Venerable Remington .222 still going strong

[OLDSTER]

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

 

[Drm50]

222

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.

 

[30-30remchester]

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.

 

[ColbyBruce]

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.

 

[ma deuce]

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.

 

[Arik]

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

 

[30-30remchester]

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

In one word, CLASS

 

[Arik]

Something more than emotion

 

[M29since14]

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.

 

[Gamecock]

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

Accuracy.


.

 

[ColbyBruce]

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.

 

[MG-70]

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!

 

[Lee Barner]

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

 

[Drm50]

222-223

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.

 

[Drm50]

222-223

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.

 

[S&W SS Revolvers]

Amazing thread...

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

 

[Krogen]

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."

 

[Gamecock]

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.

Good load for varmints.

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

 

[jack the toad]

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

 

[30-30remchester]

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.