Friend has a chance to pick up a Remington .222 for the right price. I know ammo is available, but how much trouble to change to .223 ?

Also, need polymer stock for sporterized 1917 enfield with straight bottom metal...Bell & Carlsons stock is for military bottom.

Not much troulbe at all, a barrel change and headspacing is all. I wouldn't be changing it too fast, most 222's are very accurate unless of course there's something really wrong with the rifle. A 222 will do almost everything a 223 will. Factory ammo and brass is readily available.

Lost

Changing a 222 to a 223 is very easy. You can either re-barrel or simply get a gunsmith with a 223 reamer and headspace gauge to re-chamber, which takes only a couple of minutes. However, I would consider craigster's advice very carefully. I had a real nice Rem 222 that I rechambered to 223 because I thought the availibility of military surplus ammo would be an advantage. Well it wasn't since I handloaded most of my ammo and the 222 was more accurate. I always wished I had left it as is. JMHO

Ray

222 has a much longer neck to better hold the bullet straighter. That explains why the 222 is usually more accurate than the 223
Many more bench rest competitions were won with the 222 than the 223. Take it for what it is worth.

It's easy to change a .222 to a .223.....already described. As far as the accuracy thing, I'd disagree that the .222 is more accurate than the .223. Theoretically maybe but the .223 rifles I have had were superbly accurate and the equal of the only .222 I had.

I'd be more concerned about the future value of the rifle by rechambering....it's up to you.

don't do it!!! most twist rates for the 222 is 1 in 14" org. factory 223 was anywhere from 1 in 12" to 1 in 7" you are not likely to find any military ammo that will shoot very well with 1 in 14 twist. I did one of these on a remington 788 many years ago, very disappointing.

Unless you want a double shoulder you had better set the barrel back about two threads and rechamber, not a simple rechamber job, but not a tough one either, but it may effect the bedding and require glassing the barrel channel....

That said I would rather have a .222 any day...

Thanks for the replys. While I was waiting I did a little searching. My friend is not much into reloading but I can pick up cases and dies for cheap enough to make it worth his while.

Will have to check the local Gander Mountain store this weekend to see if they stock the .222 ammo. They seem to have the standards but no variations. I have to order bullets for my 6.5 Swede & 35 Whelen.

The 222 is a grand little round which enjoys a very good reputation here in NZ.

My 222 is a BRNO 601, the stock, to my eye, is ugly, it's for a 222 heavy, however I would no more rechamber to 223 than I would sell it.

You are, of cause, free to do as you choose.

The best arguments against rechambering are the differance in rate of twist and the answer to the question question what, if any, advantage would be gained from doing so?
Ergo why change it?

If you need a p17 bottom metal un altered I can trade you. or you can fill the hole in the bc stock its pretty simple matter

quote:

Originally posted by Lost Oki:
Friend has a chance to pick up a Remington .222 for the right price. I know ammo is available, but how much trouble to change to .223 ?

Also, need polymer stock for sporterized 1917 enfield with straight bottom metal...Bell & Carlsons stock is for military bottom.

It's NO TROUBLE AT ALL! I had my good old Rem. 722 in .222 rechambered to .223, and altered the magazine spacer myself so it would accept and feed the .223.

It's something I wish I had not done. The idea was to be able to use GI ammo (the original 55-grain FMJBT bullet load), and I discovered that the original .222's 1/14" twist was too slow for that bullet, as the groups were very large. It did shoot 55-grain flatbase softpoints quite well, as good as it had before being butchered.

If I had it to do again, I would leave the .222 a .222.....

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
The 222 is a grand little round which enjoys a very good reputation here in NZ.

My 222 is a BRNO 601, the stock, to my eye, is ugly, it's for a 222 heavy, however I would no more rechamber to 223 than I would sell it.

You are, of cause, free to do as you choose.

The best arguments against rechambering are the differance in rate of twist and the answer to the question question what, if any, advantage would be gained from doing so?
Ergo why change it?

------------------------------------

IF you ever do decide to sell your 601, Please, Please contact me first! I'm sure we could arrive at some arrangement that ewould make us both happiest. I love, lust for, adore, that model & chambering, and am experienced in importing such pieces into the U.S. for my own use. I had one of the same model except for chambering (mine was .223) which I bought brand new in 1969. Don't know what sort of brain failure ever let it get away...

Crusher, its not about the hole location, its about the step that you will have from the bent bottom metal to the straight bottom metal. Have a nice walnut stock on it that needs checkering so I thought I would look for a poly. WIll have to tear my 35 back down, including recoil pad to try and determine who made the stock. Bought the gun used.

Alberta Canuk,

I'm sorry my friend, but I have no plans to sell the 601. It took me a while to find it. It is a very accurate with bog standard Winchester Factory 50 grain ammo.


I'll keep you in mind, should I come across another, I did see one a couple of years ago.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
Alberta Canuk,



I'll keep you in mind, should I come across another, I did see one a couple of years ago.

I'd sure appreciate that!! I am also almost desperatly seeking a ZKK 600 in 7x57. Shot my first moose with one of those, and then for some reason totally unknown to me now traded it straight across for a M70 in '06 at the Custom Gun Shop up in Edmonton, Alberta.

Would pay a $500 U.S."finder's fee" to snyone who could help me find and successfully recover that particular rifle...it had a Brno 1-piece mount and Meopta 2-1/2X scope when last I saw it, but though I'd really like to get back both scope and rifle, I'd pay the fee just to get back the rifle....plus the cost of the rifle, of course.

I know that rifle has likely not made its way to NZ, but even if I can't find that specific rifle, I'd still like to make a clone of it using another M600.