Welcome to AlphaRomeo15! This forum is dedicated to the AR15 modern sporting rifle and all variants. Please register or login to take full advantage of everything we have to offer! Everyone is welcome including all knowledge levels and all budget ranges. All AR...No Attitude!
I was working on a script for my podcast for an upcoming episode on the 222 Remington. I know not everyone here listens to my show, and I don't always take the time to write out scripts or notes, but I did this time and figured I would edit it a bit to a readable format and share it here before I delete it
The 222 Remington is the nation's most popular 22 caliber centerfire varmint cartridge, an accurate, versatile, and pleasant shooting choice for varminting out to ranges of 200-250 yards.
Introduced by Remington in 1950 and initially chambered in its Model 722 rifles, the 222 has been produced in literally dozens of makes and models of factory firearms. Not only is it a favorite choice of varmint hunters, the benchrest fraternity has adopted it as well, and used the cartridge to set a host of accuracy records.
The versatility of the 222, the excellent barrel and case life it affords, and the wide range of firearms chambered for its use have helped it eclipse the popularity of older 22 caliber centerfire cartridges. As of yet, no 22 cartridge introduced after 1950 has seriously threatened its dominance.
What you just read is from the second volume of the Hornady reloading manual published in 1973. While to 222 may not be nearly as popular as it once once, it is not nearly as dead as many people think.
Ok, Let’s talk about the 222 Remington cartridge. In the May of 1977 issue of hand loader magazine Ken Waters wrote of the 222 Remington saying “It’s steadily growing fame as a maximum accuracy round for bench rest targeteers appears to be eclipsing it’s reputation as a varmint cartridge. It holds the record I believe for more wins in bench rest competition than any other cartridge. together these dual uses have made the 222 Remington THE most poplar 22 caliber centerfire cartridge in America and possibly the world.
It s obvious that for the first 30 years or better of the triple deuces life it reigned as king of the small bores. So what happened? Why did this fine cartridge just kind of fizzle out?
I’ve finally gotten around to playing with this Remington 660 222 rifle that I picked up and that is what made me decide to come and talk about the 222 today. Growing up my dad was a big fan of the 22 hornet, but I always found it to be too finicky to reload for, and case life was rather poor as well, plus I liked pushing my bullets a bit faster. As a teenager I had a Remington 788 rifle in 223 which was probably the most accurate rifle I have ever owned. That rifle had been rechambered from 222 to the 223, and I always kind of wished it had been left as a 222. My dad had a Sako Vixen rifle in 222 and I always thought the cartridge was just about perfect.
I’ve never owned a 222 of my own until I acquired this model 660, but I’ve been on the lookout for one for a long time. The Remington 660 rifle is a nice 20” carbine which doesn’t allow for the greatest velocity potential, but it is a very handle rifle for a small game and varmint rifle, and just about ideal as a rifle to use for predator calling here in Alaska where the brush is thick.
I picked up a set of dies for the 222, and 100 rounds of factory ammo with the intent to shoot up the ammo and reload the brass. Accuracy with the factory Privi ammo wasn’t the best, but not the worst either and I was able to shoot a few groups in the 1.5” range at 100 yards. Not too shabby for a old rifle and scope. This rifle has a lot of play in the recoil lug inletting in the stock and I think will benefit greatly from a bedding job, but I won’t be doing that right now since I want to replace the plastic floor plate with a steel one before bedding the rifle. I believe that this rifle has the potential to be very accurate with a proper bedding job and some good hand loads.
A interesting observation on the scope on this rifle while we are talking about it too. This is an older Bausch and Lomb 8B model scope. The older models of Bausch and lomb scopes did not have internal adjustments, and you have to use a scope base with adjustments built in. The 8B model scopes were the first with internal adjustments and introduced in 1968, one year before this rifle left the factory in 1969. Judging by the wear to to the rifle, scope and rings, I think it is a safe bet that this scope has been on the rifle since it was new. I intend to leave the scope the rifle unless for some reason it fails and I have to replace it. The glass on the scope in surprisingly clear for its age with sharp cross hairs, and the 2-8 power range is just about perfect for my intended uses. What I found interesting about the scope though was how coarse the adjustments are, being close to 3/4 inch per click at 100 yards. I guess back in the old days good enough was a real thing, and we were not worried about trying to click in shots or anything like that. For 1968 this was probably a really nice scope and the fact you don’t need a coin to turn the turrets, man that was top tier.
Ok, so lets talk about the 222. Prior to the spring of 1950 when the 222 Remington was introduced the only cartridges in that class were wildcats with the 22 R2 Lovell being the most popular. The R2 used the 25/20 single shot case necked down to 22 caliber, and was not really suited to use in a bolt action rifle, nor was it easy to get brass for. Many people were begging for a factory offering and in 1950 Remington answered the call with the 222 Remington chambered in their model 722 rifle, which was one of the first short action bolt rifles. Designed by Mike Walker of Remington arms, the all new 222 was able to claim credit to several “First”. It was the first commercial cartridge introduced after ww2, and it was the first commercial rimless 22 caliber cartridge. The 222 was also a all new case, not cut down and necked like the wild cats of the time.
The factory specifications for the 222 called for a 50 grain bullet at 3200fps from a 24” barrel. Original designs called for a bullet jacket with a jacket thickness of twenty thousands but testing proved that these bullets were too tough for the little cartridge and did not expand properly and were prone to ricochets. Warren Page suggested using thinner jackets with a nine thousand o twelve thousands thick jacket, and the problems were solved.
The 222 was a nearly immediate success. It perfectly filled the gap between the 22 hornet and the 220 swift, and became known for its extreme accuracy potential. Its intended purpose was varmint shooting with a max range of 200-250 yards. Jack O’conner wrote of the 222 saying that it could be sighted in 1.5 inches high at 100 yards and it would be dead on at 200, and 3-4” low at 250 yards and this pretty much became the standard sight in for the cartridge. Remember, scopes of that time didn’t really allow for clicking in shots, so using a maximum point blank range sight in was much more common back then.
The 222 Remington also became renowned for its accuracy, and took a solid foothold in the benchrest shooting community, and pretty much dominated that scene until the PPC cartridges came out. As a matter of fact in 1973 Mac McMillan shot a 5 shot group with one of his custom rifles chambered for 222 that had an official score of .009”. This group held the world record for 40 yards and many people considered it to be unbeatable. It was finally beaten in 2013 by a fellow named Mike stinnett using a custom rifle chambered in 30 stewart.
The 222 was very popular among hand loaders as was well since the cartridge is very easy on barrels compared to other cartridges and the 222 is also known for long case life. It did will with many powders, but IMR 4198 had a reputation for producing consistent and accurate ammunition.
The 222 being a new case, also become a parent case for lots of stuff we know and love today like the 223 Remington, 17 Remington and the 300 blackout. Remington cut the case down in 1963 to devolve the 221 fireball cartridge for use in the 14” barrel of the new at the time XP100 pistol, which is based on the same action as my model 660. JD jones also used the case for his whisper family of cartridges, and its been wildcatted by many others, some quite popular like the TCU family. While many of those claim the 223 as the parent case, the is 222 direct father of the 223, and the others wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the 222.
So what lead to the 222 Remington losing popularity and dying out in the united states? Well, In the late 50s the military started to search for a new cartridge to adopt for the new rifle they were developing which would become the M16. Remington submitted the 222 to the trials, but unfortunately it failed penetration test at the longer ranges needing the penetrate a steel helmet at 500 yards. The military calculated that the 55gn bullet need to leave the barrel at 3300 fps to meet their requirements, and while this was done during testing with the 222 cartridge, it was determined that the chamber pressures were too high. Remington answered this problem with the 222 Remington magnum which the military also rejected, choosing their own design with the help of Remington. The 5.56x45 M193 ball was adopted in 1963 which at first was called the 222 special. Remington thought that calling it the 222 special would be too confusing with the other 222s they had on the market and renamed it the 223 when they released it commercially in 1964 chambered in the model 760 rifle.
The 222 remained popular for some time after the 223 came out so the 223 was not the immediate downfall of the 222. As a matter of fact, the 222 was so poplar that when Colt first introduced the AR15 on the commercial market it was available in 222 Remington, although those rifles are rather rare.
I think a few things played a factor later on in the 70s and 80s. #1 being the cheap surplus ammo and brass for the 5.56 after Vietnam leading shooters to look into getting blasting rifles like the colt AR15 and the Ruger mini 14, as well as bolt action rifles chambered for the slightly hotter 223. In the Remington 660 episode I was surprised to see the 222 listed with loads showing 100fps more than the 223 in the old Hornady manual I looked at. Several of my older reloading manuals show the 222 pushing 50 and 55gn bullets 100-150fps faster than the 223 but I think this is due test rifles having 24” or 26” barrels on the 222 vs shorter barrels on the 223 test rifles. Modern reloading manuals generally show the 223 as getting 100-150ps more velocity, especially with the heavier bullets. While 222 Remington brass is a bit harder to find these days for the hand loader, its still very easy to form from 223 cases, needing just a run through a full length sizing die and a trim.
Another factor that lead to the 222 becoming less popular in the bench rest shooting community was the introduction of the PPC cartridges which lead to the 222 rifles getting passed up for the newer, better, bigger thing as is often the case.
While no commercial rifles are currently produced in the united states for the fine little cartridge, it still has a pretty good following with the the older generation and hand loaders.
It is rather sad really. The 222 is a phenomenal cartridge, and a better cartridge design in my eyes than the 223, especially for the hand loader. One of the big advantaged to the 222 is the longer case neck. This leads to much better neck tension and bullet retention, and it also keeps the base of the bullet in the case neck. When you seat bullets below the base of the neck, you will generally see a reduction in accuracy in my experience. Another advantage to the longer neck is that powder gases deflecting off of the shoulder of the case will still be contained by the case neck, and not directed straight into the throat, which leads to faster throat erosion. The 223 although nearly the same case capacity and pressure, is proven to have shorter barrel life than the 222, and other examples of cartridges with short necks burning out throats would be cartridges like the 7mm Remington magnum.
The 222 still remains fairly popular in Europe and other countries that ban the use of military calibers in sporting rifles, and I hope that maybe someday it will make a comeback here in America. Until then, I will continue to enjoy the one I have, and maybe even keep on searching for another one to add to the safe. I would really love to find a Remington model 788 left handed rifle in 222, and maybe someday I will.
[FPC News] FPC and FPCAF Tee Up Challenge to NFA Firearm ‘Silencer’ Laws in Fift
<p><strong>NEW ORLEANS </strong><span style="font-weight: 400;">(March </span><span style="font-weight: 400;">20</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">, 2025) – Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) issued the following statement regarding </span><a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/peterson"><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">United States v. George Peterson</span></em></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">, a criminal matter presenting an FPC-backed challenge to the U.S. Government’s regulation of suppressors through unconstitutional registration and taxation requirements. Key case documents in </span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Peterson </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">can be viewed at </span><a href="http://firearmspolicy.org/peterson"><span style="font-weight: 400;">firearmspolicy.org/peterson</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p>
[FPC News] FPC-Backed Lawsuit Against Illinois Public Transportation Carry Ban Conti
<p><strong>CHICAGO </strong><span style="font-weight: 400;">(March</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"> 18, 2</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">025) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that attorneys for the challengers in an FPC-backed lawsuit challenging the State of Illinois’s ban on carrying firearms on public transportation and in related facilities have filed a response brief with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate filing comes after the district court </span><a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/judge-rules-illinois-transportation-carry-ban-unconstitutional-as-applied-to-plaintiffs-in-fpc-backed-federal-lawsuit"><span style="font-weight: 400;">declared</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> the ban unconstitutional as applied to the named plaintiffs and </span><a href="https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6601/attachments/original/1727903792/2024.10.02_125_ORDER_Denying_Motion_to_Stay.pdf?1727903792"><span style="font-weight: 400;">denied</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> the state’s motion to stay that decision. Key case filings for</span><a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/schoenthal"> <em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Schoenthal v. Raoul</span></em></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> can be viewed at </span><a href="http://firearmspolicy.org/schoenthal"><span style="font-weight: 400;">firearmspolicy.org/schoenthal</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p>
![[Image: 8xy2GDd.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/8xy2GDd.jpg)
