Which of the two?

[Stuart C.]

Hi,
Just throwing out a question: For coyote, which would you buy of the two, and why/why not?

- New Remington 700 in 223 Rem with brand spankin new modern steel, no hassle parts, maybe stainless with a synthetic stock or blued/wood.

or

- An old Sako Riihimaki in 222 Rem with a replacement stock and in need of new expensive scope rings, but with tons of character.

or

- neither, but give an alternative suggestion.

What do yo u think?

[Wyo. Coyote Hunter]

  Stuart, given the two choices you offer, I would go with the .223. I have only one sako in .222. I have owned only one other.  A small spring broke in the .243 and locked the bolt so it was impossible to open the bolt.  It was 6mths before I got it repaired. The ONLY reason I bought the Sako .222 is it belonged to a very good friend, and the stock was made by another good friend, both now gone. But rather than the .223, if I were buying a coyote rifle and could get a .22-250 in the same caliber, that would be my choice. Coyotes are tough animals. Plus your shots are likely to be quick at unknown ranges, (in my country anywhere from 50 to 600 yards) so the speed of the .22-250 would be of benefit over the smaller .223. Since you only mentioned coyotes. A couple 50 round boxes of ammo would last you all winter. My second choice would be the old Swift. But ammo is expensive and harder to locate.

[Drilling Man]

  I think, i'd rather have the Remington 700, and i'd rather have the extended range of the .223, so there's my choise.

  DM

[nomosendero]

  I think, i'd rather have the Remington 700, and i'd rather have the extended range of the .223, so there's my choise.

  DM

Same here.

Plus with the Sako having a replacement stock, the original value is gone. The 222 vs 223 deal is regional to some degree, but in my part of the World the 222 is almost non-existant & 223 components everywhere there are components. And bot have more than enough accuracy to the end of their customary range even on PD's, so yea, 223 hands down.

[LaOtto222]

The Remington makes the most sense - but don't discount the 222 Sako so quickly. If you are buying your ammo, then do not give the 222 another thought. If you do hand load, then the 222 is just as cheap to shoot as the 223. They usually are very accurate and are only a step behind the 223 in performance. Most 222's have a 1 - 14" twist, so 52 grain and under bullets are what they shoot best; while the 223's have a 1-12" or 1-9" twist. They will handle a little heavier bullet well. I have a soft spot in my heart for the old 222 - it was the bench rest gun of the 50's and 60's and there were a ton of them made up for varmints and predators. If you hand load and want to have a little nostalgia then get the 222, yu will not be disappointed. Good Luck and Good Shooting

[Drilling Man]

I have a soft spot in my heart for the old 222 - it was the bench rest gun of the 50's and 60's and there were a ton of them made up for varmints and predators. If you hand load and want to have a little nostalgia then get the 222,

  Me too, but in this day and age, with all the cheaper .223 ammo out there, the .223 does make more sense...

  I have a 12ga-.222 combo gun, and i've shot a ton of small game with it, using light loads with bullets i swaged out of spent LR cases...  I still REALLY like my .222's, but...

  DM

[LaOtto222]

Reloading for the 222 is as cheap as the 223. Cases are some where from $1 - $2/ hundred more for new - but if you get military cases, you can resize them in your 222 die and use those too on the cheap, just like a 223. Or resize 223 brass for the same cost - just a little bother, but for $2/ hundred I would not resize; unless I had too. Bullets - same; primer - same; powder - a little less. A little less pressure so cases last longer and so does the barrel, if that is any concern. But again, unless you reload go with the 223 - all the 222 ammo commonly found is the premium stuff and will not be cheap - compared to a the cheap 223 ammo - but about the same as the premium 223 ammo. The 223 is easier to find - most of the time. I think right now the 222 Remington would be easier to get, but that will not be the case forever.

[nomosendero]

In my part of the World the 222 stuff will never be easier to get. I understand someone who already has the dies, brass & so on getting a 222, but can't imagine anyone that would start from scratch with one.

[Wyo. Coyote Hunter]

  I tend to agree with nomosendero, to go with the .222 from scratch isn't the best program cost wise. I have picked up hundreds of good .223's at the range probably close 1000. Very few 222's. Now don't get me wrong. I love the little old .222 it was my first center fire varmit rifle in and old SAv. .340.  I have shot it for almost 50 years. I came to the .223, only because my shooting buddy bribed me with 400 new "trimmed cases" if I would go with the .223. Right now I have 2 .222 bolts, and one .223. I would say the .222 has a slight edge accuracy wise, but other days I am not sure. When I had my .223 barreled up, I had a Douglas blank here for 1-14 twist, so except for case design, they are equal. While I have a Sako, I distrust the design due to problems I had with a .243. 

[Coyote Hunter]

I'd take a .223 every time.  Not necessarily a Rem M700, but I wouldn't object, either.

[emsemt911]

.223, options are unlimited

[searlock]

years ago i lived in kansas and hunted coyotes a lot. back then they brought $50.00 a hide for good ones. i found the 243 to be the best weapon with 75gr bthp. i took 5 to 6 hundred shots with regularity. it also made a great deer gun.