Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Polycarp
My memory's vague about this, but wasn't the .222 Remington the forerunner of the .223? Wasn't the M-16 initially chambered for the .222? Other than that, I don't recall any semi auto chambered for the .222. If it's a .222 (which I doubt) then that narrows the field, considerably. Bolt action or Thompson Contender, maybe.

Probably a .223 semi auto. Probably Muslims. Possibly going to see this kind of thing happen quite a bit.
67 posted on 10/04/2002 10:37:46 PM PDT by hoosierskypilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: hoosierskypilot
The 22.250 is a better round for long range shooting in my limited experience.
69 posted on 10/04/2002 10:48:15 PM PDT by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: hoosierskypilot
I thought that back in the 60s, Remington and Winchester had a thing going with .222 and .223. Both, as I recall, were mods of the .220 Swift, which was the preferred varmit round. The .220 was reputed to wear out your barrel pretty quickly.
81 posted on 10/05/2002 12:12:14 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson