.222
02-14-2006, 07:07 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Unfortunately, a \"Blue\" state
Posts: 1,943
.222
I know that the .223 nato round basically retired the the triple duce , but I just happened to come into one. Picked up a clip at the harrisburg show and will be shooting it today. What kind of performance should I expect from this round ? I'll be taking it for coyotes when I go to NH in March for snowshoe hares. Thanks for any info ...
02-14-2006, 08:58 AM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MB.
Posts: 2,984
RE: .222
From what I’ve been reading the 222 is an excellent cartridge for shooting. At one time it was #1 for competition shooting and was over taken by the PPC cartridges in the mid 70’s. I’ve picked up a 222 rifle but haven’t had a chance to shoot mine yet. Good luck...
02-14-2006, 09:37 AM
#4
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Unfortunately, a \"Blue\" state
Posts: 1,943
RE: .222
I'll post some pics from the range later today. I'll be using 50gr accutip's. Going to shoot that and pattern my model 37 and win model 12 for turkey. See which one is better. All my buddys tell me to leave the model 12 in the closet , but my grandfather wouldnt want it to sit.
02-14-2006, 10:35 AM
#5
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wall SD USA & Jamestown ND
Posts: 11,474
RE: .222
A great cartridge which still holds (as far as I know) the world record smallest group size. Cases can be reformed from223 cases and it gives up little to the 223. The only reason the 223 took over was the surplus military brass. I took several mule deer with the 222 which is the minimum legal cartridge for deer in our state.
02-14-2006, 03:37 PM
#6
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 368
RE: .222
the 222 is just about the same as a 223 for most purposes and posses a little more inheret acccuracy. it will be about 50 fps slower than any 223 load with the same bullets, but i dont know any animal that can tell the difference.
02-14-2006, 05:50 PM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,290
RE: .222
I bought a 222 used decades ago and reloaded for it. Shot the barrel out. (Noone ever gave me lessons about how hot things should get.) I replaced it with a 223 but that is because of the cheap and various ammo. When I reloaded for the 222 I used the Hornady SX, I recall it was 45 grains. My old rifle was a standard weight barrel. Impressive accuracy, and the inexpensive SX bullet pretty much blew up whatever it hit. Local yote hunters have used 45 grainers with good results. Anyway, I think it is alot of fun to shoot, with a modest report for settled areas.
02-14-2006, 07:01 PM
#8
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 411
RE: .222
Hi Everyone:
I don't understand why the .222 is so unpopular. Regardless, I know folks that would never part with their Savage 340s. They are kind of ugly but are great rifles. In the gun shops you can find them for $250 to $300 and are a steal at that price. The cartridge used to be the BR round of choice and gives up nothing to the .223.
CE
I don't understand why the .222 is so unpopular. Regardless, I know folks that would never part with their Savage 340s. They are kind of ugly but are great rifles. In the gun shops you can find them for $250 to $300 and are a steal at that price. The cartridge used to be the BR round of choice and gives up nothing to the .223.
CE
