.22LR vs .223 Remington
Josh Wayner for TTAG

I have been involved in the rifle sports for more than half my life. I shot in my first big competition at the Camp Perry National Matches when I was a junior in high school. Since that time I have been active in raising awareness about the Civilian Marksmanship Program sports and have gotten a number of shooters started in classic American rifle shooting.

I get asked a lot what is the best rifle round to start with. Quite often the answer is the .22LR and the .223 Remington/5.56mm NATO.

For the purposes of this article, I will be referring to the .223 Remington and 5.56mm NATO (first officially used in the M16 rifle) collectively as “.223”, even though they are technically different in a couple of ways. There have been many articles written on this topic, but .223 and 5.56mm are dimensionally identical except in the most minute areas and are essentially interchangeable. While some people go overboard on this, they would never be able to tell the difference if you were to hand them a mag and not tell them if it was loaded with .223 or 5.56.

.22LR vs .223 Remington
Arz [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons
When looking at the .22LR vs .223, the truth is that the .223 is, in fact, a .22 caliber round. While the media loves to portray this as a ‘huge assault bullet’ and only meant for use in warfare, the truth is that a .223 round is a relatively small and not particularly powerful. The bullet diameter is actually .224” Rounds range from a 55-grain bullet at the low end to a 77-grain bullet at the high end. The .223 will achieve velocities of about 2500fps to higher velocity rounds pushing 3200fps. Of course heavier and lighter options exist.

The .223 is best used at middle ranges which I qualify as 0-600 yards. While it can be pushed further out for long-range use , it rapidly loses power due to low bullet mass as opposed to bigger, heavier alternatives like the .30 caliber .308 Win/7.62 NATO cartridge, which typically is loaded with bullets in the 175gr range.

The .223 is excellent for varmint hunting, self-defense, and match shooting. It’s not big or powerful enough to be used for large game and is questionable for deer. Many people consider the .223 to be the minimum for centerfire hunting rifles and others don’t think it’s suitable at all for that use.

While you can hunt deer with it, it is not ideal. The round just doesn’t have enough energy or stopping power. Despite this, many hunters I know have great success when using tough, all-copper expanding bullets at close ranges.

.22LR vs .223 Remington
Josh Wayner for TTAG

The .22LR (which stands for .22 Long Rifle, and yes, there is a ‘short’ variety and more) is an extremely common rimfire round and is one of the most widely used cartridges in the world. Being a rimfire (as opposed to center fire), the cases aren’t reloadable (unless you’re especially determined) and contain their primer in a fold in the rim at the base. The .223 is a centerfire round that typically contains a separate primer in the head of a reusable brass case. Centerfire cartridges are considered more reliable than rimfires.

When it comes to general use, there is almost no cartridge as widely accepted as the .22LR round. The small, light cartridge features .22LR bullets usually in the 30-40 grain range. Typical muzzle velocity is about 1000-1500fps. While it’s not especially powerful, the .22LR has a huge number of uses that larger rounds are unsuitable for.

In addition to being a top target shooting caliber, the .22LR is a staple of life of many. Fishermen and trappers have long carried .22 ‘kit guns’ in their tackle boxes and trail hikers commonly pack a .22LR for signaling and emergency hunting. The low ammunition weight makes it appealing for those who want a gun, but don’t have the need for a full-size pistol or rifle.

.22LR vs .223 Remington
via Wikimedia Commons

The .22LR is arguably the most popular small game cartridge ever and can be used reliably for animals as large as coyote. Despite what you may hear, the .22LR isn’t a suitable round for deer or anything large. While it can inflict lethal injuries, it’s not ethical barring an extreme circumstance such as emergency survival, in which case anything goes. There’s a story I have often heard of a woman who killed a large bear with a .22LR, but this is not something you want to do if you can help it.

Pest control, target practice and recreational shooting are probably the three most common uses of the modern .22LR cartridge. Most youngsters start off with a .22 when they begin shooting, frequently with a bolt action or lever action rifle. The .22LR has exceptionally low recoil and is comparatively quiet compared to larger caliber centerfire rifle options.

In my experience, there is nothing wrong with starting out with either a .22LR or a .223. The latter is something that an older child would be more capable of handling. I never learned on a .22LR and instead went straight to the full-horsepower Russian 7.62x54R for CMP Vintage Rifle competition. That may not have been wise, as looking back I missed out on some marksmanship fundamentals while learning recoil management techniques.

The CMP offers a variety of competitions for both the .22LR and .223. The Rimfire Sporter events held at Camp Perry are a great way to enjoy your .22LR and you don’t need to have an expensive tricked out model to do well.

.22LR vs .223 Remington
Josh Wayner for TTAG

The rifle pictured here is an M1 Carbine lookalike built from a Brownell’s BRN-22 receiver. The Ruger 10/22-compatable rifle is set up to use iron sights and a sling just like a shooter would use when shooting in centerfire competitions. A gun like this is perfect for both beginners and seasoned shooters looking for a challenge.

The .223 is a more costly round and powerful than the .22LR by a substantial margin. Despite these things, the .223 is still a very low recoil rifle cartridge. Some Service Rifle match guns I’ve tested over the years built for 600-yard matches display recoil so low that you’d think you were shooting a rimfire. Expert match shooters want this because they are able to track their shots through recoil and can avoid having to reposition themselves after a shot. Low recoil also means that there will be no flinch developed in the long term.

When it comes down to it, you can buy a .223 AR-15 rifle and get a .22LR adapter kit. The kits can be somewhat pricey, but since the .22LR can be fired through the same bore as the .223. All you’re really looking at is the price of the adapter. The adapter usually comes in the form of a replacement bolt and chamber insert. A dedicated .22LR magazine would then be used to feed ammunition into the rifle.

I would recommend the .22LR for young and inexperienced shooters just starting out. When they decide to go into standard .223 Service Rifle matches, the fundamentals will then be there and are easily translated. The CMP has updated their rules to include optics up to 4.5x in their various Service Rifle matches which will make it easier to transition from optics-legal rimfire matches.

As two of the most popular rounds in America today, the .22LR and .223 are at the top of their game. You really can’t go wrong owning either or both.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

89 COMMENTS

  1. .223 is to .22LR what .308 is to .223. Of course, 6.5mm Creedmoor is to .308 what .308 is to .22LR.

    • a suppressed AR-15….sounds like a .22…a suppressed .22 (especially sub-sonic)…sounds like nothing more than a dry fire…yes, those conversion kits can be useful!

      • just bought 1,000 rds of remington thunderbolts for $30 at walmart….cost is a big factor for most folks…so is not having to use any hearing protection…..

        • I strongly suggest you do use hearing protection for anything that goes bang especially the 22 LR………

  2. No, man, you want .350 Legend – it blows them all out of the water!;-) Best clam hunting cartridge ever!

    • I think that would be blowing them out of the mud really. Something the .350 Legend would be great at, especially in those states that only allow shotgun and straight walled cartages for clam hunting.

    • I’ve always used a spear for clam hunting. I’ll have to borrow my son’s Mosin-Nagant next time to see how that works. I’m sure a .22 or .223 would be insufficient, only maiming or killing the clams too slowly and cruelly. Do you have any recommendations for a good parallax correcting sight?

  3. “Pest control, target practice and recreational shooting are probably the two most common uses of the modern .22LR cartridge.”

    Huh?

    • The author did not place a comma after “target practice” and therefore “target practice” and “recreational shooting” are to assumed to be a single item making a list of two items. Had he used a comma after “target practice” you would have grounds to question his statement. Google “Oxford Comma” for more information.

      You’re welcome.

      • No, it’s still a list of three.

        An Oxford comma never hurts in the clarity department, but it’s irrelevant here. To make this a list of two, you’d need another “and” in place of the first comma.

        Pest control AND target practice and recreational shooting are probably the two most common uses of the modern .22LR cartridge.

        It’s still a very awkwardly constructed sentence, but at least the numbers are correct.

        I’d bet money that this is not bad grammar, but an editing oversight; it was originally a list of two, and the sentence wasn’t edited to accord with the added item.

        /end subroutine “Grammar Nazi”

        • “Grammer Nazi” learned a new phrase and now uses it whenever (s)he gets a chance, even though (s)he has no idea what it means.

      • “Is it wrong that I love that movie?”

        I always wondered what was under Sister Mary Stigmata’s habit… 😉

      • That is technically wrong because the last item in a comma separated list is separated with a “and”, that actually has the role of a comma in natural language.

        You’re welcome.

    • scholastic rifle teams… competing in indoor ranges…use .22’s exclusively…the idea is to put a .22 caliber bullet through a .22 caliber hole at 50 ft… which can prove challenging….

    • remember feeling comfortable taking a hike in the woods in the springtime with nothing more than my hi-standard sentinel for company…for snakes and such…until I came upon a fresh bear track!

  4. Josh, where have you ever seen or heard the 223/556/AR15 ever described as a huge assault bullet?

    I’ve heard many erroneous descriptions and adjectives but never “huge”

    I think you made that up. And that only degrades the thin thread of trust around here. Exaggerating things on either side just projects weakness.

    • This is a common perception for those who know little about guns. I myself just had a conversation with a friend who claimed the Mini-14 was a “high powered rifle that would shoot a hole right through a concrete wall.” The statement is probably technically correct, depending on the concrete and the wall, but the implication was that 5.56/.223 is somehow unusually potent or powerful. My friend didn’t specifically say “huge,” but accusing the author of making this up because you’ve never heard it yourself seems unfair.

      By the way, I have also heard the opposite from those who want to downplay the power of 5.56/.223. For example, the claim that this round is “just a .22 varmint round” or “not suitable for battlefield use at all.” The first claim ignores bullet weight and velocity, and the second glosses over a deep and complex debate about the nature of military firearms and ammunition capabilities to score a political point.

      Myself, I’m not enamored of either kind of deliberate mischaracterization, but both DO happen.

      • plays hell with one side of a concrete block…while leaving the other side unscathed….

    • Hmmmmm….. can’t say I’ve heard “Huge” used like that either. But I have heard “assault bullets” and “assault magazines” and “assault clips”.

      “Assault Laughter” was the immediate result.

      • As long as it was semi-auto laughter (one laugh per breath)…full auto laughter requires a permit.

    • When you have Army generals describing the .223 as inflicting horrendous wounds, and that it has no place in civilian hands, lines parroted in the press and by politicians who would have them banned, or as “high power assault weapons” that fire “60 rounds per second,” the unknowledgeable general public thinks these are truly scary weapons. What was it that that retired general said on CBS, that these are fully automatic semiauto rifles? A guy who obviously hadn’t shot a rifle in decades?

  5. A .22LR round can be fired through a .223 AR barrel using an adapter kit, but the twist rate and barrel interior diameter won’t be ideal. Plus, you’ll be introducing lots of dirt to your AR gas system because .22 LR rounds tend to leave a lot of residue behind. If you can save your pennies for a dedicated rimfire upper, it’s a much better solution.

    • the military uses them all the time…[saving money?]…and the accuracy is acceptable…

    • .22mag tends to cost about the same as cheaper .223 ammunition.

      I would use .223 as my step up from .22LR.

  8. Well, Joe Scarborough says that the AR-15 is more powerful than the M14, so I’m going with that.

    But I can’t remember why we called the M16 a “poodle shooter” back in the day.

        • First time I heard the term ‘mouse gun’ was in boot camp referring to the m16. In those days the small pistols were called ‘pocket guns’.

        • After many months of training with the M14, I was introduced to the M16.
          I was looking all over it for the “Made by Mattel” logo, and I wasn’t the only one.

        • I thought is was a joke. Until I held one in my own hands in 1984, in an Arms Room in Ft Campbell kentucky. That M-16 was stamped Mattel Toy Company. I don’t know how many were made. But I did hold one in my hands. The weapon belonged to the unit arms room NCO. He refused to trade it. He wanted his “toy gun”. (smile)

        • Chris T in KY:
          There were a relatively few M16s that did indeed have “Made by Mattel” stamped on the stock, because Mattel made some of the stocks. (They had a lot of experience with the resin molding required.)
          Later shipents of the stocks didn’t have that stamping, for reasons that should be obvious.

    • That M16 (Vietnam) round tumbled after penetration, didn’t need no .308 to get the job done

  9. Your wrong about the .223 not being powerful enough for deer. I have a friend who shoots deer out of his kitchen window at a measured distance of 220 yards with the .223 and he has used mostly fmj bullets and occasional 55 grain soft points. The deer never run more than a few yards before falling over dead and some just fall down immediately when hit.

    P.O. Ackley found out the .220 swift killed ferule mules better than all the old fashioned WWII military cartridges and the .220 swift with a 48 grain soft point bullet penetrated 1/2 inch hardened armor plate while the 30-06 with armor piercing rounds failed to do the same. He recommended it be put on the approved State List of deer cartridges but the Neanderthals that were in charge of the game department were aghast.

    The first rifle should be a .22 rimfire hands down. If one can learn how to hit with its slow moving bullet especially under windy conditions shooting a high power rifle is a piece of cake. One could say if one learned on a pellet gun the same is also true.

    And I might mention the forerunner of the .223 was the .222 Remington Magnum a superior cartridge to the .223 whose short neck is inferior when it comes to accuracy and velocity. Few people today have ever fired a .222 magnum and many have never even heard of it. It was one of those cases where a superior cartridge was made to become extinct because of an inferior one the .223 and that was because of all the cheap surplus brass and the fact that people always erroneously think everything the military adopts is superior to everything else.

    I might add I have an ancient Sako rifle in .222 Magnum and I would sell off the old lady before ever selling it.

    • I have often wondered about that half-track shooting story. It is my understanding that the sides of M2 and M3s were generally 1/4″ and I have no-idea about the composition or hardening was. Anybody here know more about the armor and if he really hit a 1/2″ spot. I have heard that machine guns often did penetrate M2s and M3 “Purple Heart Boxes” and the Axis didn’t generally use larger caliber machine-guns that one would expect to punch through half-track armor. I am not saying I don’t believe Mr. Ackley, but rather that the re-telling of stories often changes them a bit. I don’t even know exactly what Mr. Ackley said.

      • I would suggest you get a copy of Ackley’s books at the library or buy them on line. Ackley dispelled a lot of gun writer myths like Stainless barrels are more accurate and lasted longer than chrome molly barrels. They were not. Or that the strongest military bolt gun ever made was the 6.5 Japanese Arisaka. It was. Just a few of the fascination facts from Ackley’s books and experiments that were all painstakingly documented, often with witnesses such as in the Mule shoot.

        • too long…and too heavy…(used to play with one when I was a kid)…most jap small arms were crap…

    • I smell bullshit. Your choice of words and writing style remind me of another bullshitter that used to frequent here. One that claimed 9mm could pierce a steel helmet at 125 yards and that .45 couldn’t penetrate a window curtain. You didn’t happen to join the NRA in 1952 did you?

      • First hand experience here. 1/2 inch thick hardened stainless stell plate. 9mm-45 fmj’s indication of bullet impact,..30 carbine 110gr fmj , indention. .223 55gr.fmj and 7.62X39 123gr fmj much deeper crater around 1/4 inch deep. 243 80gr sp bullet pushed it’s nose through. 30-06 and 7.62X54R passed through. I believe if the 243 would have had 100gr.fmj it would have easily passed completely through also. Animals kill different then shooting steel plates. In sure a 220 swift could kill an elephant with the right buulit and triggerman. But I doubt you’d out penetrate a fmj with a soft point.

    • Interesting. I have the Remington .222 Magnum and I love it. I had not heard the stories about the mules or armor plate. My biggest problem is finding ammunition for it. If I find it in any store I buy it up.

      • Some European and South American nations do not allow civilian possession of “military” ammo so .222 is popular in those places as a substitute. Some ARs have been chambered for it. Frankly, the specs for the .223 cartridge case neck should have been stretched just a bit to better allow for longer heavier bullets.

    • I call bullshit. The .223 is not some magic bullet. Do you really think a .223 is more effective than a .30-06?
      If you do I wound venture that you don’t believe in the laws of physics.

      • The .223 was chosen because it weights less and 30.06 ammo. Also the M-16 is much lighter than a M1 Garand. Most WW2 rifle engagements were less than 300 yards. So an M1, 700 to 800 yards, was not considered to be necessary.
        But now with combat in the flat land middle east, or afghanistan, there is a need for a long range shooting rifle. There going back to a 30 caliber rifle again. Probably in 3 or 5 years.

    • I heard the .223 was based on the .222 with the shoulder move forward 6mm (quarter inch) for more case capacity to meet performance criteria.

      I have heard of the .222 Magnum but it was only popular in countries where service calibers were not allowed, such as France and West Germany. In France you could buy a FAMAS in either .222 or .222Mag.

    • Thank you for telling the truth about the .223 and deer. You get so many people who just repeat ad infinitum what they got from the internet these days. It really makes the gun community a comedy of sorts. The .223 will still have at 100 yards more energy remaining that almost all handgun bullets and many muzzleloading loads, but there are people who won’t question for a second that these will kill deer effectively who will immediately discount smallbore rifle rounds. It’s hilarious. A .223 can very easily still possess 1000 ft. lbs. approximately at 100 yards, which is more than many muzzleloader loads at the same distance. This is more than enough to kill whitetailed deer. Oh and the first sign of an amateur is someone who says, “Well by God I’ve been doing this for XX years, and I ain’t never… .” I know many shooters who have been taking game for ages, and they don’t argue like that. They are much more likely to hit you with a ton of facts. First sign of an amateur, the “By golly I been at this for XX years and BLAH BLAH BLAH.” There are all sorts of morons, in all fields, from guns to automotive to fishing, who have been doing the EXACT same dumb things for 30 straight years.

      • I’ve found many Fudds who claim to have X years experience really have 1 year of experience repeated X number of times.

      • yeah,..hard to make that argument….when you see deer running around in the woods with arrows sticking out of them…

  10. Josh, how old are you? Your “half my life” comment smelled a bit squirrely. If you are in your 20’s, half your life is not a particularly long bit of experience.

  11. I have long ago come to the conclusion that 22 long rifle is the best round for survival and without rule of law situations. Just take a 50 round box of .223 and fill it with 22lr then count the rounds.

    If you are on your own in wilderness then you will be eating small game so anything larger not suitable for hunting.

    If you are in a WROL situation you are also in without access to medical situation. Almost wound is going to be fatal eventually so nobody is going to press home an attack where someone is shooting at them.

    • .22 LR first and foremost produces cessation of hostility through a psychological effect. Close range, they see you have a gun, they hear the report see the flash, and may or may not feel getting hit (if you hit them) fear and common sense causes cessation of hostilities or at least mitigation (people shooting while retreating is a thing). Distance, terrain, desperation, panic, mental fog, auditory impairment from gun fire can and has caused people to not even release they are being shot at or know they have been hit especially if wearing armor. I’m not saying your wrong but those factors come in to play with .22 and any suppressed weapon.

    • “…so nobody is going to press home an attack where someone is shooting at them.”

      I would doubt this.

      The same statement could be said to be true of warfare until about 70 years ago yet we know war has been a thing for thousands of years. Further, desperate people do desperate things. Someone who’s starving doesn’t think about the word “sepsis” very often.

      Outside of military operations where the people involved know there is a “no man left behind” mentality and an entire logistical system set up specifically to help them if they get wounded the theory of modern medical care entering into people’s thought processes probably doesn’t apply very often.

      I have quite literally never met someone, even some of the crazy gangbangers I’ve known, who thought “Getting shot isn’t a big deal because I’ll go to the hospital”. So, I really rather doubt that without the hospital the opposite would enter their mind either. Also, if they do think about it, they know that they can’t just scream “MEDIC!” or “CORPSMAN!” and get help from someone in their gang because their gang doesn’t have dedicated first responders. They might give some money to your family but gangsters aren’t going to brave gunfire to tend to their wounded and generally speaking even if the other guys ran away they’re not going to casevac the wounded guy anyway because staying means getting arrested.

      Some people think about things and plan for bad situations. Most people don’t even check the batteries in their smoke detectors. The kind of people to worry about in a WROL situation are exactly the kind who don’t check their batteries which is why they’re dangerous.

      • I think your both right to some degree. TD may be operating on the premise that in a complete grid down scenario simply not being the softest target may keep you safer than most for weeks or even months. That argument has some validity.

      • Nobody walks into a fight thinking he is going to get shot. It’s always something that happens to the other guy. In the 21st Century if you are the other guy’s other guy there is implicit belief that the EMTs are going to roll up and save you. Take that away and a lot of potential attackers are going to reconsider their decision to come after you. For those that don’t a 22lr to chest will at 50 -100 yards is going to stop them. A 22lr can be accurate out to 200 yards if you practice. I have put 100 out of 100 rounds on a Q-bottle target at 175 yards

        Will you deter everyone? No. But if you have a geared up, armored up bunch of guys coming after you short of having a SAW you aren’t going to make it anyway.

        I agree that unprepared are going to be the most dangerous but probably the easiest to deal with. If they don’t have extra flashlight batteries they probably won’t be armed either.

  12. I’ve read or heard somewhere that the .223 caliber was heavily used in Viet Nam.

    Theory behind it’s use was that the round could be fatal as well as injuring an enemy soldier. However, if it wasn’t fatal it would immobilize the enemy solider that was hit, requiring one or two other fighters to help that individual to safer ground; thereby, (temporarily) reducing the number of enemy soldiers to continue the fight and hopefully win battle.

    Make sense??

    • No. The last army we fought that cared enough to tend to the seriously wounded was the Germans.

    • The theory was that the reduced recoil of the smaller caliber would allow for better controlled fire in full-auto or burst compared to the 7.62×51 that the M14 was chambered in, and the smaller round would allow troops to carry more bullets without increasing weight.

      It had everything to do with putting more shots on target.

      • And, the weapon (M-16), with a load out of ammo for it, was easier to carry and handle by the physically smaller statured South Vietnamese Army (ARVN) troops than an M-1 or M-14. At least, that’s what we were told before we got there.

        • All of the equally tiny North Vietnamese and Viet Cong had no trouble lugging around their AK-47’s, as well as the boxes of 7.62×39 rounds, 50% heavier than the 5.56 rounds.

    • We were also fed the myth that the M-16 made HUGE wounds because the round tumbled upon striking flesh and bone, making wound channels you could drive an AMTRAC through. Since I was in RVN a bit earlier than most (66-67) and carried an M-14 my entire tour, I can’t speak from experience about the M-16 “Jam-o–matic” other than to say I personally witnessed brand-new ones jamming constantly when my battalion fam-fired it.

      • The colt AR15 round had the ability to take your head off or put a small hole through you , depending on where it hit you. I’ve seen a wild hog killed at 100 yards with one shot . I put six rounds into into a rice humper , three into his shoulders , three into his pack . When I checked his pack I saw three entrance holes and no exit holes . His pack was large and full of loose corn kernels, yes corn kernels as large as my thumb nail. They apparently spun straight up and out . I have a photo of a bengal tiger that one of our teams took out on one of our Lrp patrols , point to point contact. My point is this round is a lethal round and no joke.
        Steve Risk ( 1rst, recon bn., DA Nang,1970.

        • The colt AR15 round had the ability to take your head off or put a small hole through you , depending on where it hit you. I’ve seen a wild hog killed at 100 yards with one shot . I put six rounds into into a rice humper , three into his shoulders , three into his pack . When I checked his pack I saw three entrance holes and no exit holes . His pack was large and full of loose corn kernels, yes corn kernels as large as my thumb nail. They apparently spun straight up and out . I have a photo of a bengal tiger that one of our teams took out on one of our Lrp patrols , point to point contact. My point is this round is a lethal round and no joke.
          Steve Risk ( 1rst, recon bn., DA Nang,1970.

  13. .22LR vs .223…. two completely different types of rounds with completely different purposes. What was the point of this article? Coming soon- .32ACP vs .50BMG.

  14. Back some years ago in Ohio there was a big deer poaching ring that killed hundreds of deer for resale on the black market and guess what caliber they all used? It was the .22 Winchester rim fire magnum. Its low noise yet lethal results did the job and the poachers got away with their actives for years before being caught.

  15. Make no mistake. A 22LR is a perfectly good round for taking game both small and large. Long before most of those commenting on this site were born. We were putting meat on the table. Everything from bull frogs to deer and turkey. We were dirt poor and 22 rifles and ammo were cheap and readily available. No body paid much attention to how game was taken as long as you didn’t get greedy or stupid. People were just trying to survive. Shot placement made all the difference. On deer the shot was through the eye or behind the ear for a drop dead kill. On Turkeys it was at the base of the neck or the head if you were good. Now times and laws have changed so the old ways have passed to time. So don’t underestimate the power and effectiveness of the lowly 22. In a pinch it can get the job done. Keep Your Powder Dry.

  16. As some stated above, the .22lr is fully capable of killing game to deer size. In a pinch it will, with proper placement, take an elk. ( advantage mine, elk had been hit by a vehicle) My first gun was a savage single shot .22. You learn shot placement early that way. Tom in ore can probably tell stories of poachers loving the 10/22. With a peep and post it will work as a military training weapon. A better comparison would have been .22 mag vs. .223.

    • conversation centered around what would be the best choice for a first gun….think the .22 won…

Comments are closed.