What is the 222 attraction?

I had two rifles in the 222 Rem. Easy to reload and fun to shoot but now have the 223 instead. Just wanted something able to shoot heavier bullets and a little more reach. Also picked up a 22 mag for the close shots around the house and better on noise when shooting.
 
EJG said:
Never had a 222 but several 223's. Maybe the advantage of the 222 is that it never had the makeover like the 223. Chambers on the 222 are made for the lighter side of bullets up to say 55gr? The 223 especially with 1/8 twist is chambered for up to long 80gr bullets leaving a huge jump for 40gr. The 223 T3's in 1/8 seem to have a reputation to not be the most accurate with light bullets...just ok. With say 75gr it all comes together.

edi
Click to expand...
Yer making me want a 222. Stop it. lol
 
As has been said the Triple Deuce, with its 1:14" twist [early BSA's & Sako's had 1:16" twist] was designed & made for 50-53 grain bullets.

The original .223 [.222 Remington Special] was designed for a heavier 55 gr. FMJ bullet, & was originally chambered in barrels with the same 1:14" twist as the .222, but shortly thereafter, the bullet was changed to a BT design for longer range stability. This required a 1:12" twist. Fast forward a decade or so and the 55 gr. bullet was changed to a 62 gr. [SS109] bullet which required an even faster twist of 1:9". For use with C78 tracers, an even faster 1:7" twist is required, hence the change to barrels with a 1:7" twist.

It is a pet peeve of mine hearing people say that "a .223 is a .223 is a .223".
NO, they are NOT!
A .223 with a 1:14" or 1:12" twist is a completely different animal than a .223 with a 1:7" - 1-8" twist.
One is meant as a target / 250 yd. varmint cartridge.
The other is meant as a long range 600-1,000 yd. target / & shorter range deer cartridge.
Try shooting a .223 90 gr. VLD bullet in a .223 with a 1:14" twist & see what happens. Alternatively, try shooting a 52 gr. HPFB bullet in front of a MAX! load in a 1:7" twist .223 & see what happens.
I believe that that is the 1 instance where we should follow CIP rules, just as in the case with the 6mm BR Remington - 6mm Norma BR. Although the cartridge case for both is the same, because of different twist rates and different chamber leades, the cartridges are completely different, therefore requiring different names, which is EXACTLY the case with the different .223 chambers/twist rates.
Rant ends!
:)
 
It just plain works like the 243 270 and 30.06 . Nothing against the new stuff and the bells and whistles they all go bang! but don't offer much over the old tried and true. And if you are honest most can't make long range shots that some claim on real life game shots. One word explains the triple duce "SWEET"
 
I`ve loaded for & shot .222 for a long, long time. It is very easy to load for and in a good rifle will deliver exceptional accuracy. I finally shot the barrel off of my Sako A1 Varmint and rather than re-barrel it, sold it because I have a custom built .223 that will shoot the same 50 - 53 grain bullets faster, flatter & further with the same exceptional accuracy. My experience has shown that a good .223 if fed properly will deliver accuracy pretty much on par with a .222. Factor in the availability of free brass and the fact that the .223 is also very easy to load for and I decided that my .222 days were over. Having said that I think that the .222 is a great cartridge and one of my favorites. Anyone who wants to try one, go ahead and do it, it will not disappoint.
 
It is not an inherently more accurate cartridge than the 223. However, the muzzle velocity is faster so to the average shooter, it seems to be more accurate.
 
My .222 Rem’s are a connection to my buddies, my past, good old days hunting groundhogs in alfalfa fields in southern Ontario. Sort of a time travel machine. The .223 REM of which I have a ‘few’ doesn’t conjure up the same memories, and I’ll throw my hat into the ring with the chaps that think it’s easier to coax great/better accuracy with the old .222 Rem instead.
Remember driving to LeBarons to buy a brand new to the market Sako heavy Barrel rifle in the new stellar 22PPC caliber. Walked over to the counter to buy shells and opened a box to look at the rounds. Short puggy little things that instantly turned me off and I ended up buying another rifle/calibre instead. Just a mental thing for me but to this day I prefer my choice of ammo to resemble my women, long legs and curves and pretty !! I’ll sacrifice some performance for the above.
 
I don't own a 222, but I would love to have one at some point in the future. Given the choice between a 223 and a 222 in the same gun, the only reason I would pick the 223 is if I was planning on launching the really heavy 70gr+ options. If I was buying a gun for coyotes and bobcats I'd pick the 222 every time.

My reasoning is I just like stuff that is different. When I got into hunting and all my buddies were buying 30-06s, I bought a 270. Nowadays I shoot a 7mm08. I could have bought a 308, and it would perform virtually the same at the range and on game, but 30cals are boring. When I get around to buying my "moose gun", I'd LOVE it to be something different again - a 325WSM is what I really want but something like a 9.3x62 or 35whelen would be other fantastic options.
 
Bad Bob said:
availability of free brass
Click to expand...
Not if you want the cartridges to perform to their ability.
Lapua brass is actually ~$10.00/100 cheaper for the Deuce than the .223 & everyone that I checked is OOS for the .223.
Quality bullets are the same for both cartridges.
You want to use the same BR or Match small rifle primers in both.
Dies are the same price; maybe even cheaper for the Deuce, plus you can find Wilson dies for it with little trouble.
 
Out of all the usual suspects during my Yote days, the triple douce never entered my realm oddly enough. Kinda fell for the 204R and 243Win for my needs and never felt the need to consider one.
 
Shot a 222 for a little bit.

I found it significantly less “blasty” than a 223.

Could be my slightly damaged ears and I’m not advocating this, but a 222 touched off in a field at a coyote didn’t the same instant “eeeeee” a 223 did.
 
wheelin_ca said:
bought my 222 because it was the cheapest coyote gun I could find at the time (savage 340).. Sold it because of ammo availability (i dont reload) and hated the side mount scope.

now shoot a 223 for coyotes
Click to expand...
I feel like reloading is a major factor - those that do reload gravitate towards the 222 thanks to its great reputation for accuracy and the general availability of rifles on the used market, while those that don't reload have little interest in it (and from my personal experience, those who don't reload are also more likely to be shopping for new rifles, rather than used ones, which further reduces the market for 222.)

That would also explain why the 222 seems so popular around CGN where a large portion of us reload, whereas if I asked my buddies who don't reload about 222 they'd be like "do you mean 223?"
 
ShrtRnd said:
Out of all the usual suspects during my Yote days, the triple douce never entered my realm oddly enough. Kinda fell for the 204R and 243Win for my needs and never felt the need to consider one.
Click to expand...
If you fell for the 204 Ruger [introduced in '04], the Deuce was already, unfortunately, well past its prime.

The .243 Winchester would have been, maybe still is, the long-range equivalent of the .22-250, .220 Swift, .22 CHeetah in the .224 realm.
 
jamesharrison said:
If you fell for the 204 Ruger [introduced in '04], the Deuce was already, unfortunately, well past its prime.

The .243 Winchester would have been, maybe still is, the long-range equivalent of the .22-250, .220 Swift, .22 CHeetah in the .224 realm.
Click to expand...

Ya the little wonder cartridge (204R). Back in the old PHC Board (Predator Hunt Can) days, some regulars there and now on here were taking some insane shots with it to 400+yrds. 35gr Bergers or 39gr Sierra Blitzkings were your friend with the 204R.

As for the 243Win, sure knocked em down hard enough, if you didn’t mind the almost softball sized exit wound and weren’t chasing em for the fur market… But it was a better cartridge in windy conditions not getting knocked around as much as the little .20Cal 204R.
 
ShrtRnd said:
Ya the little wonder cartridge (204R). Back in the old PHC Board (Predator Hunt Can) days, some regulars there and now on here were taking some insane shots with it to 400+yrds. 35gr Bergers or 39gr Sierra Blitzkings were your friend with the 204R.

As for the 243Win, sure knocked em down hard enough, if you didn’t mind the almost softball sized exit wound and weren’t chasing em for the fur market… But it was a better cartridge in windy conditions not getting knocked around as much as the little .20Cal 204R.
Click to expand...
What sort of bullets were you using in the 243?
 
Suther said:
What sort of bullets were you using in the 243?
Click to expand...

Oh geez.. I wanna say BT’s in the 90gr range. I was running one of the original Savage Predator 10’s with it’s funky 1:9.25 twist rate. Thing only liked 90gr’ers. Tried everything from 70-105gr range too. Back when Savages were dang accurate out of the box and reasonably priced.
 
jamesharrison said:
It is a pet peeve of mine hearing people say that "a .223 is a .223 is a .223".
NO, they are NOT!
Click to expand...
True story from the range last year when I mentioned shooting my .223 Wylde out to 1,000.
" BS, the .223 isn't accurate at 1,000 if it even makes it that far!"
" Well, maybe yours isn't, but mine sure enough is. I shoot 95 grain Match Kings with a 6.5 twist barrel . and yup I can do it accurately!"
Cat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom