Author Topic: Convert .222 Remington to .223 Remington? (Read 4866 times)

Rum River · « **on:** August 02, 2004, 01:27:03 AM »

A friend of mine has a 700 Remington in .222 Remington (not the magnum) and wants to rechamber the same barrel to .223 Remington.

He prefers factory ammunition, and would like to take advantage of the cheaper and more available .223 Remington.

Looking at cartridge drawings in my Lyman manual, it looks like it may be feasible. I did notice that the diameter of the shoulder on the .222 is .357" where the same measurement on the .223 is .354".

Thoughts?
Comments?
Opinions?
Outright lies?

Thanks in advance.

PA-Joe · « **Reply #1 on:** August 02, 2004, 02:53:26 AM »

If it can't be rechambered then you can always have a new barrel installed.

Blackhawk44 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 03, 2004, 01:06:50 PM »

Be sure that the gunsmith removes the barrel and trims about a half inch off the rear, then rechambers and rethreads it. That will asure that the old chamber and throat are cleaned up by the reamer. If you have any visions of using military surplus (not military style) ammo that you specify the 5.56mm throating. Commercial .223 works fine in the 5.56 throat, but 5.56 can cause odd problems in the .223 throats.

Larry Gibson · « **Reply #3 on:** August 12, 2004, 11:15:10 AM »

Rum River

Years ago when the Rem M788 came out in .222 I ordered and rechambered to .223 a dozen plus of them for friends. I've also rechambered a couple M700, several M600s and Savage 24s. I used a standard commercial Clymer reamer (still have it). I did not pull the barrels and set them back, all reaming was by hand. All of the rifles shot as well in .223 as they did in in .222 - all sub MOA with handloads using 50 or 55 gr Hornady SXs. The fireformed cases showed a slight ring (visabile but hard to feel) around the case where the .222 shoulder was. I at first thought this may pose a problem with case seperation but after extesive use none of the owners of the rifles report any instance of that.

Also I have been shooting military 5.56 ammunition in commercial chambers for years (since 1969) without any of the "reported" problems associated with that. I consider the caution against that practice to be one of theory (I usually referrence "old wives tale") that is not born out in practice. Mostly I have found that those who buy crappy foreign milspec ammo and find it still shoots crappy tend not to blame themselves for buying the crappy ammo but want to come up with some essoteric excuse for the lousy accuracy; unsually the "tight commercial chamber" is the chosen culprit. Hogwash! Given a correct rifling twist for the ammo all US made military ammo will shoot more accurately in tight commercial match chambers without any pressure signs. Crappy foreign ammo (not all is crappy - some is really pretty good stuff) is just that, crappy.

Now be advised that all older commercial .222s that I know of have a 1 in 14" twist barrels. This may get you 2-3 MOA with some better lots of US made M193 military ammo in 60 degree plus weather. Much below that temeprature and accuracy will go south. With any SS109 type ammo the bullets will be keyholing at 25 yards or so. So, unless your friend is going to shoot reloaded .223 ammo with 50 to 55 gr flat base bullets or use commercial .223 ammo with comparable bullets you are wasting your time - the milsurp ammo most likely will shoot patterns instead of groups. Suggest your friend leave it as a .222 as it is a fine cartridge, particularly with the newer bullets and powders.

Larry Gibson

TNrifleman · « **Reply #4 on:** August 19, 2004, 07:30:38 PM »

I'm a great fan of the 223 cartridge in bolt action rifles. It seems to be that it would be a shame to ruin a good triple deuce just to save a bit of money on ammo. Gee, sell the 222 to someone who appreciates it, and but a 223. :cry:

Catfish · « **Reply #5 on:** August 20, 2004, 12:59:48 PM »

What LMG said.
You would be penny wise and dollar foolish to rechamber a good shooting .222 to .223. If he wants cheaper ammo tell him to start reloading. That way he will not only get cheaper ammo, but with alittle load work it will be more accurate.

cowpoke · « **Reply #6 on:** August 29, 2004, 01:18:27 PM »

I have to agree with those who say it would be a sin to molest a good shooting 222.

Rum River · « **Reply #7 on:** September 01, 2004, 03:40:41 AM »

I mentioned to him that there is nothing wrong with a .222, but his mind is made up, apparently.

Thanks for the responses.

Gregory · « **Reply #8 on:** September 06, 2004, 06:46:45 AM »

Quote from: Rum River

A friend of mine has a 700 Remington in .222 Remington (not the magnum) and wants to rechamber the same barrel to .223 Remington.

Thoughts?
Comments?
Opinions?
Outright lies?

Thanks in advance.

According to my Gun Traders Guide, a M700 BDL in excellent condition in 222 has a $90 premium price over standard calibers. I'd tell your friend to sell his 222 and buy a used 223 and put $90 in his pocket instead of paying a gunsmith to convert it.

saltydog · « **Reply #9 on:** July 21, 2007, 02:29:13 AM »

+1 on the sell it and move on response - the 222 in a varmit rifle REM is highly desirable.

Argonaut · « **Reply #10 on:** July 22, 2007, 02:37:15 PM »

I have a Rem. 700 BDL with a heavy barrel in .222, I wouldn't dream of messing with it. .222 ammo is available from walmart at a good price if you don't reload. I like the .223 (I have one) but for shooting pingpong balls at 200 yards and seeing the bullet hit, you can't beat a .222.

Also if you reload, it has very long case life, I have 600 cases and i figure when those are unreloadable, then maybe the throat will be worn enough to warrant a rechambering. though I will likely go to the .222 mag. (I believe in keeping calibers alive. I used to hunt with a .303 Savage).

shotgun31 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 24, 2007, 08:26:35 AM »

I have a former .222 M700 BDL rechambered to 223. Amands in Faribalt MN rechambered it, I specified a chamber for military ammo and it has a fair amount of freebore besides. 1X14 twist, of course.

The first thing I noticed was the Hornaday 50 SX's were inaccurate, where they were the best before rechambering. Then I chronographed the loads and was getting an honest 3350 out of a 223 with 50 grain Hornaday 50 spire points. This combination wasn't "quite" as accurate as the 222 loads but certainly good hunting loads.

The rifle likes the 40 gr VMax best of all. Little-fingernail size groups from the bench at 100 yds. Certainly minute of woodchuck or prairie dog. It's good out to 300, where the 222 was just not up to it, in my opinion. The 223 seems to have more power and I like it better.

I'll have to rebarrel this rifle soon, probably 223 and I am thinking 1X14 twist. If I tried to get all the woodchucks and prairie dogs I've killed with this rifle into a wagon box, it'd overflow.
Shotgun.

alsaqr · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2007, 02:58:07 PM »

My Sako in .222 was re-chambered to .223 in 1968 when i came into about 5,000 rounds of 5.56mm ball. Maybe it is worth a dollar or two less but i have saved thousands in ammo.

Hairtrigger · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2007, 03:53:41 PM »

The main reason to rechamber is to save $$?
Assuming you are paying for the work, How much do you have to shoot to see any savings?

alsaqr · « **Reply #14 on:** September 13, 2007, 03:27:05 PM »

"The main reason to rechamber is to save $$?
Assuming you are paying for the work, How much do you have to shoot to see any savings"

Well, it cost $15.00 in 1968 to re-chamber my Sako to .223.

Hairtrigger · « **Reply #15 on:** September 13, 2007, 04:46:43 PM »

and how much did ammo cost in 1968?

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 14, 2007, 12:05:55 AM »

If you reload cost is not much different. Bullets cost the same, primers cost the same, powder is a little cheaper for the 222 and the cases are a little cheaper for the 223. Just about a wash. About all you can buy for the 222 are premium loads. If you buy premium loads for the 223 there is not a whole lot of difference in cost either. Performance wise the 223 has a little edge over the 222 about 150 -200 fps with 50 grain bullets. This is at most 50 yards more. That would be 250 vs 300 yards. Remember the twist rate will be the same, I assume 1 - 14" so you can not use heavy bullets in the 223. There is no way in he** I would chamber for the 223 unless the barrel's throat is shot out. Cost of the rechamber would take quite a while to recoup unless you are shooting ball ammo or some other cheap stuff. Why shoot if you are just going to be blasting, shoot the good stuff or reload with quality components. Remember, you are going to have to keep the bullets under 55 grains. Why shoot cheap stuff? Don't you want to make every shot count? If you want to blast away; shoot a 22 rim fire with the cheap bulk ammo.

alsaqr · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2007, 02:16:45 PM »

"and how much did ammo cost in 1968?"

Would you believe about $5.00 for a box of 20. i got about 5,000 rounds of free US Army 5.56mm that was going to be destroyed for some reason that had nothing to do with safety or functioning. The stuff worked fine. Fired some of my best groups with it. Still have a few hundred rounds of it.

Hairtrigger · « **Reply #18 on:** September 16, 2007, 02:24:15 AM »

$5.00 wow ... the good old days.
And to think that last week I was in a gun shop that had Federal magnum primers for $17 per 1000. I bought all that they had and walked out with 6000 primers and a big smile!
back to the 222 vs 223~~argument~~ ok discussion! Speaking for myself, I have purchased rifles in the past based on cheep ammo. I ended up blasting a few magazines thru it then wanting to actually hit what I was shooting at. If I just want noise I will buy firecrackers. The comment made earlier about 222 "premium" ammo vs the same in 223 is true... the cost is very close to the same if not equal. That is just the way I shoot, I want to be able to hit at over 100 yards.

alsaqr · « **Reply #19 on:** September 16, 2007, 10:10:53 AM »

"That is just the way I shoot, I want to be able to hit at over 100 yards."

My .223 Sako routinely makes sub one-half inch three shot groups at l00 yards with a variety of military surplus ammunition-especially my carefully hoarded made by the US military TW 67 stuff. With carefully made handloads, one quarter inch groups are not unusual.