Thread: The ‘controversial.222’

When using a good projectile a .222 and .223 were emphatic and fast killers out to 300 metres on large Reds and Sika.
Loved the Barnes 52 grain x bullet and Swift Scirrocco 70 grain.

Originally Posted by ariki

When using a good projectile a .222 and .223 were emphatic and fast killers out to 300 metres on large Reds and Sika.
Loved the Barnes 52 grain x bullet and Swift Scirrocco 70 grain.

Discussions like this make every other discussion silly. If a wee .222 is a fast and emphatic killer to 300m on large reds, so is everything else.

Which I don't disagree with.

Where it gets squirrely is the amateur who reads that and goes banging away at everything out to 300m in all conditions, with limited experience.

Young guys I shot with wanted 222 and 22-250 bexause they were awesome, because the "real pros" used them.

Bigger chamberings are often harder for people to place their shots with.

All being comparable, a big gun in the right spot breaks more stuff than a little gun in the right spot.

I've never seen anything as effective as the 6.5x47 with target bullets because recoil and ease of shot placement is comparable to the wee 222/223

I have magnums now and it's not all its cracked up to be. I love my rem mag, find it effortless to shoot. You just can't kid yourself you can shoot it comfortably from weird angles and funny rests like a very low recoil rifle. Not without a bleeding eyebrow.