hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
Really?? There are a few posts that had 22-250 and sold them. I wouldn't buy another one.
whats the better varmint calibre? .223 or .22-250?
- Thread starter rem74283
- Start date
Really?? There are a few posts that had 22-250 and sold them. I wouldn't buy another one.
Not miffed.
It's pretty much that when someone says something stupid, and nobody bothers to say anything, it gets taken as being fact. So...Got any more wisdom to add?
At the end of the day it really does not matter so much, if the guy that is doing the shooting is happy. But if a fella that otherwise does not know any better, decides he needs the 'best' he better have a clue what it's best for or because, or he ain't gonna be happy in the end. There is no best. Just lots of good.
Cheers
Trev
.223 all the way. A lot less powder for what, 2-300 fps less? Velocity doesn't kill, accurate placement does. You'll also get waay more rounds downrange before burning out a barrel which means more practice. And at the distances you mention, hold over values are negligible.
Don't overlook the .204 either... A real sweetheart round, and deadly on dogs. Fur buyers love it too, very easy on pelts.
Don't overlook the .204 either... A real sweetheart round, and deadly on dogs. Fur buyers love it too, very easy on pelts.
burnt_servo
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- right in the middle of b.c.
what about the 5.8x55 penguin ? or the 23-250 ?
or even the 5.8x62 mauser .
or even the 5.8x62 mauser .
Is the pot thoroughly stirred yet?
The 223 was designed around a rifle, therefore it was a compromise cartridge to begin with. If the 222 Rem Mag had fit in th AR platform, you would be singing about it right now.
The 222 Rem (standard) is a better design and I could make the same arguments as you comparing those two.
The 22-250 is easier to handload for and is generally more accurate in typical hunting rifles.
22-250 = 200 rounds to the pound of powder v.s 223 = 300 rounds or 1/3 more cost to shoot. $10.00 roughly?
The 22-250 will do over 4000 fps and will compensate for your range errors a little farther.
The 22-250 uses large rifle primers and has enough neck. It offers everything the 223 does and more, yes it is slightly more expensive to shoot, you don't get something for nothing.
All that being said, the 223 is a good compromise cartridge, the 22-250 is just better for sporting rifle purposes.
The 223 was designed around a rifle, therefore it was a compromise cartridge to begin with. If the 222 Rem Mag had fit in th AR platform, you would be singing about it right now.
The 222 Rem (standard) is a better design and I could make the same arguments as you comparing those two.
The 22-250 is easier to handload for and is generally more accurate in typical hunting rifles.
22-250 = 200 rounds to the pound of powder v.s 223 = 300 rounds or 1/3 more cost to shoot. $10.00 roughly?
The 22-250 will do over 4000 fps and will compensate for your range errors a little farther.
The 22-250 uses large rifle primers and has enough neck. It offers everything the 223 does and more, yes it is slightly more expensive to shoot, you don't get something for nothing.
All that being said, the 223 is a good compromise cartridge, the 22-250 is just better for sporting rifle purposes.
- Location
- Steel Town and The Peg
I seem to get the job done with a 22 Hornet. 
hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
Heck with the 22-250 if you want a bullet traveling at 4000fps This is the one you need.
ht tp://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2007/09/franklins-4000fps-30-cal-varminter-a-hit-with-hunters/
ht tp://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2007/09/franklins-4000fps-30-cal-varminter-a-hit-with-hunters/
- Location
- West coast of Vancouver Island
Both rounds can do the job but 22-250 would be my choice of these two. 25-06 is a beaut
