222; Hornet and 223 - differences?

Snoepie

Snoepie

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the 222, the 22 Hornet and the 223 in terms of practical application, bullet diameter etc.

I just wonder what the justification or reason was for the development of these three cartridges that, to me, appear to be almost identical?
 
Different people tried different things

Why do we have ford ,chevy ,gmc, etc all build similar class vehicles? all cars do the same thing!!!

p.s. Google/wiki are your friends

The .223 Remington was developed as an enlarged and higher velocity version of the .222 Remington, which was introduced in 1950 as a varmint cartridge. The .223 Remington was developed specifically for the AR-15, a version of which later became the U.S. military's M16 rifle.
Click to expand...

The .22 Hornet's ancestry is generally attributed to experiments done in the 1920s using the black-powder .22 WCF at Springfield Armory. [2] Winchester adopted what had so far been a wildcat cartridge in 1930, producing ammo for a cartridge for which no commercially-made guns yet had been built. It wasn't until 1932 that any company began selling commercially-made guns for the cartridge.
Click to expand...
 
The Hornet has quite a bit less VOOMA than the .222 or .223. Its does about 2700fps with 45gr'er while the others top 3000fps with a 55gr'er. So the .222/.223 are quite close, the Hornet is not all that similar to them ballisticly. The hornet also has significanty smaller case capacity relative to the other 2.

The .223 beats out the .222 in velocity (by about 200fps I believe) with identical bullets due to 2 reasons:
1) Increased powder capacity of the .223
2) I have read that the .222 was designed as a max 50000psi, while the .223 was designed to max at 55000, so operates with more powder and higher pressure...

Ultimately they are close when compared to say a .308 and a.300WIN but relative to their small calibres and case capacites the Hornet is quite different to the others.
 
Snoepie said:
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the 222, the 22 Hornet and the 223 in terms of practical application, bullet diameter etc.
Click to expand...

The bullet diameter (.224) is the same, but thats about it. In short: 22 Hornet < 222 Rem < 223 Rem

I just wonder what the justification or reason was for the development of these three cartridges that, to me, appear to be almost identical?
Click to expand...

Justification? We don't need no steenkin' justification. :p Seriously, though, you could write a treatise or two on the justification (or lack thereof, if you were liberal) for various .22 caliber centrefire cartridges.
 
here is very little similarity between the 3 rounds listed. In order of velocity 22 hornet. 222 then 223. the 222 magnum and 223 are very close, but a little research can explain the difference.
 
CV32 said:
The bullet diameter (.224) is the same, but thats about it. In short: 22 Hornet < 222 Rem < 223 Rem
Click to expand...

Actually the older Hornets used a .223" diameter bullet and a slow twist - I don't know when manufacturers moved to the .224" bullet. The other big difference is that the Hornet is a rimmed catridge.
 
Certain Hornets were built with smaller groove diameters [.223 vs .224], so if you have an early Hornet, especially of European descent, you should check the groove diameter before using it to be sure. The .224 bullets will work in the .223 groove barrels, but can raise pressures significantly in this very small case. One must adjust powder charges accordingly. Best results are obtained by using the bullet that is of proper groove diameter. The 222 Remington & 223 Remington all use .224 bullets and show a fair velocity increase over the Hornet, as has been noted. Regards, Eagleye.
 
1899 said:
Actually the older Hornets used a .223" diameter bullet and a slow twist - I don't know when manufacturers moved to the .224" bullet. The other big difference is that the Hornet is a rimmed catridge.
Click to expand...

Yes, you could go on and on about the various idiosyncrasies.
 
The .222 rem. is/was the winningest benchrest cal. until the PPC came along and because of neck length, ideal case capacity, and other reasons..it was developed start to finish to be an accurate cartridge. The .22 Hornet is much older and known more for it's lack of noise and recoil, and can be fussy to get good accuracy. The .223 is the military offspring of the .222mag./.222 and is capable of more velocity but not quite the accuracy of the .222. The .221 Fireball is also a child of the "triple deuce".
 
CV32 said:
Yes, you could go on and on about the various idiosyncrasies.
Click to expand...

Actually it makes more difference than you think. My uncle has a .223" Hornet and it doesn't shoot worth a crap with .224" bullets. Many guys load them for those guns but his just hates them.

Tim
 
the .222 certainly has its devotees, but IMO buying one now would be quite foolish. its practically identical performance to .223, but you miss out on white box/FMJ ammo deals, ammo is hard to find and more expensive, and resale is more difficult.

the .22 Hornet is outperformed by them both but its just such a cool little cartridge. its inbetween .22 WMR and .223 performance. i have both the latter, yet i still want a .22 Hornet because of the uniqueness of it and the history behind it :D
everyone has a .223 -- only elite :ninja: CGNers have Hornets.
 
1899;
Quite right, the .22hornet used .223 bullets up into the 1960s and a bit later, most English and Australian Martinis for example are .223, for many years your EUropean rifles were the same.
Not that many years ago the various manufacturers decided on .224 as the "standard"
So if you buy a used rifle and your groups look like shotgun patterns slug the bore, you may just have a .223 bore.
.223 bullets are still offered by various producers, or get hold of a die and size your .224 projectiles down to .223 either way it works
May not be the fastest kid on the block but certainly one of the quieter ones when shooting groundhogs, I have yet to meet a groundhog who could tell the difference between a .22 hornet at 2600fps and my .219 Donalson at 3800fps
John
 
Snoepie said:
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the 222, the 22 Hornet and the 223 in terms of practical application, bullet diameter etc.

I just wonder what the justification or reason was for the development of these three cartridges that, to me, appear to be almost identical?
Click to expand...

History was the justification, the Hornet was developed in the 30's, the 222 in the 50's and 223 well after that.
I have a Hornet, K-Hornet and another wildcat know as the 19 Calhoon all done on the CZ 527 action. All three are very fun to shoot and are very accurate, economical to reload. FS
 
I have a H&R 22 Hornet single shot 22" barrel, open sites and plannig on putting a scope on her shortly, its a great caliber to shoot and reload, you won't be disapointed if you purchase one.
 
how would the ''K'' hornet compare with the .223?is it worth reaming out the chamber for the extra performance-or would you just buy a 223?I knew an old guy who shot a lot of deer with his BRNO hornet
 
ratherbefishin said:
how would the ''K'' hornet compare with the .223?is it worth reaming out the chamber for the extra performance-or would you just buy a 223?I knew an old guy who shot a lot of deer with his BRNO hornet
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother. It ruins the value of the rifle and the gains aren't really worth it. It won't come even close to a .222 or .223. If you want a little more consider the .221 Fireball.
 
ratherbefishin said:
how would the ''K'' hornet compare with the .223?is it worth reaming out the chamber for the extra performance-or would you just buy a 223?I knew an old guy who shot a lot of deer with his BRNO hornet
Click to expand...

Although there is a few extra FPS, the main feature of the K- Hornet is increased brass life. FS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom