[Guest]

I was reading a copy of, i believe it was Small Arms Review and the author of this particular article made reference to the Australian government fielding a small group of Finnish Tikka HB Varmint rifles in .22-250 Remington to supplement their Parker-Hale M85 .308s. Now my personal groundhog splitter is a Leupold-scoped Savage M12 varmint rifle in .22-250, and, despite the violent things it does to those sod poodles, i can't see it as being an army sniper rifle. Unless you put one of those cute little 40 grain V-Shock hollow points in someone's eye... Any thoughts?

 

[Nekekami]

Why not? I could see it being used for operations in urban/populated environments, where ranges are often short, noise levels and rifle size needs to be kept down, and where overpenetration is a problem. Large bullets are not the solution to everything.

And besides, maybe it's not intended for the combat troops, but for the airfield personell, to kill rabbits, toads etc with? Both animals are huge problems in Australia.

Nekekami

 

[morpheus]

The .22-250 wouldn't be my first choice for sniping. It's flat shooting for a .22, but it's still a .22 and for military application I don't believe it would last for long. Especially compared to the .308. But thats just my opnion. Nekekami is right it would be do well in urban areas but not well in most other terrain.

 

[mele]

Good for varmints, bad for sniping. It "could" work for close in work as indicated, but absolutely will not work for long range duty. Ballistic Coeffecients are horrible for the little .22 bullets, killing long range ballistics, and wind plays havok on them. On target energy/penetration/lethality will be minimum at long range also. So, while the .22-250 could be used for urban, then that would mean having 2 weapons to handle urban vs. long range, and that doesn't make a lot of sense when you can use your typical sniper rifle for urban as well.

just my $0.02

MEL

 

[ironman]

I agree with the face that it would be a great rifle for many of the short-ranged urban situations. If it were outfitted with a heavey silencer all you would hear is the action click, click, click. I believe that it could be a very useful precision tool, but I personally like a smaller precision rifle rather than a big cannon.

 

[Nekekami]

Mel:

Doesn't that depend on what your mission is? No, it most likely won't be issued to the ordinary military snipers. But how about it being issued to the SASR squads tapped for an extended operation in urban environments?

Now that I think about it, it ties in with the notices in Janes IDR etc about Australia putting an emphasis on urban operations for the special forces and special operations teams.

And, for extended operations in that environment, how much does 8 clips of .22-250 weigh compared to 7.62x51?

I'm not saying that it _is_ being issued, but I think playing the Devil's Advocate is sometimes very necessary.

Ironman:

As for suppressors, you shouldn't overstate their effectiveness. A suppressed .22 will still be quite audible. But there's a huge chance that it won't be recognizable as gunfire noise.

 

[FLEA]

Ironman:

As for suppressors, you shouldn't overstate their effectiveness. A suppressed .22 will still be quite audible. But there's a huge chance that it won't be recognizable as gunfire noise.

On a side note to make a suppressed .22 really effective you would want to use sub-sonic ammo which will drastically effect how well the round will improve.

 

[Nekekami]

FLEA:

Definitely. Shooting with suppressed weapons can be a real PITA. My standard backup weapon is a H&K MP5SD3 with a 4x SUSAT on it.

 

[Hectorvictorious]

Just out of curiosity, why use a 22-250 for urban warfare when you can just use .223? It's lethality is comparable and its availability is huge.

 

[Nekekami]

Well, since it mostly seems to be a rumour, we can just speculate.
But, it seems that bolt action rifles chambered for .22-250 are more readily available, at least when I look around at various dealer websites etc.

 

[ironman]

I wouldn't go as far as to say that you should use a .223, not that it couldn't be done. It's just that the .22-250 has an appreciable range advantage over the .223 and I would believe that some urban situations can require a fairly lengthy shot even for a .22-250 and you don't want to come up short.

 

[Jeff_850]

both loose energy real quickly, have low ballistic coefficients
they could be good at 100-200m
im really not sure how they would do at say 600m though

 

[Nekekami]

Jeff850:

However, in urban combat, you rarely have effective ranges over 300m(As a side note, the average combat engagement range for ordinary infantry in open terrain is estimated to be 100m, in urban terrain around 30m). And the keyword is effective. If you see a wide open area that you think is nice for sniping, well, so did the opposition.

 

[Jeff_850]

even at shorter ranges does it do as well as .30 cal rounds?

 

[morpheus]

even at shorter ranges does it do as well as .30 cal rounds?

Ballistcally it might do as good as a .30 cal, but it definatly won't have the stopping power as a .30 cal

 

[Jeff_850]

yeah
what 5.56mm NATO, M855 i think it fragments at velcoites over 2500 or 2700 fps, that i think is around 200m.. might not be a .308 but it will still definitely ruin your day if you get hit by it

 

[ironman]

I Agree

I can agree with that, almost anything that hits you from 30yds. will keep you down for quite a while, even if it is a .22.

 

[Jeff_850]

well maybe you dont want to rely on a .22 LR but even that can ruin someones day
i know i woudlnt want to get hit by one

 

[Nekekami]

Stopping power is such an arbitrary concept that debating it is mostly pointless. A 9x19 Parabellum FMJ to the brain stem is more effective than 7.62x51 Oryx through the lung or heart, even though the "stopping power" of the 7.62x51 Oryx is "better". All three hits will kill, but the hit to the brain stem will cut off the nervous system, while with the hits to the chest, the target might well be able to fire his weapon, trigger a detonator or whatever.

People regularly bring down elks with 6.5x55 Mauser here in Sweden, despite the "stopping power" of the bullet being relatively low....

Also, against vests, what gives you more "stopping power"? The large caliber, relatively slow and somewhat heavy bullet, or the small caliber, hard and high-velocity bullet?

Answer: The small caliber high-velocity bullet, because it concentrates the energy into a smaller area, more easily defeating the vest.

But, really, for a sniper, it's all location, location and how you aim suited to the situation.

 

[Jeff_850]

but in your situation, what if the 9mm hit in the chest just like the 7.62 did?
in that case the 7.62mm will have a better chance to stop someone althoguh it doesnt look good either way for the victim