Inherent accuracy question -- .223 vs. 22-250

[Rafter-S]

Gentlemen,

Again I call upon your experience and expertise in the realm of shooting. And I post this here on the Reloading board since I figure folks who make their own ammo are more attuned to accuracy than the “average guy.”

I am looking at a new rifle (Remington 700 VTR) and trying to decide between the two calibers of .223 and 22-250. The application is for coyotes and other small varmints within 300 yards maximum range, so I am thinking either caliber will be sufficient. My question is: Does the 22-250 have the same INHERENT ACCURACY as the .223? I will handload for whichever caliber I get.

Thank you in advance,
Rafter

 

[OKFC05]

IMHO, when they made the short neck on the .223, it was inferior to the .222 magnum. If it weren't a military cartridge, it would have disappeared.
I'd choose the .22-250.

 

[H Richard]

There is nothing the .223 can do that the 22-250 doesn't do better. I load mine with 55 Gr. Nosler's at 3716 fps, and it is an easy 400 yard + gun on small targets like Prairie Dogs. I expect 1/2 MOA accuracy and this is from a stock Remington 700 VS.

 

[Homie]

The answer to your question is NO. Remington's factory acceptance standards for the 40X were .10" tighter for the .223.

That said, I would chose the .22/250 as a coyote gun, if coyotes at 300+ were the primary target.

In the VTR, I doubt if you could see the accuracy difference.

Remember the three Bs- Bullets, bedding, barrels.

Good shooting.

 

[moxie]

What they said. But if it matters, the .22-250 will eat quite a bit more powder.

 

[drhenzler]

Inherent accuracy has always gone to the smaller case. Practical accuracy... depends on the barrel. My advice is to consider your range requirements, and choose with care. If you never shoot more than 300 yards the 223 does it just fine. A fellow shooter has a Savage with accutriger that shoots under an inch at 300 yards all day long.

My personal experience is with two Remington 788's both with Canjar Triggers, T-16 Weaver scopes. Identical except for caliber. The .223 will shoot .3 groups easily, while the .22-250 is more like .4 Both by the way were shot with Sierra 52gr HPBT. Which at the Sacramento Valley Shooting Club is the choice of the small group shooters at anything up to 300 yards. I don't have any experience with it beyond that distance.

 

[one eye joe]

I would opt for the .223 for a slight edge out to 300yds in accuracy, economy of powder, AND ease of resale of the .223 to a factory ammo shooter.......

 

[Bullzaye]

I would also expect that the .22-250 might experience more rapid barrel wear than the .223.

Tim

 

[n4zov]

Unless you are a benchrest shooter there isn't going to be an appreciable difference in the inherent accuracy of the two cartridges. Both are adequate for the purpose you are going to use them for. However I would go with the .22-250 simply because it lets you shoot heavier bullets faster at longer ranges than the .223. For example a 60 grain bullet from a .22-250 arrives at 300 yards almost 300 fps faster than the same bullet shot from a .223. The higher velocity should make for more humane kills on coyotes. The .22-250 had an established reputation for long range varmint hunting before anybody even dreamed of the .223.

 

[Rafter-S]

Decision ! ! !

Thank you gentlemen for your suggestions. All are excellent and have been processed into a decision. I ordered the rifle in 22-250 caliber. I also have a 4.5x14x40 Leupold VXIII scope on the way. I hope I can hold as steady as I will be able to see the varmits.

Rafter

 

[H Richard]

You will like that scope. Something to consider is the Leupold "custom" target turret, engraved specific to your gun & load. You give them the bullet weight, caliber, actual chronographed velocity, altitude, barometric pressure, and they will engrave a turret specific to your set up. Read the distance on your rangefinder, dial the turret, take the shot. Works great.

 

[mack1]

For coyote hunting my vote is 22-250. The 223 may have an accuracy edge in a benchrest match but for low volume hunting where targets move and appear at various ranges and wind changes hits are easier with the higher velocity of the 22-250. All of that said either one will as well as many others work well.

 

[Engineer1911]

In a side by side accuracy test conducted in a praire dog field, my 223 killed (or missed) as many dog's as my buddy's 22-250. My shots cost 12¢, his shots cost 22¢ -- in 1992. Both rifles gave up the accuracy ghost around 7,000 rounds -- keyhole bullets at 25 yards.

 

[Joed49]

There is nothing the .223 can do that the 22-250 doesn't do better.

Accept for accuracy. I've had 2 .22-250's and 1 .223 in bolt rifles. Hands down the little .223 gives better accuracy.

Depends what you want to do though. To me the .223 is a 250 yard cartridge. Goes farther then that but beyond 250 yards and I'd pick one of my other rifles preferably the .25-06 which I consider one of the best varmint rounds for long range.

 

[cp1969]

If accuracy is the primary concern, one would get a .222. But suitable accuracy and suitable power are both required. You don't want to give up too much power to gain a tiny amount of accuracy.

FWIW, I hunted a lot of coyotes with .222, .223, and .22-250. I don't consider any of them to be a good coyote round; the .22-250 is the best but not by much. A .243 or 6mm works far better for that size game. The .22's deliver some spectacular kills but will also deliver some spectacular failures.