would you change a .223 for a .22 hornet?

[RoeStalker270]

As many have said above, trying to justify the hornet by any real world benefit to you is probably difficult. For something around that size, I really enjoy my .222, I know others would outperform it, but it does everything I need it to, and it’s a pleasure to use.

One thing I would say, justification or not, if you have an itch to scratch, then do it. There is nothing wrong with trying something new ‘just because’.

 

[alled12]

If you want niche with function similar to 223, with a reduced load of powder then 221 fireball is about your only answer. Got one and its a fun little round. But as has been pointed out, scratch the itch just to see what its like. I owned a hornet and got rid of the hornet, you may have better luck than i did. Keep the 223 while you are deciding. My only recommendation would be go for a CZ527 in 22 hornet, you stand a much better chance of getting one that shoots straight than a Ruger M77-22h.

 

[Penyard]

Personally, no, I wouldn’t swap a .223 for a .22 Hornet but that’s just based upon what I use my .223 for which is as a general vermin gun that’s capable of dealing with muntjac.

 

[Neddle]

Had all 3 calibres and shot foxes out to 200yds as easily with 17 hornet as I did the 223, can't see why you need a second hornet as the 17 performs better than the 22, I would however sell the 223 and buy a 204, I did and will never go back! 25.8gr N133 39gr Blitzkings will take foxes out to 350yds no bother, lethal on the crows and magpies too

 

[kenbro]

Had all 3 calibres and shot foxes out to 200yds as easily with 17 hornet as I did the 223, can't see why you need a second hornet as the 17 performs better than the 22, I would however sell the 223 and buy a 204, I did and will never go back! 25.8gr N133 39gr Blitzkings will take foxes out to 350yds no bother, lethal on the crows and magpies too

All depend where you hit ‘em (Foxes that is) when using those sub calibres.
Ken.
Ps. What will do a lot will do a little, sometimes better too.

 

[Neddle]

All depend where you hit ‘em (Foxes that is) when using those sub calibres.
Ken.

You could turn that statement on its head, here in Northern Ireland we're restricted to 22 centreline max for foxes, so bullet placement is critical,in the south or mainland UK you're allowed 243 and above for foxes control and it would appear from watching videos that bullet placement is less critical as foxes seem to skip about a it more rather than drop to the shot

 

[kenbro]

You could turn that statement on its head, here in Northern Ireland we're restricted to 22 centreline max for foxes, so bullet placement is critical,in the south or mainland UK you're allowed 243 and above for foxes control and it would appear from watching videos that bullet placement is less critical as foxes seem to skip about a it more rather than drop to the shot

I think that’s what I said!
Kb.

 

[BryanDC]

is not the non-lead only required for .243 and larger when/if it becomes law?

That's until it becomes all centre fire ammunition regardless of calibre, with the only exception for rimfire.

 

[Mungo]

That's until it becomes all centre fire ammunition regardless of calibre, with the only exception for rimfire.

I suspect that won’t be long in coming.

Hence I’ve recently got a .22 ARC. Should be able to shoot up to 70gr lead free no problem.

 

[BryanDC]

I suspect that won’t be long in coming.

Hence I’ve recently got a .22 ARC. Should be able to shoot up to 70gr lead free no problem.

Sounds like a good plan.

The restriction on lead ammo here started just over 15 months ago and includes all centre fire. That said the argument over .243 is irrelevant as it was never allowed for larger species here even with lead.

 

[25 Sharps]

Only use my .223 for foxes and generally under 150yards, thinking of parting with it to be replaced with a .22 hornet.

Thinking I would save on reloading costs as use less powder, have brass as also have a .17hornet and i neck down .22 to .17.

good idea or not?

Advantages vs disadvantages?

If under 150 yes, especially if you reload.

 

[gonzo]

I have both. Though not used the 22H for quarry yet.
But if you are reloading, then if you need a lower power round, just load down some 223rem's ?

Personally I think the 22H is a lovely little round. But that is based purely on aesthetics and that it is one of my latest rifles, rather than terminal ballistics.

 

[25 Sharps]

I could be wrong, but I suspect the .22 Hornet is what could be described as a "nostalgic" calibre. Many, like me, have memories of the good old Hornet from the days when there were few calibres available. I always loved the Hornet, but admit that these days there are more efficient calibres available. I recently sold my own Anschutz Hornet as it was not getting used very much. Do I miss it? Yes, would I get another, probably not.

Personally I think the hornet defines efficiency, if we’re talking powder burned for muzzle energy produced. It’s a cracking little calibre and I would still have one had I not picked up a load of .223 powder at £6/lb, which made the .223 more efficient again in terms of cost.

However, if you’re saying .223 is more efficient in terms of opportunities, in that there are shots you have to pass up with a .22 hornet you could take with a .223, I’d agree with you!

 

[25 Sharps]

I have both. Though not used the 22H for quarry yet.
But if you are reloading, then if you need a lower power round, just load down some 223rem's ?

Personally I think the 22H is a lovely little round. But that is based purely on aesthetics and that it is one of my latest rifles, rather than terminal ballistics.

At 150 yards the terminal ballistics of the hornet will be as effective on a fox, hare or rabbit as a .223 will.

It’s a very effective round, the only issue being it’s more affected by wind.

 

[Bowland blades]

Seeing as 22 hornet is pretty much a cartridge for reloaders, and you can download a 223 to hornet levels - I struggle to see the advantage of a hornet. What am I missing?

A true Hornet like the CZ as a hornet is a fair amount easier to carry and it gets quite close to the 3000 fps with 40 and 45 grain hornet ( yet you can run a far lower powder fills ) Casting means you can run even down to std velocity RF performance . Its half the powder as compared with a 223 . Cubbing fox earths its perfect!
Anyhow its likely all over for the 22 Hornet if nobody gets none toxic bullets into the UK . I think the cost of a wildcat is lost to cost v benefit

 

[gixer1]

No, keep the .223, very capable and versatile little round.

 

[Overlay]

Keep the 223 and get a 222 and the 22 hornet, get them zeroed up, then let the Mrs see your selling the 223, many many problems solved

 

[rob.batterbury]

I can sympathise as I’ve got an unreasonable hankering for a CZ 527 in .22 Hornet. Have a .223 but still want a hornet.

 

[Liveonce]

thank you all for your help, my logic is as follows, I like my .17hornet savage m25 thumb hole stock, but do find it getting heavy to walk my permissions especially as I am no spring chicken now. The .22lr i use when need subsonic it’s lighter than the hornet, but it is in my opinion not a fox gun. My 223 is light but too much gun for rabbits.
I do like the way the .17hornet hits rabbits with authority, they go down never to move and it’s cheaper to shoot than an hmr (i stocked up on primers and powder a few years back).

However my thinking is as I reload and have .22 hornet cases that i convert to .17 hornet, I could use the .22hornet to replace both the .17hornet and .223. Virtually all my shooting rabbit and fox is under 150yards.

Thinking put in for a variation and give it a try, before disposing of the .17 or .223. assuming they grant the variation.

 

[Sanglier 857]

I guess it depends what you’re shooting, I use Hornet for most things from rats, squirrels, rabbits, hares, crows foxes etc