Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats rechamber 223 to 222 rem?

Never done it before but it looks doable.... Looks like the 222rem has a little less taper than the 223rem but is a little shorter. Would think the barrel could be set back a tad and be able to rechamber to 222rem....Is it possible?

Curious why you would want to do that. I've run them both and the .222 Rem won't do anything that the .223 can't do.

Barrel would have to be set back.

DF

My 1950's vintage Remington 40x that I inherited from my grandfather is chambered in 222 rem and my old 700adl is chambered in 222 rem. I dont own a 223 at the moment but was considering buying a new rifle and having it rechambered. Can run the same dies, no confusion with my reloads, etc. Plus its waaaay cooler...LOL.

Well, that makes sense.

I shot the .222 as a youngster, shooting crows here in Louisiana during the early '60's. My first was a Savage 340, next was a 700 Rem. That Remington now wears a .204 PacNor, 26" SS barrel. I had a Rem 722 with a .222 Hart that shot great. The smith nicked the chamber and with hot loads, a corresponding wedge shaped hole would appear near the base of the case. Not good. I had the Hart set back and chambered for the .22-204 Ruger, which I've enjoyed playing with.

The .222 is a good one and Lapua brass is available.

DF

Well... I can agree with you ONE point:
However, I disagree with you on another:

The 40-X centerfire didn't come out until 1961. (According to the BBofGV)

I am wondering, however, why you seem compelled to own yet another .222 Rem...? (Not that I have any room to talk... since I own 3, I think...) One can easily tell at a glance the difference between a .222 Rem case and a .223 Rem. Thus, your "Confusion" theory doesn't hold water, (At least not to me...)

If you set back a .223 barrel enough to rechamber to .222, then the barrel would no longer fit the barrel channel in the stock. And would look waaay ugly, IMHO.

OTOH, it just may be that you just do not LIKE the .223 Rem... Now that's something I DO understand... (Because I'm not crazy about it either... tho' I do own a couple or three...) Such being the case, It would seem to make more sense to have a .223 AI'd... (Now that's a COOL case...) OR rechamber it to .222 Rem Mag. Either way, performance is about the same...

Trust me, I'm not putting you down, just applying a bit of logic... Idle thoughts from a mostly idle mind....

GH

Interesting....never researched the serial # But it has to be from the very early 60's then....good to know.

As far as being confused....yes I can tell the difference but I have probably 5000 empty pieces of 222 brass. Not looking to muddy the waters by adding in anything close.

I guess the real reason for a 3rd is because when I'm shooting 300+ rounds a day on the squirrel fields I'd like to have 1 more to rotate in as the others get hot.

On the barrel set back.... I have a laminated varmint stock thats inletted for a SA 700 with a strait cylinder.....My plan was to by a SPS Varmint in 223, have it set back and rechambered, then bed it up in that stock so does'nt really matter where the taper ends up.

Does anybody know where I can research the serial # for my 40x? Really interested to know when exactly it was made?
This be her.....

Or, if you wanted to be super cool, a .22-204. That would be great in the single shot, as you wouldn't have to do the mag modifications...

PM me for a smith with that reamer, one who does great work.

DF

Thanks for that link, aalf. I saved it.

Are you and I the only two telling everyone jsut how utterly cool the .22-204 round just so happens to be?

DF

'pears so.....wait'll it hits saami status.....

Is it to be considered for SAAMI recognition any time soon?

DF

Never had a 222, but always kinda wanted one...just so I could say, "I'm gonna shoot my "triple deuce"'. AND, of course because it's WAY COOL.

Not that I know of......it's inevitable though....

Yeah, it's a cool old round. I have many fond memories of the triple deuce. It was always good to me.

Guess I just moved on...

You know how gun nuts operate...

DF

Hardway,

Your reasoning becomes much clearer, now.

As to setting back and rechambering a M-700-V... You'd likely end up with 1~12 twist as opposed to a 1~14" as is what most .222's are. (Not necessarily a bad thing.) Unless you started with a M-700 tactical, and then you'd get a 1~9" twist.

Only advantage to a quicker twist, is the ability to shoot heavier bullets. Altho' I've always been of the opinion that the .222 was at it's best with 50-53 gr. bullets. That may be a consideration on a windier day...

Your M-40X looks to be an earlier one... I think the stock as pictured with the two set screws in the front was only used from 1961 to about 1964... The best way to check producton date is by the barrel code.

1st letter:

B= January
L= Feb
A= March
C= April
k= May
P= June
O= July
W= Aug
D= Sept
E= Oct
R= Nov
X= Dec.

2nd letter:

H= 1961
J= 1962
K= 1963
L= 1964

Barrel code is located on the left side of the barrel close to the action recoil lug.

Only other way, it to call Remington's Custom Shop. They can tell by the serial #.

Hope this helps...

GH

My 40 XB is numbered 32,XXX and is a 12 twist .244 that I bought around 1964 or 1965. It has the two bedding set screws like the one pictured. I have read that Remington used Hart barrels on those early guns. I know that the 40 XB barrel look more like a custom barrel thru the Hawkeye borescope. And I have looked a bunch of factory Rem barrels with their machine marks, etc. They typically shoot better than they look, but the 40 XB barrel looks good and shoots good.

DF

Top gun in photo. As you can see, I reshaped the stock, refinished and checkered the grip.

DF,

I have nine Remington 40-x's. My earliest had a stock with the holes in the F/E. It is serial# 18xxx. I don't know the year, and I have rebarreled it to .223 A.I. The original barrel is long gone. (It was a .222 Rem.)

My 2nd oldest is serial #24xxx in 6.5x55. (blued S2 barrel) Ironically, even tho' it shows the Remington proof marks, it lacks a barrel code, so I don't know when it was made. But IIRC, I read somewhere that the 6.5x55 was only made from 1966-1969. Thus I'm assuming it's somewhere in the latter 60's.

My 3rd oldest is in 7.62 NATO and ironically it doesn't show a bbl code either... Serial # 32xxx

I have an extra barrel in 6mm Rem, that shows the barrel code "BQ". THat makes it January 1978 or January 1996. Go figure...

I think come Monday, I'm calling the Custom Shop and see when mine were made... Just to satisfy my own curiousity...

GH

P.S: I like what you did to the P/G on yours...

Thanks,

I didn't like the clunky target type stock, wanted a varmint stock. So, out came the rasps and sandpaper. I more recently re-did my re-do, improving the finish with darker stain.

My 40 XB doesn't have the barrel code, either. I was second year college when I bought it. I saved up money picking up pecans. I can figure the date from that info. I had a sales tax number and letterhead in those pre FFL days, thus got it wholesale from Glen Slade's Texas Gun Clinic in Houston. Ole Glen Slade was a big time hunter, with trips all over the world. I would think he's probably long gone from this world, as that was quite a few years ago.

DF

Now, you have me wondering if Remington didn't start stamping the barrel codes on the 40X's until perhaps sometime in the '70's or at least late 60's...

I have an extra 40X stock that off a 6mm that I bought a few years ago... (MY buddy owns it now...) Someone has cut the about 4-6" off the front and fitted a contrasting piece of wood. Only other thing I don't like about those early stocks, it the angle of the butt. Makes 'em so they won't sit in place in the safe...

My next quest in a 40X is for one chambered in 6mm Walker Int'l. (Love those odd chamberings...) I already own a 6x47, and a .30/.338....

GH

Sounds like you got quite a collection of 40 X's. Those are fine guns.

I guess the pitch of the butt stock is to keep the butt on your shoulder in prone or on the bench. I know what you're saying about them not wanting to sit still in a gun safe. They tend to pivot around due to the butt plate angle.

Those guns were cutting edge at the time and are still well thought of.

DF