.22 Hornet, .222 or .223 for foxing
- Thread starter FrenchieBoy
- Start date
Shadrach2986
Well-Known Member
.222, got mine last year and bloody love it.
I loved my little .222, and I've heard only a great thing about the .22 hornet. However all that been said you are hard pushed to find a reason to pick either over the much more available and common .223, a little more punch and a little more choice in terms of second hand market and off the shelf ammo. It's a clear winner.
the .222 will shoot 40-55g with ease,to be honest when I had my .223 I never went heavier than 55g,if I wanted to shoot 69g or above I would use a .243
I am not saying .223 is no good you understand,i just find the.222 a sweeter calibre to shoot
sir-lamp-alot
Well-Known Member
ive owned all 3 that you have stated and still own a .22 hornet which i really like and have taken foxes cleanly out to about 180yrds but to be honest unless your going to start home loading forget the hornet. the .222 was my 1st centre fire and served me well and they are as many others say a very accurate round. ive owned 2 .223's and neither really floated my boat, i cant really put my finger on it it just wasnt the caliber for me, this said there are thousands of people out there who would disagree.
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
i use 60gr Hornady sp for roe in a 1:14" .222 barrel
no issues
heavier or bt/BT then yes a faster twist would work but most .223 factory barrels are only 1:12"
Exactly, at a push a short flat base 60 can be done, anything heavier or better bc is out of the question (not that it matters at 200 yards) and I'm guessing it's a struggle to find that loading in factory ammo?
R.e. twist, I would say that used to be the case but the latest fashion for heavy .223 means that 1:8 & 1:9 twists are available off of the shelf, CZ varmints are 1:9 and howa are now doing a 1:9 varmint too, tikka do 1:8 but it's a bit of a wait.
It does depend what you want to do with it, my .223 is my back up target rifle and will shoot to 600 yards, the better BC of the TMK is an advantage. For quarry I'm now using 40 gr SBKs so no real advantage over the .222 there, it's a more useful calibre for multiple uses but some people don't need it to be!
bob tail
Active Member
I have used the hornet for seven years as a dedicated fox rifle and I never wanted anything else in one year in accounted for 361 foxes and it performed faultlessly for me. Its light weight and not very loud and perfect for foxes and it only once made a mess on a fox that I can remember vividly. I've used a 222 and a 223 and they worked well too but for me the little hornet was a cracking rifle perfect what I needed.
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
For long barrel life, readily available ammo, accuracy, flexibility for bullet weight, I'd go 223. 222 is a fab round too but you may find availability of 223 is more universal. My own 223 is the most used rifle I have, low recoil, moerates to hmr levels easily too. I've used it out to 350 yds on occasion for vermin control and it's always dropped whatever's been shot first time.
Hi "Frenchie boy"
With all this head spinning advice. Have you made your mind up yet ?????????? Looks like the .222 is top of the pops.
Steve.
With all this head spinning advice. Have you made your mind up yet ?????????? Looks like the .222 is top of the pops.
Steve.
I went .222, lovely round, easy to load for, seems to be not at all fussy with factory ammo as well with PPU working well and very cheap if you don't reload. As a dedicated fox/vermin rifle it's perfect and very accurate. Also as they seem to be a little out of fashion you can buy a lot of rifle (2nd hand) for not that much money, I ended up with a lovely SAKO 75 Varmint.
Good luck with your choice!
Good luck with your choice!
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
I haven't made a definite decision yet but I can say that I have ruled out the .22 Hornet. I am a lover of the .222 but after reading all the replies I am starting to sway towards the .223 due to the availability of the better variety of factory ammunition than for the .222 - I really don't want to go down the reloading route for whatever calibre I end up getting..
Crow Man
Well-Known Member
Hi FrenchieBoy, In use a .204 for all my foxing. I have two set ups, a Tikka T3 Super Varmint with zeiss victory scope and a Remington 700 with pulsar n750a both shooting 32gr hornady V Max. Deadly out to 300 yrds+
Let me know if you want to try one, you are not to far away.
Let me know if you want to try one, you are not to far away.
Last edited:
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
That's a very kind offer Crow Man, many thanks!
I have just had a look at the average prices of .204 rifles on Guntrader and it puts them slightly out of my reach compared with (Let's say) a .222! I would also have to question the availability and price of factory ammunition for a 204 (I don't know, it might be available by the bucket load and cheap as chips, or it might be hard to find and cost an arm and a leg) Whatever calibre I opt for it must have a readily available supply of factory ammunition at a reasonable cost, which .222 and .223 does seem to have!
I have just had a look at the average prices of .204 rifles on Guntrader and it puts them slightly out of my reach compared with (Let's say) a .222! I would also have to question the availability and price of factory ammunition for a 204 (I don't know, it might be available by the bucket load and cheap as chips, or it might be hard to find and cost an arm and a leg) Whatever calibre I opt for it must have a readily available supply of factory ammunition at a reasonable cost, which .222 and .223 does seem to have!
Alan Maughan
Well-Known Member
FB,
Either .222 or .223 it makes no difference at all, both are accurate and both will do the job more than well enough over the distances you require and some. .222 v .223 could be argued to death over the smallest margins but in the field it makes no difference for your application. I have both calibers now myself and for 250yd fox shooting they cannot sensibly be separated.
The main question is what ammo can you get easily, you mention your reluctance to get into reloading and the fact you have had success with PPU ammo in the past. If either your .222 or .223 can shoot 1" groups at 100yds with PPU ammo at £10 a box then you have what you need. Personally I would be looking around for a rifle locally that you may be able to try before buying and take a box of ammo with you, if it shoots it then buy it, job sorted.
Dont deviate away to .204, its a fine caliber but it wont do what you need any better than the other two and ammo will be harder and more expensive to get.
Good luck with the search.
Either .222 or .223 it makes no difference at all, both are accurate and both will do the job more than well enough over the distances you require and some. .222 v .223 could be argued to death over the smallest margins but in the field it makes no difference for your application. I have both calibers now myself and for 250yd fox shooting they cannot sensibly be separated.
The main question is what ammo can you get easily, you mention your reluctance to get into reloading and the fact you have had success with PPU ammo in the past. If either your .222 or .223 can shoot 1" groups at 100yds with PPU ammo at £10 a box then you have what you need. Personally I would be looking around for a rifle locally that you may be able to try before buying and take a box of ammo with you, if it shoots it then buy it, job sorted.
Dont deviate away to .204, its a fine caliber but it wont do what you need any better than the other two and ammo will be harder and more expensive to get.
Good luck with the search.
personally I use a 223, and tend to use heavier ( 69gn) bullets, if its a dedicated fox gun why worry about the cost of ammo, if you shoot a 100 a year there is little difference in the cost, you might save £20 or £30 quid. just see what gun feels the best and which is the most accurate for you, foxes at 300 yards get very small in the grass! good luck
Similar threads
