223 vs 22-250

samdunc

samdunc

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Newfoundland
In a month or so I will be buying a varmint rifle. I have been leaning towards a 22-250. Ammo price is not a consideration as I reload but I have been hearing rumours about short barrel life with the 22-250 vs the 223. Is there any truth to this? I will be shooting this rifle a lot.
Regards
Gord
 
The 22-250 has a slower twist rate for lighter bullets normally. As it's got a pretty big engine behind it for a .224, and since many that use them, tend to burn a fair number of rounds each session, they do wear out.

If it was my money, I'd think about the normal range I'd be shooting at, and the bullets I'd want to use.

I think most shooters are well served with the .223 Rem, but if you need the extra 150 yards, get the 22-250.
 
samdunc said:
Ammo price is not a consideration as I reload.
Click to expand...

Reload or not the 22-250 uses about twice the powder and really there is only a little more range out of the 22-250. If you ever encounter high pressures or head space issues it will be with the 22-250 (9 out of 10 times).

I have 22-250's as well as 223's and the 223's are just a whole lot nicer to shoot and make for a ecomicial day at the range or gopher patch.
 
Hornhunter said:
Reload or not the 22-250 uses about twice the powder and really there is only a little more range out of the 22-250. If you ever encounter high pressures or head space issues it will be with the 22-250 (9 out of 10 times).

I have 22-250's as well as 223's and the 223's are just a whole lot nicer to shoot and make for a ecomicial day at the range or gopher patch.
Click to expand...

Actually the 22-250 uses about 25 to 50% more powder or about 6¢/round more. If this is going to influence your shooting, you may be in the wrong sport. Unless the varmints are in your back yard, you will spend way more on gas getting to the varmints than you will ever save shooting a 223.

This is really just another 308/30-06 debate. The 22-250 has a bit more reach, at the price of a bit more recoil. Recoil in itself is nothing unless you like to watch your critters vaporize in the scope and you are shooting a sporter weight barrel. The nod then goes to the .223. With a heavy barrel it is not much of an issue. If you can foresee a lot of long distance use, well, you can't make a .223 shoot like a 22-250. The 22-250 will keep the speed up on heavier bullets if you think this feature will be handy.

If you have shot both, then your heart is already telling you which you like better. If not, see if you can find someone to let you take a couple shots and chose from there.
 
I think there is a lot of wisdom in what joe-nwt has said!

I have owned a lot of .22 centrefires rifles, from .22 Hornet to .220 Swift, and including .221 Fireball, .222 Rem, .223 Win, .22-250, .22 Hi-Power, .225 Win, probably others that I am not remembering right now.

In my own experience, the ones that are the most pleasant to reload are the .222 Rem and the .22-250.

I never met a .22-250 that could not shoot anything you fed it, with good accuracy - with the exception of an older lever gun that gave only mediocre accuracy.

I have never seen a shot-out .22 centerfire barrel, although these probably exist since people talk about them all the time. That includes half a dozen rifles in .220 Swift, one of which saw well over a thousand rounds and still the bore, throat, etc were bright and shiny. My opinion is that, for just about any shooter, the likelihood of burning out a barrel is minimal. (Please note I am not talking about bench-rest shooting, where a "shot-out" barrel has groups opening way up to an inch at 200 yards kind of thing......)

I am on the side of the .22-250 for the reasons noted by other posters. It just might be my favourite .22 cf cartridge......

Doug
 
This is probably nit picking but I like the .223 however only on the condition that it comes in an action scaled to the round like the CZ, Sako, etc.

If I'm going to tote around the larger action then I'd rather have a larger round. The .22-250 benefits over the .223 aren't great IMHO. If I'm going to have the longer action and a need to reach out further I'd rather have a .243 than a .22-250.
 
If you have LOTS of shooting in mind, get the 223. Cheaper to feed and the barrel doesn't heat nearly as fast. If you are more interested in whacking coyotes at 400 yards, get the 22-250.

As has been mentioned, the 223 Ackley may be the best compromise. I have one, and get 3650 with a 50 grain bullet and 28.5 grains of powder. That's getting close to 22-250 country, and you can still shoot standard 223 "fireforming" loads for practice. I load mine for less than 25 cents per shot. Nice cartridge, although some apparently don't feed that well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom