.22 Hornet, .222 or .223 for foxing

[hybridfiat]

.222 if you are handloading, because the rifles are cheap to buy. .223 if you are using factory loads. I've had sub .5" groups from Norma ammo.
Your choice, just don't go smaller as you don't have to. The Hornet was created before the good small caliber high powers came along. It is hopelessly outclassed by the .222Rem.

 

[Woodlander]

+1 for the .222. I have ASE SL5 moderating mine and I'm very pleased with it.

 

[sir-slots-alot]

Whilst both the 222 and the 223 are great foxing cals, Personally I wouldn't look any further than the 223.
Put simply , it shoots flatter , moves less in the wind and hits harder than the 222... , all very important factors for a foxing rifle.... these are cold hard facts

There are more rifles available in the calibre and rifles tend to hold their value better than the 222. There is more choice of both factory ammo and reloading components.

I was told by a rep for Remington that sales for the 223 dwarf the 222 by over 300 to one. The 223 is obviously doing something right.

IMO the biggest plus for the 223 is the fact it comes with a better twist rate. Rifles tend to be either a 12 or a 8/9 twist tubes as standard (the odd 10 ") Whereas the old 222 has the dated 14 twist and really loses out on being able to shoot the modern high BC ballistic tip bullets such as the 53 grn Vmax with a BC of 0.290 or the 69 grn TMK. In fact many 222's wont even stabilise the 55 grn Bal tip bullets

As said there is nothing wrong with the 222 and both the 222 and 223 will drop fox at 200 yards .. but the 223 is more versatile and the better choice IMO.


Regards
Alan

 

[Conure]

Whilst both the 222 and the 223 are great foxing cals, Personally I wouldn't look any further than the 223.
Put simply , it shoots flatter , moves less in the wind and hits harder than the 222... , all very important factors for a foxing rifle.... these are cold hard facts

There are more rifles available in the calibre and rifles tend to hold their value better than the 222. There is more choice of both factory ammo and reloading components.

I was told by a rep for Remington that sales for the 223 dwarf the 222 by over 300 to one. The 223 is obviously doing something right.

IMO the biggest plus for the 223 is the fact it comes with a better twist rate. Rifles tend to be either a 12 or a 8/9 twist tubes as standard (the odd 10 ") Whereas the old 222 has the dated 14 twist and really loses out on being able to shoot the modern high BC ballistic tip bullets such as the 53 grn Vmax with a BC of 0.290 or the 69 grn TMK. In fact many 222's wont even stabilise the 55 grn Bal tip bullets

As said there is nothing wrong with the 222 and both the 222 and 223 will drop fox at 200 yards .. but the 223 is more versatile and the better choice IMO.


Regards
Alan

The reason for the .223 selling more is the semi auto rifle folks and the black tacticool crowd that label always makes me smile since I read it on the web ........................ and according to my old reloading manual the 223 only give a few fps more in velocity one load gave an extra 73fps over the .222 round with the same bullet weight. You can find that amount of differnce in different barrels that these are cold hard facts taken from a published and printed manual. So with so little velocity gain for the .223 how can it shoot much flatter?

There is also nothing to stop someone having a fster twist barrel chambered in .222 now is there?

 

[sir-slots-alot]

The reason for the .223 selling more is the semi auto rifle folks and the black tacticool crowd that label always makes me smile since I read it on the web ........................ and according to my old reloading manual the 223 only give a few fps more in velocity one load gave an extra 73fps over the .222 round with the same bullet weight. You can find that amount of differnce in different barrels that these are cold hard facts taken from a published and printed manual. So with so little velocity gain for the .223 how can it shoot much flatter?

There is also nothing to stop someone having a faster twist barrel chambered in .222 now is there?

Below is the official velocity figures given off the Hodgdon wedsite. ( both the 222 and 223 have same length barrels & all using max loads and a 50 grn bullet)

Link to web http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle


Powder = Varget - 222 velocity = 3114 fps ..... 223 = 3383 fps

Powder = BLC-2 - 222 velocity = 3000 fps ..... 223 = 3428 fps

Powder = H 335 - 222 velocity = 3120 fps ..... 223 = 3393 fps

Powder = H4895 -222 velocity = 3022 fps ..... 223 = 3468 fps

As anyone can see , there is a significant difference in velocity between the calibres (up to 400 fps according to hodgdon) - So regardless how hard you stamp your feet in protest... it is a fact that the 223 shoots noticeably flatter and hits harder. It also can shoot a range of High BC bullets that the 222 cant due to its dated twist rate - therefore the 223 pulls even further a head balistically.

Yes you can have a 222 re-barrelled with a tighter twist - but why would anyone spend £700 + to do that , when a standard 223 comes fitted with the twist rate from the factory.


Alan

 

[KRW1]

Not used the 222 but have used a 223 for foxing for the last 15 years. Easy to load with readily available components (55gr V max with 24gr of N133 under it does it in my rifle very well) obviously develop a round for each particular rifle, working up gradually. Accurate and hard hitting close or at distance with very very few runners in the 100's I have shot over the years. Also reasonably inoffensive in the sound department when using a good mod. - essential at night! Just my own opinion on something I have used for a while and found works. Good luck with what ever you choose.

 

[ChesterP]

I think that sir-slots-alot made an interesting point that if you came to re-barrel, would you do it in a .222 given that you can get 1/8 or 1/12 twist in .223 that allows for far greater flexibility? Nothing wrong with .222 but why restrict yourself? I've heard a lot of opinion over the years about .222 being a more accurate round, I don't buy that one either.

 

[cjs66]

Is there a reason why nobody has mentioned the mighty 22/250. Norma 53gr soft points are £25 a box and Are deadly accurate. Same goes for Hornady Vmax. Just a thought. There's a very nice Sako on here for sale too.

cjs

 

[KRW1]

The 22/250 is usually very accurate but not more than most other calibres in practical use, it uses more powder and can be a bit louder in the wee small hours. Depending on the type of shooting you are doing and where these can all be factors to consider, I have used and been out with both many times.
As a direct comparison not found anything much between either for stopping power/clean dispatch of fox but from what I have seen the 223 edges it on overall usability.

 

[A J]

The .222 is a great calibre, but the .223 is far more versatile and as sir-slots-alot points out, noticeably faster with the same bullet weight.

You'll never have any trouble getting ammo for a .223.

 

[jdiver]

I used a 22 hornet when skins were worth money. Was dropping them out 250 yards with ease. A few did move from where I shot them but never very far, I had more runners when I shot with a 22-250. I'm toying with getting one of the 17 cals for a dedicated fox rifle at the moment.

Could you please expand a little more as to why you think this occurred?

 

[w0rks2much]

Hi,

I use .223 50gn for for foxing on a NV rig.

Great round, accurate and inexpensive to reload.

Ive gone with that calibre as there are also Muntjac on the land that can be shot.

I must confess for a fox only rifle I would be looking at the .204.

Good luck with your decision.

Jeff

 

[Dickie]

What about a .243 then if you ever have problems with the .270 you still have a deer rifle but you haven't said what else you have in the cabinet.

 

[Hales Smut]

Is there much diffrence in noise between a moderated 22 Hornet , 222 and 223 ? Would like to use the rifle from a fixed spot ( fox box ) but needs to be as silent as possible, due to circumstances.
22 Hornet vs. 17 Hornet , noise difference ?
I am shopping around to find an affordable dedicated fox box rifle. Found a new A-bolt 223 and an A-bolt in 222 . Both no longer made. The 222 is about 200 euro cheaper. This man also stocks an Anschutz 222.
Still look around to find a good second hand Hornet, to compare.

 

[Overlay]

Below is the official velocity figures given off the Hodgdon wedsite. ( both the 222 and 223 have same length barrels & all using max loads and a 50 grn bullet)

Link to web http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle


Powder = Varget - 222 velocity = 3114 fps ..... 223 = 3383 fps

Powder = BLC-2 - 222 velocity = 3000 fps ..... 223 = 3428 fps

Powder = H 335 - 222 velocity = 3120 fps ..... 223 = 3393 fps

Powder = H4895 -222 velocity = 3022 fps ..... 223 = 3468 fps

As anyone can see , there is a significant difference in velocity between the calibres (up to 400 fps according to hodgdon) - So regardless how hard you stamp your feet in protest... it is a fact that the 223 shoots noticeably flatter and hits harder. It also can shoot a range of High BC bullets that the 222 cant due to its dated twist rate - therefore the 223 pulls even further a head balistically.

Yes you can have a 222 re-barrelled with a tighter twist - but why would anyone spend £700 + to do that , when a standard 223 comes fitted with the twist rate from the factory.


Alan

Alan
well done on explaining the difference, clear as day

really handy piece of info, I've got two 222's and they shoot superbly, can't find faullt

like you say the .223 has the edge on performance , I guess it's all down to preference really.


Atb

phil

 

[jdiver]

Yes particularly when the Sako L461 vixen can be found fairly easily in both calibres

lots of chat here. What's the final decision?