Rocky’s

                 Reloading

                                        Room

BROWNING'S MICRO-MEDALLION HORNET

 

 Let me say this right up front.  Browning's new Micro-Medallion A-Bolt in .22 Hornet is going to be a real winner among varminters.   Not all varminters, you understand, because no one gun can be all things to all shooters.  But for the walk-around hunter, the fox shooter, the medium range ground squirrel gunner or even those who varmint only occasionally, this gun is worth waiting for.   And it's a good thing too, because it's a rifle the varminting world waited almost four years to see.

 I live only a few miles from Browning's corporate headquarters in Morgan, Utah, and visited the site in late 1989.  During my discussions with affable Public Relations Manager Paul Thompson, I mentioned that I was then working on an article about the .22 K-Hornet variant for Varmint Hunter magazine (see issue #5).  Paul grew a kind of half-smile, leaned close and said, "I'll let you in on a secret.  We're about to announce production of our Micro-Medallion scaled down for .22 Hornet.  If you're interested, I'll see to it that you get a sample rifle for review." 

 Would I be interested?  Do prairie dogs live in holes?  Hell yes, I was interested.  Then Paul revealed a detail that seemed unimportant at the time.  Browning  engineers, said Thompson, had everything perfected except the magazine.  Seems it was proving a bit difficult to get those tiny rimmed rounds to feed from their existing box-style magazine.

 It must have been more vexing than they supposed, for although the rifle was announced as predicted in the 1990 catalog, not a single rifle was shipped in that production year.  The rifle promptly and quietly vanished from the 1991 through 1993 catalogs.  Although I don't know for sure, my best guess is that Browning's other new product developments, such as their BDM 9mm pistol, recoilless trap shotgun, new Gold shotgun and revolutionary BOSS system put the Hornet project on a cool back burner for several years.   

 It might have languished there indefinitely if it weren't for Browning's competition.  In 1993 Sturm, Ruger announced their model 77/22 rimfire bolt action rifle was being beefed up for the Hornet.  Demand for Ruger Hornets was immediate and hot, to say the least.  That heat soon got the Browning project bubbling again.  And that, I would bet, is how we varminters finally got this sexy little rifle.

 The solution to the feeding problem was to go to a three-shot magazine with all rounds vertically aligned.  The rear edge of the magazine is angled backwards, similar to most .22 rimfire pistol magazines.  This lets each round's rim ride ahead of the round loaded below it, preventing feeding jams.  It works.   And, the magazine snaps onto the rifle's floor plate, just like the magazines for its bigger A-Bolt brothers.  Because it's removable, you can carry one or two spare magazines in a pocket, ready for fast reloads.

SCALE MODEL RIFLE?

 Physically, the Micro-Medallion Browning looks almost like a scale model of its big brothers.  The receiver is a scant 6.5 inches in length, nearly an inch shorter than even the short action version of the regular A-Bolt.  On the scales, my rifle weighs a feathery six pounds four ounces as it comes from the box.  One difference between the real rifle and the descriptive brochure is in the barrel length.  While the brochure says the barrel is 20 inches, my sample tapes a full 22.  No prehistoric iron sights clutter the slim barrel.  Muzzle diameter is a wispy 0.57-inch with a match-style countersunk crown.  Twist rate of the .224-inch barrel is the traditional one turn in 16 inches, perfect for bullets up to about 45 grains. 

 I do regret that Browning does not offer their BOSS accuracy system on any of the Micro-Medallion rifles, but that's probably due to the slim contour of the barrels.  Perhaps someday they'll offer a retrofit.  The recoil reduction certainly isn't needed with the Hornet, but the BOSS's almost Zen-like ability to shrink group sizes with the twist of the wrist is highly desirable on any rifle, but especially on a light varminter.

 Mechanically, the rifle is pure A-Bolt.  Three locking lugs at the front of the bolt allow for a short, 60-degree bolt lift.  Like other A-Bolt II rifles in 1994, a non-rotating shroud surrounds the bolt body and provides guide ribs for a very smooth bolt throw.  In addition, the rib that extends through the ejection port is polished and can be engraved with the owner's name.  Nice touch.  The bolt face is deeply recessed, and holds a plunger ejector and hook extractor.  

 The trigger is adjustable for weight of pull through a range of about six down to about three pounds.  From the factory, the trigger is set at about five pounds pull.  Almost miraculously in today's society, the owner's manual contains clear instructions on how to reduce the pull weight.  A jeweler's screwdriver is needed for the tiny adjustment screw, but the process is simple.  Set at the lower end of this range, the break is crisp with no creep and very little overtravel.  Although three pounds might seem quite high for those accustomed to bull-barreled bench rifles, it's perfect for a light walk-around rifle. 

 At the rear of the receiver, a cocking indicator protrudes from underneath a sculptured bolt tailpiece for a visible and tactile "cocked" indication.  Immediately behind it is a two-position sliding safety located on the tang.  Action is positive, smooth and silent.  When "on," the trigger is blocked and the bolt cannot be opened.  When moved to "off," a red dot is exposed.  At the left rear of the receiver is a grooved horizontal bar which serves as the bolt stop and release.  Like everything else on the rifle, it works slickly.

 None of these dry facts properly convey how this rifle feels and carries.  Try as I might, I can't think of a descriptive that fits better than "dainty".  Ok, that's not an adjective that's used very often with guns, but that's just how the Browning Hornet strikes me.  Nothing else says it so well.  I don't mean to say that the rifle is fragile, though.  Instead, it's closer to what engineers call "elegant," meaning it has exactly what it takes to do the job with nothing extra.  As a catch-as-can kind of walk-around varminting rifle, the Browning Hornet is as near perfection as I've ever seen.  It's slimmer and lighter than some .22 rimfires, yet fires a much more potent round.  Plus, it's one of the best proportioned and most beautifully finished factory guns I've ever seen.  The flat, angled sides of the receiver and the magazine floor plate are covered with nicely done roll engraving, and all metal is well polished and deeply blued.  The stock is beautifully proportioned in the classic style with cut checkering and a gloss finish that's hard and deep.  The forend and pistol grip have attractive rosewood caps devoid of ugly white spacers or California-style flares.  At the butt is a solid black rubber recoil pad that won't slip if you lean the rifle against something.  I really like that. The rifle comes equipped with sling studs and locking swivels, another nice touch.  Have I mentioned yet that I like this rifle?  And before you say it; no, I'm not being paid by Browning to say all this.  If I found something I didn't like, I'd say it.

 ONE SMALL PEEVE

 So, did I find something wrong with the Micro-Medallion Hornet?  Only one small thing.  Just like Browning's engineers, I have trouble with the rifle's magazine.  It feeds and functions perfectly, let me hasten to say, but loading the magazine is the pits.  Because of their rims, Hornet cartridges have to be fed into the magazine with a distinct down and back motion.  This necessity makes it almost impossible to load the magazine through the ejection port, and very difficult even with the floor plate open unless you completely remove the magazine from the floor plate.  This is a pain.  A-Bolt rifles chambered for rimless rounds are easily loaded through the ejection port or directly into the magazine with the floor plate open.  Difficulties with the Hornet version aren't the fault of Browning designers, but are simply a result of the cartridge being rimmed.  Otherwise, the rifle is faultless.

 But shooting is where rifles become truly beautiful.  Fortunately, the Browning Hornet is a winner here, too.  I haven't had the chance to test one of the Ruger Hornets, but other writers have reported accuracy no better than 1.5 to 1.75 inches.  My Browning beat that from the first, and continues to improve as the barrel laps itself in.  Because the .22 Hornet is such a mild round, I decided not to break the rifle in using my usual practice of fire one round and clean the barrel, fire one and clean and so forth for 20 rounds, then fire two and clean through a total of 50 rounds.  Instead, I cleaned every five shots from the very beginning.  That allowed me to shoot groups and record velocities while breaking the rifle in.  The down side is that the first shot in each string usually landed outside the group, as it does with many rifles. 

 To allow for these clean-barrel fliers, I carefully noted the strike of the first shot in each group through a spotting scope, then recorded the remaining four shots as the official group for that series.  After a couple of hundred shots, the tendency of the first shot to go wide was much reduced.  At that point, I began counting all five shots as official groups.  As a result, some of the average group sizes in the accompanying table are from four-shot and some from five-shot groups.  This isn't of any real significance since there was little if any difference in four- versus five-shot group sizes. Reloading results fell right along predicted lines, with two exceptions that I'll relate in a moment.  After all, with some six decades of history, the Hornet is a cartridge whose favorite recipes are pretty well known.  Excellent performance can be gotten with almost any combination of 40 or 45-grain bullets and fast-burning propellants such as Hercules 2400 and IMR 4227.  Only standard small rifle primers are needed, although match-grade primers can make a definite improvement with some loads. 

 The first exception is actually just an addition.  In addition to the classic powders for this cartridge, one shining newcomer may be the best Hornet powder ever.  It's Accurate 1680, a near twin for the discontinued Winchester 680 powder that the factory uses for its ammo.  I don't think the similarity in the two powders' numeric names is much of a coincidence, although the two are NOT identical and load data cannot be indiscriminately substituted.  But with Accurate 1680 around, I won't lament the passing of WW 680. 

 I'm also looking forward to trying some of Hodgdon's new 4198SC, especially with heavier bullets.  The new version is ballistically identical to the earlier 4198, meaning that load data is identical.  If a manual calls for 10.0 grains of the old 4198, then you can load 10.0 grains of 4198SC.  But the new version has Short Cut kernels that pack into much less space.  This means that you will have to adjust your powder measure differently to throw that 10.0 grain charge, and also means that the charge will take up less room in the cartridge case than it used to.   That could be particularly useful in tiny cases like the Hornet, which has always been volume limited for this excellent and highly consistent powder.

 The biggest exception with my reloading results involved the brass.  I bought a bulk lot of brass from a mail order discount house whose name I won't mention.  But I suspect that this house gets its brass from factory-second lots.  I say this because many supposedly mild to moderate loads caused excessive expansion of cases, including the case head.  About two of ten cases expanded so much that the fired primer would fall out of its own weight.  Some allowed powder gasses to leak around primers at firing.  Again, this occurred with mild, starting-level loads.  As a check, I re-fired some of these same combinations using brass from factory ammunition and experienced no such problems.  Neck tension of seated bullets was also very inconsistent with the bulk brass, convincing me that many of the cases were poorly annealed and overly soft.  For this reason, the loads in the table may be considerably lower than what may be possible in this rifle using better brass.

  (IN)ACCURACY MYTHS

  If you've read anything about the .22 Hornet, you know there are opposing myths regarding its accuracy: one that the Hornet is uncannily accurate, and another that it is not only hopelessly inaccurate but shifts point of impact at whim.  If you know anything about myths, you know that they may have once held a breath of truth, but have since been inflated into hot air balloons.  So too with Hornet accuracy myths.

  The Hornet may never win any benchrest trophies, but with moderate loads and when loaded with attention to detail, it's as accurate as most any other smallbore sporter - which is to say pretty accurate indeed.  But its short, light bullets are also highly susceptible to wind.  The slightest zephyr will blow Hornet bullets all over hell and gone.  That alone might account for the "changing impact" complaints.  It's also true that many early Hornet rifles used side mount scope attachments and scopes themselves that were far from the epitome of stability.  Rifles like that haven't been produced for decades, but myths are harder to kill than a bare-fanged badger. 

 Yeah, but do the impact points shift?  Yes they do - but always to the downwind side.  Surprised?  I didn't think so.  Headwinds also lower the impact point slightly while tailwinds raise them.  Not much, but measurably and predictably so.  The key is predictable.  Feed ballistic coefficient, muzzle velocity and wind speed and direction into any computer ballistic program and the solution matches very well with what the rifle delivers.  Given its medium velocity and the relatively poor ballistic coefficients of its lightweight bullets, I'd say it performs about as well or perhaps even better than expected.  Understand its limits and you won't myth.

  Puns aside, how does it perform?  On dead calm days using factory ammo, it hits about 2700 fps and averages just over an inch for five shots from a padded rest.  Good reloads can match or exceed that velocity (especially with 40-grain bullets) and average about three-quarter-inch groups.  Some "bragging" groups are a bit smaller.  If the wind picks up even a little, groups double to 1.5 inches or so.  Even its best groups wouldn't cause a target shooter to weep with joy.  But this isn't a target rifle.  It's a featherweight field rifle for small to medium sized varmints at ranges of 150 yards or a bit more.  Most shots with it will be taken offhand or casually supported at best.  For those purposes, it's just fine in my book.  It beats all but the very best .22 rimfires including magnums; and shades not a small number of centerfire rifles.  And it's cuter than a wicker basket of Dalmatian puppies, to boot.

   Considering that I'd positively lusted for this rifle for nearly four years, that's saying a lot.  And now that my evaluation of the rifle is finally complete, will it go back to Browning?  Do prairie dogs live in trees? 

Home

Hornet Load Data

Home

Back To Articles Index Page

Published in Guns Magazine August, 1996

Copyright © Rocky Raab, 1996