I have always wanted a 222. Should I now consider a 223 instead?

3sport

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2022
Messages
534
Location
3 States
When I was in my early teens, I would dream of some day owning a 222. But back then, I did not have the means to acquire one. I was an avid small game hunter, and my trusty Remington 22 LR Scoremaster was OK for squirrels at short distance, but I wanted something with a bit more punch and distance for slightly larger game with improved accuracy over longer distances. I was never able to get a 222 when I wanted one. But now, I am in the market for a 222.

Now the question is, should I reconsider the caliber and go for a 223 instead? I have of course Googled this topic and I know that some consider the 222 obsolete. But you can still get ammunition, dies and components. I'd like comments and suggestions from the members here to help me decide. And if you have a favorite brand/action rifle, please let me know. Once I decide on caliber, then the next step will be to choose a brand of rifle and type of action. A few "bullet" points to consider;

+ I am an avid reloader, and I will be reloading for either of these calibers. I am not sure of availability of components, cost, and other reloading issues for each caliber.

+ Because I'm a Western aficionado, lever action would be nice, but bolt action would also work well for me. Nothing automatic interests me.

+ I no longer hunt. The rifle will initially be for range use only. But you never know. Hunting may come into play at some point. Preferences change over time.

+ Cost of factory ammunition should be mentioned. I can not guarantee that I will reload all ammunition, so factory ammunition cost may come into play at some point.

+ Finding a new 222 rifle for sale may be challenging, but I am not opposed to purchasing a used rifle for either caliber.

+ I currently have rifles chambered for 303 British, 357 Magnum, 22 caliber, 9mm and 45 Long Colt.

Any and all comments are welcome. Thanks in advance for the help with this.
 
Last edited:
To use for what, but the answer is most likely yes, go .223, the one exception would be a full blown target rifle where you expect to shoot at or under 1/4" moa most of the time.

Lever gun? Absolutely .223. Play toy for the range? Absolutely .223.

More options, cheaper brass, still a very accurate round.
 
I have/and loaded for both=the .223 is easier in most every way...EVERYTHING is easy to get in .223 Rem/5.56==NOT so much in the .222 Remington.

I DO enjoy building loads/shooting my 2 rifles chambered in the Triple Duce, but it just is harder all the way around.

I DO think that I can shoot tighter groups with my .222 Rem, than any of my .223 Rem. rifles, but it IS more work.
I would recommend that you buy a QUALITY Bolt gun in the .223 first....Bill.
 
borderline geezer here (70). a 223 rifle of today has a faster twist suitable for heavier bullets. not saying they cant shoot lighter weight bullets though. 223s have shorter necks and slightly larger case capacity.
...however saying that a 222 rem is not viable or very usable is just malarkey. 52 grain bullets and a case-full (book data of course) of 4198 is a marvel onto itself. brass is easily resized from 223. even once fired will do. put a 222 classic wood/steel gun on the shelf and a whole bunch of newer 223 rifles and i will leave with the 222 every time. jmho.
...heck even the cheapest 340/840 222 savage shoot well.
....about the only thing that might sit next to it, not replace it is a 6arc.....sorry for the mouthfull but what do you expect from a boomer.
 
borderline geezer here (70). a 223 rifle of today has a faster twist suitable for heavier bullets. not saying they cant shoot lighter weight bullets though. 223s have shorter necks and slightly larger case capacity.
...however saying that a 222 rem is not viable or very usable is just malarkey. 52 grain bullets and a case-full (book data of course) of 4198 is a marvel onto itself. brass is easily resized from 223. even once fired will do. put a 222 classic wood/steel gun on the shelf and a whole bunch of newer 223 rifles and i will leave with the 222 every time. jmho.
...heck even the cheapest 340/840 222 savage shoot well.
....about the only thing that might sit next to it, not replace it is a 6arc.....sorry for the mouthfull but what do you expect from a boomer.
I'm right there with you chief==71 years old next June.
I have done quite a bit of loading/fun with the Duce==Heck I have even made .222 cases out of .223 cases=A couple of rounds of sizing-turn necks and all-FUN caliber to work with...Bill.
 
I'm not a geezer by any means, but I do own a 222 that I'm quite fond of. It's an old Savage 340, with a 3-9x32 scope. With a 50gr sierra over 22.2 grs of H322, it'll shoot as many shots as you want in the same hole at 100 yards. A more excellent mid range varmint rifle I haven't found. I definitely prefer it over the 223, as it is both more accurate, more pleasant to shoot, and quieter. As far as reloading, it's not any more difficult to find components than anything else. The only killer is, the 222 doesn't like bullets heavier than 55gr; but not a worry if you're only paper punching. So unless you're hung up on a lever gun, hunt up a good bolt action 222 and go have a ball!

Mac
 
The Triple Deuce is a whimsical smile of nostalgia for dudes 40+, and really 50+, but really hasn’t survived into the last 2 generations. In 2025 and beyond, the logistical advantages of the 223rem so heavily outweigh the nostalgia of the 222, it just isn’t worth it. My first combo gun was a 222 over 20ga, and I did enjoy the Deuce for a long time, but in the current and future market, loading the 222 is akin to shooting blackpowder; nothing but whimsy. Pragmatism says 223rem on all counts, and it’s not short on smiles itself.
 
.223 is so much more widely supported by the current industry that the .222 Rem is largely regarded as obsolete.

Unless you have a specific out-of-production rifle chambered for .222 Rem in mind, I'd just look into a lever action .223. Henry has a variety of options:


Internal 5 round magazine with the Long Ranger, and the ability to accept any standard AR-15 detachable magazine with the Supreme.
 
For reasons perhaps known only to a handful of folks, the military opted for the 223 over the 222 … or so the urban legend(s) goes.
The rest, as they say, is history.

Logistics strongly favors the 223, and really only nostalgia is a checkmark in the 222s column anymore. I don’t believe a 223 really gives up anything to the 222 in overall performance (and likely accuracy), using todays methods and components.
 
I have considered building a .222 for a number of years. No question that it would be for nostalgia purposes, and that's probably why I haven't done it. I do shoot another cartridge that many consider obsolete-.220 Swift. Not that much different from .22-250 but I enjoy it anyway. Nothing wrong with .222 Rem, and the only thing that would be difficult to find is brass. Starline does make it but currently is on backorder. I say if you want it, go for it.
 
Last edited:
It really comes down to , “what do you want?”

I see posts about how the 222 is not supported, the 223 is? Powder, primers and bullets, are they not the same for each cartridge? Rifling twists determine bullet weight to some extent. The big hitch is brass. If you can lay in a supply of brass, you should be set for life.

What do I have? In bolt action rifles, a 22 Hornet and a 222 Remington Magnum. Yes, I handload. 100 rounds of brass has lasted 30 years.

Kevin
 
I have loaded and shot both. Loaded ammo availability (strongly favoring the 223) is the major difference, though 222 brass can be difficult to find at times. 223 is available with a faster twist, but I always loaded lighter bullets so that didn’t matter.
 
Grafs.com has all the 222 brass a fella could want at 57 cents per plus shipping. So there's that little issue resolved. Used die sets are dirt cheap on ebay; the rest is the same as for 223 as @StrawHat said. Not many (if any) new rifles are made in the 222 now, but given there's a plethora of used ones, finding a rifle is only a matter of how much you want to spend. For my money, I'd rather have a 222 as an all-round target/varmint rifle in my neck of the woods. Those that shoot over 300 yards might disagree, and for that I could see where the 223 would be a better cartridge.

Mac
 
.222 is usually gonna be SLOW-TWIST barrel unless you can find a new-production gun in that caliber.
So limited to lightweight bullets to maintain acccuray.

.223 new-production guns have a faster-twist barrel and can shoot light bullets and heavy bullets accurately.

Some of the old .222 guns have some real nostalgic appeal. If that's what you want it for.
 
I think the choices should be 223 or 22-250.

For what I do 223 is fine. I have an accurate bolt rifle and a couple of AR's set up differently. The 223 is a good target cartridge out to 500, maybe 600 yards and with the right bullets is acceptable for deer size game with some range limitations.

22-250 is a little faster and generally barrels are twisted for 55 gr or lighter bullets. Most 223's work with 50-75 gr bullets.

For what you want to do you want a bolt rifle, especially if you aren't interested in an AR. Not many options for lever action 223's and they aren't particularly accurate compared to most bolt guns.
 
So .222 has a reputation for stellar accuracy. Is there any science behind that, such that the cartridge itself leads to better accuracy? Another way of saying that, with 2 rifles with
exactly the same components, same case headstamp, primer, and bullet, will the .222 always shoot tighter groups than .223?

My thinking is it shouldn't if everything else is the same, but I've never owned a .222.

.222 is usually gonna be SLOW-TWIST barrel

That seems to be the choice in bench-rest rifles.
 
Saying one cartridge is more inherently accurate than another won't go over well. I know.

Why shouldn't it? It would be hard to argue that 6 PPC is less accurate than .222, or practically anything else for that matter. Just talking IBS type shooting here, not extreme long range or other disciplines, because of the context of the OP which was about .222.
 
My understanding is that it’s more forgiving because of the longer case neck. The fast twist probably helps because it narrows the range of bullet weights you are tempted to use too.

222 is a fun little cartridge and I’m glad I have one (a Savage 340) but I wouldn’t pick it over 223 if I were shopping for a new rifle.
 
I still owned the .222 when the .223 first came out. Back then not much difference that I could see. Now with all the AR stuff going on the .223 has pretty much buffaloed out the .222.
 
Back
Top