The 222

[Cape_Yorkee]

A little bemused that there isn't a dedicated thread for the 222 as per numerous searches. I've been researching this caliber (and as usual, this forum!) for a few weeks now and yep... hats off to the 223 (we all know what it can do) but it would seem the 222 with lower grain ammunition could be just as or even more deadly accurate. There are obviously lots of factors here. I am also a big fan of nostalgic calibers... not only are they time tested but could make great hand-me-downs to future generations who could appreciate them for what they're worth.

There is a thread back up and running that mentions the Remington 788 in 222, by all accounts a very fine rifle. Though, it looks like it has a few niggles. It doesn't seem like a hard rifle to get a hold of either which could make for a good project and is very tempting. Primary use for acquiring one would be for the range and testing the ability to shoot good distances (300+m).

What are other people's 'go to' 222's?

Happy festive season to you all too.

[mickb]

Im interested in seeing the replies to this thread. Almost no knowledge of the 222 myself sorry. Was looking for a small game gun recently, started a thread here on the 22 hornet but looked a bit of a temperamental calibre for an impatient, non-tinkerer like myself. maybe the 222 has some merit...

[animalpest]

I have been using a .222 for pro shooting for 25 years. Mostly with 50gr bullets but sometimes 55gr. Don't do much paper punching with it except load development.

The .223 has a bit more speed and a little more reach, but can also be loaded with heavier bullets for out past 300 in tighter twist barrels.

The .222 is an inherently accurate calibre, meaning I can just throw stuff together and it shoots good enough for my needs

[bigrich]

for the paddock i use 223 in a 1-12 tikka , 55 and 60 vmax's shoot less than 1/2 " with BM2 and 2206H easily . and if i lose my ADI brass it's no big deal at $80 a bag of 100. my 222 rem 700 that i had built shoots 1 ragged hole very consistently. had a winchester xtr that would do the same . the 222 in my opinion is more inherently accurate with projectiles in the 40-55gn weight range . but the brass is more expensive, so my 222 is primarily is used for field rifle comps. i'm using BM1 with 53gn sierra MK's and 55 vmax in my 1-14 twist rem 700 . BM1 gives a cleaner burn than 2207 in it's 24" barrel . designed as a target cartridge from the get go ,with a nice long neck , it's hard to find a bad load for the 222.
1-8 twist 223 might be fine for flinging heavy for calibre projectiles at long distance , but that's not my thing. with regards to rifle actions , winchester 70's, tikkas , BSA CF2, and others use a long action with a bolt stop and mag to suit the short 222. rem 700's are about right for me as their a 308 length action that has a bit of weight and strength . sako L461's are made to size for the 222/223 , but are too light and dainty a rifle for me .lovely build qaulity though . later sako 75/85 series are also built to size for the 222 cartridge , but i have no experience with these .
222 is a lovely , not fussy catridge, that is more inherently accurate that the 223 .
JMHO

[bigrich]

Im interested in seeing the replies to this thread. Almost no knowledge of the 222 myself sorry. Was looking for a small game gun recently, started a thread here on the 22 hornet but looked a bit of a temperamental calibre for an impatient, non-tinkerer like myself. maybe the 222 has some merit...

22 hornet brass does not have a long life compared to the 222 . no accuracy tricks needed for the 222, just FLS to the right head space, trim if necessary , and load . simples you can load the 222 down .very hard to get a bad load with 222, but good accuracy also depends on the rifle platform as well . my old model 70 winchester i bought second hand from rural victoria ,with it's original 1-14 barrel , would shoot 1 hole at 100 with 40 vmax and a load of 2205 . until i cleaned the barrel and exposed lots of pitting .it got rebarreled and again became a 1 hole shooter . i downloaded my old krico 400 22 hornet with trail boss for speeds of 1550 fps with 45gn projectiles . you could do the same with the 222 and get 22 hornet velocity's if you wanted

[fnq22]

Im interested in seeing the replies to this thread. Almost no knowledge of the 222 myself sorry. Was looking for a small game gun recently, started a thread here on the 22 hornet but looked a bit of a temperamental calibre for an impatient, non-tinkerer like myself. maybe the 222 has some merit...

you could do the same with the 222 and get 22 hornet velocity's if you wanted

So using that thinking why would someone not get a 223 or 22/250...both will do what a hornet and .222 will do but also have more powder space to extend another 50 or 100 yards of distance..

Back in the day on the family farm my uncle had a Sako .222 which was primarily used for foxes when skins were valuable.. a lighter load was used along with a projectile that hopefully wouldnt do to much damage to the skin..

That rifle was burnt up in a ute fire and now my uncle regrets replacing it like for like with another Sako .222 as fox skins are not kept anymore and whilst he was waiting for the new rifle he borrowed a neighbors 22/250..obviously that calibre proved far more versatile for other critters like roos and pigs and longer distances then he was previously used to so now he was told he can just swap the barrel out to a .223 which if true is something he said he was considering...

So I think you are placing unneccessary limitations on yourself with a .222...it kind of sits in no-mans land as a calibre these days I reckon...

[stihl88]

I can't fault mine, it's the Sako 75 Hunter in .222 and is one of my favourite memory inducing cartriges.

Main use is for pro-shooting night time roo culls, hanging out/off the back of vehicles under spotlight it's never missed a shot, it's one of the most reliablly accurate headshot cartridges i've owned and it hit's and drops them with absolute authority!

[stihl88]

Here's the specs and cartridge history

.222 Cartridge.jpg (321.6 KiB) Viewed 1657 times

[bladeracer]

A little bemused that there isn't a dedicated thread for the 222 as per numerous searches. I've been researching this caliber (and as usual, this forum!) for a few weeks now and yep... hats off to the 223 (we all know what it can do) but it would seem the 222 with lower grain ammunition could be just as or even more deadly accurate. There are obviously lots of factors here. I am also a big fan of nostalgic calibers... not only are they time tested but could make great hand-me-downs to future generations who could appreciate them for what they're worth.

There is a thread back up and running that mentions the Remington 788 in 222, by all accounts a very fine rifle. Though, it looks like it has a few niggles. It doesn't seem like a hard rifle to get a hold of either which could make for a good project and is very tempting. Primary use for acquiring one would be for the range and testing the ability to shoot good distances (300+m).

What are other people's 'go to' 222's?

Happy festive season to you all too.

I've only owned one (the 788) but it was very east to get it to shoot well with any bullet short enough to stabilise, though the same can be said for the .204 and .223.

I think the only thing that limits the .222's versatility is twist rates of 14" or 12". I think it's similar to the .204 in that regard, very limited bullet choices thus only suited to small game. With a tighter twist so it can use modern VLD/ELD bullets it would just be step down on velocity but would do everything the .223 does. I think it would be more sensible though to just buy a .223.

[bigrich]

So I think you are placing unneccessary limitations on yourself with a .222...it kind of sits in no-mans land as a calibre these days I reckon...

horses for courses . 222 is not a limitation if all your doing is rabbits foxes and hoppers . or in my case comps .if you need a practical, cost effective, general purpose rifle you can't go past a 223 . a 243 shooting 87gn vmax's is a great alrounder , at the expense of muzzle blast , and cost naturally . my 250 savage is good in this role but a lot easier on the ears than a 22-250 or 243 . having said that i'm leaving the savage at home and trying 60 vmax out of my 223 on my next trip . bit cheaper to run . 308 is always on hand for bigger critters having said that the 222 is extremely accurate and easier to load for . the OP's post is about a light game cartridge , 22 hornet being his original choice for his intended use

[bigrich]

A little bemused that there isn't a dedicated thread for the 222 as per numerous searches. I've been researching this caliber (and as usual, this forum!) for a few weeks now and yep... hats off to the 223 (we all know what it can do) but it would seem the 222 with lower grain ammunition could be just as or even more deadly accurate. There are obviously lots of factors here. I am also a big fan of nostalgic calibers... not only are they time tested but could make great hand-me-downs to future generations who could appreciate them for what they're worth.

There is a thread back up and running that mentions the Remington 788 in 222, by all accounts a very fine rifle. Though, it looks like it has a few niggles. It doesn't seem like a hard rifle to get a hold of either which could make for a good project and is very tempting. Primary use for acquiring one would be for the range and testing the ability to shoot good distances (300+m).

What are other people's 'go to' 222's?

Happy festive season to you all too.

I've only owned one (the 788) but it was very east to get it to shoot well with any bullet short enough to stabilise, though the same can be said for the .204 and .223.

I think the only thing that limits the .222's versatility is twist rates of 14" or 12". I think it's similar to the .204 in that regard, very limited bullet choices thus only suited to small game. With a tighter twist so it can use modern VLD/ELD bullets it would just be step down on velocity but would do everything the .223 does. I think it would be more sensible though to just buy a .223.

from a practical point of view 223 makes perfect sense . however for accuracy the 222 is better . it just is
if your after rabbits or foxes a 40vmax in 222 shoots fast , flat, in tiny ragged holes

[bladeracer]

from a practical point of view 223 makes perfect sense . however for accuracy the 222 is better . it just is
if your after rabbits or foxes a 40vmax in 222 shoots fast , flat, in tiny ragged holes

Mine performed best with the 52gn and 53gn match hollow-points.

[on_one_wheel]

Let's not confuse accuracy with consistency.
The .222 is known to be more consistent than the .223

[bigrich]

Let's not confuse accuracy with consistency.
The .222 is known to be more consistent than the .223

absolutely . that's why i use it for a comp rifle

[Cape_Yorkee]

Let's not confuse accuracy with consistency.
The .222 is known to be more consistent than the .223

Well, this comment and others kinda sums it up - accuracy reigns supreme!

As usual the 223 and 22-250 gets plenty of mentions in these discussions. Again horses for courses. The 22-250 for me personally is a little pointless for the things I'd do, as my Tikka T3X in 243 is and will for sometime be my main allrounder. It is currently grouping very nicely with the 87g V-max. I'd also like to get my hands on the 90g factory made Tikka soft points as these also seem very good. Certainly not a range gun (could light a cigarette after 3 shots) but for in the bush it is perfect. A 22-250 would be too, but perhaps just a tad light on for big boars - sure, if shot placement was good - but humane kills are nicer.

The 222 being just so accurate fills a good gap. I currently have a 22LR lever which is good fun, but a little boring (dare I say). Nothing against anyone that likes rimfires and comps etc - we all love things for a reason - but for me if it doesn't make a loud BANG I ain't getting excited. A 222 at a range could make for a little more excitement. If I ever venture south it could be deadly on the varmints too.

[bigrich]

Let's not confuse accuracy with consistency.
The .222 is known to be more consistent than the .223

Well, this comment and others kinda sums it up - accuracy reigns supreme!

As usual the 223 and 22-250 gets plenty of mentions in these discussions. Again horses for courses. The 22-250 for me personally is a little pointless for the things I'd do, as my Tikka T3X in 243 is and will for sometime be my main allrounder. It is currently grouping very nicely with the 87g V-max. I'd also like to get my hands on the 90g factory made Tikka soft points as these also seem very good. Certainly not a range gun (could light a cigarette after 3 shots) but for in the bush it is perfect. A 22-250 would be too, but perhaps just a tad light on for big boars - sure, if shot placement was good - but humane kills are nicer.

The 222 being just so accurate fills a good gap. I currently have a 22LR lever which is good fun, but a little boring (dare I say). Nothing against anyone that likes rimfires and comps etc - we all love things for a reason - but for me if it doesn't make a loud BANG I ain't getting excited. A 222 at a range could make for a little more excitement. If I ever venture south it could be deadly on the varmints too.

you've got a 243 tikka shooting 87 vmax , i couldn't think of a more practical all rounder . except maybe my 250 savage
yeah, horses for courses . my 223 tikka is retired from comps since i got my 222 rem 700 done . i clean paddocks of large grey rats as targets of opportunity in the afternoon and morning for graziers when i'm poking about for pigs and deer . i don't go with the code as i've had the large grey rats turn their heads and what-not which has resulted in taking off their noses and just bad hits at times which doesn't sit well with me . i go for heart/spine shots which is very effective with the 250 . 55 vmax's in the 223 don't give the required penetration at times which is why i switched to the 250 . however i'm going to try 60 vmax in the 223 on my next trip . if this shows promise i'm thinking of rebarreling my 223 to 1-10 or 1-9 twist and running 65gn sierra game kings or similar . the 250 is over kill really , organs turned to jelly and a 2" exit . very effective

[Sean]

Have one of those old crap Sako A1 in 222.....have taken it with me everywhere, shoots into a hole, didn’t have to fiddle, adjust or modify it to shoot.

Yep I’ve got a 223.....but I’d pick the 222 everytime

[Oldbloke]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

lol-laughing.gif (669.7 KiB) Viewed 1525 times

[bigrich]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

lol-laughing.gif

30-06 is good , but overkill for what and where i hunt . i'll open another can of worms , 308 is more inherently accurate than 30-06 as well

[Cape_Yorkee]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

lol-laughing.gif

30-06 is good , but overkill for what and where i hunt . i'll open another can of worms , 308 is more inherently accurate than 30-06 as well

Ohhh this is getting interesting...

I wouldn't be debating this one with ol' 'Hunting with Stu'. That bloke can handle a 30-06

[bigrich]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

lol-laughing.gif

30-06 is good , but overkill for what and where i hunt . i'll open another can of worms , 308 is more inherently accurate than 30-06 as well

Ohhh this is getting interesting...

I wouldn't be debating this one with ol' 'Hunting with Stu'. That bloke can handle a 30-06

i don't mean to be rude , but "handling" a 30-06 ,and whether or not it's more inherently accurate than a 308 are two different things . i've gotten good accurate loads out of 30-06's i've had , but accurate loads have far easier to develop in 308 for me . like the 222 it's hard to get a inaccurate load .

most would say 1 1/2" @100 is fine for a hunting rifle . but confidence in your rifle taking long shots is important to me as i hunt cattle properties ranges can vary considerably from 15 m to around 300 which is as far as i'm willing to risk with a good rest against a tree . hence the importance i place on good accurate loads. i do field rifle comps to try to up my skills for longer shots as well . humane kills are a priority for me

[Wyliecoyote]

Back in the day when the SSAA magazine was a worthwhile magazine, it would print the monthly medal awards. If you excluded the dedicated benchrest rifles in 6x47, 6PPC etc, the one cartridge that shot more Ruby and Diamond awards was the 222. The award also listed components. A 222 case of whatever brand, a load of 2207 between 20 and 21 grains and bullets in either 52 or 53 Sierra match or the 52 Kats made by old mate Nick Catlin. Many of those Ruby awards were in the low sub inch as were some of the Diamond awards. The rifles listed were the usual suspects from pre T3 Tikka M55s, Remington 700s and 788s as well as Sako Vixens. There were the odd 223s making the lists but they mainly appeared in the Silver and Gold awards in the same rifle brands. These awards still exist but i haven't seen a mention of an award for years.
Those not familiar.
Silver-5 shots under inch at 100yds
Gold-10 shots under inch at 100yds
Ruby- 5 shots under inch at 200yds
Diamond- 10 shots under inch at 200 yards.
All awards were officiated by range officials on any recognised SSAA BR or HunterClass target. Rifles were often seen advertised for sale with award certificates, the official target and medallion. Sort of proof of the rifles ability.
The value of those lists was that it showed what rifle brands and models were top of the heap and what bullet and powder primer combination was proven.
Put simply if you had a 222, loaded with 20.5 grains of 2207, a Fed 205 and a Sierra MatchKing bullet, and it didn't shoot a ragged hole, you sold the rifle. Same as 308s with 168 grain MatchKings, Fed 210s and 43 grains of 2208 or Re15.

[Wyliecoyote]

One point specifically on the 222 case itself. Mike Walker developed the case back in the 60s at around the time of the Rem 722. It is a scaled down 30/06 except for one very interesting omission. It has a 82 thou flash hole which totally goes against modern day thinking. The 222 held the smallest 100 yd 5 shot group record of 0.009" for more than 40 years only to be finally broken by a benchrest variant of the Gendel in 30 caliber using 2207. So it has taken all those years with modern actions, barrels, rests and bullet tech to do what an unknown 222 benchrest rifle did in the 70s.

https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/20 ... rification.

[Oldbloke]

Thx Wyliecoyote.
You just made my day.
My s**ty 223 Marlin BA on a reasonable day often shoots 4 or 5 shot groups @100yards well under an inch. Mmmm,, about 20mm.

Guess I'm doing something right,,just for once.

[bigrich]

One point specifically on the 222 case itself. Mike Walker developed the case back in the 60s at around the time of the Rem 722. It is a scaled down 30/06 except for one very interesting omission. It has a 82 thou flash hole which totally goes against modern day thinking. The 222 held the smallest 100 yd 5 shot group record of 0.009" for more than 40 years only to be finally broken by a benchrest variant of the Gendel in 30 caliber using 2207. So it has taken all those years with modern actions, barrels, rests and bullet tech to do what an unknown 222 benchrest rifle did in the 70s.

https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/20 ... rification.

yup, your post says it all . i think there's a resurgence of interest in the 222. mines a conversation starter at the range

[Cape_Yorkee]

Back in the day when the SSAA magazine was a worthwhile magazine, it would print the monthly medal awards. If you excluded the dedicated benchrest rifles in 6x47, 6PPC etc, the one cartridge that shot more Ruby and Diamond awards was the 222. The award also listed components. A 222 case of whatever brand, a load of 2207 between 20 and 21 grains and bullets in either 52 or 53 Sierra match or the 52 Kats made by old mate Nick Catlin. Many of those Ruby awards were in the low sub inch as were some of the Diamond awards. The rifles listed were the usual suspects from pre T3 Tikka M55s, Remington 700s and 788s as well as Sako Vixens. There were the odd 223s making the lists but they mainly appeared in the Silver and Gold awards in the same rifle brands. These awards still exist but i haven't seen a mention of an award for years.
Those not familiar.
Silver-5 shots under inch at 100yds
Gold-10 shots under inch at 100yds
Ruby- 5 shots under inch at 200yds
Diamond- 10 shots under inch at 200 yards.
All awards were officiated by range officials on any recognised SSAA BR or HunterClass target. Rifles were often seen advertised for sale with award certificates, the official target and medallion. Sort of proof of the rifles ability.
The value of those lists was that it showed what rifle brands and models were top of the heap and what bullet and powder primer combination was proven.
Put simply if you had a 222, loaded with 20.5 grains of 2207, a Fed 205 and a Sierra MatchKing bullet, and it didn't shoot a ragged hole, you sold the rifle. Same as 308s with 168 grain MatchKings, Fed 210s and 43 grains of 2208 or Re15.

How good is this post? Absolute gold info here... cheers for posting

[Oldbloke]

If your into target, bench rest, you would certainly go 222. Well known it excells.

Hunting, more general shooting, 223. No question.

Best all rounder, 30.06 of course.

lol chimp.gif (284.83 KiB) Viewed 1347 times

Sorry, no self control here today.

[bigpete]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

lol-laughing.gif

Get a 35 whelen...or better yet a proper big bore...

[bigpete]

Have owned 222 and 223 and they did the same job afaic. 223 was just a little easier to get hold of factory ammo.
One interesting thing you can do with a 222 ( and a 22 hornet ) because of the long neck....you can seat a 22 air rifle pellet in there and use primers to shoot pest birds etc in yiur yard....can do it with 223 and 22-250 too but the pellets don't sit in the neck anywhere near as well....

[Oldbloke]

Come on. Don't be a bunch of woooses buy a real gun, buy a 30-06.

The attachment lol-laughing.gif is no longer available

Get a 35 whelen...or better yet a proper big bore...

Hey, does a 0.729" count?

FettGrins.gif (2.01 KiB) Viewed 1296 times