I am getting the fever for a new gun and was wondering which would be a better caliber. I will be using it for varmint hunting and like the idea of being able to download the caliber. I was told that the 222 was an "inheritly accurate cartridge like the 308" and was wondering if this is true and what would be the advantages over the 223. I am also toying with the 17 Rem idea, and was wondering how much louder it was than the 222 or the 223.Any input will be appreciated.

Unless you intend to get into a true benchrest gun the difference between the 222&223 is a moot point even in a true benchrest gun there may be no real advantage. The 223 has the advantage of cheap brass from almost any mfr. The .17 rem is an overbore cartridge which will be much harder on the throat of the barrel,is harder to keep clean and in the wind impossible almost. My 2C worth.

It depends on the accuracy you are looking for, you can shoot small groups with most calibers in custom rifles. If you put the same amount of money in a rifle in the .17, .222 and .223 the .222 will shoot the best groups all day long.The .17 has few selections in bullets, the .222 holds the world record for the smallest groups and is easy to reload,the .223 has cheap brass that you can get anywhere. Good brass is very important in creating a accurate round. You can do well with either the .222 or .223, but if you shoot against a .222 of equal quality you will lose. Good Luck with what every you shoot!

Thanks for the replys. Which one (223,222) would be an easier cartridge to reload, and just how hard is it to find 222 brass? Also, what is a good barrel twist to look for? I dont plan on shooting anthing over 55 grains.

Happiness is a 1-12" twisted 223Ackley............

Swamp-Man I have all three calibers that you mention here. First the 17 does have a noticeable decrease in sound and recoil. I think most of the problems with 17 Remingtons comes from the factory barrels if you have an after market barrel you will have much less problems with fouling etc. Mine shoots .6's and .7's mostly somewhat better with berger 25's. I really enjoy shooting it. I never tried to do much load development beyond that it's only a carry rifle and is used at 100 yards in mostly. Now for the .222 and .223 The major differance is the cost of brass. The .222 has shot .273 and the .223 has shot .285. The .222 shoots a little more consistantly. They both almost never shoot over .5. So in a hunting rifle what does that mean not a lot. If you can find one at a good price and shoot it to verify that it groups well all the better. You are probably going to put some work into your gun to get these type of groups. Trigger etc. But you may be lucky like my friend who bought a Savage in .223 and it shoots like this right out of the box this doesn't happen everyday. Either will serve you well.

I only have tried a 222rem and it is a hoot. Easiest calibre I ever loaded for. Mine is a 14 twist and shoots 55gr very well too. (0.4")

Shilen,Hart & krieger barrels are the top three and either of these will work. With the 55 grain bullet I would stay with the 1-14 twist which has proven to be the most accurate. Have one .222 in a 1-10 twist and it shoots 52 grain bullets great but the 1-14 is still better. Good Luck

Limited bullet selection in the 17 is complete bullshit unless you are talking only factory ammo. The wind myth is bullshit as well, plug the numbers into any ballistics calculator and see for yourself. The throat erosion can be controlled with sensible shooting and loading, if you hot rod then you will have quicker erosion. Yes, a factory Remington barrel may foul quick but any custom barrel 17 shooter will tell you other wise.
That being said, get a 223 if you want to save some money.

Chris

Swamp-man: You said you're interested in down-loading. In that case, the .222, with its smaller case capacity, would be a little better. Actually, I have a .222, .223, and .222 Magnum in virtually identical guns, and the difference in them in practical power and range is almost negligible.

There is no difference in the relative ease or difficulty of loading. The price of new commercial brass in .222 and .223 is very little (I've had enough problems with military brass in the .223 that I've quit using it). Besides, it's very little trouble to make .222 brass from .223.

As far as accuracy, most people seem to feel that it's a bit easier to get gilt-edged accuracy from a .222, (and I've found that true with my guns), but a little work with a .223 match the smaller case.

Bottom line: Choose the caliber which is available in the gun you want.

[ 02-13-2003, 23:53: Message edited by: Stonecreek ]

Well, my fever has subsided. I went to the local saxet gun show and bought a Rem 222 model 788. I am unfamiliar with this model and was hoping to get some opinions on it. The man I bought it from said the gun was 20 years old and brand new in the box. Now I am sure this is a load of crap but the gun is in imaculate condition and was in the original Remington box. There is no scratches on it and the barrel looked ok and just overall looked good. I paid 425$ for it and was wondering if that seemed a good price and what is the "history" of the model 788.

Swamp-Man:

I have a number of friends that own Remington Model 788's. And to a man, they have all told me their 788's were tack-drivers! It's my understanding the 788 has one of the fastest lock-times of any firearm made. I believe it was only offered in "short" cartridges.

I don't know what 788's generally sell for, but $425.00 for any quality firearm sounds great to me...

I believe the .222 Remington is one of the few cartridges that is not based on any other case design. The "Triple Deuce" is a fantastic design.

You did good getting a like new 788 for 425. I had one chambered in 222 that shot like a house on fire with 20.1 gr. of IMR 4198 and the Hornaday 50 gr. SX. I put in excess of 8000 rounds through that gun and it got to the point it wouldn't shot sub .5 MOA anymore. I took it to the local smith and when he scoped the bore he said the throat was showing a lot of wear. I rebarreled it to .223 and am very happy with it as well. It shoots the 50 gr. BK in the .3's and with the 1 in 9 twist barrel shoots the 75 gr. AMax very well. Enjoy that old 788, they are shooters, trust me!

Shoot Safe, Shoot Straight.......RiverRat

Swamp-Man,
Now you are in the same predicament that alot of us 788 owners are in - triggers. There are alot of previous threads - one currently on the forum 'gunsmithing' 788 triggers on what to do with them. They are great guns that will not let you down with great accuracy.
Supposedly Timmney is introducing a trigger this spring for the 788 for around $80.00.
God knows i'll take two right now!!!
MBK

I once had a Rem. 722 in .222. When the Army adopted the .223, I had my 722 rechambered. I found I was able to develop a load for the .223 that was every bit as accurate in this gun as any 222 load I had been using previously. (about .75 MOA). However, if I had it to do over again, I would leave it a .222. This rifle had a 1/14" twist, and would never deliver decent accuracy with GI ammo (55 gr. BT), nor with any handloads that used GI or other boattail bullets. The twist just wasn't fast enough!!

Finally got time to try some loads for the 222, and found out they do not like the 52 grain Amax boattails. I cant say the same for the 53 grain match kings with flatbases. 20 grains of IMR 4198 and Federal gold match primers and this gun shoots way better than I do.Thanks for all the input and quality advice that you gentlemen offered. Good shootin.

A shooter is going to have to be a helluva shot to discern the difference in accuracy between a .222 and a .223.
Re: your 788. You did good. Want to sell it? I had a fellow just yesterday offer to sell me a 788 in .243 that looked like a tomato stake with a pos scope that you couldn't even see thru. He wanted $375.00 for it.
At one time, many bench rest rifles were built using a 788 as a platform. Put some gun slick on the trigger and it will break like a piece of glass. On the last 788 I owned, I would ask folks to guess what the trigger weight was. They pretty much guessed between 1.5 and 3 pounds. They rarely believed it (until I showed them a scale) when I told them the trigger broke at 5.5lbs

Ditto on what Cisco said!!!!
Some people have no clue.
And when you here someone bad mouthing a 17 just ask them if they have ever owned one.
99% of the time they will say NO.

I agree with Cisco and gunslinger. Anyone that has trouble keeping a .17 clean will have trouble keeping anything clean and there is a multitude of bullets available ranging from 15grs. up to 39grs. I am building a 17-222 with a 40 degree shoulder as soon as I get my new barrel from Pac-Nor. As far as the .222 or .223 question it don't make a lot of difference unless you are building a bench rifle and in that case the .222 has a decided edge in accuracy if constructed from quality components by a quality smith to benchrest standards.
Jim

[ 02-22-2003, 10:56: Message edited by: Lightnin ]