|
|
|
Welcome to Outdoor Life
Subscribe to Outdoor Life
and enter to win $5000
OutdoorLife.com is part of the Bonnier Outdoor Group Network
Copyright © 2009 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Print
Email
Share
You will probably get numerous opposing answers to this one.. .223 is cheap to shoot.. no doubt about it.. If you're handloading however, who cares about that, as the different between loading your own .223 vs. .22-250 wouldn't be much.. Especially since the new President took office and you can't keep .223 ammo on the shelves because everyone is worried our assault weapons are gonzo. Back to the point, I prefer the performance of the .22-250. Any standard load will have a higher muzzle velocity which computes into less bullet drop in long distances (about 15-20" less at 500 yards). Those are what really matters in varmint shooting. If you're handloading and working up a real performance load, you can make either of these do just about anything you could possibly want for varmint. If I may play the devils advocate, take a peak at the .220 Swift if you want a real performer from factory loads. Not an easy load to find on just any store shelf though. Just a suggestion.. Happy shooting!
with the .223 there is always an army surplus meaning you can get them fairly cheap, they will also do considerable dammage, while the .22-250 is a lot hotter bullet it also has more wallop to it and will hold up farther, the shells are more expensivethe .223 would be the cheaper alternative and in the hands of an experienced marks man can be just as deadly as the .22-250
the .22-250 ruger m77 is what i use for cyotes
I hunt prarrie dogs in south dakota every june and I shoot a 223 with great success out to 300 yards, beyond that a 22/250 or 204 Ruger is hard to beat.
Post a Reply (200 characters or less)
with the .223 there is always an army surplus meaning you can get them fairly cheap, they will also do considerable dammage, while the .22-250 is a lot hotter bullet it also has more wallop to it and will hold up farther, the shells are more expensivethe .223 would be the cheaper alternative and in the hands of an experienced marks man can be just as deadly as the .22-250
You will probably get numerous opposing answers to this one.. .223 is cheap to shoot.. no doubt about it.. If you're handloading however, who cares about that, as the different between loading your own .223 vs. .22-250 wouldn't be much.. Especially since the new President took office and you can't keep .223 ammo on the shelves because everyone is worried our assault weapons are gonzo. Back to the point, I prefer the performance of the .22-250. Any standard load will have a higher muzzle velocity which computes into less bullet drop in long distances (about 15-20" less at 500 yards). Those are what really matters in varmint shooting. If you're handloading and working up a real performance load, you can make either of these do just about anything you could possibly want for varmint. If I may play the devils advocate, take a peak at the .220 Swift if you want a real performer from factory loads. Not an easy load to find on just any store shelf though. Just a suggestion.. Happy shooting!
the .22-250 ruger m77 is what i use for cyotes
I hunt prarrie dogs in south dakota every june and I shoot a 223 with great success out to 300 yards, beyond that a 22/250 or 204 Ruger is hard to beat.
Post a Reply (200 characters or less)