.222 turning back the clock

I use a vixen 222 quite a lot and the beauty of the caliber is it’s accuracy, most of my hunting is bush or clearings near cover so I don’t shoulder shoot but go for head and neck shots which sack the deer on the spot, yes those shots from Willy flattened those deer through the shoulder but I would still personally make use of the accuracy and neck shoot them because sooner or later you will hit one through the bread basket and it will run for a bit not leaving much of a blood trail to follow. 200m is far enough for me to push my 222 and most of my shots are under 100m so the little 50 grain pills are perfect for what i do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

So presumably you would have rifles more suitable for shooting deer to then?

---

Who’s to say it’s unsuitable.

I knew this would happen...

Philip Holden wrote a chapter some ?????40-50 years ago now.....222 the controversial one..... NOTHING written then is so out of date now OTHER THAN PROJECTILES AND RANGEFINDERS........ rangefinder takes the guess work out if you going to shoot past 150 yards.......and wee tiny mono projectiles,like 50 grn barnes have really upped the ability of the tiny .224 calibre by giving it some expansion and lots of penertration.
other than those two things NOTHING has changed..... what WAS good,is still good
what WAS shit...still is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

So presumably you would have rifles more suitable for shooting deer to then?

---

I dont own a trebly,but do own a 223 and she gets lots of use.......also have a 7mm mag sitting in cabinet......so fallow yearling at say 150 yards......now which one is MORE SUITABLE????
re projectile choice...the one AND ONLY time Ive had mighty poohseventy let me down was believe it or not on fallow yearling,I used a 110grn hp varmit load and it blew up on surface of shoulder leaving pudding bowl sized shallow wound and a screaming deer.....quickly finished with norma 130grn....
match the hatch is a fly fishing term
match projectile to animal body weight is similar thing....too much/too hard, projectile and not enough body weight/resistance and it pencil through
too much body weight /resistance and too soft or too light of projectile.......shallow wound

ya gots to think about it bro.....
I had a 7.62x39mm and the 223 at same time...on paper at sub hundy yards both very capable...for young inexperienced shooter the x39 gave more MARGIN FOR ERROR but the 223 was more accurate so allowed better shot placement.... both work,but you got to think about it a little bit and match rifle/cartridge to job at hand.

Match the hatch.
Match the projectile.
Not bad for a Saturday morning,MD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

And I said more suitable.

---

Yes more suitable implies unsuitable. Yes I do have “more suitable rifles” if you want to term it like that. Perhaps I should not have taken the piss and gone fishing at the start of the thread. I have no intention of putting a cds turret on the scope. The rifle comes with a VX3 2.5x8x36 which will be more than adequate. I have no intention of having a crack at anything much past 150 yds.
I will work up the fastest load I can using a hunting bullet. At the expense of sounding arrogant I’m not the worst shot in the world either. I’m confident of being able to place shots in the right situations. Hence I’m going down this track.
If I wanted to just range dial and shoot to 1000 yds I have a carbon light perfectly capable of that type of application. Using my bush pig tikka this summer hasn’t exactly been challenging either.
Hey if I don’t like the experiment I still have a beautiful collectable rifle to shoot hares and pests with :cool:

Greetings Nathan F,
Congratulations on going to the old school simple side. Shooting all those deer inside 200 metres indicates that a long range scope and all the modern whizo bits are not needed for your hunting. You don't need to go back to a 1960's scope with a post reticle and dimmer optics like Willy used but a fixed power scope could be considered. My 6.5 has a Leupold 6x42 FX2 with the long range Duplex reticle. This is a super light scope and the reticle can be used both for hold over and estimating range, at least to the ranges you may be shooting. Lots of retro cred as well.
Regards Grandpamac.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan F

Yes more suitable implies unsuitable. Yes I do have “more suitable rifles” if you want to term it like that. Perhaps I should not have taken the piss and gone fishing at the start of the thread. I have no intention of putting a cds turret on the scope. The rifle comes with a VX3 2.5x8x36 which will be more than adequate. I have no intention of having a crack at anything much past 150 yds.
I will work up the fastest load I can using a hunting bullet. At the expense of sounding arrogant I’m not the worst shot in the world either. I’m confident of being able to place shots in the right situations. Hence I’m going down this track.
If I wanted to just range dial and shoot to 1000 yds I have a carbon light perfectly capable of that type of application. Using my bush pig tikka this summer hasn’t exactly been challenging either.
Hey if I don’t like the experiment I still have a beautiful collectable rifle to shoot hares and pests with :cool:

---

Exactly. My few rifles cover the complete range but I feel the most comfortable and "at peace" hunting with a .223 (could well be a .222). Mainly because it brings it all together - a need to be closer and to shoot more carefully. Less bang and less fuss all round. It also takes me back to my shooting roots. I shot 17 deer with a .223 last year and loved it. I guess that's the other reason I use a .223 - it gives me a sense of satisfaction.

That NZ Hunting program brought back a flood of memories of meat hunting in the Ruahines with a .222 and using that sort of gear. Just a 2 bit player compared to Derek and hundreds of others but my memories are precious. Who wouldn't want to relive it - or like Nathan, experience it.

I remember back when we were culling the Rangitoto Range inland from Otrohonga, at the time there was a fencer working on the farm we had our base camp at. Any deer we shot that we didn't use were traded for Veges. I can still hear him saying What canon did you use to shoot these deer, when we showed him the 222 round he didn't believe us as he said most of the deer he processed he lost the front shoulders from blood shoot meat. I don't really know why they kill so well as when you look at the energy figures and compare them with other deer calibers most people wouldnt consider even trying to use one. Back then the little trebly was carried 7 days a week and you got to know how to shoot it and it just plan worked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooseman

I remember back when we were culling the Rangitoto Range inland from Otrohonga, at the time there was a fencer working on the farm we had our base camp at. Any deer we shot that we didn't use were traded for Veges. I can still hear him saying What canon did you use to shoot these deer, when we showed him the 222 round he didn't believe us as he said most of the deer he processed he lost the front shoulders from blood shoot meat. I don't really know why they kill so well as when you look at the energy figures and compare them with other deer calibers most people wouldnt consider even trying to use one. Back then the little trebly was carried 7 days a week and you got to know how to shoot it and it just plan worked.

---

I remember those days Brian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooseman

I remember back when we were culling the Rangitoto Range inland from Otrohonga, at the time there was a fencer working on the farm we had our base camp at. Any deer we shot that we didn't use were traded for Veges. I can still hear him saying What canon did you use to shoot these deer, when we showed him the 222 round he didn't believe us as he said most of the deer he processed he lost the front shoulders from blood shoot meat. I don't really know why they kill so well as when you look at the energy figures and compare them with other deer calibers most people wouldnt consider even trying to use one. Back then the little trebly was carried 7 days a week and you got to know how to shoot it and it just plan worked.

---

I’ve shoulder shot them with the 222 (rarely) and been amazed at the haemorrhaging for such a small pill


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Attachment 161453
From left to right 70gr Speer, 63gr Sierra, 62gr Barnes. I have also used 55gr Sierra, Hornady and Nosler ballistic tips. I only have a wee CZ now so I would be leaning towards the 50gr Barnes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by top of the south

I remember those days Brian

---

Well you should they were some of the best days we could ever experience. Would love to be able to buy a Sako Vixen with Sako rings and a Weaver 4 X for $ 240 brand new again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooseman

I don't really know why they kill so well as when you look at the energy figures and compare them with other deer calibers most people wouldnt consider even trying to use one. Back then the little trebly was carried 7 days a week and you got to know how to shoot it and it just plan worked.

---

The answer to the question in the first sentence is answered in the second sentence!