22-250 vs. 220 swift

[carpsniperg2]

22-250 is going to be a better choice for most people. The brass is easy to find and a little cheaper to shoot most times.
Both are great guns and a lot a like.

[TheSkyBuster]

What are the differences between a 220 swift and a 22-250 I would like to buy one of the two but I'm not sure which one to get. If anyone has any info it would be appreciated. I would be shooting coyotes and ground hogs and possibly competitive. thanks.

I love this debate, It's never going to die. 

Here is what this what I think I know, and this is purely my opinion:

the 2 are kinda, sorta, somewhat, fairly, similar balistically.  the 220 swift has the reputation as a barrel burner and it is definitely faster (hotter) but you can still wear out a 22-250 barrel in a few thousand rounds (with the proper load)  I know this from experience.
the 22-250 rem is hard on brass, cases stretch due to the body taper and trimming every round is a PITA.
22-250 rem factory ammunition is inexpensive and usually readily available. 220 swift ammo is neither.
same story on brass, I can often pick 22-250 brass up off the ground at the local shooting pit. 220 swift brass is pricey. $$$
a coyote won't be able to tell the difference between the 2. and on the range or in the field you and I probably wouldn't either.
Remington (in all their wisdom) has built their 22-250 model 700 rifles with a 1-14" twist rate witch pretty much limits you to a maximum of 55 grain bullets.  (not the best for compitition)  My model 700 22-250 rem will not stabilize a 53 gr barnes or a 55 grain blitzking but it will stabilize a 55 gr gameking.   
The 220 swift is the more impressive balistically and that is good for braggin rights, unfortunatly the .223 WSSM has them both spanked in that department. 

[demontang]

I loved the 22-250 I had it flat knocked the varmits around. With reloads it can be a monster but finding one with the twist for heavier bullets is a hard thing unless you rebarrel it. The 220 is a great round too with a little more speed and the 223wssm will blow them both out of the water and have longer barrel life since they chrome lined a lot of them. The 204 Ive never liked and havent seen the speed they claim out of them either. Factory 223 40gr vmax was only 100fps slower then 204 40gr vmax

[huntnphool]

204 Ruger, 40grn V-Max, 4100fps-Energy at 500 yards-454 pounds
22-250,40grn V-Max, 4400fps-Energy at 500 yards-323 pounds

 The 204, using the 40grn V-max will out shoot and shoot flatter than the 22-250 using either the 40grn, 50 or 55grn .22 cal bullets. The 204. 20 cal 40grn bullets have a BC of .275 and the 22-250 .22 cal 40grn bullet has a BC of .200, similar differences when increasing weight up to 55gr.

 Here are the MOA adjustments in Elevation and Windage at 500 yards for the 204 Ruger and the 22-250 using the 40grn V-Max at 4100fps;

204 Ruger at 500 yards: Elevation Adjustment-5.25
Windage Adjustment-4.25

22-250 at 500 yards: Elevation Adjustment-6.75
Windage Adjustment-6.75

 The .204 .20 caliber bullets have a better BC and shoot flatter than the .22 caliber rounds out of the 22-250 when both are shooting the same factory loads.

 If you are going to shoot heavier rounds than 55gr. then you will likely not be using a factory twist rate barrel, numbers change dramatically if you are talking about custom barrels and loads.

[demontang]

Have you ever ran the 204 through a chronograph? My factory hornady load said 3900 for the hornady 40gr vmax custom loads and the 223 40gr was 3800 factory hornady load. My reloading book doesn't list any load over 3900fps as well 

[257 Wby Mag]

Chronographs can be a real eye opener.....

[high country]

Chronographs can be a real eye opener.....

and a heart breaker.