Somewhere between 223 and 22-250

A

adamthebad

Regular
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
BC/AB
Nosler 22 CF was introduced sometime in 2017 with supposedly no parent case. Supposed to have a plinking barrel life of 4000 rounds and has a bit more snap then the 223 but not as much 22-250. One of the wildest 22 cals around.

has any one used this cartridge on anything...thoughts, opinions
 
much like the more recent .224 valkyrie the .22 nosler was design to function in the ar platform and give some more velocity than the .223/5.56 round. I think interest in it died out pretty quickly. Years ago I tried to find something between the .223 and the 22-250 for a bolt action that could be used for target shooting and coyote hunting (wanted longer range than the .223 and better barrel life than the 22-250). the only 2 rounds I could find were the .22 br or the even rarer .22 ppc. and have a custom gun built. I'm hoping that the .224 valkyrie will catch on. Mossberg was planning to offer it in a bolt action but last i heard it had been delayed.
 
Browning had claims that there chrome lined barrels they made for a while had exceptional barrel life with some studies to back up their claims. I think they discontinued making those, but maybe that's a unicorn that would check some boxes if you could find one, and like Brownings
 
Seems like 224 Valkyrie is gaining some popularity in the US. According to the YouTubers it can make hits on paper and steel out to 1000 yards with an AR15. Some guns stores here are starting to carry AR's in that cartridge and have ammo, as well. It would be a nice round to rebarrel in a Howa Mini Action or CZ 527. But I'd prefer a 6mm version because then I could shoot deer with it in Alberta. Similar to a PPC. A 6mm Valkyrie would still be better at distance than the 6.8 SPC that the Valkyrie is based on.
 
Hitzy said:
Get a 22-250 and load it lighter.
Problem solved.
Click to expand...

This; however the big case will still use more powder than a more compact round, and load variation with the large capacity can have broader consequences with pressure variation and accuracy.

Don't get me wrong, I had a .22-250 for many years, and regularly vaporized ground-hogs out to 3-400 yards; but as time went by, I got older and needed a lighter rifle and switched to .223 with no regrets; since then, I now have an AR in .223 for the range, and have down-sized to .17 HMR for the rare occasion that I go ground-hog hunting.
 
Last edited:
rifleman762 said:
Seems like 224 Valkyrie is gaining some popularity in the US. According to the YouTubers it can make hits on paper and steel out to 1000 yards with an AR15. Some guns stores here are starting to carry AR's in that cartridge and have ammo, as well. It would be a nice round to rebarrel in a Howa Mini Action or CZ 527. But I'd prefer a 6mm version because then I could shoot deer with it in Alberta. Similar to a PPC. A 6mm Valkyrie would still be better at distance than the 6.8 SPC that the Valkyrie is based on.
Click to expand...

I read an article on the 224 V. a while back where the author (Black Rifle or Rifles Magazine I think) compared it's performance with the 6.5 CM rather than the .223. I'm not one to hop on the band-wagon with new stuff, but based on his review and what I have read elsewhere, is nothing short of impressive. If I were younger and still actively hunting, I would consider having a bolt action rifle built for this cartridge; fast velocity retained at distance due to heavier, longer, higher coefficient bullets, and by all accounts very accurate.

Home loading should give good results with a case being more compact than the .22-250.
 
Got Juice? said:
get a 204?
Click to expand...

Not really in between .223 and .22-250; be great for varmints up to coyote size; but lighter bullets even at higher velocities, will yield energies about the same as .223; and at velocities similar to heavy .22-250 loads, barrel life will be much shorter.

Maybe 6 mm CM or 6 mm Remington? Both good performers; good velocity, versatility with lighter and heavier bullets; should be able to load for rodents up to deer no problem.
 
I have all sorts of varmint guns, but I really like my 6mmbr Norma, very efficient with powder fights the wind well. But some days I still like to vaporize gophers with other calibers. I guess two two two Remington would be in between
 
Not inbetween diameter size wise but the 25/45 sharps can match the 250 savage with lighter bullets. An 87gr bullet at 3000fps is ideal for varmints and acceptable for deer depending on construction. The speer hotcor 87gr is a great bullet. In a bolt action you could load it longer and use 100 to 110gr accubonds or partitions for deer and wolf as well
As for the fight between 223 and 22250 id throw in 222 magnum or even the standard 222 if you want to keep it classy
 
scott_r said:
You nailed it.
Click to expand...

If you have not yet shot a .204 Ruger you owe it to yourself to try one with 40 gr. bullets at longer ranges (400 -500 yds). Also go to JBMs site and compare a 40 gr. .204 to a 55 gr. .22-250 and you may be surprised. The .204 burns approx. 10 grains less powder and will generate pretty much equal performance with considerably less muzzle blast, recoil, heat & barrel erosion.I was a hugh .22-250 fan but got tired of buying new barrels, switched to the .204 and problem solved. Another hugh benefit to the .204 is that you can see your bullet impact with the scope on 10 to 16 power, fun when you are shooting gophers or crows.
 
adamthebad said:
Nosler 22 CF was introduced sometime in 2017 with supposedly no parent case. Supposed to have a plinking barrel life of 4000 rounds and has a bit more snap then the 223 but not as much 22-250. One of the wildest 22 cals around.

has any one used this cartridge on anything...thoughts, opinions
Click to expand...

With so much overlap between them, I'm not sure why attempting to find middle ground between the .223 and the .22-250 is necessary or even desirable. If speaking of bolt guns, the .223 has the advantage of being used in mini actions available from CZ, SAKO, Krico, Zastava, and others. If the object is to get .22-250 performance in a .223 size platform, it might be prudent to ask what is achieved? I'm not talking about differences in paper ballistics, but advantages that could be exploited in the field. I'll bet there is little to be appreciated in a carbine sized rifle by choosing a cartridge which typically burns 5 grains more powders for any given bullet weight.
 
Aren’t both of these cartridges designed for ar type platform? Is there any reason other than maybe a rifle that takes ar mags to chamber a bolt gun in these offerings? I don’t see any advantage to currently offered and readily available chamberings in a bolt action. In the platform they were designed for however I can see the appeal.
 
Bad Bob said:
If you have not yet shot a .204 Ruger you owe it to yourself to try one with 40 gr. bullets at longer ranges (400 -500 yds). Also go to JBMs site and compare a 40 gr. .204 to a 55 gr. .22-250 and you may be surprised. The .204 burns approx. 10 grains less powder and will generate pretty much equal performance with considerably less muzzle blast, recoil, heat & barrel erosion.I was a hugh .22-250 fan but got tired of buying new barrels, switched to the .204 and problem solved. Another hugh benefit to the .204 is that you can see your bullet impact with the scope on 10 to 16 power, fun when you are shooting gophers or crows.
Click to expand...

the .204 is the rifle I shoot the most. Use it all winter for coyotes. I dont shoot 40's I prefer the 35gr Bergers for fur. Best varmint cartridge ever. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom