.222 or .223

[young1982 1]

I've got the FA officer coming around next week to sort out having my ticket opened for the .22 and .17HMR, at the same time were having a chat about putting in for my first centrefire.

At present I'm torn between the .222 and .223, I was going for a .223 but a bloke I met recently said to go for the .222 amongst other things he said it started life off as a benchrest calibre so it's more accurate than the .223. He did say he had a .223 and couldn't get on with it so he could be basing his opinion on the trouble he's had in the past.

 

I'm going to start home loading so my way of thinking was to go for the .223 if I don't like it I can have a look at what other .20cals use a .223 case choose one, apply for a variation on my FAC and the rifle re-barreled for that calibre.

 

I basically want you lot to bring your opinions to the table so I can make a educated decision by the time the FA officer comes around.

ATB

young1982

[Deker 3,478]

Specifically it's a...

 

.222 Remington

 

Its also a

 

.223 Remington

 

Remington no longer chamber ANYTHING in .222....tell you anything?????

 

The .222 is a good calibre, as is the Hornet etc etc... but we live in the real world!!!!

[lgray88 4]

id go for the .223 if given the choice between the two , 2 friends of mine have a these calibers. Both sound very similar but if you decide to moderate them you could get them down to around the sound of a HMR well thats how my mates .223 sounds. ballisticaly the 223 with 55gr bullet is around 200ft per second faster than a .222 with a 55 gr head or so i am lead to beleive, so its not overly much diffrence. The faster it goes the flatter it goes, Simple. and i dont think theres a huge diffrence in ammunition prices.

 

liam

[Deker 3,478]

id go for the .223 if given the choice between the two , 2 friends of mine have a these calibers. Both sound very similar but if you decide to moderate them you could get them down to around the sound of a HMR well thats how my mates .223 sounds. ballisticaly the 223 with 55gr bullet is around 200ft per second faster than a .222 with a 55 gr head or so i am lead to beleive, so its not overly much diffrence. The faster it goes the flatter it goes, Simple. and i dont think theres a huge diffrence in ammunition prices. liam

 

Hi Igray88

 

Like for like there is not a lot of difference..if you can find the .222!

 

.223 offers a LOT more choice, is much more readily available and being a derivative of the military 5.56mm there are also some very cheap brands about, such as Barnaul FMJ at £13.95 per 100 and Wolf HP at £18 per 100...MUCH cheaper than even HMR!!!!.......you will not find deals like that on .222...like I say, shame really as .222 is a good calibre, but is all but dead and buried!!!...Wait for the flack after that comment!!!

Edited September 20, 2008 by Deker

[jamie g 17]

any will be ideal to be honest. 223 has more legs at longer range and more bullet choice to which is better. but 222 is

very good acuracy wise and use to be the best on the benchrest before the 6mm came along.

 

people say the 222 is very accurate because if you look at the neck on it its very long this aids accuracy.

 

a lad on the bbs jonty has a 222 and reloads for it with 50g amax and its super accurate ive seen some of the groups at 150 yards and 200 yards and there super.

 

if you want to use some factory loads then 223 is the way to go i think. but if you are going to reload for sure then i would get the 22/250

[SportingShooter 0]

Now then Deker, .222 all but dead???

 

Your not that far wrong! There are a lot of boys still shooting the .222, myself included. But there are very few maufacturers still pumping them out, CZ being one of the few. (Come to think of it, I've just seen a new one advertised.)

 

I do have a place in my cabinet for the .222, always will aslong as I have a gun that is accurate. Homeloads are soon to come with mine.

 

Even though I don't want to see the .222 die away, certainly not as fast as the Hornet, In todays climate for ammunition range, prices, and guns available, the .223 or similar!!!! Is the way to be thinking.

 

With a 40 or 50gr Ballistic, either .222 or .223 is deadly. Up to you.

 

Regards

SS

[Deker 3,478]

Now then Deker, .222 all but dead???

 

Your not that far wrong! There are a lot of boys still shooting the .222, myself included. But there are very few maufacturers still pumping them out, CZ being one of the few. (Come to think of it, I've just seen a new one advertised.)

 

I do have a place in my cabinet for the .222, always will aslong as I have a gun that is accurate. Homeloads are soon to come with mine.

 

Even though I don't want to see the .222 die away, certainly not as fast as the Hornet, In todays climate for ammunition range, prices, and guns available, the .223 or similar!!!! Is the way to be thinking.

 

With a 40 or 50gr Ballistic, either .222 or .223 is deadly. Up to you.

 

Regards

SS

 

 

Unfortunately that is the point I was making...there is nothing wrong with the .222, it is actually a very useful calibre, but we live in an economic capitalistic society which is steadily shunning the .222! Shame!!

 

But this leaves us realistically with only one answer today if someone says should I get a .222 or .223!!

 

Re-loading could change this but it is an area many don't want to get involved with!!

 

Hey ho, nothing is forever!!

 

Remember.. Film cameras, VCR's, music cassettes, etc etc!!!

 

...spangles, jubbly, no, I don't either, my Dad told me about them!!!

[dwighet 1]

Lads.. what is the difference between 223and 222? your all going to say ".oo1"I know I could look It up on the net but I would like to hear different opinions...Im not talking about price and accessibility of factory ammo.. Im talking accuracy and knockdown power compared to its slightly bigger brother the 223.

[young1982 1]

I'm going to go down the re-loading route as I want to get the best I can (accuracy wise) out of any given calibre, but until I have all the necessary equipment I'll have to rely on sub standard factory ammo. I'm surprised more people don't do it once you go down the route of re-loading where you get your ammo from isn't a issue anymore, also the list of possible calibre is endless.

[Guest JohnGalway]

Just another option, and probably one that'll annoy you, but, if I was looking for a new calibre, if I was gonna home load, and if I was going to mod the rifle I'd go 22-250.

[Mr_Logic 5]

If you're reloading then anything will do

 

I'd take a 22 calibre over a 20 unless you fancy a challenge, more choice of bullet heads from what I can see (don't reload so no expert)

 

22-250 is very good if you reload, but tbh I still think the 243 is a better choice.

 

223 all the way for me - 1200 ft lbs of poke, 40gr bullet at 3700 fps. 22-250 is faster and more potent but also has more powder load, and is louder.

 

222 is roughly 1000 ft lbs so a bit lighter than 223, not worth bothering with because ballistically not different enough from 223 and a bit less effective.

 

204 Ruger is meant to be 22-250 like with trajectory, not that popular yet though, but some swear by it.

[young1982 1]

The same bloke who recommended I go for a .222 did say the .204 Ruger was a cracking little round, but because it's not to popular and I've not done any re-loading, and I don't have the kit I thought it's best to stick to something I can easily buy off the shelf.

I have had a go of a TAC .20 which I was very impressed with, it was almost as quite as my HMR

[jamie g 17]

If you're reloading then anything will do

 

I'd take a 22 calibre over a 20 unless you fancy a challenge, more choice of bullet heads from what I can see (don't reload so no expert)

 

22-250 is very good if you reload, but tbh I still think the 243 is a better choice.

 

223 all the way for me - 1200 ft lbs of poke, 40gr bullet at 3700 fps. 22-250 is faster and more potent but also has more powder load, and is louder.

 

222 is roughly 1000 ft lbs so a bit lighter than 223, not worth bothering with because ballistically not different enough from 223 and a bit less effective.

 

204 Ruger is meant to be 22-250 like with trajectory, not that popular yet though, but some swear by it.

 

i disgree with you there mr l my 22/250 with ase cqb mod on against my mates 223 with ase cqb mod on.

 

if your eyes was covered i shot both rifles i thnik it would be hard for you to say which one is which out of the two calibers

[young1982 1]

In comparison what are they like accuracy wise jamie?

[jamie g 17]

In comparison what are they like accuracy wise jamie?

 

 

both very accurate mate 1/2 inch grouping at 100 yards if you do your bit. my mate has shot a couple of 1/4 inch groups at 100 yards with mine and i no he has shot less then 1/2 inch with his 223. so about the same really.

 

i just like the more flater shooting of the 22/250 set it a 1 1/2 inchs high at 100 yards and your pretty much flat out to 300 or there about