.222 or .22-250?

https://Immersive-optics.com/
Sonicdmb73 said:
I did see that you had corrected or rather added that you were referring to 22-250.
Unfortunately your first post and another which was referring to 222 were quoted in such a way that made it look like 3600 was achievable in 222.
The problem nowadays with reloading many people don’t read the books and compare data from manufacturers. They google it and call it right, a recipe for disaster literally.
I load for some common rounds 222 6.5x55 etc, but I also have a 20 Tac.
Finding data for that with REACH compliant powders especially when the guy who designed it is known for “hot” loads anyway. Takes a lot of sifting through and sorting out the sensible from the downright insane.
Click to expand...

its really simple for anyone with two brain cells. 36+ grains in a 222 case does not go.

luckily the .222 case capacity would protect the idiots from themselves, but if youre shooting .222 you probably know a thing or two, and it seemed obvious That DTSWas referring to 22-250.
 
308tikka said:
its really simple for anyone with two brain cells. 36+ grains in a 222 case does not go.

luckily the .222 case capacity would protect the idiots from themselves, but if youre shooting .222 you probably know a thing or two, and it seemed obvious That DTSWas referring to 22-250.
Click to expand...
Yes it did seem obvious to me. The problem is google seems to override some people’s brain cells. And that’s dangerous
I did realise the powder wouldn’t fit, I did wonder if it was a slip and that it was meant to be 26gn which could possibly fit. Some playing with GRT showed serious over pressure with some of the other loads/speeds suggested.
I do like the 222 it is easy to load for and accurate out to sensible foxing ranges. The 20 Tac is a cracking round too. I am not sure which I would give up if I could only have one.
 
i agree
Sonicdmb73 said:
I did see that you had corrected or rather added that you were referring to 22-250.
Unfortunately your first post and another which was referring to 222 were quoted in such a way that made it look like 3600 was achievable in 222.
The problem nowadays with reloading many people don’t read the books and compare data from manufacturers. They google it and call it right, a recipe for disaster literally.
I load for some common rounds 222 6.5x55 etc, but I also have a 20 Tac.
Finding data for that with REACH compliant powders especially when the guy who designed it is known for “hot” loads anyway. Takes a lot of sifting through and sorting out the sensible from the downright insane.
Click to expand...
I agree with this some of the things seen here and other forums make me wonder if load manuals are consulted at all. Draconian verification of data found on line seems logical to me I hope to other's as well.
 
In the almost forty years I’ve been shooting and loading the 222 has always been on my list of cartridges I regularly load for . Now when it comes to 22 center fires since the beginning I’ve been hung up on both ends of the spectrum the 222 and 220 Swift . While I’ve owned 22-250’s and have a 22-250AI now it’ll never be liked more . Now I will say I like the 224 Clark and 224 TTH . Both are derived from the 6mm REM case necked down with the shoulder blown out .
 
Old thread I know but forgive the new boy! If memory serves the late great Lea McNally used his 222 for eveything including stags until the introduction of the 240 minimum requirement. Old stalkers whom I have had the pleasure of meeting over the years also used the triple deuce for Reds etc. I have shot a number of large lowland roe with mine, some at distance and they all dropped. I also have a 6.5x55SE and a .308 but for scottish roe they stay in the gunsafe - nuff said!
 
Just revisiting this thread, I do think the 222 / 223 are very nice rifles with a good balance between velocity and bullet weight. And, in particular, the 223 are cheapish to run.

My take on the 22-250 is that they are very good fast and flat shooting. Have used a 22 wildcat in the past -a 243 necked down that was pushing 4,000 fps and it was point and shoot to 300 metres.

But in the UK with our silly calibre laws and rifle restrictions I can’t help that a 243 does everything the 22-250 does, but you can use the bigger bullets and its deer legal as well. With 60ish grain varmint bullet its close to 4,000 fps - ie close enough to the 22-250 that no fox will know the difference.

But I suppose some FEO will no doubt opine that the 243 is much more powerful than the 22-250 :)
 
In New Zealand the .223 and 22-250 are widely used for large deer and to very good affect, have a search on YouTube. A .22 65g bullet at 3000fps to the head isn't that much different from a .24 90g bullet at 3000fps, good TV but not for the UK, capable but not legal.
 
Heym SR20 said:
Just revisiting this thread, I do think the 222 / 223 are very nice rifles with a good balance between velocity and bullet weight. And, in particular, the 223 are cheapish to run.

My take on the 22-250 is that they are very good fast and flat shooting. Have used a 22 wildcat in the past -a 243 necked down that was pushing 4,000 fps and it was point and shoot to 300 metres.

But in the UK with our silly calibre laws and rifle restrictions I can’t help that a 243 does everything the 22-250 does, but you can use the bigger bullets and its deer legal as well. With 60ish grain varmint bullet its close to 4,000 fps - ie close enough to the 22-250 that no fox will know the difference.

But I suppose some FEO will no doubt opine that the 243 is much more powerful than the 22-250 :)
Click to expand...
I have had similar conversations over the years. It would seem to be luck rather than anything else that the person on the other end of phone. Has anything but a basic knowledge of cartridges and the ballistics thereof.
 
Sonicdmb73 said:
I have had similar conversations over the years. It would seem to be luck rather than anything else that the person on the other end of phone. Has anything but a basic knowledge of cartridges and the ballistics thereof.
Click to expand...

'Sir, we simply cannot permit that, it's too big and powerful!'

'Never in my private or professional life have I ever been granted such a compliment, thank you!'

VARIATION APPROVED
 
Leupsak said:
In New Zealand the .223 and 22-250 are widely used for large deer and to very good affect, have a search on YouTube. A .22 65g bullet at 3000fps to the head isn't that much different from a .24 90g bullet at 3000fps, good TV but not for the UK, capable but not legal.
Click to expand...
Works pretty well in the UK on red as well - I believe. I read somewhere recently that monolithic bullets give the high velocity .22s real capability on big with conventional body shots as well. Given the experience I have seen with 6 and 7mm bullets I am sure a 22 whilst making a smaller hole will still bore a good sized wound channel right the way through a good sized deer.
 
all this swooping of guns and bullets makes my head hurt! I have used a 22/250 for over 20years not changed my load or bullet combo
the old saying of beware the man with lots of guns but fear the man with one because he will know how to use it!
 
Phil fox man said:
all this swooping of guns and bullets makes my head hurt! I have used a 22/250 for over 20years not changed my load or bullet combo
the old saying of beware the man with lots of guns but fear the man with one because he will know how to use it!
Click to expand...
How many barrels in 20 yrs?? Just interested......👍
 
I am on my second barrel! I had a border stainless varmint fitted by Callum up to now 1200 round count.i had the last one replaced at 4000as it was losing its edge! the group's had opened up to around 1.5 inch @100yds
 
Had a. Couple of 22/250 rifles the 1st one a winchester stealth shot very well.

Then sold it and had a right tacdriver rpa interceptor. 50 grain blizking's. 50 grain nostlers
And 55 grain soft points all silly accurate.

Wouldnt worry about barrel wear if you are not target shooting it all the time. Can the 222 and 223 do the same. Of course for normal foxing ranges. It seams most people have night vision and thermal these days so being in complete darkness on shy foxes. Getting them in close seams alot easier.

I would have another rpa 22/250 again tomorrow though thats for sure
 
Edinburgh Rifles said:
one uses 21-22gr of powder for 3100 with a 50gr VMax/SP
one uses 33-34gr of powder for 3600 with a 50gr VMAx/SP

45-50% more powder for 15-20% more MV
Do the deer know the difference? No

I have shot the .222 for a few years and shot a lot of roe with it.
Personal choice but I use 60gr Hornady SP over N133 for a pleasant 3000fps
a 200+ yds roe is not a problem
Cheap to feed, pleasure to use
Click to expand...
And remember both require a PRIMER.

K
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

22-250 53g vmax
Replies
18
Views
1K
Bowland blades
Bowland blades
Experience with Bergara HMR Pro in 22-250
Replies
11
Views
1K
oldhamstocks
oldhamstocks
Sold: QUALITY .222, .22-250, and .308 DIES
Replies
7
Views
610
Straighton
S
22-250, goldilocks twist rate
Replies
9
Views
1K
Greenmist
Greenmist
243 or 223
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
Peaky
Peaky
PSE Composites Limited - The next level Rifle Stocks
Back
Top