US ARMS MADE IN CHINA

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:45 am

Not to get off the focus, but one question, for you, Rich. If I remember correctly, the .223 was based off the 22-250. What do you know about that round?

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:07 am

Actually, IIRC, the .223 was based off of the .222 magnum... and so was the 5.56 NATO. They just got tweaked in different ways. There were a number of cartridges back then (early-mid 50s) based on the .222 and they all were some nomenclature of being called the "triple-deuce". To prevent confusion, even though it had only changed slightly, the .222 magnum started getting called the .223... not exactly accurate and soon the .222 magnum kind of fell by the wayside and what we know as the .223 Remington became the civilian norm. The U.S. military, realizing that they needed the NATO specs and some more tweaking done, created the 5.56 NATO which, while having the same geneology, was a new child. And here we are.

Now, before Rich jumps all over me... that was completely from memory and when you get to be ancient++ like me, that isn't always the most reliable thing to use. So... cut me some slack when you correct my copious errors.

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:15 am

That is about right panther.

I'm sending you a PM on a separate matter.

Regards, Rich

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:40 pm

My apologies Allen... I didn't really answer your question... and there's a good reason for it. The only thing I knew about the .22-250 is that I'd seen a box on the shelf before. But yesterday PM, I called a good friend that owns the "fun store" that I frequent and picked his brain a little bit. Here's what he told me.

.22-250 is completely different from the .223... The .22-250 was first dreamed up and started being made by a master ballistics expert and avid rifleman in the 1930s, Capt. Watkins who did consulting for Winchester at the time. Evidently the .22-250 competed against the first .222 magnums and when the .222 magnums fell by the wayside because of the .223, the .22-250 continued being refined and developed. Supposedly it is an excellent long-range varmint round. My friend also said that you can get rifles of various brands chambered in .22-250 today, but that the first commercial .22-250 rifles weren't made until the early 60s... So even though the cartridge was actually invented BEFORE the .223, commercially available rifles for it weren't available until after ones for the .223... Because the .223/5.56 NATO became our military round, the popularity quickly exceeded the .22-250. The .22-250 is a larger casing, holding more powder... When the first commercial rifle came out for the .22-250 in the early 60s (according to my friend), no body was commercially make the ammo yet. It wasn't until the next year that Remington started making the ammo and added the "Remington" name after the .22-250 designation. That was still early 60s, so we must be talking 62-64 timeframe.

Personally, I was a little young to be into ballistics yet.... My knowledge of gun safety at the time revolved around a 20 gauge and a .22lr and the rules of safety for using them.... Only with Daddy present mind you...

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:52 pm

I once owned a bolt-action 22-250 in the sixties and seventies, that's why I was curious. It had a good reputation as a chuck gun with a very flat trajectory and a high muzzle velocity, and was accurate at long ranges as long as there wasn't any wind.