.223 or .22-250?

Looking at buying a varmint gun.

Want either a Savage 10xp which comes in 22-250. That gun comes in mossyoak brush camo and I like that. Probably wanna buy a nikon coyote special scope in brush camo to match.

Other gun is a Savage 25 lightweight varminter but it only comes in .223 but its got a really nice laminated thumbhole stock. Could get a cheaper black scope for that.

The model 10 is about 50 bucks more than the model 25.

I guess I like both guns equally, so it comes down to caliber. I tend to like the22-250 more. Thoughts? Thank you.

22-250 is nuch better. Lood at ballistic charts and you will not get the 223. Tom

I agree: I use the 22-250 with a 80 grain cartridge in the 500-1000 yard range for distant groundhogs with good sucess.

Both of those rifles will work well for you, guess it just comes down to which one you like best and feel the most comfortable with. The .223 will cost less to shoot and is a good caliber but the .22/250 will give you a little longer range. I have a Remington 700 in the .223 with the bull barrel and it is a fun rifle to shoot.

Both would be good to do the job on most any varmint Iv got a Remington bolt in 22/250 and I have a ruger mini 14 ranch rifle in .223 i like both of them the remington for longer range work and the ruger for in the woods if you could try out a couple of different ones that could help you to decide,time to visit your shootin buddies with a bunch of questions and a sixpack

22-250 hands down! Id go with the 110 series as it is a modular rifle; real easy to swap barrels therefore more desirable we keep its value if you ever need to sell ; also go for the accu-trigger happy hunting

If it just for Varmints then get a .22LR and be done with it. A lot quieter too.
The .17 is high velocity and will blast groundhogs, squirrels, racoons and other small pests very well. A buddy of mine shot a cat with his .17 Thomson center and the cat was dead in 3 seconds (so he says)

I have a .223 AR. Super fun to shoot. Super accurate too.
Ammo is usually $10 or under for a box, a lot less if you search Gunbroker.com
I have never fired a 22-250 round before.
I dont know the cost of the 22-250 either.

.223 you will always be able to find military ammo even if everything else is banned someday.
No varmint out to 400 yards is going to notice the difference being hit with a .223 of the blasting loud and more expensive 22-250.
999 out of a thousand people who tell you a 22-250 is required to blast gophers at 500 yards. Them selves couldn't hit half the gophers they see at 150 yards with any caliber.

The 22-250 is a better caliber for long distance shooting.

The 223 or 5.56 same thing is a cheaper caliber to shoot.

Did you ever look into the 220 Swift ? If you want long distance and blazing speed this is top of the food chain.
Factory 45 grain ammo is rated over 4000 fps and faster depending on the bullit.

I own two of them and there both Rugers. This is a fun gun to shoot , the speed and destruction of such a small bullit is really something .

But anyway the 22-250 is a great caliber and the thumb hole stock is a nice feature.

And i agree "Guns" are tools ....

This is a difficult call. Twenty years ago there would be no question: .22-250 without a second thought. But the .223 has evolved a great deal since then, primarily because of the M16A2 and its use in highpower competition. When the military decided it needed to shoot heavier bullets in the M16, they increased its rifling twist to (I think) 1:8. The commercial AR and bolt action rifles followed suit, with the result that many new rifles chambered in .223 have twists of 1:8 or even 1:7. But .22-250 rifles typically have twists of 1:12 or 1:14. The result is that a typical .22-250 may have trouble shooting heavy bullets that a .223 can handle. On the other hand, light bullets in a .22-250 with a fast twist are likely to come apart in flight.

Now this isn't much of a consideration if you're planning to stick with factory ammo. But if you're a handloader, it's something to think about. I looked at the Remington site, and the M700 in .223 has a 1:12 twist versus the 1:14 twist of the .22-250, so it isn't such big difference for the Remington. Savage, on the other hand, goes with a 1:9 for the .223 and 1:12 for .22-250. That is a huge difference if you intend to shoot bullets much heavier than 60 grains.

Personally, I still think the .22-250 is one of the finest cartridges ever. It's the fastest .22 you can get that isn't hard on barrels. It is capable of outstanding accuracy with handloads. Most importantly, it literally vaporizes any varmint it hits. What's the point of shooting prairie dogs and woodchucks if they don't EXPLODE?

By the way, I love my .22-250, but I just went the other way this year and got a T-C Contender rifle barreled in .17 Fireball.

The .223 will do everything you need for varmints. Son has even used mine on deer, but not recommended. .223 is far easier to buy ammo for. If you"re reloading, they are easy to reload for as well. .22-250 is hotter - how good a shot are you, how dead do you want them?

I'd take a look at the .243

If I remember right ? from years past charts it shot about as flat as the 22-250 and had better barrel life and you can use even heavier bullets if needed.

Buddy has a Savage rifle in .22-250, very accurate. I've always heard that caliber is super fast and very accurate but I don't have much experience with it.

Regarding the .223, if that is what you go with be sure to check what the rifle is chambered for. The military 5.56 creates more pressure than the standard .223 and some rifles may not be able to handle the extra pressure. Happy shooting!

I picked up a few month back a Bushmaster 223/556 .
It is all done up with all the after market goodies right down to a E-otech scope.

The 223 is a cheaper caliber to shoot and there is is a lot of companys making ammo for it.

I'm still up in the air on how i like the caliber, but i like the AR based system this is built on.

Your right on the speed of the 220 Swift as far as it being hard on barrels. But most people will never shoot one enough to ware a barrel out.

I used to shoot combat with a 9mm Baretta that i used 115 grain bullits in. I have a honest 30,000 rounds threw that barrel.

I really did ! I load my own and ran non jacked bullits trying to add life to the barrel.

It still shoots great but better when it is dirty " i wonder why " ...

I was shooting about 300 to 500 rounds a week and had it down to a cost of $4.50 a box of 50 with Winchester 231 powder.

I have a friend that has private range built on his farm so we shoot often. It's nice having a friend who has the room and space to build a first class set up .
Sunday afternoons with beer and guns !!!!

Isn't America great.

My choice: .223, heres why
* MUCH less noise
* low recoil makes it possible to keep your eye on the target during and after the shot, particularly nice with a semi-auto for a quick 2nd shot - that is if you were ever to miss
* Ammo is relatively cheap and definiately readily available. Ammo is also smaller and ligher - somthing to consider if you are carrying a hundred rounds in your pockets on the prarie.
* While it is not as capable in the long range game, I have consistantly taken prarie dogs at 400 yds and more with the .223.

The .22-250 is also a very popular varmint cartidge, just not my choice. Perhaps if I wasnt using it primarily for prarie dogging I would have a different opinion.

As far as Savage is concerned, 2nd to none in out of box accracy: pillar bedded actions and good triggers go a long way to improving accuracy. Just not as "pretty" as a Reminton 700.

Just my 2 cents

Good luck and have fun

What kind of varmints are you going to shoot? I mostly have ground hogs to deal with or the occasional coyote. The biggest problem I have is deflections from grass or tree limbs on the 223 or 22-250. I have a 243 with hallow points (good for 100 yards) and it gets them but, For all around varmints I now go with a 44mag single shot rifle that gets them every time brush or no brush. The 44 is as cheep as the other rifles Ive had to do reloads on. I would look around your local gun shops and see whats out there. You maybe surprised on what you might find. Bandit

I have both and the only time the 22-250 out shines the 223 is prairie dogs past the 350-400 yard mark. I reload so don't consider ammo prices, but if you don't reload I'd go for the .223. I have never heard of a Savage that does not shoot well out right out of the box. My personal opinion I'd by the heavier barreld of the two. Don't buy a cheap scope.

Kind of vague question with many variables possible. I would say overall the 22-250 would be best for energy at impact, velocity, and minimal wind resistance. However a very, very close second would be the .223 in Winchester Super Short Mag. I don't know if the WSSM is an option, but it is a very good round. Another good round to look at is the .220 swift.

I have both, a model 11-G Savage in 22-250, and a 110 in 223. Both are pre-accutrigger, and I have installed Timney triggers on both. When it comes to shooting, I prefer the 22-250 ten to one over the 223. Just my $.02 worth.

Buy them both, you just need to decide which you want first. Then you can look forward to a .243 , a .257, a .264, and on, and maybe a .22 Hornet , and a .22 Mag, a .17 and then......

I think it all depends on where you are going to be shooting. If you"ve got real long shots (over 250 yards) then the 22/250 would be my choice. At distances less than that, the .223 works fine.

The most accurate woodchuck rifle I ever had was a 22/250 with Remington 700 action and a heavy Douglas barrel. But where I live and hunt now, I don"t get the long shots. Now I use a Remington 700 ADL in .223. I hand load and use 40 gr. Horandy V-MAX bullets.

But-you really can"t go wrong with either. And I agree with what others say below: Savage has the best out-of-the box accuracy. Remington has slipped a bit.

How hard is it to put a Timney in the 110? I have had a 110 in 243 since I was 14. It shoots good and it was my first deer rifle but the triger on it sucks bad. Several friends of mine have 110s from about the same time line but their's all have much smoother triggers. Just been wander'n.

Thanks.

Dave

While the 22-250 will shoot a little faster and carry a little more umph down range, the critter will never know the diffrence. If you don't reload I would go with the 223. Go to midway or cheaper than dirt's website and look at the factory loads on the market for both. The 223s will blow your mind at what all is out there and how much cheaper they are for the most part.

Good luck.

Dave

Holy cow! That"s the most replies you guys have ever given me! Thank you!

I didn"t tally up the votes but I think 22-250 is the winner. I really liked that guy"s comment about vaporizing the critters : )

Lots of valid points and thank you all. I will definitely keep you up to date when I make a purchase.

Price,performance,less noise, less recoil and always being able to obtain ammo.
Even if personal firearms/ammo were ever banned or restricted. This alone makes the .223 or 5.56X45 the over all winner.
.22, .223, .308, 30/06, 9mm,40S&W, and 12 gauge for that matter will always have a white, gray or black market ammo supply.

The chamber dimensions on the 5.56 NATO are a little different, too. You can shoot the .223 REM in a 5.56 chamber but no the other way around.

Or, at least it's not recommended.