bye-bye 223 Moving on to another caliber.
- Thread starter Mitty38
- Start date
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
I'll offer my 2 cents. I've owned one 223. A Ruger Mini-14 bought specifically for Rez use where the BG's had, literally, 30 and 50 cal machine guns and we had a 357 and an Ithaca 37 12 ga. Bought it pretty reasonable from a NYS DEC Fish Cop who went through guns like I go through paper towels. Great guy to know, especially if you had a little $$$$. Anyway, while it felt okay and was easy to carry, groups of 4-5" at 50 yards were not uncommon. At 100 8-10" groups were the norm. The muzzle was recrowned, a whole list of things checked, I never figured it out. Sometimes I'd get a 2.5-3" group at 50 yards if everything in the universe just happened to line up right. It had been glass bedded before I got it and they had obviously tired supporting the barrel and free floating it. It was just a lemon. Anyhoo, that was my sole 223 I ever owned. I regret selling it now simply because I could have asked a ridiculous price and gotten it today. I believe I traded it, partially, for my '03 Springfield. I would take another stab at the 223 if I could find the right rifle- but not an AR. I have tried and tried but they just don't appeal to me. Plus- who wants to chase brass? No, something like those little CZ's might do it, but that's about it.
I own 2 quasi 1911's- a Star PD, which is only mostly a 1911 from what I read, and a 1927 Argentinian 1911, which I understand was built under license from Colt with Colt input. Again, we're back to chasing brass, not my favorite hobby. The Star is a great carry gun, but I'm afraid to shoot it much lest I break it being one of those alloy framed "Carry often, shoot little" guns. The Argie is a project as the barrel was toast when I got it. Another long term repair job since I decided, probably mistakenly, to try to build a reliably accurate 1911 back around 2005, with 2005 tech and, at that time, components.
In truth, I'm a revolver/bolt/lever guy. I carried every day for 20 plus years and to honest, it's a royal pain in the keester. Doesn't matter what you do, it's one more thing weighing you down, in the way, right where you need to roll to under a vehicle and you spend every waking moment worrying about it somehow falling out and getting lost. Trying to figure the best trade offs for me brings me back to a rifle that's fairly accessible in various out buildings or a tiny snubbie 38 in a pocket. I can not imagine trying to live life as I do carrying a 1911 all the time.
I own 2 quasi 1911's- a Star PD, which is only mostly a 1911 from what I read, and a 1927 Argentinian 1911, which I understand was built under license from Colt with Colt input. Again, we're back to chasing brass, not my favorite hobby. The Star is a great carry gun, but I'm afraid to shoot it much lest I break it being one of those alloy framed "Carry often, shoot little" guns. The Argie is a project as the barrel was toast when I got it. Another long term repair job since I decided, probably mistakenly, to try to build a reliably accurate 1911 back around 2005, with 2005 tech and, at that time, components.
In truth, I'm a revolver/bolt/lever guy. I carried every day for 20 plus years and to honest, it's a royal pain in the keester. Doesn't matter what you do, it's one more thing weighing you down, in the way, right where you need to roll to under a vehicle and you spend every waking moment worrying about it somehow falling out and getting lost. Trying to figure the best trade offs for me brings me back to a rifle that's fairly accessible in various out buildings or a tiny snubbie 38 in a pocket. I can not imagine trying to live life as I do carrying a 1911 all the time.
Mitty38
Well-Known Member
I could never carry a full size gun for a daily either. I tried and just could not make it work.
I like a mouse gun because I can wear it in the exact same place no matter what I wear, or what I am doing.
I still like the AR platform. Just not pushing 223 with it now.
I like a mouse gun because I can wear it in the exact same place no matter what I wear, or what I am doing.
I still like the AR platform. Just not pushing 223 with it now.
Last edited:
richhodg66
Well-Known Member
The whole AR thing doesn't appeal to me in the least either. Carried too many M-16s over the years and simply don't find them interesting at all.
But in a bolt gun, that .223 is a winner. So easy to get really good accuracy out of and about as cheap as you can shoot a centerfire either reloading or buying ammo.
But in a bolt gun, that .223 is a winner. So easy to get really good accuracy out of and about as cheap as you can shoot a centerfire either reloading or buying ammo.
CWLONGSHOT
Well-Known Member
Yea I have had two and my brotherin law three! Not one would shoot better then 2-3" 100 yard groups. BUT ALL WAS 100% and it was probably good enough for needs with that gun.
CW
L Ross
Well-Known Member
I had fantasies of calling predators with mine. I'm no longer enamoured with that idea, and wouldn't shoot a fox if you paid me. The Mini had me convinced that the .223 in a semi auto platform was no bueno but when WJC told me I could not/should not own an AR I picked up a used H-Bar Colt. The M-4 clone guys I played some games with chided me about my "musket" until the target was a 55 gallon drum across a picked cornfield and I slipped in a mag of Match Kings. I had the dope out to 500 yards, and I never missed that drum even once. Standing, sitting, kneeling, or prone.
I was just getting to know my now very good friend Charlie, and he asked to see the H-Bar. He dry fired it, made a face, grumbled something about pulling a cat off a screen door and offered to replace the trigger at cost. I wish I still had the "musket" but alas. But now that I understand more I appreciate the entire system better.
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
My experience with the Ruger Mini-14 is like the others – not good.
I had a few of the older models and they were completely reliable but just would not shoot straight. I know there are all sorts of tricks to correct these deficiencies but didn’t want to go down that road. By the time the 580 series appeared, I was done with the Mini-14. The newer series may be great guns, but Ruger lost me when it comes to that platform. I like Rugers but not Mini-14’s.
The .223 Remington is a good cartridge. Being a NATO cartridge certainly helps with availability. When you get away from the semi-auto rifles, the 223 has a lot of good that sometimes gets over shadowed in the world of AR-15’s. Not the least of which is accuracy and decent power as a varmint cartridge.
The 223 Remington has killed off the 222 Remington, which is a shame. The 222, or triple duce, was highly prized and very useful. The typical three-gun battery of a small farmhouse was a .22 rimfire rifle, some type of shotgun and centerfire rifle, usually chambered in .30-30 or .30-06. But sometimes, that centerfire rifle would be a 222 instead of a 30 caliber. The 222 was a huge step up from the 22 rimfires, or even the 22 Hornet when it was needed for pest control. More useful range, more killing power, excellent accuracy, light recoil. The 223 now fills that role that the old triple duce served in.
I had a few of the older models and they were completely reliable but just would not shoot straight. I know there are all sorts of tricks to correct these deficiencies but didn’t want to go down that road. By the time the 580 series appeared, I was done with the Mini-14. The newer series may be great guns, but Ruger lost me when it comes to that platform. I like Rugers but not Mini-14’s.
The .223 Remington is a good cartridge. Being a NATO cartridge certainly helps with availability. When you get away from the semi-auto rifles, the 223 has a lot of good that sometimes gets over shadowed in the world of AR-15’s. Not the least of which is accuracy and decent power as a varmint cartridge.
The 223 Remington has killed off the 222 Remington, which is a shame. The 222, or triple duce, was highly prized and very useful. The typical three-gun battery of a small farmhouse was a .22 rimfire rifle, some type of shotgun and centerfire rifle, usually chambered in .30-30 or .30-06. But sometimes, that centerfire rifle would be a 222 instead of a 30 caliber. The 222 was a huge step up from the 22 rimfires, or even the 22 Hornet when it was needed for pest control. More useful range, more killing power, excellent accuracy, light recoil. The 223 now fills that role that the old triple duce served in.
RBHarter
West Central AR
The only thing wrong with the volume 223s is the twist rates . The cartridge was built around 3000 fps 55 gr bullet why has it gone backwards to hurling spears ? I've read about a 1-5" twist , that's bullet poof for anything offered that's not steel jacket or monolith copper under 55gr . Maybe it's because I fought a 1-8.5 30 cal for so long and the 1-12s came so easy . What's wrong with a nice 1-10 for 62s or 68s in 223 ? You don't buy a smart car if you need a pickup but you might buy a crew cab 30/350/3500 if you're running a few cows and doing 4H .......which is weird because there are a lots of asphalt queens that have never seen a cow or dirt much deeper than parking lot dust .
Petrol & Powder
Well-Known Member
I think it depends on the application.
I'm not sure I agree with the concept that the 223 was Built Around a 3000fps 55 grain bullet. It may be a little closer to say that the original 223 Yielded 3000 fps with a 55-grain bullet.
As a target or varmint cartridge, the user may want that high velocity. In other applications, the user may choose to surrender some velocity in exchange for a little more bullet weight. A 62 grain bullet will need a faster twist rate and it gives up some velocity but I don't think I would characterize that as “going backwards”.
It’s sort of like saying, “It TOOK 50 firefighters to put out that house fire” as opposed to saying, “They USED 50 firefighters to put out that house fire”! Or saying, “Fortunately they HAD 50 firefighters that particular day”.
The comedian Ron White told the following joke, “I didn’t know how many of them it would take to beat me, but I knew how many they were going to use” !
I'm not sure I agree with the concept that the 223 was Built Around a 3000fps 55 grain bullet. It may be a little closer to say that the original 223 Yielded 3000 fps with a 55-grain bullet.
As a target or varmint cartridge, the user may want that high velocity. In other applications, the user may choose to surrender some velocity in exchange for a little more bullet weight. A 62 grain bullet will need a faster twist rate and it gives up some velocity but I don't think I would characterize that as “going backwards”.
It’s sort of like saying, “It TOOK 50 firefighters to put out that house fire” as opposed to saying, “They USED 50 firefighters to put out that house fire”! Or saying, “Fortunately they HAD 50 firefighters that particular day”.
The comedian Ron White told the following joke, “I didn’t know how many of them it would take to beat me, but I knew how many they were going to use” !
Glaciers
Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
Well I had a couple of min 14, sold traded the 2 early ones way and replaced them with 2 newer series mini 14’s. I didn’t go for the AR‘s as wasn’t stocked in wood for one and I figured with all the politics around the AR the mini was the more politically excepted semi-auto. Over the years I ended up with a stack of 20 and some 30 round mags.
When the AR, which certainly had lots of advantages became so popular with another generation buying AR’s because they are the rifle as a standard, owning one is just run of the mill now.
I sold my last Mini a couple years ago and gave the second Mini to my brother who lives in a State the thinks the AR is the Devil incarnate but the Mini is mostly excepted. Go figure. My brother is sending his Mini off to a Smith that reworks Mini’s and guarantee’s 1 MOA. $900 and you supply the rifle, for that much you have to want or need a Mini.
Anyway I have an AR now in that will shoot any form 223/556 and has a 1-9 twist, personally I would prefer a 1-10, but it was either a 1-8 or 1-9, 60 - 65 grain bullet is as heavy as I believe is practical. But what do I know.
The AR is easy to shoot and very accurate right out of the box. It’s ugly but it’s growing on me. It does what it’s supposed to do and does it well. As far as I’m concerned it certainly isn’t a moose gun and I wouldn’t use it for our little coastal deer unless I was carrying my 480 with hot 410’s in it, as a gun shot down on the coast is like at times ringing the dinner bell for the big brown ones.
Edit: To me he AR is a tool, but I like tools and this one is turning into a fun tool. But it’s still a tool.
When the AR, which certainly had lots of advantages became so popular with another generation buying AR’s because they are the rifle as a standard, owning one is just run of the mill now.
I sold my last Mini a couple years ago and gave the second Mini to my brother who lives in a State the thinks the AR is the Devil incarnate but the Mini is mostly excepted. Go figure. My brother is sending his Mini off to a Smith that reworks Mini’s and guarantee’s 1 MOA. $900 and you supply the rifle, for that much you have to want or need a Mini.
Anyway I have an AR now in that will shoot any form 223/556 and has a 1-9 twist, personally I would prefer a 1-10, but it was either a 1-8 or 1-9, 60 - 65 grain bullet is as heavy as I believe is practical. But what do I know.
The AR is easy to shoot and very accurate right out of the box. It’s ugly but it’s growing on me. It does what it’s supposed to do and does it well. As far as I’m concerned it certainly isn’t a moose gun and I wouldn’t use it for our little coastal deer unless I was carrying my 480 with hot 410’s in it, as a gun shot down on the coast is like at times ringing the dinner bell for the big brown ones.
Edit: To me he AR is a tool, but I like tools and this one is turning into a fun tool. But it’s still a tool.
Last edited:
I wasn't there, but from all I've read over the years, it was the military (a commission) which didn't like the 222, because it "needed" to go faster with a heavier bullet. The 222 was squeezed and stretched to make the requirement and still cycle through the M16. My personal opinion on that was that the people on the commission just had to come up with input to make it seem like they were important, because I doubt any of them had any experience is using a center-fire 22 to shoot people at that point in history. Cynical? Yes, but it fits a pattern I've come to recognize over the years, right or wrong.
The faster twists, I believe, are also strictly a military influence, as they tried to make the cartridge more effective for current uses and conditions.
Everyone jumps on that bandwagon.
Lots of good stuff came out of it all, no doubt about that. The variety of twist rates cause people to have to choose now, or compromise.
Does a coyote or woodchuck rifle HAVE to shoot 70-grain bullets? No. Does a military-like AR HAVE to shoot 45 grain bullets at top velocities? No. Some picking and choosing or compromising has to be considered depending on what one wants most to do with which rifle. I found the 1:10 twist in the No.3 in 223 to be great with 50 through 63-grain bullets. My current 223 (TC Contender carbine), I THINK has a 1:12 twist. Probably won't shoot 70-grain bullets, but I don't need them, regardless of how popular or cool they are. What I need are cheap HPs that disintegrate when they hit something.
I don't know if anyone has ever established an optimum compromise twist fro the 223, but the 1:10 gave me some latitude.
My 222 is a 1:14, which is just fine, but it wouldn't have hurt my feelings if it were 1:12 or even 1:10. H&R offered it in 1:9 and I avoided it, even as a brand new one was offered to me for free. Maybe my logic was misplaced or wrong, but I felt that would start to be restrictive in terms of bullets I wanted to use. Maybe not, but there it is.
Here in North Texas, I could get by with just a .223 Remington. Of course I won't, but it's a good round. I'm really enjoying it in a 22" 1-9 twist Remington barreled AR15.
I've killed several deer with 55gr sp and it works fine(all under 100 yds).
It's not and never will be my favorite .22 centerfire- 22-250 holds that title.
I've always been a fan of 1911s - but I've never kept any of the Colts I've owned. I'm wanting to get a Tisas 1911 in Commander size to play with. My rebarreled and re-sighted Ballester Molina is my favorite- although it's more of a Star copy.
Joshua- I love Ensenada! Was there for a few days last trip to Baja.
I've killed several deer with 55gr sp and it works fine(all under 100 yds).
It's not and never will be my favorite .22 centerfire- 22-250 holds that title.
I've always been a fan of 1911s - but I've never kept any of the Colts I've owned. I'm wanting to get a Tisas 1911 in Commander size to play with. My rebarreled and re-sighted Ballester Molina is my favorite- although it's more of a Star copy.
Joshua- I love Ensenada! Was there for a few days last trip to Baja.
The 7 twist shines in competition. At 600 yards the 68-69 gr bullets just don’t cut it.
This is an excellent example of how people extrapolate inappropriately. Just because it works for a specific type of competition doesn’t mean it is right for everything.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
There's another fly in the ointment with the AR, Mini 14, etc. My state is currently looking at years of court battles over unconstitutional laws regarding semi's of all kinds. Sorry if that's political, but it's also fact. I don't want to play the games. What I have is currently grandfathered, I don't want to go looking for more problems.
I never got the whole 55 gr +++ thing with the 223. I understand the concept, but if you want a 6.5x55, then get a 6.5x55!!! 60 grs is about as heavy as I can see in a .224 cal rifle. It's like using a 250 gr bullet in a 30 cal. Yeah, you can do it, but after a while you realize you probably aren't going to run into that many charging rhinos in the lower 48 of the USA.
I never got the whole 55 gr +++ thing with the 223. I understand the concept, but if you want a 6.5x55, then get a 6.5x55!!! 60 grs is about as heavy as I can see in a .224 cal rifle. It's like using a 250 gr bullet in a 30 cal. Yeah, you can do it, but after a while you realize you probably aren't going to run into that many charging rhinos in the lower 48 of the USA.
The 80 Sierra for 223 is not a hunting bullet- it is a target bullet. That long sumnabeech bucks the wind pretty well at 600. That is the bullet that made the AR a legit platform for HP competition. Put a few K thru mine.
Too many want to extrapolate what works for target games and use it for everything. Makes no sense to me.
For varmint work with a 223 I would be using the 50-55 gr bullets.
Too many want to extrapolate what works for target games and use it for everything. Makes no sense to me.
For varmint work with a 223 I would be using the 50-55 gr bullets.
RBHarter
West Central AR
I have 1-8" 223s I don't care for . I established a 3 brand baseline in 4 of them then started cast ....... Not only does the 340 in 222 out shoot all 3 but it outruns them with the same powder , primer , and bullet , the 62 gr NOE . It's weird , the 222 shouldn't even shoot that bullet .
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
When I built my AR I ordered a 1/12 HB specifically because I no longer shoot high power competition. So now I can shoot 52's in both it and the CZ. The AR is just not as good of varmint gun for me as the CZ, but that is OK. Son and I shoot our AR's couple of time a year.