[cottontop]

You guys who are over 50 and especially those over 60 (like me), I have the following cartridge question. If you have had experience with both cartridges, which do you prefer, the .222 Remington or the .223 Remington?
I prefer the .222 for the following reasons and if you don't agree with me, then I won't argue with you, but say what you will, I will still prefer the .222. I believe that the .222 is just a little more accurate; to me, the longer neck is an advantage for reloading; nothing is lost in velocity with the .222; I prefer the standard 1 in 14 twist in the .222, for the lighter bullets (55 grain on down) stabilize well in the .222 and if you are going to load 60, and up to 80 grain bullets, then get a .243 as I just can't see bullets of that weight being used in .22 caliber rifle; and brass and ammo is still readily available in the .222 which shows it is not obsolete. When we were all younger guys, the .222 was the queen of the benchrest set.
ct

[axxe55]

the 223 as a varmint round is good, but looking just at the ballistics, IMO the 222 is a little better. pretty much for the same reasons you posted. i think because the military pretty much standardized it, it just became more common that the 222 over time. not near as many rifle chambered factory as the 222 compared to those chambered in 223. personally i would prefer the 222 over the 223 in a bolt action varmint type rifle.

[nitestalker]

Hi Cotton Top. Yes I recall when the .222 Rem. pushed the Hornet and the .218 Bee the .219 Zipper out the door. The .222 Rem is a very fine case and lends its self to great accuracy. It reminds me of a "Baby" 30-06.
I think it remains very popular in Europe. The .223 off spring of the failed .222 Rem Mag. is popular because it is the nations most continuously used military rifle round.

[rockratt]

There were superior rounds out there for the military to have used one being the.222. Who made the execative decision to use the .223 and why is beyond me!!!

[trip]

Originally Posted by rockratt

There were superior rounds out there for the military to have used one being the.222. Who made the execative decision to use the .223 and why is beyond me!!!

If you ever have been involved in government contracts, you know that common sense is not a requirement. Facts can just muck up the process.

[nitestalker]

Well in a way they did use the .222. The .223 or 5.56 was the off spring of the .222 Rem. Magnum. The full auto firearms needed the stronger web and added powder capacity. The military was not trying to develop a prairie dog or bench round.

[cottontop]

My son, who was a sniper in Afghanistan, a decorated war hero, and a real bad ass just hates the M4 rifle and the .223 cartridge. He said the rifle wasn't too bad, but the ammo was such junk that it caused the rifle to constantly jam and it was very dirty. He much preferred the M24, which was his sniper rifle and the military version of the Rem. M700 in .308. I guess that's the quality of the ammo you get when you get it from the lowest bidder.
ct

[nitestalker]

Yep my son was there USMC. When he got home we unpacked his gear. He had two cans of brake cleaner. He said that is how they kept their rifles running with dirty ammo.

[locutus]

Depends on what you will use it for.

I don't shoot bench rest, so I have no use for the ,222.

I like the thicker web and increased powder capacity of the .223 and, of course, the faster twists enable a wider selection of bullet weights.

As far as being "dirty"?????? what does caliber have to do with that?????????

That's a function of the powder! My 5.56X45 loads are very clean.

[nitestalker]

It was not that the caliber 5.56 is dirty. The problem is with the Military Ball ammo that is issued. It is for some reason very dirty.