Gentlemen,
I am in need of some advice. I've been invited to go on a prairie dog hunt in May - an invitation that I accepted. Unfortunately, the smallest caliber rifle I own, with the exception of .22 LRs, is a 25-06. The good news is that I have another reason to buy a new rifle! My friend who invited me on the hunt shoots a .223 and is a big advocate of that caliber. He also reminded me that brass for the .223 is readily available - a point that has some merit since I reload. Another friend advised me to go with the 22-250 as it is an extremely accurate round and provides benefit over the .223 at distances beyond 300 yards.
So I have a couple of questions:
1) Is one caliber significantly more accurate that the other, or is this more a function of the rifle and the shooter? I have read (in fact, on this site) that some calibers, like the .222, are just "inherently" accurate.
2) I've heard people talk about the increased risk of "shooting the barrel" out of a rifle with high velocity rounds. Is there a greater risk of this occuring with the 22-250 than the .223? Assuming that the bolt action rifle has a bull barrel, how many shots does one realistically have to take with a .223 for this to occur? How about with a 22-250?
3) If you had to choose between the .223 and the 22-250, and you were limited to just one rifle for varmint hunting, which caliber would you pick and why?
I have come to this forum over the past few years for input before purchasing a shotgun/rifle/pistol - in fact, Lawdog provided me with valuable feedback on my last three firearms. Like all of you, I will greatly miss his common sense, matter-of-fact advise. Thank you!
Dave from MN
