Thread replies: 12
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
Anonymous
Ok so what is /k/'s opinion on .222 remington? 2016-12-04 01:29:43 Post No. 32208265
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Ok so what is /k/'s opinion on .222 remington? 2016-12-04 01:29:43 Post No. 32208265
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: 860045.jpg (170KB, 880x660px) Image search:
[Google]
170KB, 880x660px
Ok so what is /k/'s opinion on .222 remington?
Anonymous
2016-12-04 01:29:43
Post No. 32208265
[Report]
>>
Why not just use light .223
>>
What's there to say?
.223 does all it can and gives you a little more velocity; it also has cheap plinking ammo.
No real point in going for .222 unless you've already got a rifle (say, given to you).
It's a good cartridge, of course, but it's kinda like .22 Long compared to .22LR. Similar thing, with the latter offering a little more options.
>>
That was the round that supposedly took out Kennedy from the grassy knoll from a Fireball Remington XP-100.
>>
>>32208327
And for that I say thank you. Kennedys are scum.
>>
>>32208445
Found the Globalist Jew
>>
>>32208327
(Citation needed)
>>
>>32208265
Totally obsolete. Serves no purpose that a 223 won't.
>>
File: 1375377280196.jpg (201KB, 1920x1080px) Image search:
[Google]
201KB, 1920x1080px
>>32208445
>Kennedys are scum.
JFK was the only Kennedy that WASN'T scum.
>>
>>32208265
I've killed a lot of woodchucks and a few deer with .222
Good round.
>>
.223 is .001 better.
Thread posts: 12
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3