222 or 221 Fireball

The advent of the 223 and the military adopting it stole everything the 222 had going for it, thats why no one chambers rifles for it anymore. Think about it...

The 223 has nothing over the 222 that the 222 has over the "furball" or whatever you guys call it.

The fact still remains the same. The furball wasn't and didn't win anything in BR whether it came out in a pistol chambering or not. If it was "so great" they woulda put it in a rifle in its day and won BR matches with it. But they and it didn't.

The fact remains the .222 was DESIGNED as a BR cartridge. Whats that tell you??? Obviously not much...
 
The big advantage of the 221 is that you can shoot it faster on colony varmints while keeping barrel temps down. Little difference in ballistics but noticeably less barrel burning.

No big deal unless you routinely shoot lots of colony varmints. If you routinely shoot colony varmints it probably doubles barrel life while only giving up a little bit in ballistics.

Jack
 
Quote:
"...The fact remains the .222 was DESIGNED as a BR cartridge. Whats that tell you??? Obviously not much...



Oh nooo.... that is pure, unadulterated BS!!

It was released in 1950 in the "new" Remington 722 with a long 26" thin barrel... Rem didn't make any heavy barreled rifles in those days.

It was designed as a varmint cartridge, because varmint shooting had become VERY popular with service men returing from WW-II.

When the 222 Rem came out, BR was not even a "sport"... it was something that varmint shooters did informally at the local range. In 1950, there were very few handloaders in the country.


.
 
I like the .222, but the difference is probably only cheaper brass and dies. Where I go shooting .222 factory ammo is easier to get in shops than .221 but this might be different in your area.

Jeff

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
Quote:
The advent of the 223 and the military adopting it stole everything the 222 had going for it, thats why no one chambers rifles for it anymore.



Both Tikka and Sako still produce some very nice rifles (especially the latter) in .222.
 
Little know but Ruger still makes them too,however they have never been cataloged in the USA. Why ? Because they are still very popular in countries like Britain where you are not allowed to own military calibers like the 223. I was fortunate enough to get 1 of only supposedly 49 in the US last year. Brand new Hawkeye stainless with the black stock

Stan
 
Quote:
Little know but Ruger still makes them too,however they have never been cataloged in the USA. Why ? Because they are still very popular in countries like Britain where you are not allowed to own military calibers like the 223. I was fortunate enough to get 1 of only supposedly 49 in the US last year. Brand new Hawkeye stainless with the black stock

Stan



Same in Mexico, where they buy tons of Mini-14s cambered in in 222 Rem.


.
 
Quote:
Quote:
"...The fact remains the .222 was DESIGNED as a BR cartridge. Whats that tell you??? Obviously not much...

Oh nooo.... that is pure, unadulterated BS!!

It was released in 1950 in the "new" Remington 722 with a long 26" thin barrel... Rem didn't make any heavy barreled rifles in those days.

It was designed as a varmint cartridge, because varmint shooting had become VERY popular with service men returing from WW-II.

When the 222 Rem came out, BR was not even a "sport"... it was something that varmint shooters did informally at the local range. In 1950, there were very few handloaders in the country.Quote:





Right on, Catshooter! It obvious that you know your gun history. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif

I think maybe he is thinking of the 22 PPC or the 22 BR which certainly were made for competition shooting.

Oh, and the reason that the 222 is availible in some rifles along side the 223 is simply that in some countries (like Mexico for example) gun manufacturers are forbidden from selling firarms that and chamberd in military cartridges.
 
Back
Top