opinions of .22 mag vs 22 hornet?

[ddhartzell]

I am looking to get a new fun gun. I want something smaller than a .223 for plinking. cheaper the better as far as shooting cost. I have a .17 and some .22's. I am leaning toward a .22 mag but can't you reload the 22 hornet? i dont have a reloading set up yet but am working towards it.

It would mostly be a semi long range armadillo/turtle popper. (100-200)

opinions appreciated
thanks

[ddhartzell]

revision:

just learned that after 120 yds the .17HMR maintains more kinetic energy than the .22 mag..
so opinions of 22 mag out to 100 yds

[Loader9]

You can reload 22 Hornet all ya want- I do. But brass life is short. The case is almost paper thin and doesn't last long. Split necks are common. You can get almost 223 velocities from a single shot like a Ruger #1 or such but brass life is extremely short- 2-3 times only and it's not a cheap date to buy. I also have several 218Bs and love them but again brass is expensive and they can be handful to load for and get the bullet where you want it. You might want to look at something like a 204 Ruger, a 25-20, or maybe one of the 17 centerfires or possibly the 30 Whisper if you know how to load for wildcats. While I wouldn't trade any of my Hornets, they are not a rifle you take out and run several hundred rounds thru like you might a 223. You might also consider a lever gun in a pistol cartridge like a 357 mag and others. They're a fun shoot and cheap to load for.

[mini14.223]

loader9 is right you can reload the hornet but not the mag.
does anyone know there is a 22 mag or hornet autoloadin rifle?

[Loader9]

Ruger made a 10/22 rifle that was a 22 mag. It's been discontinued but they're still around.

[mini14.223]

i would like to find a new one in either of the two. preferably the 22 hornet

[ddhartzell]

the 204 is pretty flat shooting out till ???????? 300?

My main worry is the audible report. most of my shooting is off the hood of my truck at the farm, not on the range. I want something that I dont need worry about hearing protection. that is the main reason I am shying away from .223.

2 questions:
#1) is .204 loud?
#2) someone once told me the .204 was a little on the hot side and was causing barrel issues. it was a round that couldn't be shot in succession. any truth to these statements?

sorry if this is a subject that has been kicked around

[nemoaz]

Turtle popper? You shoot turtles?

Hornet isn't easy to find. I'd stick with 22 mag.

[mini14.223]

sorry i kinda kicked it around myself. i dont know much about the 204 but i do know when i am not at the range for instance if i am shooting at an animal. my ears wont ring. its almost like the adrenaline keeps me from hearing the shot

[Loader9]

Here's another option that crossed my brain. Remington makes a bolt action 221 Fireball.
http://www.remington.com/products/fi...1_fireball.asp

I've been considering one of these. You can almost get 223 performance out of the lighter bullets but next to no recoil and not much muzzle blast meaning it's quiet like a Hornet or Bee. This just might be your answer. It's good to about 250 yds.


There are the 7 TCU, the 223, and the one on the right is the 221 Fireball.

[NWCP]

the Hornady Vmax 30gr 22wmr is quite accurate out to 100 yards and that's from my Winchester 9422M lever gun. Beyond that I break out my .17 HMRs to about 150 yrds. At 150 yards and beyond it's my CZ in .223. The Hornady Vmax has breathed new life into my .22WMRs. I've always been fond of the .22 magnum.

[CraigC]

You need hearing protection with everything, including .22LR rifles. Period. Yes, even the lowly .22LR will produce hearing damage over time. I am living proof, tinnitus ain't fun. The .204 will probably be louder than the .223.

Up to about 150yds, the .22Mag has it all over the .17HMR in terms of effectiveness on game. The .17 is almost always more accurate but the .22Mag is typically accurate enough and carries more splat factor to the target. Regardless of what those meaningless energy figures show. Where the .17HMR shines is at ranges beyond that, up to around 250yds.

There are a few autoloaders for the .22Mag but the cartridge has always been difficult to chamber in an auto due to its pressure curve. Which is why there are few left on the market. Remington has their 597, Ruger had their 10/22M which was discontinued due to reliability factors, H&R had their 300, HK produced one for a while, Volquartsen is probably the best available but you will pay for it and if I recall correctly, CZ has produced one at one time or another.

I've never heard of the Hornet being chambered in an automatic.

[L_Killkenny]

With the ranges you are talking about (100-200) I'd go with a centerfire like the hornet if you're .17 isn't enouogh gun for effective kills. If you can limit your ranges to 150 and under (preferably under 125) the 22 mag is a great gun (although I'll admit I don't know how much killin turtles and dillos take).

As for Semi-auto .22 mags: Remington chambers their 597 in 22 amg or you could try one of these http://www.excelarms.com/acceleratorrifle.html .

I believe you can pick up either one for $300-400. Bettin that either one is a fun woods bummin gun.

LK

[triggerhappy2006]

Turtles are the only critter I'll pull over and help across the road, but I'm sure you have your reasons, and turtle shells aren't body armour(which would be friggen awesome) so I go with a .22 mag.

[jdscholer]

.222 Rem.
Although not as common as it used to be, it can't be beat. Less powerful-and usually more accurate than the .223, it is a dream to reload. Case life is great, and if you're loading anyway, you can load it down to fairly quiet plinker levels.
Not just sub MOA groups, but sub 1/2" groups are fairly common with this little sweetheart. I dare anyone who owns one to downtalk it; cmon, I dare ya. jd

[GoCart]

Out to 150yrds the 22 Mag is great and not too expensive. I still wouldnt shoot at anything much further.

Very effective killing round but I would never trust reloading it more than once or twice.

[mavracer]

IMHO your pushin a 22mag pretty hard past 100.22hornet is a great 200 yard option.a couple more options especially if you want quiet a 32/20 marlin has a nice one 1894cl. also I have a 1894CB in 357 with a 24" barrel its quiet as all getout with 158s at 1000fps and accurate out to 100.

[Inspector3711]

In my book... .22Lr and then .223 and then .22-250, and then .25-06... Covers everything from squirrels to deer... If ya wanna shoot elk add a .270 on up to the list. .22 magnum is way overpriced for ammo... Might as well go .223 and be set out tyo 300 yards.. Not enough better than .22Lr to justify the extra cost!

.22LR out to 100... .223 out performs the .22 hornet for alot less money from 100-300... .22-250 handles from 300-600 and .25-06 covers anything the .22-250 will but larger animals as well out to 600.

[ryalred]

I love shooting my .22 magnum. You can reload for the 22 Hornet, but as has been stated, the case life isn't as long as other centerfire cartridges. I'm not sure you can even reload for as cheap as shooting the .22 Mag. I also have a .17 HMR and like it too, but the ammo seems way overpriced.

[CraigC]

Anytime I hear someone say the .22Mag isn't much better than the .22LR, I have to assume they have little or no experience with it. No, it ain't a cheap plinker but it ain't meant to be. The .22Mag is far more effective on game than the .22LR. That extra money gets you a real jacketed bullet at least 500fps faster that will expand reliably on impact. It kills all out of proportion to its size and will cleanly take small game and varmints up to and including coyotes at ranges considered irresponsible with the .22LR.

Comparing it to the .223 is silly at best. The .22Mag fits into rimfire actions, which translates to lighter (6lbs or less) and less expensive guns. Not to mention the huge difference in muzzle blast. You may be able to "get by" with a .22LR, a .223 and a .25/06 but you're making rather drastic compromises and none of us are here to save money. Life would be boring as hell if we restricted outselves to just a handful of rifles. Hell, I have almost a dozen rimfire rifles and don't consider any of them to be redundant.

[ddhartzell]

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.

[Scorch]

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.

[mnhntr]

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.

[44 AMP]

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.

[ken22250]

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