.222, .223 or .222 Mag?

[Peter M. Eick]

Ignoring a lot of other issues, which is the most accurate out of say a bolt action rifle (ignoring semis)?


Basically I was reading in my reloading manuals and they all talk about how the 222 is the most accurate and easiest to reload because of the long neck and size, but then in several of them they go on to say just buy the 223 and not worry about it.

I realize the 222 was eclipsed by the PPC rounds for competition, but this got me thinking. Which would be more accurate? I know if you are a hunter, then you can say well the 223 has better ballistics, then I would say well so does the 222 Mag then the 223. So why is the 223 so popular and the 222/222 Mag almost historic after thoughts?

 

[Onmilo]

.222 is still the most inherently accurate of the three cartridges listed.

.223 Remington is more than capable of guilt edge accuracy and as an added bonus, there are scadloads of Mil-Surplus ammunition available for practice.

.222 Remington factory loaded ammunition will generally cost more per twenty round box than factory loaded .223 Remington cartridges but can cost less to reload since maximum loads in the .223 use less powder than general purpose loads for the .223
Two notable exceptions to the factory loaded cost per round difference is the Sellier and Bellot and the Privi Partizan loads for the .222

.222 Magnum is a dead duck, the cartridge is all but obsolete now and difficult to find even at well stock gun stores.
There is nothing a .222 Magnum can do that a .223 Remington cannot duplicate with hand loading.
You will find no bargain prices on .222 Magnum unless you come across a shop that is closing the stuff out just to get rid of it.

 

[LeonCarr]

Ignoring all other issues, the .222, or triple deuce, is the most accurate of the three. I believe the record for the smallest group shot in sanctioned benchrest competition is still held by the .222. I think all of the other records are held by the 6 PPC .

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Jim Watson]

The .223 has the sales lead because it is GI, with a lot of government resources for development and a lot of vetrans familiar with it, just like earlier service calibers.

The .223 was developed because the .222 was not powerful enough - the then Army requirement was for a 55 grain bullet to penetrate a helmet at 300 metres - and the .222 Magnum was too long for the magazine of the .22 Winchester Special which was favored for a short time. So Remington and Armalite collaborated on a cartridge that approached the .222 Mag at shorter OAL. As I recall the .22 Win would shoot .223 Rem but not vice versa.

 

[Byron]

My experience between 222 and 223 is that the 222 is more accurate. I reload and the 222 just seems to shoot and bullet and powder combination extremley well. Byron

 

[BigG]

For some reason, the .222 has always had the accuracy rep among the three Rem cartridges. I am not a bench rest shooter, per se, when I get a rifle that will keep five under a dime or nickel diameter at 100 yds, I feel I have an accurate rifle. I've had a .243 Winchester and a .223 Remington that would do that. YMMV

 

[YodaVader]

It is getting hard to find a factory rifle in .222 these days. Even Remington , who introduced the cartridge , no longer has it in any of the popular varmint models like the VLS. I think the BDL is still made in .222 and the custom shop offerings.

The .223 can be extremely accurate in a factory rifle. I have a Rem 700 LTR and a Savage 12BVSS - both in .223s. They have the ability to be accurate with a wider range of bullet weights as well as both rifles have the 1 in 9" twist barrel. I have shot 52 - 69 grain bullets with excellent results.

Still the .222 was the accuracy champ for many years. In a full blown benchrest rifle it might be the way to go. For factory rifles , I had considered the .222 in the past but by the time I ever got around to buying a rifle there really were none to be found.

Although , with the Savage all it would take for switch to .222 would be a new barrel , barrel wrench and vise. But the .223 shoots so well I doubt it would be worth it. If I ever rebarrel my Remington I will stick with .223.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I agree with the post above about the 222 being hard to find. I can get a 700 stainless sendero in 223 but I could not seem to locate a new one in 222. I am starting to think custom is the way to go.

Since brass lasts a long time for me, I don't see the allure of the 223 brass availability. I tend to treat each piece of brass pretty carefully in terms of prepping it and the like.

My take on the posts is the 222 is the way to go for target shooting. I guess I will just start collecting information and looking around a bit.

Thanks!

 

[Robbot]

Sako still makes rifles in .222 Rem.
It is a favorite small caliber in Europe.

 

[rangerruck]

check this:
http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155617
totally sick!

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I found a nice heavy barreled varmint 700 (blued) with a laminate stock and 12 x scope. Obviously some ones old rig in 222. I will have to take a loop by/buy to see it.

Thanks again.

 

[YodaVader]

Sounds like a VLS - these were available in .222 when they first came out. I eventually bought one in .223. Actually had a 12X scope on mine for a while too. Good luck!

 

[Brian Williams]

I would love to find a new RemMauser mini in 222. That would be a great short range near development/house gun.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

If they (Remington) had made a scaled down mini-mauser 98 instead of a "cross-breed" 98/700 I would have bought one on the spot sight unseen. But until I handle one, I just can't get over the mixed heritage. I realize this is kind of "stupid" but heck with guns in general there is no accounting for tastes.

 

[Jim Watson]

You should know that Remington is not making those rifles at all.
They are Yugoslavian (or whatever they call that area now) and are the same as were sold by Interarms and then Charles Daly as Mini-Mausers.

Bear in mind that a second hand .222 was somebody's target or varmint rifle and was probably shot a lot unless he died, divorced, or took up some waste of real estate like golf. Serious shooters keep a log on their rifles and the original owner should be able to tell you how many rounds have been fired through that barrel.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Jim,

Your comments convinced me to start from scratch. Since I like Rem 700 stainless units, I have been checking out 700 SS VLS or in my terms a mini-sendero. I like my 25-06 sendero and my 700 BDL SS so I see a VLS in 223 as next. I will then shoot it a while with 223 and when I wear out the barrel I will switch it down to .222 since that is what I want in the end anyway.

Thanks for the insight on the shooting. I thought about it a while and I keep track of every single round, so why not everyone else?

 

[Jim Watson]

I think if you get it some Lapua brass, or weigh and prep Winchester and load it with good bullets, you will get plenty of entertainment out of a good quality .223 whilst wearing it out to make room for a .222 barrel. My AR-Krieger-VLD is not an average half minute rifle, but does it often enough to show it is not an accident.

The other possibility would be to just have the factory barrel pulled, replaced in .222, and sold. Save you the cost of .223 dies and brass.

 

[YodaVader]

The .223 cartridge in a good rifle is no slouch. In 3 different rifles (700VLS , 700LTR and Savage 12BVSS) I have seen exceptional accuracy. Like Jim said, load up with some quality components and you may be pleasantly surprised. My old VLS with Berger bullets still shot the best group I ever fired but I hope to beat it with my 700LTR or Savage!

 

[redneck2]

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e283/Indianaoutdoorsman/Gunpix-1.jpg
Two consecutive 3-shot groups. Very solid benchrest. Bushie Varminter. 268 yards.

I've gotten to the point that I'm not sure one round is inherently more accurate than another for the average person, particularly in a field situation. Bullets, powder, and barrel manufacturing techniques have evolved to the point that most anything can be pretty accurate.

IMO, the #1 factor in accuracy is getting a great bullet in a great barrel. Everything else falls way down the list. Handloader did an extensive test a few years ago doing the ultra case prep (weighing & sorting, flash holes uniformed, etc., etc.) and took another group and just loaded and shot them. No difference.

Guys used to post about how accurate their AR's were. I pretty much sluffed it off as BS. Now I know what's possible.

 

[Critter183]

I keep track of every single round, so why not everyone else?

Cuz paperwork takes the fun out of everything?

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Oh but paperwork is fun when it comes to my hobby. Knowing every round that went down a rifle barrel, how the gun was cleaned, when I shot it and what I thought of the round is part of the raw sport to me. Lots of fun!

 

[danurve]

I wouldn't turn down (if I was in the market for) a nice .223, but I like the idea of reloading so I might opt for the triple duce. Ok, a good friend at work and my brother both own 788's in .222 - friggin nice shooters. I think most 788 owners would take their rifles to their graves if they could.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I priced a Rem 700 VLS. 629$ less tax and rings. Figure another 600$ for a nice Vari-x 6.5x20AO and we have a project going. I see a fun holiday season approaching....

 

[44AMP]

.222 vs Mag vs .223

In a sporter weight rifle, all three are better than many shooters can use, and in varmint and benchrest guns, it just gets better. .222 gets the nod for absolutes, and the benchrest guns that can do it. One reason the .222 got the nod from the benchresters is that in that game, the other rounds don't offer any significant advantage.

The .222 Rem Mag was plowed under by the fact that the military adopted the .223. For virtually the same performance, but at a higher ammo cost, the .222 Mag was doomed. GI brass is cheap, and very plentiful. The military style semi autos are one popular market, and if you have (or want) one, getting a bolt gun in the same caliber makes a lot of sense. The .222 Mag is fading fast, and the .222 is going the same way, just slower.

I have one light sporter in .222 (Rem 600), and a .222 barrel for my Contender. I an quite fond of the round, actually preferring it to the .223 for sport shooting. But there is no getting around the fact that the .223 is the Govt. round, and tremendously popular. The other rounds will be around longer than I will, but I do predict that they will be discontinued long before the .223 is.