dieseldogg Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) For my first centre fire for Vermin control I know I could search, but surely the umble .222 has been eclipsed by the sexy .223 Your thoughts please. Cheers M Edited June 11, 2009 by dieseldogg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullet boy Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 Get a 22-250-better and faster than .222 0r .223 for Fox Control,although some may argue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyb Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 Each to their own, but I favour the .223 Easy to find wide range of factory ammo for Popular and plenty of guns of the shelf, and reloading options available Probably the most reviewed cartridge on the planet (ok in 5.56x45mm NATO - but still) Foxes hate it... I'm sure you could say the same regarding a .222 mind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 I've got a .22-250, but find the muzzle flip and noise (with an ASE CQB mod fitted) off-putting. Yes, it has a lot more grunt than the .222 and .223, but it's almost too much gun for my needs. I've had a .222, several .223s and a .220 Swift, but preferred the mild-mannered .222 above all other .22CFs that I've owned to date. I'm losing interest by the day in long-range shooting, and as such, the .22-250 is being ditched when I can find a buyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swift4me Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 Just to throw in here... In the US, the .222 died long ago in terms of sales and interest. I shoot the Swift, which is also not on every ammo shelf, but the .223 certainly seems suitable as I see the fox shooting you guys do. For American coyote shooting, I like to take a long poke if necessary in open country, but the Swift, and the 22-250 were both really developed for volume ground squirrel shooting in the west. One might shoot 500 rounds in a day off a bench at ground squirrels or prairie dogs. Barrel burning out and all that. As I got better at calling coyotes, I realized I didn't need the range. I still love the Swift though as I can always take the long poke and the ballistics are incredible. I'd say .223 for practical reasons. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) . Edited September 22, 2009 by JohnGalway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunganick Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 from what ive seen the .222 seems to be an easier round to make shoot exceptionally. If we didnt already have a .222 in the house i would have had one instead of the .223 .22-250 is really in a different league. more compairable to the swift or 243 Unfortunatly the .222 seems to be being killed off. Great shame. As such i suspect alot of people have only ever tried the .223 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardo Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 .223 vote from me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 Unfortunatly the .222 seems to be being killed off. Great shame. As such i suspect alot of people have only ever tried the .223 It is indeed a great shame, particularly when there's so much cheap, high-quality ammunition floating about (Sako 55gr soft-points for £15 per 20 in my local shop!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hodge911 Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 got a box [20] winchester 55gr .223 for 11.80 yesterday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 My choice would be .223 because of the wider choice of ammo and guns available. Both however are very good so whatever you choose you wont be disappointed. Don't bother with the big boomer .22s, as Baldrick rightly says they are too much gun for most occasions and they're far less pleasant to shoot. If you need bigger get a .243 so you can shoot Deer too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrelsniffer Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 My 1st CF was 222 and boy could it shoot. would group 5 rnds the size of your little finger nail,with homeloads. with varmint barrel. i then swapped it for 223 which still is good to shoot.but some reason still miss the 222 But as for 22-250 like the guys above say,and from friends who also have used ,they say same comments as above. Mick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharpshot Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 .222 suits me fine. it ain't the size of the nail its the hammer thats hitting it!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunganick Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 .222 suits me fine. it ain't the size of the nail its the hammer thats hitting it!!!! maybe not the most suitable quote, given that they all fire .224 projectiles of a similar weight, just the .222 has less powder behind it. but i agree, the .222 does its job fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatGun Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 .223 gets my vote for cheap and available ammo. Lots of choice in bulet types / weights so you can have a fast 40gn or slow 70gn round etc. .222 just dosent have quite the same availability Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.