little rifles for unknown uses, etc. Bullet makers from all over creation were sending bullets faster than I could fit proper twists to handle them. Geez, this is a long story, and many people to thank for the quick development of good heavy bullets and fast twists. The experimentation had started at least three decades earlier, but there were many erroneous theories (and horrible bullets) that got in the way.
The Wylde chamber was designed for use in a semi-auto as well as any bolt rifle. Behind the throating was basically a NATO case body. From there forward it was something that Keith Francis (JGS) and I cooked up in a pretty short telephone conversation.
Never in my wildest imaginations would a google of the Wylde .223 chamber produce about four dayz reading. Neither can I imagine that a foreign country might, for any reason, ban it from import. I find it all amusing, as so little time was invested in this chamber design. The real time was spent in making things work downrange for the 5.56/.223. Many were involved in that.
For history:
The first real LR test of the 62 grain (C77) NATO round to 900M was at Connaught in 1989 or 1990. The DCRA made four ranges available for the test, and about a half dozen competitors were involved. We shot ranges of 500Y thru 900M. I had an AR in U.S. SR configuation and a 28" bolt rifle along for the test. The AR remained supersonic thru 800M and the 28" bolt rifle made it all the way. Both were still shooting good scores @900M and these rifles took the first two places. A few still look at me strangely when I mention shooting a 62 grain ball round to that range in competition. I'm afraid to tell them that several years later I made and shot the Governor General's final (900M) with the same round and came through it in (I think) 15th place against 49 7.62's. What a hoot !
