Thread: 222 vs Fallow

Yes the damage the 222 inflicts is quite amazing. I remember back when culling we gave a fencer a couple of deer we shot in exchange for fresh vegs and I always remembered his comment when he asked what sort of canon we were using. When we told it was a 222 and showed him the round he couldn't believe the damage to the front shoulders, basically he lost the front end on those deer.

Originally Posted by Steve123

Is it a marlin? Good/bad/indifferent? I've got 100 rounds of 30/30 I can't get rid of so may need to go shopping.

Sent from my SM-G388F using Tapatalk

yup marlin 336
but she just had shoulder surgery so cant use it yet

That's will power. I'd have put at least 100 rounds through it by now.

Originally Posted by gonetropo

yup marlin 336
but she just had shoulder surgery so cant use it yet

Sent from my SM-G388F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Tahr

Fed. It was a wonderful camera. I bought it my first year out of school. 1966. Always been a camera guy.

You must have shot a few deer with your .222 - what do you think?

Not nearly as many as others, only a handful, I came to the .222 late. I have had two .222's over the years, a Winchester 70 and a Sako Vixen. The damage the bullet does is way out of proportion. I think Tussock said it once, you open up the chest and pour most of it on the ground.
I decided against the TSX's in the end, as they didn't seem to kill any better than an el cheapo Hornady 55 grain softpoint,

As for there "not being much of a margin with a .222"..."" I dunno. I have shot them in the shoulder and one I got with a liver shot, and he didn't go anywhere either. But I didnt do any rear end shots; but then I hardly do with any rifle. I think truly I was more careful though, more aware. I never did shoot a big stag with one, all young stuff.

Originally Posted by Carlsen Highway

The damage the bullet does is way out of proportion.

I'm intrigued to know why.

cause they are fast and frangible and loose ALL thier energy inside the animal instead of the countryside behind animal.
I grew up with stories of how great the trebly was and fellas talking it up over the .223 so looked at fundemental differences....only thing that stuck out was hard 55grn Vs softer 50 grn which is why I prefer to feed my .223 50-52 grn pills (trying to get same preformance by going lighter and softer)


with ttsx in my .223 it gives VERY SIMILAR results to my .270 using 130grn cup n core except it is reverse....


130grn rem coreloct small damage nearside shoulder....stuffed up internals...big bloody damage far shoulder

50ttsx big damage near shoulder...stuffed up internals..small damage to farside shoulder

Originally Posted by Max Headroom

I'm intrigued to know why.

Well we must keep it in proportion - a .243 does more damage than a .222.
But I am sure it is just sheer velocity and a soft bullet. But I am not a .222 expert like others on this thread.

The smallest amount of damage I see is from my black powder .44-40 - it just punches a .44 calibre hole through everything - its only going 1200 fps at the muzzle and less than the speed of sound when it hits the animal. Actually a soft point .22LR will often do more internal damage to a rabbit for example, than that slow lead slug. The other side of the coin is that I doubt I will ever catch a .44 bullet from it, ten water jugs wouldn't catch one, and that's more than enough to hold a .270. It will always exit a deer, but you may have trouble finding the off side hole.
Theres no such considerations with the fast ones, the .222 and .223 and the .243's. So it's velocity. With the .222 the exit hole would sometimes be hard to find, you would skin it out and find it, but the entrance area and internals would be all bloodshot to hell.

I saw two fallow on the road to work this morning, mum and last years baby, by the look of it. I think my .222 is too much gun for the area I have access to, I bought a .22 Hornet when I first moved here, specifically for the fallow. Does the job and way less noise, but too pretty to knock about, 1974 BRNO Fox with less than 50rds through it ! I used to do ALL my hunting with a .22-hornet, I gave-in to peer-pressure and traded it for a 6.5x55. While I've never lost an animal with the 6.5, I can say the same for that old hornet, including 3 pigs up mangapurua valley, and it accounted for way more game overall than the 6.5 has. Only limit, is range and a good ear-shot, plus you actually have to Hunt;ie; stalk in close, 100 max, unless its little stuff.

Apart from iron-sights, my fox looks identical to Kudus .222..