Rechambering from 222 to 223, worth it?

marlin

marlin

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
85   0   0
Location
SWOntario
Title says it all. I recently purchashed a 222 over 20 savage and noticed another gun in the rack at time of purchase was rechambered in this way. My gunsmith says it will cost about 50$. What do you guys think? I will have to shoot alot of ammo to recoup the $$
 
If you reload I would suggest not to do it. If you do not reload it would probably be best to do it.
 
The two cartridges are so similar that I could never figure out why the military didn't just adopt the .222 in the first place. The only reason to bother would be if you have trouble getting .222 Ammo.
 
you'll still have the 222 twist rate if you rechamber, 1:14 i believe(13.5 in my rem.). that will limit you in bullet selection for the 223. i'm not a 223 shooter, but i think that would limit you to really light bullets, 14 twist shouldn't shoot anything much over 50 grains well.

you will only gain about 150 fps in velosity, the only other advantage is you may end up with a higher quality chamber.
 
I'd keep it in .222. The .222 is supposed to be a slightly more efficient and accurate cartridge than the .223. The advantage of the .223 is way better availability of ammunition and cases.
 
Talk about a timely question.
I've been mulling the same question for my Rem 700 in 222.
So the 2mm increase in case length buys you 150fps- what sort of accuracy impact would you forecast with the 14-13.5 rifle twist, using the heavier slugs?
I'm looking at the chamber change to increase cartridge commonality, when I eventually get that 223 autoloader:D
Next on the hit list is the reloading gear:rolleyes:
 
I have had it done in the past and in my opinion it isn't worth it. Keep the deuce and buy a cheap .223. If worse comes to worse you can always reform .223 brass to make .222.

44Bore
 
223 is a higher pressure cartridge than the 222. If handloaded to the same pressure levels, the performance difference is minimal.
 
thanks for all the input guys. Haven't test fired her yet, if she shoots straight I think I'll leave her stock. I'm not an avid reloader and after I have it sighted in I'll probably only shoot a box or two per year. Twist rates are another interesting topic......Slower twist vs Faster twist? 1:14 vs 1:10 What are the pros and cons?
 
A twist rate that is to slow for a given length bullet will not stabilize it sufficently.
For instance, a 1:14 twist barely stabilized the 55 grn FMJ of the original M16, if it was fired in warm dry air. If it was fired in more dense air (cold and/or humid) the bullets would sometimes tumble, giving very poor accuracy and striking the target in unpredictable attitudes (a bullet hitting a target sideways, produces an oblong hole somewhat resembling a "keyhole"), with the twist rate increased to 1:12, giving adequate stability. Using the longer SS109 type bullet in the old barrel twist rates will also produce poor accuracy and keyholing, that's why new-spec AR type barrels run faster twist rates, and match rifles intending to use the very long .224 bullets, some over 100 grains in weight, need even faster twists.
 
I have a Remington 600 that was originally 222, but was rechambered to 223 before I picked it up. With 45 grain bullets (1:14 twist), this little rifle is deadly accurate.
 
.222

If your rifle shoots well, and most Remington .222's do, I would leave it alone.
Also, if you want to get into shooting .22 cast bullets, a pasttime enjoyed by drunks and damphools, then the .222 with its longer case neck, makes it a better cartridge for this frustrating and enjoyable experience.
 
I love my 222, I bought it on purpose! Before the PPCs came along it was big medicine. Unless you want to shoot a lot of surplus ammo I would never consider it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom