Base condition is very important to accuracy. Firing pins that left a heavy dent (R) tended to result in torn jackets or base defects resulting from artifacts left from the firing-pin indent.

Over the past few years, I've used a Stevens Model 200 in .223 Rem. for accuracy evaluation of that chambering, so I turned to that faithful rifle for this evaluation, too. Its typical accuracy with good ammunition for five, five-shot groups at 100 yards runs between 1.0 and 1.5 inches. The last time I used it in an evaluation, it averaged 1.23 inches using Black Hills 50-grain Hornady V-Max loads, so I was pretty satisfied with the five, five-shot group average of 1.28 inches from the home-swaged bullets. I didn't note any flyers, and I attribute that to the diligence in making sure I used good cases with light firing-pin indents to avoid any base defects.

There was excellent consistency on bullet weight from the home-swaged bullets. A random sample of 20 showed 17 of them weighed 55.6 grains and three weighed 55.7 grains.

With home-swaged bullet consistency and accuracy established, it's important to touch on terminal ballistics. As noted, the jackets are very thin, so even where it's legal to hunt big game with .22-caliber rifles, these bullets shouldn't be used because they will lack the penetration required. Instead, they should be stellar performers on varmints.

Much has been made about the fouling from brass-jacketed bullets. Corbin makes a valid point about the mercuric priming compound used in the past causing brass to be brittle and foul bores, but ultimately I think it's a matter of individual rifle preference. For example, I have some rifles that foul badly with all-copper bullets. So do a lot of other folks, which is why there are coated all-copper bullets available. In this case, my Stevens did foul rather quickly with the brass-jacketed bullets, causing groups to open up slightly after about 10 rounds--after which, accuracy seemed to stabilize. I don't personally care for moly-coating bullets, but this may be a case where such a coating would be a benefit.

Cost is also an important consideration when deciding whether or not to swage your own .22-cal. jacketed bullets because the allure of great savings is perhaps the first thing to come to mind. Up until recently, you would have been hard pressed to realize much savings by handloading .223 Rem. at all. But now that ammunition cost is higher and supply is limited, handloading .223 might be more of a practical matter than an economic one.

Bullets made with .22 Rimfire cases have thinner jackets than commercial .224-inch bullets. The result is that velocity should be kept below 3200 fps, and you can expect explosive performance on varmints.

Regarding economics, if you select swaging tools that fit an existing

O-frame reloading press, you're looking at an investment of about $600. The cheapest I could find 55-grain HPFB .224-inch bullets is about $0.12 per bullet. Provided you don't count the value of your time, and you use scrap rimfire cases and scrap lead, you'll need to make about 5,000 bullets to cover the cost of the tools. If you're after economic savings, then you're probably best off going in on the cost of the tools with a couple of friends.

Home-swaged jacketed bullets were every bit as accurate in the author's gun as quality factory ammunition.

On the other hand, the experimenter in me sees the versatility afforded by swaging, and that's where I see the value. Imagine the performance on furbearers if you swaged the case full of No. 6 shot instead of a solid-lead core. And Corbin suggested experimenting with plastic or cornstarch fillers under the lead core to shift the center of gravity closer to the center of pressure to influence bullet stability. Add in the ability to swage a bullet to any weight, size, or shape imaginable, and the possibilities--and potential--are limitless.