.222 or .223

[Swmac 24]

Considering applying for my FOC and I'm undecided of which calibre to go for .222 or .223. Its predominantly for fox at distances of 100-250 yard, does anyone have any strong opinions?

[walshie 2,804]

Not much in it performance or accuracy wise. My personal preference is 223. Good selection of off the shelf ammo if you don't reload. 

[Meece 1,957]

Don't make any difference.  They fire the same bullet at exaçtly the same velocity. Charlie ain't going to notice any difference in the slightest. Both reload very easily, keep your cases for reloading even if you don't think that your going to. Just keep them. Plenty of very good s/h ones out there. You ain't  going to wear any out. The choice is yours. The slight differences in the calibre are just in the case dimensions.

[Dervburner 2,548]

More choice of rifles and ammo available in .223, but I think .222 is a nicer round to shoot. .222 is supposedly less effected by throat erosion due to its longer case neck, but whether that would be an issue to most shooters, I don’t know? I don’t think that you’d notice any difference in performance between the two.

[Sausagedog 7,381]

I've got loads of strong opinions.

That aside. Nothing in it really. Some honestly believe more is always better but I have a soft spot for 222. If the right rifle turned up in either I would snap it up.

With 223 you can find good deals on mil spec ammo which is fine for small game and crows but I have also know some folk pull the bullets and seat in its place a slightly lighter premium bullet and get good field results.

[David.evans 5,323]

I give most of my cases away , don’t I Walshie,  

[walshie 2,804]

31 minutes ago, David.evans said:

I give most of my cases away , don’t I Walshie,  

Eventually. 

[Meece 1,957]

It's  when people just eject and walk away.  Mucky and wasteful.  We got to do our bit for eco saving. ..... I love it when this happens cos I  slip over and pick them up. Even if its not a caliber that I might be shooting this wèek. Yep 222,  223,  243,  270 their all welcom in my bag.  The 222 is so inherently accurate. 

[David.evans 5,323]

Now now david be nice today

[Swmac 24]

Thanks guys, there seems to be more .223's available and the ammo seems to be a little cheaper so I think that's the way im going..

[foxdropper 17,092]

I recently changed from 222 to the fashionable 223 because the CZ was shot  out ,had it 22 years so did well .I like the tikka 223 more than the 222 as the last few years of the CZ were painful grouping tbh .Either calibre more than capable of fox out to 250 .

[Dervburner 2,548]

1 hour ago, foxdropper said:

I recently changed from 222 to the fashionable 223 because the CZ was shot  out ,had it 22 years so did well .I like the tikka 223 more than the 222 as the last few years of the CZ were painful grouping tbh .Either calibre more than capable of fox out to 250 .

As a matter of interest FD, roughly how many shots until the .222 was shot out?

[foxdropper 17,092]

Christ mate now your asking .600 a year x 22=13,200 maybe .

[Dervburner 2,548]

1 hour ago, foxdropper said:

Christ mate now your asking .600 a year x 22=13,200 maybe .

Well that’s a fair service anyway

[Alsone 789]

At the risk of suggesting a different calibre, (not that I ever do that  ), get a .204. Far more powerful pill, flat shooting, low recoil and very accurate.