Why do you think .223 is so popular (exexpt it is a military cartridge)? I have used for years, not anymore, a .222 and found it really remarkable in power and precision. So it is a bit difficult to see what the .223 does better. They use the same bullets and the velocity advantage isn´t that big, not in my eyes anyhow.

What the .223 has over the .222: velocity and cheap components and ammo. Commonly, .223s are equipped with faster twist barrels (1:12, 1:10 and faster), so the .223 nomally handles heavier bullets better.

What the .222 has over the .223: better accuracy (not much, but still), and a better case design (longer neck).

I shoot both and like both. For paper punching, I prefer the .222, for field applications, the .223 has the edge.

- mike

Any rifle that has a military background is destined to be a success because of the availability of cheap ammo and components.
I THINK both the .222 and the .222Magnum were offered for testing as military rounds and the military opted for a "split the difference" round. Thus the .223.
The fast twist .223's are a recent phenomenom. When the military found that the standard .223 was a fairly inadequit service round and went to a heavier bullet to try and overcome some of its shortcomings. Basically, its a case of trying to make a .243 out of a .223.
As posted, the .222 is said to be more accurate than the .223. I have both and a fellow would have to be a much better shot than me to prove that statement. Neither present any reloading problems.

quote:

As posted, the .222 is said to be more accurate than the .223. I have both and a fellow would have to be a much better shot than me to prove that statement. Neither present any reloading problems.

Absolutely.....to infer that the .223 isn't accurate is terribly misleading. I've owned six and all were exceptionally excellent shooters.

I first owned a .222 and loved it. Great little varmint round. The .223 is all that and cheaper and a bit more velocity. What more can one say?

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
[QUOTE]As posted, the .222 is said to be more accurate than the .223. I have both and a fellow would have to be a much better shot than me to prove that statement. Neither present any reloading problems.

Well I have both. The accuracy well in a sporter rifle you're not going to know the difference. If I showed you my targets and asked anyone to pick the .222 target I wager they wouldn't fair well. In a bench rest quality rifle there may be some difference but when the .222 was in its hay day the .223 didn’t exist.

Both of my favorite .222 and .223 rifles are carry guns. The accuracy for all intents and purposes is dead even. I've also observed the same results from others shooting both of these while I've been at the range.

Having said that the .223 has the edge in velocity I’ll post an example of the highest velocity using 40 Gr. Bullets from Nosler’s Manual 4.

.222 21.5 Gr. of N120 3564 fps.
.223 27.0 Gr. of N133 3812 fps

Now people will say they are not interested in missing faster. But it has been my observation that my accuracy load for both of these calibers that the .223 still holds a substantial lead. Now depending on what you are hunting that may not be an advantage depending on the range you’re shooting and the game in question.

Here is a ballistic program you can play with a little and see your foot pounds and trajectories. From there you should be able to figure it out for yourself.

ballistics calculations

JMK, If you have a reloading manual compare the cartridge measurements and load data to the .222 , .223 & .222rem.magnum. I believe the .223 & .222rem.magnum are more closer comparison, but I'm not saying .222 isn't a good cartridge either but like others posted faster twists, overwhelming surplus put .223 ahead.

Jmk: I will have to agree with both Johnny Johnson and jwzbeeman.
I have several Rifles in both 222 Remington and 223 Remington and the accuracy from both lots of Rifles can only be described as WONDERFUL!
I have both factory stock Rifles and custom Rifles in both calibers.
Using "quality" components (Berger bullets, LaPua brass and Federal 205M primers) in a brand new Remington XR-100 in 223 Remington just two weeks ago on a dead calm and very cool day I fired a sensational group. The 5 shot group at 100 yards with this all factory stock 223 Remington measured .121"!
I immediately followed that "load test with new brass" group up with a .326" grouping!
Both cartridges share many fine attributes like the aforementioned accuracy, mild recoil, long barrel life, economical to reload, long brass life, excellent lethality on Varmints and small game and versatility!
By versatility I mean I shoot bullets from 40 to 55 grains in weight in my various 222's and 223's. So all manner of Hunting of small game and Varmints is feasible with my rigs. Then when at the range I simply expect them to perform in a top notch manner anymore.
I just expect it.
My first 222 Remington was a humble but pleasingly accurate Remington 722! It had a Refield 3x9 scope on it and with the Du-plex type reticle I had the choice of using the cross hair intersection for sighting or if the range was much more distant then I would use the top of the lower vertical cross hairs thick section as a built in ranging device/aim point. I made MANY 300 yard plus shots on Rock Chucks with this "humble" (compared to most of the Rifles I use today!) Rifle.
I would venture to guess I have killed 20+ Coyotes with my various 222's yet I seldom pick a 222 anymore as my first choice when the quarry is going to be Coyotes!
There is no logical reason for this oversight on my part! With todays bullets the 222 Remington is a very adequate Coyote Rifle.
Dittoes on the 223.
Thanks Remington for the whole lot of cartridges that have been derived from their efforts developing the original wonder round the 222 Remington! These "222 family" cartridges include the 17 MachIV, 17 Remington, 20 VarTarg, 20 Tactical, 221 Remington Fireball, 223 Remington, 222 Remington Magnum the 6x47 and (dare I say it?) perhaps the best of them all the 204 Ruger!!!
There I said it.
Jmk I have no idea why the 223 is so much more popular than the 222 I love them both and was greatly miffed and mystified when the folks at "Big Green" (Remington Arms Company) began "phasing out" the 222 Remington. Its still miffs and mystifies me to this day!
The fact that Remington does not offer a Varmint style Rifle in 222 Remington caliber anymore is a form of blasphemy in my mind!
Long live the 222 Remington!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

VG I think you said it very well. I know one thing for sure if I were hunting for a rifle and I came across either or one had a much better price that would become the factor that made my decision all things being equal there just isn't enough difference between the two. I have 2 of each and a .222 Magnum. If I wasn't a hand loader I'd give the .223 the nod for the obvious reason of availability of ammo.

Thanks for your opinions. I must say that I agree with most said here. But, and just but, there is not enough difference for me between these two good calibers. If possible I would certainly own one of each. But as the laws are written I have to choose and that is why I sold my .222 and my smallest caliber is a .308. This .308 is used from the smallest small game to moose and bear when necessary. But for these big critters I prefer my .375 HH. I don´t want to be charged by a bear if I can stop it with a heavier caliber. Good hunting and shootig folks!

I have .223 and .222 and like both. My .222 will shoot cast bullets and really seems it's hard to find a load it doesn't like. (My 22-250 also will shoot cast bullets). My .223 is possibly my most accurate jacketed bullet shooter,but it will not shoot the cast bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by jmk:
... If possible I would certainly own one of each. But as the laws are written I have to choose and that is why I sold my .222 and my smallest caliber is a .308. ...

Sad state of affairs! Pity shooters have to put up with such totally senseless rules.

The last time I went to Sweden (long time ago), I seem to remember a Swedish hunter telling me about a restriction on the maximum number of (long?) guns owned by an individual. If memory serves, at the time the maximum number was 8. Is this the restriction you are referring to - assuming I got my numbers right??

Speaking of Swedish shooters and how to get round these senseless restrictions. A gunsmith once told me a great story about his Swedish customer, who had several rifles built simultaneously. The customer specified that each gun have its serial number removed, and that all guns subsequently be engraved with identical serial numbers.... I have always imagined how he must have prepared to present various guns to the authorities over time, and each time being able to prove it was the same rifle - "look, here is the serial number!"... :-)

Hi mho, yes restrictions we have. Officially it is 6 rifles and shotguns together. But there is a big BUT, in many areas difficulties begin when asking for license number 5. So many have to be "satisfied" with 4 long guns. This is one reason why switch barrel rifles are popular. A rifle is complete only when it can be used, so here it is, at least now, possible to buy one complete long gun and how many barrels you want.
But I don´t trust this switchsystem fully, so I have to accept the other rule of BIG limitation. And then there is the problem that if the system of a switchbarrel breaks, you are without any gun...

Thanks for the enlightenment jmk. What a load of bureaucratic crap - max 4,5 or 6 rifles... Still, one lives under whatever conditions one can. Sweden is such a lovely country, and I susppose the moose hunting and the big roe bucks make up for it - not to speak of the girls...

- mike

yes, mho, good points