Thread: 222 vs 223 on deer

There is a post on here titled '223 on deer' that has gained a bit of traction, well done.

Perhaps someone should start a post on 222 on deer?

However parts of it have wandered off onto 222 rifles etc like most of these forum posts do.

I'm not really a gun person and more into my photography. I have a collection as I have stated before on 35mm photos from the past again and I am putting them up for forum enjoyment.

However I have used both 222 and 223 just like others on this forum.
Yes as we all know the 222 caliber was used all over the world and some will have a following on it. So this thread is about the comparison of 222 vs 223 on deer. I'll leave this for the technical gun experts to sort out and explain.


Some postings on 222.
I was just like anyone else joining the NZFS like hundreds of others. At that early time period you could get a reduction deal on the price of either a 222 or a 270 rifle. The rifle I got was a Sako 222.

Yes it was stated on the other post '223 on deer' that a guy shot himself in the foot in the Ruahines and I have heard that a few times also. The 222 photos posting relate to the NZFS Ruahine area about 1974 period.




Rain gauge photo..... What has this got to do with a 222/223 posting. The fact is they were there in the 1970s and also I couldn't find other photos to match this 222 posting within that time period associated with deer culling etc.



Ruahine red deer

This is what you did in those days.....
1. Go shoot a deer
2. Remove its tail, this was to show the numbers culled.

Originally Posted by video hunter

There is a post on here titled '223 on deer' that has gained a bit of traction, well done.

Perhaps someone should start a post on 222 on deer?

However parts of it have wandered off onto 222 rifles etc like most of these forum posts do.

I'm not really a gun person and more into my photography. I have a collection as I have stated before on 35mm photos from the past again and I am putting them up for forum enjoyment.

However I have used both 222 and 223 just like others on this forum.
Yes as we all know the 222 caliber was used all over the world and some will have a following on it. So this thread is about the comparison of 222 vs 223 on deer. I'll leave this for the technical gun experts to sort out and explain.


Some postings on 222.
I was just like anyone else joining the NZFS like hundreds of others. At that early time period you could get a reduction deal on the price of either a 222 or a 270 rifle. The rifle I got was a Sako 222.

Yes it was stated on the other post '223 on deer' that a guy shot himself in the foot in the Ruahines and I have heard that a few times also. The 222 photos posting relate to the NZFS Ruahine area about 1974 period.


Attachment 230695

Rain gauge photo..... What has this got to do with a 222/223 posting. The fact is they were there in the 1970s and also I couldn't find other photos to match this 222 posting within that time period associated with deer culling etc.

Attachment 230696

Ruahine red deer

This is what you did in those days.....
1. Go shoot a deer
2. Remove its tail, this was to show the numbers culled.

you were lucky to get one of the .222 vixens from FS I started in 1975 culling -did my six months one had to do before ordering and all gone - now comparing .222 with .223 on deer I am going to say there is no real or huge difference - both need the right projectile - we used to get a variety of ammo - some was good on deer some not -genarally I have found that American manufactured ammo the worst at dropping deer - maybe because it was probably designed for small furry animals ??? - the best was always sako and norma - but Federal classic was not to bad -I do not doubt now there will be forum users who will quote ballistics to show .223 has x edge over .222 I will stand by what I have said I dont believe in real life there is that much difference when shooting deer

222 vs 223 continued....

Ruger Mini 14's in 223 caliber came into NZ about 1975?
I brought one and used it quite a bit all over the country, just like anyone else. Yes Mr Policeman, this rifle went with the NZ government/Police buyback scheme.

Bring back memory's for some perhaps?



Kea inspecting my Mini 14 rifle next to a mountain mule pack, photo taken on a walk into the Dusky Sound region.

I rejoined the NZFS in 1978, I used this rifle in the Te Urewera area they were quite popular up there, almost like fashion accessories.




Hanamahihi hut, Whakatane river area.




Rusa deer photo.... When these rifles first came out they had an extended magazine, later on I cut down the mag to comply with the law at that time. Yes every thing is lawful and above board...
May put up some more photos... ?

Barry nailed it in post #2.Bugger all difference between the Trebly & .223 in dropping deer.The real difference is in the projectile you feed both those cals to see any variation.Both cals require shot placement with a hard eg Hornady SP pill

Get real you old buggers. You can load up a .222 to be like a .233, but you can load up a .223 to be like a .243. Stick that in your pipe


.222 is great though. Shot many deer using 50 grain Hertenburger (sp) ammo. But they were not a patch on what you can do with a .223 nowadays using heavy soft projectiles.

.222 and .223 are only close really using factory ammo.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Get real you old buggers. You can load up a .222 to be like a .233, but you can load up a .223 to be like a .243. Stick that in your pipe


.222 is great though. Shot many deer using 50 grain Hertenburger (sp) ammo. But they were not a patch on what you can do with a .223 nowadays using heavy soft projectiles.

.222 and .223 are only close really using factory ammo.

okay but how many hunters reload and are willing to burn their 223 barrel out by supercharging it

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

okay but how many hunters reload and are willing to burn their 223 barrel out by supercharging it

Don't know about the barrel burning, but you make a point. The majority probably use factory ammo and dont do so well with it.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Don't know about the barrel burning, but you make a point. The majority probably use factory ammo and dont do so well with it.

if a young hunter came to me and said I have a choice between a .222 and a .223 what ya reckon 1) what do you want to shoot - well deer and goats pigs - okay no real difference but I suggest a .308 - make a decent hole yuk yuk

I think the range of factory ammo available for the 223 is far better than for the 222 these days.

The clincher is probably the availability of rifles. Not much choice in new .222 rifles these days.
GPM.

An old acquaintance of mine did culling in the BOP back in the later 70s. His comments on the rugers were that they didn't always shoot that well. A few had them rebarrelled to suit the 222 ammo they could get and the new barrel helped groups incredibly.

well I possibly shot myself in the foot somewhat ,when I shortened my 222 down to 16"..... but its lovely to carry and the animals dont seem to mind.IF I can connect they seem to die just fine.
pretty well said yes to owning it,with one block I hunt in mind...not often a 2nd quick shot is needed and ranges are usually either under 50 yards or waaay out there,250-plus
already owning a .223 that is just great...I wanted a point of difference between the two rifles.
loaded with 50-52grn projectiles and a few of the 63grn semi point sierras...it works fine.
time will tell

Originally Posted by video hunter

There is a post on here titled '223 on deer' that has gained a bit of traction, well done.

Perhaps someone should start a post on 222 on deer?

However parts of it have wandered off onto 222 rifles etc like most of these forum posts do.

I'm not really a gun person and more into my photography. I have a collection as I have stated before on 35mm photos from the past again and I am putting them up for forum enjoyment.

However I have used both 222 and 223 just like others on this forum.
Yes as we all know the 222 caliber was used all over the world and some will have a following on it. So this thread is about the comparison of 222 vs 223 on deer. I'll leave this for the technical gun experts to sort out and explain.


Some postings on 222.
I was just like anyone else joining the NZFS like hundreds of others. At that early time period you could get a reduction deal on the price of either a 222 or a 270 rifle. The rifle I got was a Sako 222.

Yes it was stated on the other post '223 on deer' that a guy shot himself in the foot in the Ruahines and I have heard that a few times also. The 222 photos posting relate to the NZFS Ruahine area about 1974 period.


Attachment 230695

Rain gauge photo..... What has this got to do with a 222/223 posting. The fact is they were there in the 1970s and also I couldn't find other photos to match this 222 posting within that time period associated with deer culling etc.

Attachment 230696

Ruahine red deer

This is what you did in those days.....
1. Go shoot a deer
2. Remove its tail, this was to show the numbers culled.

Garry Sutton was culling in the NW Ruahines in 74. He confirmed the NZFS in their infinite wisdom would not supply ammo for 243 even though it was a perfect calibre for culling. He used a 270 which he called it a blunderbuss. It was the proverbial pos called a BSA CF2.

yes sadly the Forest service stores board had much to answer for - the sako vixen in .222 ran out and what did the Muppets in stores Board replace it with a sportco .222 no one wanted them

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

okay but how many hunters reload and are willing to burn their 223 barrel out by supercharging it

Me