Up here in the northern plains from May through Sept. is Prairie Dog shootin' season. Several of the old "dog" shooters I know still shoot the good-old .222, a venerable old, and overlooked varmit and target round. I love to discuss the old round with fellow enthusiasts, and would like some comments here along with some photos This photo is of my 1952 vintage Remington 722 with the original Weaver 4X scope the I found in the late '70s. It'll go toe-to-toe with any "modern" round

__________________
John

Mine is prettier and has K-10 scope. Uncle bought new in 1950s
Have shot 55gr bullets/ BC L-2, for as long as I remember.

Attached Images

image.jpg (230.6 KB, 110 views)

After a decade of shooting various vermin, coyotes, a deer and an antelope, I gave my Remington 700 ADL with a 6 x Weaver to a good friend. I did enjoy the little round. My old gun did not look like your dog guns. Since mine was used as an everyday truck gun, I had the barrel shortened to 20". The stock looked more like firewood than an gun part. Chasing a wounded coyote over snow covered mountains while wearing cowboy boots ended the factory mint look. The stock got broke 2 times that day alone. After that the gun didn't get much kindness.

I traded into this CZ 527 American in .222 back in 2011. I scoped it, shot it, and put it away. A few months later I gave it to my younger brother, as he did not have a bolt action, .22 centerfire, "walking varminter" type rifle. It is a good shooting rifle and he was quite pleased with it.


A few months later I was rummaging through a junk box in a N.C. gunshop and found a used mag for that rifle.

Long ago, I had a Ruger No. 1 in .222. Living in Maryland, I never really got that much actual varmint use in with it, but it was about the most accurate rifle I've ever owned.

Plain old curiosity. What does it offer over 223/556?

In one word, CLASS

Something more than emotion

My Dad was a .222 man when I was growing up. He had a Sako action barreled and stocked by a local gunsmith and he used it for squirrel hunting, varmint shooting (shooting crows was a popular pass-time back then), and fox hunting. Indiana had a small bounty on fox and there were quite a few of them. I remember seeing photos of he and his buddies with 5-6 fox between them collected on their usual Saturday morning hunts. The rifles varied from .25/20 to .220 Swift and everything in between.

I grew up shooting that Sako and handloading for it. I have it now, and also a box-stock Sako factory rifle of the same vintage to go along with it. Over the years I have picked up a couple more .222s, the most recent being an '80s vintage 700ADL that is nothing much to look at but still is actually an inexpensive, handy little rifle.

Lately I have been shooting a heavy-barrel Winchester M70 from the early '90s. It needs a good trigger but even as-is it regularly shoots 1/2" groups at 100-yards. Once this spring I fired three rounds into 1-1/2" at 400-yards while tinkering with the gun and I was pretty happy with that. You can shoot it a lot before the barrel heats up enough to worry about.

It is a bit pointless probably but I enjoy experimenting with the various new .22 caliber bullets that are coming along lately. I had high hopes for the 50-gr VMAX but so far my guns are not impressed with it. The 55-gr Blitz-King is another matter. I think it is going to be a good one. Still, I don't think anything is going to badly outshoot the old standby 50-gr Sierra Blitz, which has been a favorite for accuracy since I first started using them in the very early '70s. I still have an empty box from those days with a $2.45 price sticker on it, IIRC.

My next .222 project probably will be to re-scope Dad's old Sako with something more modern, but I have not decided what just yet. I can't think of any firearm I enjoy shooting more than a .222.

Accuracy.


.

The .222 Remington is an extremely accurate cartridge that set bench rest records that stood for many years. It falls short of the .223 in energy and speed; nor will it handle the heavier bullets.

The caliber is still very much alive in countries that prohibit the civilian ownership of military-caliber rifles. In Europe, there are many fine rifles chambered in .222 Rem, and in the past, rifles that we're familiar with here in .223, including the Colt AR-15 and Ruger Mini-14 have been sold overseas in .222.

I sure as heck wouldn't mind having a varmint-weight Tikka or Sako in that caliber in my safe, nor a Rem 40-X, for that matter!

for the 14 years I lived in NE and KS I owned a few triple deuces. my two favorites were a 700V and a first year rem 788 with a walnut stock. the 788 shot the same load as the 700 and about as accurately. wish I still had the 788 for the occasional yote around here. lee

With 55 gr or smaller bullets the advantage of 223 over 222 is
so small not worth worrying about. There would be no 223 if the
longer necked 222 would function as well in auto weapons. The
longer neck is what makes 222 accurate. The 223 bullet hangs
in case like a butt in a one holer. The 5.56 NATO case has less volume than civilian 223. This can be proved with a syringe, fill
cases with water and check volume. The heavy bullet thing is
a matter of twist not cartridge. There is no reason you couldn't
barrel 222 for heavy bullets if so inclined. Not that there is any
thing wrong with the 223.

With 55 gr or smaller bullets the advantage of 223 over 222 is
so small not worth worrying about. There would be no 223 if the
longer necked 222 would function as well in auto weapons. The
longer neck is what makes 222 accurate. The 223 bullet hangs
in case like a butt in a one holer. The 5.56 NATO case has less volume than civilian 223. This can be proved with a syringe, fill
cases with water and check volume. The heavy bullet thing is
a matter of twist not cartridge. There is no reason you couldn't
barrel 222 for heavy bullets if so inclined. Not that there is any
thing wrong with the 223.

Amazing thread...

There is a cartridge and caliber for all of U.S. The choices are nearly endless.

I have loved the .222 Remington since the day we met. My first is a retired benchrest gun. Built on a Sako L-46 single-shot action in a laminated wood stock, it has a stubby thick barrel. Still shoots 2's and 3's but clearly won't win any benchrest matches anymore. Despite its "inaccuracy" Rockchucks and picket pins don't think very highly of it.

Being that the old bench gun is too much to haul around the fields, I bought an unmolested L-46. It makes for a sweet walking around rifle. Very lightweight and very accurate.

Both of these rifles like a full charge of IMR4198 and Hornady's 50 gr SPSX slug. I don't bother neck-sizing anymore and simply shoot the same load in both rifles.

The .222 appeals to me much like the 44 Special does. As another poster said: Class. In my professional world we discuss the boundaries of Necessary and Sufficient. For my purposes, the .222 is right in the middle. It never fails to deliver and does so without going "over the top."

Good load for varmints.

I also like 40gr V-Max over IMR8208XBR. Very accurate; fun to shoot.

Having once upon a time owned a 722 in 222, I can attest that it made an accurate combo.

ARIK, asked in an earlier post what advantages the 222 had over the 223. I rather flippantly remarked CLASS. Other members said it more eloquently. They all talked of a time when dad or grandpa took his crow gun afield for a day of shooting. No tactical semi auto with a plastic stock, bayonet lug and red dot sights. No vest full of 30 round magazines. Just a pocket full of handloads and a wood stocked hunting rifle. A distant time and place, when we did not ever think about shooting a paper target that looked like a human. I feel Norman Rockwell could have painted an American classic painting of a man with such a rifle perched in the field waiting for a woodchuck to show its head.

The reason I asked was because after reading the topic I Googled 222 and brefly read up on it. Seemed more or less close to 223 and since there are plenty of bolt action 223 rifles (not everything 223 is semi auto) I was curious as to what real advantage it had since 223 is widely available in a wide variety of loadings.

Arik: One of the touted differences between .222 and the .223 is the .222's longer neck. It has been said this is part of its legendary accuracy. I'd guess it tends to reduce bullet runout. If it does, one is still dependent on case sizing methods. Benchresters typically use inline dies and an arbor press to avoid case concentricity problems and bullet runout.

Arik, the simple truth is what Drm50 said. In the context of normal sporting use, the difference is not worth discussing. I happen to like both, but my "heart" is always with the .222.

My .222s no doubt are all 14-inch twist. My two .223s are 9-inch (Remington) and 8-inch (Browning). I am not sure what good 69-77 grain .22 caliber bullets really are (probably not much except as a toy for paper target shooting), but for anything in the 50-55 grain range, between the .222 and .223 ballistically there is little practical difference. What we enjoy is another thing.

I really do not understand the concept of taking the .223/5.56, putting slightly heavier bullets in it, and somehow thinking that makes it something it clearly is not. It appears to be a matter of expediency. I haven't the actual experience to be able to say it is a "poodle shooter," but I think those with that experience who do are probably on the right track.

The .223 has about 160 fps more than the .222.

I can assure you the groundhog won't notice the difference.

Realistically, that additional velocity might give the .223 maybe 25 yards more useful range, which could be important to some people. I would go 22-250 if longer range were important to me.

I actually have one of those .222 Colts; back in '97 (I think) when the first AR bans/legislation were occurring, and ARs went over 1K w/high caps, Birmingham Pistol Wholesale was advertising Colt .222 ARs for $499 on sale, N.I.B. I bought one, thinking I'd re-barrel since the bolt was the same, but ended up just buying a used 5.56mm lg. hole upper instead and an aftermarket push-pin for the front take down pin from Brownell's. The receiver is marked .222 (model 6510), and is one of the old slab-side lowers w/o the mag release fence. I still have the unfired upper in the gun room; when the ground hogs and foxes rise up in rebellion, I may switch it back . .

Or 6mrm/.243, which really would make a difference.

I've had a Sako Riihimaki L46 in a Bishop stock for over 25 years, and it has made quite a few trips to SD for Prairie Dogs. I primarily shoot the 22-250, but the .222 is my walking around rifle, and most anything less than 250 yards. A case full of 4198 behind a Speer 52 Gr. HP has been my favorite load in that rifle and it still does around a 1/2" @ 100 yds or better.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

Cool story! I remember seeing them for sale back then, I believe in Shotgun News. If I were you, I'd post it for sale on Gunbroker, indefinitely, in hopes of finding a buyer, and with the money, but a newer version in 5.56 or .223.

TC Contenders in .222 Rem are very popular on those countries with caliber restrictions too!

I have had three of them over the years. Saki L46 a really beautiful rifle, a 40x that loved remingtons 55 grain hollow points and IMR 4198 and last was a remingtom 788 in tripple duce. All long gone. Very easy cartridge to load for and in the above three rifles extremely accurate. The 222 held many benchrest records until the PPC cartridges started breaking records. Frank

222 rem is my father-in-laws favorite. He has shot many a target, varmints and a few white tail as well. Not really a white tail gun, but it does allow great shot placement! He got me into reloading, and the 222 is a great cartridge to start with.
I have owned a Win mod 70, a Rem mod 700, a "worked over" Sako, and a couple of CZ 527's. All shot great with BL(C)-2, with a charge of between 22.5gr and 23.5gr of powder and Sierra 50gn Blitz bullets. Great confidence builder, for both my meager shooting and reloading skills.
I only have the CZ 527 American now, a great little rifle for this cartridge. It isn't the "perfect" platform by any means, but man do I love this combo!
Glad to see that the old triple deuce is still appreciated by others out there. I don't hear much about it on the internet, or even in the local gun shops. It will always have a special place in my "addiction" to firearms, reloading and shooting. Plus it helped me bond with my pa-in-law,a really great old soul.

Mine is a Sako L461, the Vixen. Nice wood, great bluing, and very accurate.

Let's take it a step farther and consider the .22 Hornet and .22 K-Hornet as well.

I grew up in western South Dakota and spent much of my adult life there as well. The edge of the closest Prairie dog town was about 150 yards south of the house I grew up in and consequently I cut my teeth prairie dogging with a .22 LR followed by smaller caliber centerfire .22s from a young age.

I was hunting prairie dogs long before it became a destination hunt activity and long before it became a commercial enterprise with dog towns being over hunted. I miss those days...

In any case, there are a few factors to consider in a varmint round:

Barrel temperature and throat erosion.

Even today however where shots are a little more scarce, a good afternoon on a dog town can involve 500 rounds, and to keep barrel temps down on a 100 degree day in the sun, you'll want to stay in the shade and swap rifles on a regular basis.

That's one advantage of the smaller .22 caliber cartridges. The .220 Swift and .22-250 generate impressive velocities, but they also generates a lot of heat and in turn demonstrate much faster rates of barrel erosion (the .220 Swift more so than the .22-250). I just don't know that many serious varmint hunters who use a .220 Swift or even the .22-250. For long shots they are more likely to move up to a 6mm, a 6.5 or even a .308 caliber cartridge, or they'll use a long, heavy .223 bullet with better wind bucking ability.

The .223 is a significant improvement over the larger .22s in terms of barrel life and barrel temperatures as the smaller powder charge generates less heat and less erosion. The .222 improves on this even further, but rounds like the .22 K-Hornet and .22 Hornet are even more barrel and temperature friendly.

Accuracy.

As noted above the .222 is a very inherently accurate cartridge, but so are the .22 K-Hornet and .22 Hornet. All three cartridges are capable of consistent sub MOA accuracy with comparatively inexpensive varmint bullets. The .223 is no slouch either, but it is slightly easier to get sub MO accuracy with one of the smaller rounds.

Range.

There is not as much difference as you'd think between the .223 and .222. For example:

.223 - 50 grain bullet

A .223 loaded with a decent a bullet having a decent (for a lightweight .223 caliber bullet) BC of .242, launching it 3,300 fps from a longish varmint barrel will have a point blank range of 242 yards, assuming a 225 yard zero and a 2" vital zone radius. At 300 yards it will have dropped 4.8" and at 350 yards it will strike 10.2" low after drifting 6.1" downwind in a 10 mph full value crosswind.

.222 - 50 gr bullet

The .222 will launch the same bullet at 3140 fps (160 fps less), producing a 256 yard point blank range with a 220 yard zero, and will strike 5.8" low at 300 yards and 11.9" low at 350 yards, drifting 6.6" downwind in the same 10 mph, 90 degree crosswind.

Realistically then it's giving up only 12 yards in point blank range, and only an inch or two greater drop at 300 and 350 yards. That difference in trajectory is less than you'll see with a 5 yard range estimation error at that distance, and if you're using a laser range finder and dope on the scope, it's not a difference the prairie dog will ever notice.

.222 - 40 grain bullet

The thing is however, that the 50 grain bullet is heavier than optimum for the .222, and it does better with a 40 grain bullet. It'll launch one at 3600 fps delivering a 280 yard point blank range, striking only 3.5" low at 300 yards and 8.3" low at 350 yards, with a still reasonable wind drift of only 6.9".

.22 K-Hornet.

The K-Hornet adds 250-300 fps over the .22 Hornet with 45 grain bullets and that weight is arguably its sweet spot. With a 45 grain spitzer bullet at 2900 fps, and a 200 yard zero it will deliver a 235 yard point blank range, striking 3.5" low at 250 yards and 9.5" low at 300 yards with 5.8" of wind drift in a 10mph crosswind. It gives up about 50 yards in effective range compared to the .223 and .222 rounds.

One of the major advantages of the .22 K-Hornet over the .22 Hornet is greater brass life as the case is worked a lot less in the firing and reloading process.

.22 Hornet - 30 or 35 grain bullet

The is where you start to see some significant differences in range potential. Newer powders look Lil' Gun work wonders in the .22 Hornet with lighter bullets and a .22 Hornet will launch a 35 gr V-max at 3100 fps or a 30 grain bullet at 3150 fps. However with a 190 yard zero, those bullets will produce a point blank range of only 220 yards, before dropping about 5-6" at 250 yards and 15-16" at 300 yards.

Realistically speaking then, 250 yards is about the maximum useful varminting range for a .22 Hornet, where it also demonstrates about 6.8" of drift in a 210 mph cross wind. You're losing 100 yards to the .222 and .223.

However, the accuracy at that 250 yard range is spectacular and you can expect to consistently place 5 shots inside a 2" circle at 250 yards provided you do your part on the trigger and in doping the wind. The long neck of the .22 Hornet results in good bullet alignment and combined with neck sizing, you'll find it's very easy to load very accurate rounds for the .22 Hornet without having to resort to uber expensive bullets.

The best part is that you can put a lot of rounds through the barrel before it heats up, and you'll be generating less muzzle report than with the much higher operating pressures of the .222 and .223.

In that regard, I like the .22 Hornet here on the east coast as it is quieter and disturbs the neighbors a lot less, and it stays cool enough that I can use it and a .22 LR and not have to worry about anything else in the more forested areas where 250 yards is far enough.

Barrel twist.

Barrel twist will largely govern your bullet selection. 1-14 and 1-16" are pretty standard in the 22 Hornet and that rules out bullets longer than a 40 grain V-max, which can be a bit too long for some 1-16" barrels - for example it will not stabilize in my 1-16" 1885 Browning, but it's a tack driver in my Zastava mini mauser that is also nominally a 1-16" twist.

I'm still a fan of 1-12" twist in a .223 Varmint rifle, although 1-9" works well with heavier bullets in the 55-62 grain range. The problem is that over stabilizing the bullet with excessive rpm causes problems with less expensive, less precise bullets where the center of gravity and center of form are not on the same axis.

I always yearned for a rifle in .222 (and one in .218 Bee, just for S&G), but having limited funds I settled on the versatility of .243 Winchester.

Haven't been able to hunt anymore for several years, but still would like a .222, among countless others.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

33 posts, and no one has mentioned the big brother of the .222, the .222 Remington Magnum. This round has the capacity of the .223 and the accuracy of the .222. Mine is the fancier version of the 722, and was rechambered. Loaded ammo is almost impossible to find, but I have a good supply of new brass. I have tried to sell it as part of thinning the herd, and I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who have even heard of the Magnum.

hi bigoldave,
I have an interest in 222mag, can you e-mail me at [email protected]. thanks.....sw dan

I still have a Cooper single shot in .222 Rem. Easy rd to make little groups, especially with todays good bullets. Cases last pretty well, same for barrels.

Years back I hade a Steyr in .222 Rem MAG. It was their modern SL model. Neat plastic box mag, a Carbine with beautiful wood and a full forend. Mine shot 55 gr handloads into 1/2" with only an 8X scope. I sold it in a moment of insanity and have regretted it ever since.

My Cooper still ruins the day for a lot of Montana gophers. Great little round.

Do a little experiment: take a NATO 5.56 mm case and load it
with a 55 gr spitzer bullet, load IMR 4198 or 3031 for a velocity
of 3250fps ( old GI load) and seat bullet to cannulure as factory
loaded. Take two aspirin and call me in the morning!

On a forum full of gun enthusiasts there is little explanation needed to add another gun to the armoury. I have rifles in .22 Hornet. .222 Remington and .223 Remington in that .22 centerfire group. My next purchase will not give me any real advantage over rifles I already own ( and reload for ) but hopefully a lot of pleasure and pride of ownership.

Isn't that the truth? Every time I add another caliber to the list of rifles-to-be-attended-to, or pick up a new rifle in a caliber I already deal with, I wonder if I am crazy - but that hasn't stopped me yet.

BB57 makes an interesting point about 40-gr in the .222, but its a little hard to swallow for those of us used to shooting 50-gr and heavier. If you use 40-gr and 50-gr Hornady VMAX bullets in their ballistic calculator at 3600 FPS and 3200 FPS respectively, the 40-gr is only 0.6-inch flatter at 300 yards (200 yd zero) but gives up 13% of the 50-gr load's energy. Not a lot of difference, but the energy does interest me. I can hold over or dial in one extra click for 300, but I can't add energy to the bullet.

Anyway, with these numbers close as they are, logic indicates that selection (like most selections in rifle handloading and shooting) probably will rest with whatever the individual rifle shoots best.

Still, that 40-gr VMAX does look to be one more thing to tinker with.

I've tinkered with the 35-gr V-Max, too. I works great, but it's easier for me to standardize on just the 40.

Hornady # 22241 (100) and 22416 (250).

I have a Revelation 225E which is really a Savage 340 that my brother bought new at a Western Auto in about 1970.
He gave it to me in about 1980 with a Lee Loader setup. Easy to reload for and easily the most accurate rifle I have owned. It has had the stock refinished a couple-three times from beating around in a pickup but has smoked innumerable coyotes and more than a few Coues whitetails.
People tell me they are not worth much, still, but I wouldn't sell this one, it will go to one of the grandsons. Coincidentally, my SIL has the same rifle in a 30-30. Daggum handy, accurate also.

Great, educational reading of some your "alternate" bullet re-loads for the Triple-Deuce. I'm not a competent enough reloader to try different bullets. Consequently all I've ever re-loaded or purchased is the bullet the .222 was designed around; the 50gr jacketed soft-point. Great posts, making this thread really interesting

__________________
John

The father of one of my HS friends had an H&R bolt gun in .222. One day, my friend and I were rooting through his gun cabinet when the H&R was pointed out to me, along with a box of .222 Magnum. It took a lot of explaining that he could NOT use those shells in his rifle.

... without photos.

I did not buy the L461 based on accuracy alone but wanted a nice looking rifle. I ended up refinishing it and recutting the checkering. It has a 4x32 Hensoldt Diasta on Sako rings installed and I can keep my shots on a business card at 100 yards. Okay, I can do the same with my AR but when it comes to guns, diversity and choice is a luxury that I indulge in.

Still kicking myself for selling my 30 year old, new in box model 600 to that doggone Weatherby here on the forum. Dang it!

__________________
Halfway and one more step

The 'ol Triple-Deuce.

IIRC, it ruled bench rest until the .22 PPC came along.