OK, YOU .222 REM SHOOTERS,
Now that I have finally settled on the .222 Rem for a light carry rifle, I need the benefit of your experience. I'd like to have the option of using a wide range of bullet weights so, what rate of twist would be logical for 50 to 70+ grain bullets ? At this point, I'm not sure which manufacturers offer the .222 Rem in their lineup. I am not opposed to a used rifle and, in fact, my first choice would be an older Sako. A casual search for used a Sako .222 indicates their value somewhere in the range of an equal weight of platinum or kryptonite. I see a Riihimaki made in the 1950's offered for $795.00, supposed to be 96% overall. How's that price? That's steep for me, but I can liquidate some of the mountain I'm paying storage on and then perhaps have hope for one. So, I would appreciate your input along these lines and hearing about any used .222's out there.
Doug

Doug, it would be a rare occurrence to find a .222 Rem in anything but 1:14. As wonderful a round as the .222 Rem is, it just does not have the case capacity to handle the heavier bullets with any authority. So people have always built .222 Rems with 1:14 barrels - about ideal for 50 grs bullets. But, boy oh boy, does it sing with that bullet weight.

I totally agree with your choice of rifle - although if it was me, I'd probably see if I could locate a Sako L461 as opposed to the older L46 (sometimes marked Riihimaki - the location of the Sako plant). No flies on the L46, they often shoot well, I just like the L461 (or an A1) a wee bit better. No detachable magazine, better trigger, better looking triggerguard, smooth as anything.

Now for a couple of drawbacks with the Sakos. Sometimes (often?) you'll find Sako (.222) chambers cut with fairly long freebores, but probably no more so than other factory rifles. The triggers are nice, but if you don't like them, you won't be able to get an aftermarket triger which significantly improves (lightens) trigger pull.

About price, all I can say is, that the fact you are looking for a light barreled gun should help you to some extent. The heavy barreled guns are even more expensive. But other than that, I don't think I can comment on what price would be reasonable for you to pay. Others will be better qualified to provide this information.

- mike

Having gone this route in the last year , I settled on the CZ 527 American in .222.
It is light, rather attractive and will handle most bullets up to 60 grs. with some degree of accuracy. The lighter weight quality bullets can do MOA. It does not have varmint rifle accuracy. The price tag is affordable.

I resently aquired a Stevens Mod. 200 in .22-250. Again it was a light rifle with a Tupperware stock. and handled the same range of bullets with a much higher degree of accuracy. This rifle , however will not feed from the magazine ,so, it has been given a single shot follower which works just fine.The current price tags on the Mod. 200 Stevens is comparatively dirt cheap.This mod. is also chambered in the .223 and will accurately handle bullets up to 75 grains supposing that it is the same barrel as on the Savage rifles.

Armed with the knowledge I now have, if I had to make a choice I would go with the .223 Stevens and take the money I save and buy another Savage type barrel.

Thanks Mike and Bartsche,
Every bit of info I can get will go in the hopper. I wonder if there have been or are now any .222 barrels made with a 1:10 or 1:12 twist. Maybe custom only.
So, if the .223 can handle heavier bullets, that must account for some of it's popularity. In the end, it may not matter too much to me if I can use heavier bullets or not. I wouldn't be using it to put meat in the pot.
While I am leaning heavily toward the .222, I am still trying to sort out all the pros and cons for the .222 as compared to the .223, especially as related to a light carry rifle. I don't buy many rifles, so I'd like to get it right the first time.
Thanks again for your input and I welcome contributions from any other .222 and .223 shooters.
Doug

To me, the draw of the .222 is its history. The round has class.
Sort of like why I choose to shoot a 7x57 rather than a 7mm-08....or a 300 H&H instead of a 300 Win. Mag...or a 9.3x62 rather than a Whelen...
Some rounds just have an almost mystical draw to them.
IMHO that's the only reason to choose the deuce. And, in my opinion, its one of the best reasons.
The .223 is more versatile with heavy bullets...The 22-250 has versatility in spades...But neither is a deuce.

If I was to build a 222 today it'd have a 1-12" twist.....

I've always leaned to Ken in VA's school of thought. Long necks to me were always of the proper design. Still are.

I must, however, give credit where credit is due. Considering repeatability over a wide range of bullet weight three of my rifles stand out. All are varminters per say. They are a .243 a .223 and a .308 all have short necks.

I have to agree with Bartsche, as insignificant as it may sound, the long neck of the .222 Rem makes it a better round for reloading than the .223. To me it has to do with the ease of creating consistent neck tension, where the long neck helps.

The .222 Rem is (marginally?) more accurate than the .223 - but this will be totally dependent on the rifle in question. In fact, I could not even prove my assertion, that could probably only be done statistically, anyway.

So all in all, I just LOVE the .222 Rem.

However, all my points may well be moot when it actually comes to choosing a caliber. Yes, the .222 Rem may be more accurate, and yes it may have advantages when it comes to reloading, and yes it uses less powder, but if the .223 is accurate enough, easy enough to reload, and does not use that much powder anyway, who cares?? In particular for a light carry rifle, there will probably be little difference in absolute accuracy. And, I have to admit, the .223 with a 1:12 or 1:10 barrel wins hands down in terms of versatility, availability of factory guns, availability and price of ammo and components.

It is a sad day, when one has to suggest a .223 over a .222, and if you were a person with many rifles, looking for the "ultimate niche gun" in terms of accuracy and sweetness, I'd go for the .222. But for a person who does not have so many rifles, and who wants to achieve maximum versatility at the lowest possible cost, it is hard to go wrong with the .223.

Btw, the .223 is made with widely varying twist rates, 1:12, 1:10, 1:8 and I'm sure a whole bunch more. The reason is its heritage as a military caliber, where very heavy bullets are shot. The .222 was always a varmint/target round, and was built to get the most out of the (small) case. I guess that is why, the .222 is much more standardized than the .223 when it comes to twist rates. Some people even consider the large variation of bullet weights shot a problem for the .223. I don't necessarily share that opinion, but it does mean one has to be aware of the twist rate issue when buying a rifle in .223.

- mike

I haven't seen any factory rifles with a twist tighter than 1-14". As you mentioned

quote:

it may not matter too much to me if I can use heavier bullets or not

.
So if you went the 222 route, and 50gr bullets are heavy enough, I would definately go for it. But, if you were going to re-barrel one I would probably opt for a 1-12" twist. They seem to stabilize the longer 55gr BT bullets better. In reality the 222 isn't really meant to push bullets heavier than 50grs.

I have a Sako L461 I rechamered to the 221 Fireball. Its a fun light gun to shoot. As mentioned above by another poster, the trigger isn't the best, I did work it over, but is is a far cry from a Jewell or any other aftermarket trigger for that matter. The Sako action has attractive lines, but for shootability I would use a Remington.

As for the .223, if you were to only buy one rifle in 22 cal, this would be the one. It has enough power for coyotes out to 300 or more yards, depending on the bullet weigh, yet light enough recoil and impulse to shoot 500 rds all day at Prarie Dogs. It is easier and cheaper to find a rifle in this chambering, as every manufacturer chambers this cartridge. This is the most versatile 22cal cartridge. I have even used it to compete in 1000yd service rifle with 80 gr Bergers in my DCM AR, 20"BBL.

.222
Pros: Inheirantly more accurate, the L461 is a nice looking accurate rifle, different than everybody else
Cons: more expensive, limited bullet weight, unless rebarreled, aftermarket triggers not available

.223
Pros: Cheaper, more versatile, wide selection of twist rates, for heavier bullets, which dramatically increases effective range, if Remington action is used, excellent selection of the best after market triggers.
Cons: May take a while to find that half MOA load, everybody has one,

They have been trying to bury the .222 for years but it keeps sitting up in the coffin. It is too good of a cartridge to let die. And it has the pedigree of being THE bench rifle at one time and the holder of numerous records. Once for fun, I entered a bench rest match with a pretty much stock 788 with a Douglas barrel in .222. Needless to say, I didn't win but I did agg kinda in the lower middle.
If you're looking for just a walk around varmint rifle then the .223 is the was to go. A great deal of its popularity is because it is a military round and milsup ammo is so cheap one can hardly afford to reload. And it is accurate also.
I doubt the .222 will ever go away but if you reload, you needn't care. A hundred new cases should last you nearly a lifetime and a pound of powder will go a long ways.
In the FWIW department, I've never understood the folks that will take a perfectly balanced cartridge/rifle combo and try to make it something its not. If you want to shoot 75gr bullets, buy a .243 for christsakes.

quote:

Originally posted by mho:
I have to agree with Bartsche, as insignificant as it may sound, the long neck of the .222 Rem makes it a better round for reloading than the .223.

It is a sad day, when one has to suggest a .223 over a .222,

I usually have a hard time wadding thru a long posting, but yours was well written and exceptionally graphic. Merry Christmas roger

Asking prices for Sakos are exceeding selling prices, which is natural, but right now the spread between bid-ask is wider than normal. Older Sakos (standard grade) in reasonably good condition start to move around $600 (in common calibers), and really nice ones top out about $800 (again, in common calibers). So, you should be able to get a nice L461 for between 6 and 8.

The L461 in .222 is a wonderful little gun. It will handle bullets up to 60 grains without a problem, although it is at its best with 50's. You give up little to the .223, and the .222 is just a tad milder in report.

bartsche
i take it you dont like your cz?
you say it isnt a varmit rifle? why?
im considering a cz or a bdl in 222 because most guys think their 788's are worth gold
fog

If you can find a adl in .222, grab it! If not, let me know where it is.

The .222 is not the fanciest kid on the block, but as someone already posted, it's just a classy little round. I can't really explain why, but the newer stuff like the WSSM's, .204's, etc. have never really appealed to me. No flies on the .223, but I think everyone should own at least one .222.

I don't have a real extensive collection, but I've always been drawn to classic rifles chambered for classic cartridges. A few examples are my Pre-64 Model 70's chambered in 270WCF and .300H&H, a '68 Browning ATD semi-auto .22lr, and a Sako Vixen Deluxe .222. If you can find a clean Sako L461 for a decent price, jump on it! They're one sweet little rifle!....

Remington made a 700 Classic in 222 and you can still find them floating around for 450-500 dollars at gunshows. I have a Sako that shoots great with 50gr bullets of all makes. Factory Remington and Winchester both shoot 1/2 to 3/4 inch in my rifle. Comparing the 223 and 222 is kinda splitting hairs. One has a suplus of cheap military ammo and one is nostalgic, both require good bullet placement regardless of make or weight. You'll love either.

quote:

Originally posted by fog:
bartsche
i take it you dont like your cz?
you say it isnt a varmit rifle? why?
im considering a cz or a bdl in 222 because most guys think their 788's are worth gold
fog

Actually I do like the CZ but it is a light barreled hunting rifle and not of the stuff that a varmint rifle is usually made of. It is a great walk about rifle and that's about it in a nut shell. roger

quote:

Originally posted by grubbydug:
OK, YOU .222 REM SHOOTERS,
Now that I have finally settled on the .222 Rem for a light carry rifle, I need the benefit of your experience. I'd like to have the option of using a wide range of bullet weights so, what rate of twist would be logical for 50 to 70+ grain bullets ? At this point, I'm not sure which manufacturers offer the .222 Rem in their lineup. I am not opposed to a used rifle and, in fact, my first choice would be an older Sako. A casual search for used a Sako .222 indicates their value somewhere in the range of an equal weight of platinum or kryptonite. I see a Riihimaki made in the 1950's offered for $795.00, supposed to be 96% overall. How's that price? That's steep for me, but I can liquidate some of the mountain I'm paying storage on and then perhaps have hope for one. So, I would appreciate your input along these lines and hearing about any used .222's out there.
Doug

If the Sako looks like mine, buy it! I would scoff at an offer like that for mine.

And its THANKS I give to ALL of you
for your valuable posts on the .223 and .222.

My course is clear and plain to see,
I'll have one triple-two AND one two-two-three.

And, its blessed we are to live where one has the OPTION of choosing a firearm for recreation and
defense. Let's keep it that way.
Have a safe Holiday Season and New Year. Doug

Merry CHRISTMAS to all

I hate to muddy the water, but what about the .22-250 as compared to the .222 or .223?
Thanks,

quote:

Originally posted by grubbydug:
My course is clear and plain to see,
I'll have one triple-two AND one two-two-three.

What a great choice! The perfect solution.

quote:

And, its blessed we are to live where one has the OPTION of choosing a firearm for recreation and
defense. Let's keep it that way.
Have a safe Holiday Season and New Year. Doug

So right you are. A Merry Christmas to you and yours, Sir.
- mike

The 22-250/.220 Swift are in another league from the deuce and the .223. It'd kinda be like comparing the .300 Savage and the 30-06.

Grubbydug: I love Rifles in 222 Remington caliber and simply would not be without several 222's!
I recall right off hand having 6 of them right now.
My Remington 40XB-BR in 222 Remington is so splendidly accurate that I have used it on several occassions to evaluate the shooting ABILITIES of relatives and friends who I find need in assessing their shooting skills.
When they shoot it (it has a 24 power Leupold on it) I subtract the Rifles consistent ability to shoot .250" five shot groups at 100 yards from what they achieve with it! I am then fully able to assess their "marksmanship" for what ever reasons I had in the first place!
I have a couple of Remington 700 Classics in caliber 222 Remington!
WONDERFUL little Rifles these! Both display excellent accuracy with modest powered scopes on them! I have a 10 power Lyman on one and a 4x12 Leupold on the other.
The Remington Classic with the 10 power Lyman on it shoots groups so small that I hesitate to post them here for fear of being called a liar! I highly recommend one of these Remington Classics for your uses - if you can find one?
My two Sakos in 222 Remington are VERY accurate also but yes they were much more expensive than my Remington Classics!
Both my Sakos are heavy barrelled Varminters and the Remington Classics are of course the sporter weight barrelled models.
Good luck with whichever you choose!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

MANY THANKS, VarmintGuy, and all who have so generously contributed to my enlightenment on the relative merits of the venerable .222 and the versatile .223.
You have given me much on which to ruminate and digest. The list of inviting solutions to my quandry seems to be growing and for the moment stands at:
One Each: CZ 527 American in .222
CZ 527 American in .223
Sako L461 in .222
Remington Classic in .222
A Heavy-Barreled Varmint Rifle in .222 or .223 (WAIT! I'll figure it out!)

I think I feel a home equity loan coming on. Oh my. Is it possible that those worthy citizens stumbling around out there in blissful ignorance of this forum are a little more solvent than we? I must be strong. Doug

I think that Sako's have a lot of class. However, I recommend an average sporter weight Remington 700ADL (no floor plate) with the action bedded and barrel free floated. This is my 222 set up. I only use one load for prairie poodles and song dogs which contains a heavy charge (closer to 223 pressure) of Benchmark (4198 will move the bullet a little faster, but is slightly less accurate in my rifle) and 50gr Ballistic Tips in once fired, neck sized brass. Accuracy is truly bench rest competitive, and velocity is not far behind the 223. I strongly recommend Wilson concentric reloading dies (Neck die and in-line bull seater) for use with an arbor press. Reloading is a little slower, but well worth it in my opinion. With Wilson dies or something similar, I imagine that you can get a 223 to put its very best foot forward as well. Alignment of the bullet with the bore is the most important factor in accuracy. This is not to say that other factors don't matter. However, bullet alignment is most paramount. Good luck with the triple deuce!

quote:

Originally posted by grubbydug:
The list of inviting solutions to my quandry seems to be growing and for the moment stands at:
One Each: CZ 527 American in .222
CZ 527 American in .223
Sako L461 in .222
Remington Classic in .222
A Heavy-Barreled Varmint Rifle in .222 or .223 (WAIT! I'll figure it out!)

Minimize that loan and look at the Stevens 200 for the .223. Accurate and easier on the pocket book. Gives you something to work on during the dog days. roger

quote:

MHO

quote:

Doug, it would be a rare occurrence to find a .222 Rem in anything but 1:14. As wonderful a round as the .222 Rem is, it just does not have the case capacity to handle the heavier bullets with any authority. So people have always built .222 Rems with 1:14 barrels - about ideal for 50 grs bullets. But, boy oh boy, does it sing with that bullet weight.

MHO is correct here and my feeling is if you really want to go to any bullet in the caliber beyond say 55 Gr. that you consider another with a little more HP. I would say that the ideal bullet weight in .222 would be between 35 and 50 Gr. You should be able to find a reasonably priced one in a Remington ADL, BDL or Classic. Your other choices might be a Howa, S & W or Mossberg 1500. Good luck.

I have two rifles in this caliber and would hate to have to choose between them. The Remingtn 40XBBR is a bit heavy to lug around as a woodchuck rifle but it's a joy to shoot. It groups in the .2"s (5 at 100yds). This rifle has served as the base for many a benchrest rifle over the years. The other rifle is a Sako Varminter
which is over a pound lighter and groups in the .3"s and .4"s. You'd be hard pressed to beat this caliber in any rifle. It's a winner. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal