223 Rem vs. 22-250: planning for requirements - components etc.

P

pathdoc

New member
So I am contemplating the next thing to go in the gun safe, and I decided a small-calibre centrefire rifle is on the cards. As I am a reloader already, the first and foremost thing in my mind is care and feeding - especially feeding, which is why I'm putting this thread here.

(In terms of what I'm buying the gun for, reading up on local laws and conditions and taking the advice of others assures me that either would be eminently suited to the task. That's not what's up for debate.)

If I go with the .223, I burn approximately ten grains of powder less per shot than with the .22-250. I can use the same powders I already have for .303 British (IMR 3031 and Varget/ADI AR2208). However, it means I have to keep a separate stock of small rifle primers and change out the primer seating mechanism whenever I load for one or the other calibre.

If I go with the .22-250 I burn almost as much powder per shot as with the .303, and there is a concern about shorter barrel life, relatively speaking. However, I can still use the same powders, and as a bonus, I can also use the same primers (no need to keep a different size; just buy more). I also don't have to change to a different primer-seating cup every time.

(At some stage in the more remote future I'm also considering something in the large-calibre range - possibly .45-70 - which again means large rifle primers and at least one shared powder; IMR3031).

Commonality of components => buying in bulk => saved costs and reduced confusion for the relative novice, not to mention avoiding all the fuss with small vs. large primer seating systems (especially if a third or even a fourth centrefire cartridge enters the picture). All of this plus a slight performance edge suggests I would be better served by the .22-250, its somewhat greater hunger for powder (and barrels) notwithstanding.

Or is the complication of a different primer size offset by the .223's lesser appetite for powder, and the advantage of diversity in case large rifle primer availability is locally compromised for whatever reason? (As far as brass is concerned, I'm not in the US and I don't think I have access to cheap milsurp brass - I'm well aware of how much that would swing the balance to the .223 Remington.)

Can anyone pick a hole in my reasoning?
 
B

BuckRub

Moderator
You make your decisions too complicated for me. If you want a 223 get one , if you chose the 22-250 - get one. If you want both, get both. It's not hard to tell the person at the store large primers or small primers. They have both. Jeez
 
W

William T. Watts

New member
Your overthinking what should be an easy decision, I would pick the 22/250 and use the large primers and the same powder. If I had it to do over again I would pick/choose a 22/250 with a 1-12 twist barrel rather than the standard 1-14 twist. Personally I can't get too excited about a .223 when I think about a 22cal center fire rifle, the first caliber that comes to mind is a 22/250. With that said I wish I had picked a rifle with a 1-12 twist then it would handle the nosler 60gr Partition and could be used for deer hunting, it would be an excellent choice for a women or a young child who may be recoil sensitive. I'll touch on the 45/70, optimum powder for a 45/70 would be IMR4198 not IMR3031. I'm not intending to step on your toes but when I was younger I purchased some rifles if I had given a little more thought I might not have purchased. I prefer to purchase components that are optimum for the rifle, just because they can be used in more than one caliber doesn't make them the best choice.. If a given combinations of componets deliver the highest velocity usually these same components deliver the best accuracy. I hope this has given you something to think about! William
 
Last edited:
C

Chili Palmer

New member
Think about over the counter ammo that you will re-use the brass. 22-250 is very expensive, .223 is somewhat reasonable. You also have a better chance finding .223 at ranges.

If you want to shoot minimal rounds with very accurate results, and you don't shoot a lot, go with 22-250.

If you want to shoot a lot or have ability too, and have more versatility go .223.

If you don't own either, and you don't have a specific reason to go with a 22-250, go .223.
 
6

603Country

New member
Yup, WT Watts makes a good case for the 22-250 and I certainly agree on the desire for a faster twist than the standard 1 in 14 or the 1 in 12. If you get a 22-250 you will eventually want to shoot the heavier bullets.

But on the other hand...with a 223 you can shoot a 40 grain bullet to about 3700 fps versus the 22.250 shooting a 55 gr bullet at 3700. Trust me that the 40 grainer will do a job on a coyote. And with the 223 you can shoot up to 70ish grain bullets (with a 1 in 9 twist). More versatility with the 223.

My order of what I'd want would be: first choice is a fast twist 22-250; second choice would be a 223; third choice would be a standard slow twist 22-250.
 
4

4runnerman

New member
Myself I would go with the 223. I have both right now and the 223 is much more than then the 22-250 will ever be. Granted my twist is my issue. I shoot 52 gn out of 22-250 and 60 to 75 gn out of the 223. Also the 223 is cheaper to load for,every bit as accurate and more more available. Barrel life is longer on 223.
The big one for me is Brass life. 22-250 brass life is short. I like 22-250,but the 223 out shines it always.
 
2

2ndtimer

New member
I would go for the .223 for several reasons:
1. Cheaper to feed, both factory ammo and reloading
2. light enough recoil to see your shots hit if you are using a rest, the 22- 250 has just enough more recoil to lose the sight picture
3. increased barrel life
4.
 
J

Jim Watson

New member
It sounds like you have pretty well sold yourself a .22-250.
I have one, it is a good rifle, but if somebody offered me a .223 for it, I would make the trade. Reason, the .223 is available with the rifling twist to handle the heavy bullets needed for midrange shooting I like. My .22-250 does not and I don't know of any that do. But you say you have determined that they are equal in the shooting you do.
Carry on.
 
M

mehavey

New member
Can anyone pick a hole in my reasoning?
Click to expand...
The only (but biggest) hole is the answer for the question "What is the intended use?"

The 223 in a 24-26" bolt action will just do about anything the 22-250 will do out to
several hundred yards. Unless you're going after prarie dogs at 500-600+ the
223 is by far the most practical/least expensive choice.*



*(And this is from a guy w/ both a 223 in a 20" AR hosting a 6.5x20X ; and a 220Swift in
26" (same scope). Guess which one gets the most use -- by oodles more than an
order of magnitude.)
 
P

pathdoc

New member
Use is predominantly paper at short range in the first instance (as much fun as anything else), with the possibility of vermin control (coyotes etc.) down the road.

If I get into the long-range target game at any stage, and need the high twist rates for the 70+ grain pills, I'll bite the bullet & buy a dedicated .223 target platform with the appropriate barrel.

I may be overthinking this, but I'd rather overthink it than underthink it, and you're all providing me with useful advice to take into consideration. Thanks heaps. :)
 
B

BuckRub

Moderator
I have both. The 22-250 does shine at 300 yards and better and a 223 shines at 100 to 300 yards. The 223 you can find ammo in stores easier and cheaper and Reloaders can find brass anywhere and less powder in every charge. If I didn't have either I'd get a 223
 
1

1stmar

New member
I have both as well, while (for paper) both are sufficient for short to medium distances 22-250 is hard to beat IMO. Really a great cartridge.
 
R

Rimfire5

New member
I too have both and enjoy shooting both.

If you are a nut for getting the most out of your rifle, I find that the availability of brass at the range is not a factor.

I have gotten the best results starting with new Lapua brass for each rifle and have gotten incredible results with both calibers.

My CZ 527 Varmint (1:9 twist) .223 is very slightly more accurate than my Remington 700 (1:14 twist) .22-250.

The .223 has averaged 0.508 for
 
C

Clark

New member
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

The shooting industry has really screwed up this one.

The 22-250 was SAAMI registered at 65,000 psi in ~ 1965. Using the 1889 Mauser case head with large Boxer primer pocket it is good to ~~67,000 psi.

The 223 was SAAMI registered at 55,000 psi in ~ 1964. Using the 1950 222 case head with small Boxer primer pocket it is good to ~~ 85,000 psi.

Given the above and slow twist factory 22-250 rifles, and both rifles pushed to the limit and backed off a appropriate safety margin, the 223 can do anything the 22-250 can do for velocity with a given bullet.

I have both reamers and build both types of rifles for myself.
Why bother with the 22-250?
Because the Mauser case head actions are more common and I can buy fast twist .224" groove barrels.
 
R

Rimfire5

New member
I too have both and enjoy shooting both.

If you are a nut for getting the most out of your rifle, I find that the availability of brass at the range is not a factor. You just won't get great results using the brass the you can find at the range. Most of it comes from junk ammo and doesn't provide the consistent neck tension that you need to get great results.

I have gotten the best results starting with new Lapua brass for each rifle and have gotten consistent results with both calibers.

My CZ 527 Varmint (1:9 twist) .223 is very slightly more accurate than my Remington 700 (1:14 twist) .22-250.

The .223 has averaged 0.508 for the 1380 groups that I have shot through it from 40 grain bullets to 75 grain bullets with a variety of different powders with a range of velocities and OALs. Its top 25 loads average 0.306 and its top 10 loads average 0.270. Its best load is 0.206.

The .22-250 has averaged 0.518 for the 992 groups that I have shot through it from 35 grains to 55 grain bullets, also with a variety of powders, with a range of velocities and OALs. Its top 25 loads average 0.334 and its top 10 loads average 0.310. Its best load is 0.227. The .22-250 has phenomenal hitting power and bullets like Nosler Ballistic Tips act like grenades when they hit prairie dog sized varmints.

Both calibers are fun to shoot. My .22-250 is a full sized rifle (26 inch varmint barrel and full size stock) so it is a good practice rifle for my .308 and larger calibers.

The .223, even with the varmint barrel, is lighter and more compact with a 22 inch barrel and a slightly smaller, lighter stock. It is easy to carry and a great rifle for my granddaughter to shoot.

The both actually use the same bullets and they both shoot 40 grain Nosler BTs and 50 and 52 grain Bergers and 52 and 53 grain SMKs marginally better than anything else.
The .223 shoots best with N133 powder with H335 powder a close second. The .22-250 shoots best with Reloader 15. I never would have figured that the .22-250 would do so well with R-15, but the numbers don't lie.

The difference in cost per load (using the 15 reloads that I get with Lapua brass) is 30.8 cents for the .223 and 32.0 cents for the .22-250 so the difference in cost (1.2 cents per round) is negligible. I shoot good target bullets in both (Sierra SMKs, Berger Target, and Nosler BTs) so my average cost is not as low as some, but to me the accuracy results are worth it.

If you don't reload, that is another story. I have never found a low cost .22-250 factory ammo but then again, I have never found cheaper .223 factory ammo that shoots very accurately.
Good .223 factory ammo costs 86.5 cents a round and .22-250 factory ammo costs 1.25 a round (based upon what I have bought).
If you depend upon factory ammo, costs would definitely favor the .223 but if you want accuracy, you will still be spending a lot more than you would if you intend to shoot cheap .223 ammo.

If you can afford it, by one of each and you probably will enjoy them both as much as I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top