22-250 barrel life

heavenIsAlie

heavenIsAlie

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Location
Abbotsford
im reading a bunch about that the 22-250 has a much shortened barrel life compared to the .223. im buying a gopher rifle (first centerfire rifle as well) and was wondering if im even going to notice the difference in barrel life. .223 was my first choice but found a set up for ~700 cheaper than the .223 setup id decided on.
 
I'd say that you should buy the .22-250. I'm sure that barrel life is shorter but having said that I love mine and it is a better varmint cartridge in my opinion. In this case the $700 that you are saving will certainly pay for replacing a worn out barrel if you ever end up shooting it enough to do that.
 
Are you reloading? If not, go .223, if so then do not worry about it. BTW, even in a fairly heavy 22-250 you will likely not see your bullet strike, so if that is important to you then go with 223. Even with slow 40gr. out of my 22-250 (i.e. 3500fps) I do not see the strikes.

Ian
 
If you are considering between a 223 and a 22-250 for a dedicated gopher rifle, I would suggest going with the 223. There is enough recoil from a 22-250 that makes it difficult to see where your bullets hit. With a 223, you can spot your shots, which can be fairly entertaining when shooting gophers. I have a 222 and a 22-250, and much prefer the 222 for gophers. Also keep in mind that in a good gopher field you will be shooting a lot, and the 22-250 will heat up your barrel a lot quicker. I do prefer my 22-250 for coyotes though.
 
About the time the third thousand box of primers is getting empty, a 22/250 is usually hurting pretty good. For gopher shooting the .223 is a better choice if volume shooting is the plan. I still like the '250 better, just not for gophers.
 
22-250 is actually a rather poor gopher gun. It works, sure, but is much more powerful than needed. This means the barrel heats up faster, and the recoil is enough to make spotting your own hits difficult. Couple that with short barrel life, and high-volume targets, like gophers... it works, but it's not ideal.

Really, for gophers, get yourself a 204 Ruger. Trajectory & wind handling is the same (or very slightly better in favour of the 204, on paper), recoil is much less allowing you to spot your own hits, and you can get twice as many shots off between cool-downs. And you're blasting less powder down the barrel AND at a lower pressure than the 22-250, so your barrel life should be better, too
 
so seems that 22-250 is to much for gophers, even when loaded down. being able to spot my own shots seems like a big plus as well.

now its just deciding if i want the cz 527 varmint in laminate or kevlar stock
 
Hmmmm sounds like you need a 204 ruger! Comparable ballistics to the 22-250, you get to see the point of impact, and barrel life is quite good based on the .204 rifles I shoot!
 
heavenIsAlie said:
im reading a bunch about that the 22-250 has a much shortened barrel life compared to the .223. im buying a gopher rifle (first centerfire rifle as well) and was wondering if im even going to notice the difference in barrel life. .223 was my first choice but found a set up for ~700 cheaper than the .223 setup id decided on.
Click to expand...

How on earth is the 22-250 cheaper? You must not be buying the same setup? The rifles should be the same price. 223 is the way to go if your worried about the cost both for ammo and rifle life.
 
I was reloading 22-250 until today! I'll sttill save my brass though.

I was getting pretty good groups from some 50gn Vmax , about 1/2"-3/4" depending on the day. Today was about 3/4" then I ran out of handloads and decided to sight in my rifle with some 45gr Walmart ammo and my groups were between 1/4" clover leaf to 3/8". I have about 150 of these and they are pretty cheap, so why would I reload?

I will reload down the road, I need a fur friendly fox load and I am think of trying the Barnes Varmint grenade bullets as well... they are just too cool!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom