opinions of .22 mag vs 22 hornet?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think I will most likely end up with a .204 or .223

does anyone know of concerns with the effects of the .204's velocity on barrels? is it a true "barrel burner?"

I got a few .22's and a .17 so I guess I probably need something else.

I am really liking the Howa Axiom in .204. Any one got/used/fondled one?

Thanks for all the info.

PS
didnt realize there was so many turtle lovers out there. I am not on a turtle rampage. They can really decimate a young fish population when trying to establish farm ponds. Just trying to hedge the food chain a little.
 
I went through this same decision process many years ago. I had a 22 Hornet, and with all the relaoding headaches and the hassles, I decided a 22 Mag was the best option. It's good out to 150 yds pretty easily, and you don't have to catch and keep the brass, and no crushed case necks, and no case separations . . . the list goes on and on.

But I hardly ever shoot the 22 Mag anymore either. The cost per round makes it just as easy and cheap for me to shoot my 223 (13 cents per round for the 22 WMR vs 18 cents per round for the 223). Yes, you could go to 221 Fireball or 222, but that's the same calculation, a penny or two cheaper but not really that much quieter.
 
17 rem fireball? i would say the 22mag would be the cheapest to shoot, but the 223 is very cheap if reloading. i guess i am scratching my head as to why you would go smaller than 223. if you reload this is the cheapest plinker around.
 
As a handloader for nearly 40 years...

I prefer the .22 Hornet over the .22WMR. True, Hornet ammo is hideously expensive, but the brass isn't. I dislike paying the high price for rimfire magnums, when I can reload the Hornet for much less, and tailor my ammo to the gun for best performance.

I have .22LR, .22WMR, .22 Hornet, .222 Rem, .223 Rem, and .22-250, and for me, the Hornet is the perfect round for inbetween the .22LR and the .222. I can handload it to 22WMR perfromance cheaper than I can buy .22mag, and with the benefit of reusing the brass.

There is no good reason for going to the .221 Fireball case. The only reason Remington developed the round was to get the most from the 10" barrel of the XP-100 pistol. The .222 case had too much wasted capacity for what they could get from the pistol, so the shrank it and called it .221 Fireball.

In a rifle, downloading the .222 makes better sense, if you want .221 perfomance (or less), while still retaining full .222 performance when and if needed.
 
i would go .22 hornet, you can reload them cheaply, due to the miniscule amount of powder you use, but i really like my .218 bee as a squrell rifle, its a ruger No.1, quite accurate, and doubles nicely as a 150yard woodchuck rifle.
ken
 
44AMP- I have always been interested in the hornet, but have heard that they can be very finicky to reload due to limited case capacity ( i.e small errors in powder between throws can make a big difference) , and the stubby hornet bullets are a pain to get into the case, and get a decent stabilisation in the barel- or is this just errornet talk?
 
I think I am gonna just spend some time with my brother in laws .204 ruger and see how I like it. just looking at the numbers, I like the .204 with it's almost nothing drop out to 200. nothing against the .223 but I just feel if I get a .223 i GOTTA get a AR cause I need one (the need justification is not working with the wife :mad:) and then I am back at spending $1500.

The more I research and read I am getting very curious about the Howa's. Either the Axiom or the Ranchland security M1500. I like the 20 in barrel for ease of moving around (in/out truck)
 
Old thread, I know, but just found this an interesting subject. Don't have a Hornet, so cannot really say, but I do have a .22 magnum, and with the new loading's coming out, I think I'll stick with it.
Oh, mine's a Winchester 9422m, not scoped, but that may be another subject.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top