.222 or .223

[Axe]

I've now finally managed to secure some good land thats clear up to .308. So i'm now looking into buying my first centrefire. I don't have a need for anything really big so i've been looking at the .222 and the .223. It would seem that the costs are fairly similar for both the rifles and ammunition.

Speaking to my prefered supplier they tell me that the .222 is far more popular. Looking at the ballistics the .222 also delivers less power. Would this make it acceptable for long range Fox and Rabbit or just Fox. As always your suggestions and opions are valued. Thanks in advance.

[dunganick]

Oh no..... not another .222 .223 thread!!

 

i hate to say it mate, but it was covered in a very recent topic started by hunter.

 

however, my opinion is this

 

theres sod all difference for mr average in the field.

 

dosent matter either way.

[Axe]

Sorry guys, i've just found the other thread. :*) But please feel free to ponder my questions, particularly quarry suitability.

[dunganick]

if you body shoot a rabbit with the .222 its not good for much, the same with the .223

 

both guns have very similar velocities, and although twist rates can be different in most cases a sporting gun in .223 will come in 1:12 (.222 is 1:14) so no difference there.

 

you will use the same projectile in the same gun with almost the same twist rate, doing only 100 or 200 fps different (which is not alot in the scheme of things)

 

both rounds will take foxes to 300 yards, however this shouldnt be done unless 100% of a good boiler room hit, and a more realistic range for any rifle is 250 for a long shot. In my experiance you just dont see alot of foxes at 300 yards.

 

the only practical difference is that the .223 is now avalible in more rifles, and if you are serious about long range target shooting it can come in a faster twist rate and as such spit out heavier bullets and staibalise them properly.

 

practical difference you my friend... which number do you like the most?

[deadeye ive]

As always your suggestions and opions are valued. Thanks in advance.

Axe

 

Burn credit card Now !

 

Ive

[kip270]

As always your suggestions and opions are valued. Thanks in advance.

Axe

 

Burn credit card Now ! B)

 

Ive

I'm sure it's too late for that

 

 

If you can get head shots then the rabbits will be fine for the table.

 

It all come's down to your personal choice, but as i have a .222 i am biased B)

 

.222 :thumbs:

Edited March 17, 2006 by kip270

[Frank]

CZ 527 .223 and Federal premium Nosler 40 grain ballistic tip factory ammo. :thumbs: B) B)

Edited March 18, 2006 by Frank

[Axe]

At the moment I see the .222 as being a practicle round and cheaper than the .223. However, with the abundance of differing rounds and availbility, the .223 looks to be the better choice.

 

I didnt think you were gonna post anymore on this Nick! :thumbs: but since you have you had better explain the the twist rate in more detail.

[Frank]

better explain the the twist rate in more detail.

Hi Axe, have a look at my post above, just edited it.

 

Anyway, about twist rates.

Mine is a 1 in 12, which means, it fires bullets from 40 to 64 grain, accurately.

Then their is the 1 in 9, that handles more of the heavier stuff, like 64 to 70.

Their is a 1 in 8 which handles waights up to 80 plus, Tikka T3 springs to mind, but personally, i dont think their is a need for one in the hunting feild and only good if your into serious range work ect.

 

Dont forget, this is my experience and just a general rule, ALL rifles are different. :thumbs:

[Axe]

Thanks Frank Just when I thought i was getting the hang of it someone intoduced twist rates. What an exciting world this is. :thumbs:

[dunganick]

basically frank has it. you need a faster twist rate to staibalise the heavier projectiles (which a long range target .223 would need to throw) however the .222 has never really been a long range target gun (only shorter range bench rest) so tends to use light bullets like 40grain - 55grain as such it only requires a 1:14 twist rate (1 twist for every 14"'s of the barrel)

 

you can still shoot a fast twist rate gun with light bullets, however the majority of sporting .223 shooters will opt for the 1:12 twist rate, becuase they dont need to shoot the heavy bullets.

 

there is also next to no difference in handload amunition cost, the difference between my reloads for .223 and my dads for the .222 come down to a matter if .'s of a penny.

 

(bullets are the most expensive component, and their price goes up and down all the time)

 

however i appreciate you are going to be running factory loads to start with and i honestly dont know if one is cheaper than the other.

 

go for the .222 (its a gentlemans round) :thumbs:

Edited March 18, 2006 by dunganick

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

Sod all effective difference Axe

 

I use a Sako 223 and load my own 50g bullets. Either V-max or hollowpoints.

 

The only thing that I would add is that calibres are fashionable, and in the eyes of some, 222 is less fashionable.

 

So, in times to come you may find it easier to sell a 223 or trade it in than for a 222.

 

I have no idea what the twist rate is on my Sako, but it is an off the shelf weapon. I use 50 grain bullets as to my mind they should fragment easier than a heavier weight, and so should be more humane.

 

I suppose I could go down to 40 g bullets, but I think that they could be more affected by wind than 50 g.

 

Accuracy using a bipod is clover leaf at 100 yards. As I do most of my shooting at night it is very, very rare that I shoot at more than 180 yards. The gun is capable of it, but most of the mature foxes where I am are now fairly lamp shy, and so I usually dim the lamp down so that they are not scared off. So, target recognition at more than 200 yards could be a problem.

 

 

Don

[graysclassics]

.222 or .223 - it's purely a matter of choice - simple as that. The important bit is to check with your Firearms Licencing department to see what they are happy with. My local department (Essex) no longer recommend either .222 or .223 although they are both perfectly adequate in the field. They recommend the 22-250 which is far superior in my opinion. Some gunshops rip you off for 22-250 rounds in comparison to the .222/3 but if you shop around you can get them for as little as £33 per 100 that's Cheap! I will never forget my first fox with the 22-250 I had zeroed for 150-200 yds, my chance came and I squeeked the fox to 250 yds - it just sat and would not come any closer - I aimed between the eyes thinking it would drop into it's chest, it didn't even hear the bang - when I picked it up I had shot it cleanly in the head! It was a lousy windy winters night and the 55 grain did the job, I doubt if the .222 would have hit the spot. BTW why would you want to shoot rabbits with a centerfire are you Greek, Turkish, Maltese or Italian? You can use .22 centerfire for Hares at long range but not for bunnies. Right now that's upset everyone, I will sod off!

[henry d]

Yes please!

 

....see above " had zeroed for 150-200 yds,"

"250 yds - it just sat and would not come any closer - I aimed between the eyes thinking it would drop into it's chest, it didn't even hear the bang - when I picked it up I had shot it cleanly in the head! "

 

Yeah we all believe you :thumbs:

[Axe]

I will never forget my first fox with the 22-250 I had zeroed for 150-200 yds, my chance came and I squeeked the fox to 250 yds - it just sat and would not come any closer - I aimed between the eyes thinking it would drop into it's chest, it didn't even hear the bang - when I picked it up I had shot it cleanly in the head! It was a lousy windy winters night and the 55 grain did the job, I doubt if the .222 would have hit the spot.

 

BTW why would you want to shoot rabbits with a centerfire are you Greek, Turkish, Maltese or Italian? You can use .22 centerfire for Hares at long range but not for bunnies. Right now that's upset everyone, I will sod off![/color][/font]

Dont condone your shooting if you dont know your zero and dont know where your bullet is going, no matter what the calibre. :thumbs:

 

As for shooting rabbits with a .222 or .223, i'm simply asking if it is practicle. With the number of rabbits we have to cull, I dont have enough appetite to eat most of them. So is it practicle?

[dunganick]

theres no reason not to shoot rabbits with a centerfire. You can still eat them if you head shoot them, which is completely possible out to 200 yards if you know your gun and have the conditions on yourside. Granted its not economical to do, but neither is pigeon shooting with the number i miss :*)

 

A rabbit is a pest, and as such is often Culled for pest control purposes (like axe is doing) not for sporting reasons, as such if you kill the rabbit your job is done. it dosent matter if it is left with a neat .22 hole trough its head or its cut in half from you shooting it with a centerfire or even the HMR. Pest control is pest control, in my opinion something cant die quickly enough in this sport, so a centerfire is a very humaine and effeciant way of doing things (also effeciant at removing those beer tokens from your wallet.... but thats another story)

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

Please, please double check the conditions on your FAC lads before you start shooting rabbits with a centrefire.

 

Some police forces will still not allow rabbits to be shot with them - my 223 is for foxes only. If ever anything goes wrong (even if it is not your fault) you will be deep in the custard.

 

Don

[dunganick]

.222/223 almost always get cleared for vermin in kent IF you ask.

[miffy]

I shoot lots of rabbits with my .22/250 and always head shoot them (yes my ticket allows me to shoot vermin and i've even shot 2 rats with it)

 

If you can hit a rabbit in the head at 200 yards then taking a boiler room shot on charlie is childs play

[Axe]

Please, please double check the conditions on your FAC lads before you start shooting rabbits with a centrefire.

 

Some police forces will still not allow rabbits to be shot with them - my 223 is for foxes only. If ever anything goes wrong (even if it is not your fault) you will be deep in the custard.

 

Don

Quite right, this is why I asked about the practicality of using such a round first. I will be doing a 1 for 1 variation for the, what is now likely to be .223. Now it is looking promising I will discuss the conditions with my FLO and find out if it will be granted for both.

[Sergeant]

Personally i would go for a 223, a good round and pretty accurate to 300 yds, but its starting to drop a bit that far out.

[Frank]

 

I will be doing a 1 for 1 variation for the, what is now likely to be .223.

Good choice Axe.

Do you know yet what make you will be going for, if you get it?

[Ears]

.223 for me matie

[Big Dog]

.222 for me M8. I don't have much choice over here but even if I had, for the field I think .222 is best for me. My application is for vermin and fox.

 

From the reseach and testing I have done the .222 is very accurate and a little better than 223. For foxing really no difference. That based on my limited experience but is just another point for me using it in the field with smaller vermin.

 

I will have no problem using it on crows or what ever. My purpose is to reduce the vermin and if a .222 gives me more success than my .22lr then thats what I will use.

 

Cost is not part of the equation. For me there is no difference in shooting a crow at 150-200 yrds and shooting paper at 150-200 yrds. In fact it is better to shoot the crow, one lest to kill lambs

 

I have recently been reading up on the 22-250 and a guy I know has one. If I could get one on I would and deicate it to fox or rouge dogs that kill sheep and also target range. Its fast, seemingly straight shooter and in the windy areas I shoot would be great. My friend had a .22lr went for the 22-250 and said he was taking off the .22lr. He got it and can hunt with it and that not normal over here. I think they just saw it as a .22 and that was it. Not sure I want to get rid of my LR just yet though.

[WOMBLEHUNTERS]

.223 every time , had them both, still got the 223 and a 222-50, 222's go like stink are very flat , no stopping power though, why do the military use 223 (nato 5.56 )(there more or less the same), so any partly trained sqaddie can pick one up and it will shoot flat, a 308 (7.62) might stop an elephant but it's got a trajectory like a rainbow, in the right (trained sniper with a rangefinder and sniper turrets) hands they are as accurate as anything, 223's are the best not too noisy they shoot flat, have good stopping power,I never use my 222.50 any more even with the silencer it makes a hell of a racket and kicks too. 222 was all the rage 15 years ago they deserve there place in history, they are phasing them out at some stage, don't listen to all this twists and bullet grain nonscence but a tikka or cz 223 off the shelf , stick a decent glass on it and you are away