222 Remington Neck Tension

[wildcatter]

I agree, the .222 does extremely well with 50 -52 grain bullets. The .223 is much more prominent and it's users prefer heavier bullets. I believe you're reading too much into Sierra's statement. If the .223 case design was inherently more accurate, why did Remington use the .222 Mag case (another Cartridge that accrued BR records) for the .17 Rem?

Exactly, but the heaviest bullets wont ring the accuracy out of that the 222 is capable of using it's 50-53 grain bullets. But I doubt the OP started this thread with 80 grain bullets, or 600 yard competition in mind. Most choose the 222 for it's extreme target accuracy, or purposes inside 300 yards.

One thing is sure, if the 223 was capable of agg's as low as the 222, or could pull a .009" 5 shot group out of its azz even once,,, we would have heard about it. I believe with the number of 223 being used today, there are more than the 222 has ever had in use in its lifetime,,,,,, yet we still don't see one 223 repating this kind of accuracy.

The 222 and even the 22 ppc enjoyed success in short range competition, but the fact is there is only one cartridge that was ever capable of turning in accuracy better than the triple deuce has, and I assure you with the number of rifles competing in that caliber it also far out numbers the number of rifles that ever used the 222 in competition!

My belief's are, if we had as many 222's in competition thru history, using the advanced powders and components, as well as loading equipment we have today, as we have had 6ppc's, that record once again could be owned by the old triple deuce! Just some facts, and my belief's.

 

[LHSmith]

.222 HV IBS legal for Score BR, trued Rem. action .250 nk Shilen. I use a .243 bushing with N133. Best 100 yd score to date was 250/ 15x. The x is 1/16".

 

[K22]

I agree, the .222 does extremely well with 50 -52 grain bullets. The .223 is much more prominent and it's users prefer heavier bullets. I believe you're reading too much into Sierra's statement. If the .223 case design was inherently more accurate, why did Remington use the .222 Mag case (another Cartridge that accrued BR records) for the .17 Rem?

See my previously response comments on this issue on the historical perspective. The 223 Rem case design is absolutely not a more inherently accurate design than the 222 Rem. I don't believe that was the point Sierra was trying to make.

I think what Sierra was saying was that they discovered through their testing that differences [performance] are insignificant. I have a lot of practical experience with both shooting similar bullets, i.e., 50 to 55 grains in 14 and 12" twists for precision varmint hunting purposes, not benchrest competition.

In my experience, with tailored reloads, I could not discern the difference between the two from an accuracy perspective for the aforementioned bullets and twist rates. However, my skill and equipment are only in the 1/4 to 1/2 moa range of shooting capability, not benchrest level precision.

This is much like the hunting camp debates in the 60's about the 30 06 versus the 270.

 

[wildcatter]

The fact that the 222 Rem established benchrest records and ruled the benchrest scene for many years cannot be disputed, it's a matter of historical fact. I've read that the designer of the cartridge had this in mind when he developed the cartridge. Its design produces an inherently accurate cartridge, much like the 308 Win.

In my early days of varmint hunting, the 222 Rem was the way to go for medium range, a vast improvement over the 22 Hornet and 218 Bee. The 222 Rem was my first stand-alone strictly varmint rifle. I have nothing but good things to say about it. With IMR 4198 and 50 grain Sierra bullets, 1/2 moa was consistently the norm out of a sporter weight Remington 700. I took a ton of ground hog and a lot of foxes with it - never found it lacking.

Enter the 223 Remington, designed as a military cartridge. That it never captured the interest of the benchrest fraternity is no mystery - why switch to a similar cartridge when the 222 Rem already was established at a record holder in benchrest competition in the 50's.

When it came time to re-barrel my 222 Remington, I opted for the 223 Rem for two reasons, to gain about 100 ft/sec in velocity and because cases for the 222 become exceedingly hard to find. It didn't take long for me to realize that accuracy wise, I could not discern the difference between the two from a precision varmint hunter's point of view with tailored reloads. Apparently, Sierra, who manufactures and test bullets for a living came to the same conclusion.

That was the only point I was trying to make. No way would I claim that the 223 Rem is superior in accuracy potential to the 222 Rem. But for most of us normal precision shooters, the differences are insignificant. Incidentally, my 223 Rem, with a match grade Douglas barrel is a sub 1/4" bench rifle with tailored reloads even in my hands and I'm nowhere near an accomplished bench shooter.

Bottom Line: you can't go wrong with either one.

I agree with part of this, but to say you can't go wrong with either one is totally wrong, depending on the purpose! I think using a 223 for benchrest competition where absolute accuracy is required is a waste!

I also think trying to compete at yardages in excess of 300 yards with the bullets the 222 is suited to is a waste. Both are good choices, but for different purposes. Just like any cartridge, pick it for the wrong purpose and it will let you down!

Saying that yes, for the right discipline, it's hard to go wrong with either. I did quite well out to 400 yards with 70 grn VLD.s the 223 I had for 2 seasons, but I would never bother taking it over my bat built in 6ppc for benchrest use on the best of days.

But I am building a 222 on a Panda for next season, and will for one reason, it is capable if I do my part, but on tough day's in tough conditions, I will be using my ppc in 6mm, it cheats better in tough conditions, and on day would the 223 stand up to either in this format.

 

[natdscott]

I quit high school and went into trade school to become a Journeyman Iron Worker and a Certified Welder! The main reason was some Bi*** telling me about my spelling and grammar, which should be obvious I could give a rats backside about! It never made me a dime, or helped me complete any job I ever tackled!

I started shooting decades ago because I enjoyed it, then the more I shot the more I wanted better results, after decades competing in rifle, revolver, pistol, score, group, combat, you name it, I joined forums sharing my interest.

But rest asured, it would be a cold day in hell I joined a spelling or grammar forum,,,,,,, for two reasons,,
1) I could give a rats ars about the things they do!
2) I have found I really don't care to be drink'n buddies with people that would frequent them!

Just a casual suggestion: try understanding, if you come here to help me shoot better, I'm all fricken ears! If you come here to teach me how to spell and use proper grammar,,,,,, SAVE it for someone who gives a rats ars, cause unlike in high school, today at 68 years of age, I have less use listening to how it is supposed to be done.

I hope my grammar was close enough to explain my feelings on this subject! Now back to the OP's reason for starting this thread!

Wow.

 

[LHSmith]

FWIW, Sierra has not been seen on the equipment lists of SRBR for some time. Perhaps their "insignificant" degree in accuracy criteria is why.

 

[K22]

I agree with part of this, but to say you can't go wrong with either one is totally wrong, depending on the purpose! I think using a 223 for benchrest competition where absolute accuracy is required is a waste!

I also think trying to compete at yardages in excess of 300 yards with the bullets the 222 is suited to is a waste. Both are good choices, but for different purposes. Just like any cartridge, pick it for the wrong purpose and it will let you down!

Saying that yes, for the right discipline, it's hard to go wrong with either. I did quite well out to 400 yards with 70 grn VLD.s the 223 I had for 2 seasons, but I would never bother taking it over my bat built in 6ppc for benchrest use on the best of days.

But I am building a 222 on a Panda for next season, and will for one reason, it is capable if I do my part, but on tough day's in tough conditions, I will be using my ppc in 6mm, it cheats better in tough conditions, and on day would the 223 stand up to either in this format.

I agree - totally - I would not select a 223 for benchrest, should have been more discerning with my comments. My paradigm is varmint / predator hunting and informal precision range target shooting.

I would never make suggestions or given advice on benchrest shooting since I've never engaged it. Nor would I never dispute a benchrest shooter's assertions. These guys are at a different level of precision and in a world I've never been. Had a friend (RIP) that did competed. I watched him practice - Wow - Wow - Wow and he wasn't even a record holder. He had a bench rest contraption that looked like it came off a lunar module. However he taught me a lot about precision reloading and helped become a better precision shooter albeit not in his chosen discipline.

Thanks for the correction. I don't want to be the disseminator of misinformation especially since a lot of new shooters read these posts. I have no ego - only want to promote sound shooting and reloading practices based on my experiences to promote the shooting sports.

 

[wildcatter]

I agree - totally - I would not select a 223 for benchrest, should have been more discerning with my comments. My paradigm is varmint / predator hunting and informal precision range target shooting.

I would never make suggestions or given advice on benchrest shooting since I've never engaged it. Nor would I never dispute a benchrest shooter's assertions. These guys are at a different level of precision and in a world I've never been. Had a friend (RIP) that did competed. I watched him practice - Wow - Wow - Wow and he wasn't even a record holder. He had a bench rest contraption that looked like it came off a lunar module. However he taught me a lot about precision reloading and helped become a better precision shooter albeit not in his chosen discipline.

Thanks for the correction. I don't want to be the disseminator of misinformation especially since a lot of new shooters read these posts. I have no ego - only want to promote sound shooting and reloading practices based on my experiences to promote the shooting sports.

Suggestions are how we all learn, and that's why I come on these forums. There are a lot better than me at all disciplines, but even them that aren't can bless everyone at times if we're just willing to listen. But like you, the more I do, the more I listen, the more I learn.

I just hope some of what I've learned over the years will help someone else, That was the goal when others taught me. But joining in was what really helped me, and never underestimate rimfire hardcores, they taught me more about reading conditions than I can explain. Those boy's are just as serious as the rest of us are, and see ghost we don't.

 

[skeeljc]

This going to be a slow process getting answers. I have looked for much of these technical loading answers. The problem getting experienced 222 users to contribute is they are far and few between!

It is a bitch, as today most are turning to the inferior 223, immensely more popular,,, but not near as accurate. Performance, cheap components, availability, and me too, all seem to trump the accuracy, and reliability of this old cartridge!

I am building mine as a 6ppc killer! At least, to take down as many of them as I can in competition on the short range bench rest scene! I would suggest starting with a button .003" tighter than your loaded round. I have .243" loaded necks, for a chamber with a .246" Neck. I am starting with a .240" button, expecting .0025" or so tension after spring back. I also have .241", and .239" buttons for testing. I plan on trying the .239" if not happy with the .240", the lighter .241" will be last and from past experiance with other cartridges, this pretty standard on what worked best.

But this also can be dictated for whats best, depending on the type powder your burning. Some powders prefer more tension than others. So it's always good to have sizing buttons in these ranges. individual barrels can be slightly particular as well. These are my reasons for starting where I stated, and being willing to move in the directions I stated.

Be nice to hear from some that have already been here though!

I am running .002 neck tension for Lapua brass, turned to .0110 for a .250 neck. Next loading will be some experimentation with different bushings and mandrels. Since this is strictly a 100 yard bench gun, it's doubtful that I will see the difference on paper, but I might feel it when seating. I also anneal after every firing.

I am running a 24" Brux Rem Varmint contour 12 twist and my best node is 3220 to 3240 fps with a 52 grain Berger FB seated to jam -.002" with VV N133.

What powder/velocity are you guys running?

 

[Richard Jones]

I haven't chronoed this, and probably won't, as it is just for 100 yard shooting. Just something to play with at short range.

 

[LCazador]

How much neck tension do you use for your 222 Remington?

First of all this looks more like Wildcatter's post than AlanF's, the original poster. Alan to address your question is your ammo for a repeater or a single shot? How much bullet shank is in the case neck? A repeater will require more neck tension to keep the bullet centered in the case. If you have less than a bullet diameter of bullet bearing surface in the case then again you will need more neck tension to keep the bullet concentric. So first we need to know the answer to these questions to make an accurate suggestion.

 

[1911nut]

The 222 pretty much replaced the 219 D. Wasp in short range benchrest. The 222 came out about 1950 and the 223 was available about 1964 so they did overlap for several years before the 6 PPC showed up about 1975 and dominated short range BR ever since. I would think if there was an advantage for the 223 over the 222 it would have been found.

I have to neck turn Lapua brass for both my 222’s. I’m using a .245” bushing and loaded necks are .248”.
Ive shot several different bullets in both guns, 52g Bergers over N133 shot very good. Then I tried Barts 52g bullets Wow! they shot very small. My Shilen barreled Savage target action shoots the Origionals best while my 40 XBR prefers Ultras.

The Savage - 5 shot groups @ 100



The 40XBR


Its the bullets!