Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
I’m in Kent, come and try mine…..
would you change a .223 for a .22 hornet?
- Thread starter Liveonce
- Start date
kenbro
Well-Known Member
Nah, 221 Fireball…..
Thank you, may take you up on that kind offer, where in Kent are you.
Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
I’m in Medway, PM me for contact details if you like.
I’ve got ground in Medway,Maidstone, Faversham or Swale areas or
I’d be happy to bring over to you if that suits, it’s got an Alpex 4k on it at the minute.
I’ve got ground in Medway,Maidstone, Faversham or Swale areas or
I’d be happy to bring over to you if that suits, it’s got an Alpex 4k on it at the minute.
kenbro
Well-Known Member
Hi Tm;
Not the subject, but, do you still have a Microlight factory in town?
Cheers, Ken.
Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
Apparently yes, there are a few small businesses on the airfield…
en.m.wikipedia.org
Medway Microlights - Wikipedia
No! I have shot rabbits with a .22 Hornet using a BSA Hunter and whilst the rifle was a delight the cartridge was less so. On foxes that would only be even more apparent. Plus you are having all the aggravation of a rim and you'll pretty soon, IMHO, be wanting to spend money on having the thing reamed out to a K-Hornet. Stick with the .223" Remington.
Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
Can I ask the problem you had with shooting foxes with a .22 hornet
When you say even less of a delight?
There's less margin for error and although dead is dead with the .223" Remington they were "dead right there". The velocity advantage that it enjoyed over the Hornet tells as you get longer and longer range. So although with both the fragments of the bullets cut blood vessels and massively damage lungs the faster round retains that ability further out. Under 150 yards then the difference is less apparent.
Over 200 yards more so. Especially with regard to the point blank if you aren't exact with the range estimation. I wouldn't want to eat a fox shot with a .223" (I wouldn't want to eat one shot with a .22" Hornet) but I hope it makes the point. The more damage the better. The flatter the trajectory the better. The below helps compare 45 grain bullets in both cartridges. Zero drop and 2,533 fps at 200 yards with the 223" but 7 inches and 1,504 fps at 200 yards with the .22" Hornet.
X22H2 | Winchester Ammunition
winchester.com
USA2232 | Winchester Ammunition
winchester.com
Last edited:
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
I became a bit obsessed with shooting my Hornet a few years ago, using fieldcraft all the time, foxing at night was like a game of nip & tuck, which I loved, I never tried to stretch it to anything remotely silly as far as distance. Then one winter I had a couple of unfortunate shots where foxes coming towards me dipped the head when they twigged me at about 80 yards both times, I hit the muzzles and the little 40 grainer never had the whomph ... so I pick up the .223 now, launch 60 grain Vmax, no more problems.
I still use the Hornet, mostly over bait stations.
I love the .22 Hornet as a walk around gun for vermin and the odd fox. In my opinion though it's not the best choice for a foxing rifle, the .223 is far better for that. It gives a little more grunt, shot placement is less critical.
You're talking to a guy that thinks a .243 or .25-06 is the perfect foxing cartridge mind - I like to hit them hard. Maybe that's why I think the Hornet is a great bunny rifle?! I put a good few thousand rounds down mine when I had it, shot all sorts with it right up to a handful of humane dispatch roe. Even they dropped pretty cleanly.
You're talking to a guy that thinks a .243 or .25-06 is the perfect foxing cartridge mind - I like to hit them hard. Maybe that's why I think the Hornet is a great bunny rifle?! I put a good few thousand rounds down mine when I had it, shot all sorts with it right up to a handful of humane dispatch roe. Even they dropped pretty cleanly.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
I am just starting my journey with the Hornet. I am shooting with open sights at the moment. Next job is finding some dies and start working up a load. Factory ammo seems to be hard to find and expensive.
My reckoning so far is the Hornet is big little cartridge, whereas the 222 and especially the 223 are little big cartridges.
The Hornet is a 150 max cartridge and it tops out at Fox, small antelope, marmots, racoons, black grouse etc. and suspect its really useful in Europe, Africa and the Americas.
In the UK I think it’s the optimum cartridge for Hares.
The 223 is a bit too powerful for rabbits etc, if you want to eat them, and perfectly capable of shooting pretty much any medium sized deer or antelope, and certainly very capable on predators other than the big cats and bears. And its perfectly capable out to several hundred metres.
You probably want a bigger rifle for many of the above, and almost certainly will for legal reasons, but if you have a 223 with good bullets and take your time to place the shot correctly it will more than adequately do the job, as it does every day all around the world.
22 Hornet will also do, but I suspect you would be much more reticent and / or get in very close and would really prefer something quite a bit bigger.
My reckoning so far is the Hornet is big little cartridge, whereas the 222 and especially the 223 are little big cartridges.
The Hornet is a 150 max cartridge and it tops out at Fox, small antelope, marmots, racoons, black grouse etc. and suspect its really useful in Europe, Africa and the Americas.
In the UK I think it’s the optimum cartridge for Hares.
The 223 is a bit too powerful for rabbits etc, if you want to eat them, and perfectly capable of shooting pretty much any medium sized deer or antelope, and certainly very capable on predators other than the big cats and bears. And its perfectly capable out to several hundred metres.
You probably want a bigger rifle for many of the above, and almost certainly will for legal reasons, but if you have a 223 with good bullets and take your time to place the shot correctly it will more than adequately do the job, as it does every day all around the world.
22 Hornet will also do, but I suspect you would be much more reticent and / or get in very close and would really prefer something quite a bit bigger.
kenbro
Well-Known Member
Don’t forget the .221 Fireball. A great performer for its case size, and it works to higher pressures than the Twipple2.
Kb.
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
Some 222 rifles were made on , not weaker actions necessarily but light actions. I think but maybe wrong that the first Remington chambered in the 222 was also a light actions.
It the reason 222 data is quite low.
In a known strong action 222 can take quite a bit more with care. The case head is no different than a fireball or 223.
Finnwolf VL63
Well-Known Member
The first 222 Remington's built, were on 722 and 40 X actions ,no light soft actions there ?
Me and my brother shot dozens of foxes with our 722 when pelts were worth money, rifle is still being used by a young keeper in the borders.
Similar threads
