fox with the hmr

[The Duncan 802]

Fair point Paulus

For full range foxing, hmr is not the best calibre, cf calibres are the tool of choice.

But as Deker (and others) have said, the hmr has its uses in fox control given the right ranges and circumstances.

[The Duncan 802]

sorry what is the air rifle issue. do u need more information or are you just blowing!!!. would be interested to hear your thoughts on air rifle caliburs. Duncan

Based on how you write, I'm guessing you're less than 25, possibly 18?

Based on your spouting re airgun calibres, its clear that I've been hunting with air rifles longer than you've been on this planet.

As for 'blowing', I'll leave that to you

 

I'm starting a new thread on the airgun general discussion area, so you can put your .177 more easily deflected than .22 theory out in full there

well ive been hunting with airguns, r/f c/f shotguns a while longer and still say if your out after fox use a c/f as ive said before you can dig a hole with a spoon if needs be but a spade makes life a whole lot easyer

or you can really save time and use a JCB

[richmcgin 32]

Well iam 48 years old .17 IS NOT A FOXING CALIBRE.

[charlie caller 3,654]

yes Duncan and i bet you use 177 for rabbits too lol.

I used .22 for about 10 years and then switched to .177 for the next 10. Literally thousands of bunnies in the field have helped me form my opinions regarding both calibres.

.177 kills better than .22 in 12ftlbs guise,in my opinion,oh and 30 years of shooting experience,

[Deker 3,453]

Well iam 48 years old duncan i work with fire arms everyday and have done for the last 20 years prior to that i was shooting air rifles and shotguns. i make custom loads for my employers and have designed bullets for special forces use. .17 IS NOT A FOXING CALIBRE.

 

But you use it for foxes! :hmm:

[The Duncan 802]

Well iam 48 years old duncan i work with fire arms everyday and have done for the last 20 years prior to that i was shooting air rifles and shotguns. i make custom loads for my employers and have designed bullets for special forces use. .17 IS NOT A FOXING CALIBRE.

Well, your writing style certainly threw me then

Agreed though, .17hmr isn't a dedicated foxing calibre, but is more than up to the job given appropriate circumstances and range - yards I think someone mentioned?

I'd only go 75 yards (as I said much earlier in the thread), but there you go

[tegater 789]

Well iam 48 years old duncan i work with fire arms everyday and have done for the last 20 years prior to that i was shooting air rifles and shotguns. i make custom loads for my employers and have designed bullets for special forces use. .17 IS NOT A FOXING CALIBRE.

 

We all agree that there are better suited calibres for foxes if the circumstances warrant it, but what do you say to the farmer, who has a fox taking lambs and the only rifle he has imediatley available to him, is a 17hmr? Are you seriously expecting that farmer to do nothing about it? This actually happens to me on a regular basis were oportunist foxes appear, when least expected.

One fox I shot last year, had a rear leg almost dangling off, were a mate had almost missed it with a .243, weeks before.

 

My original comment to you was were you plucked the figure of yards from??

[The Duncan 802]

Well iam 48 years old duncan i work with fire arms everyday and have done for the last 20 years prior to that i was shooting air rifles and shotguns. i make custom loads for my employers and have designed bullets for special forces use. .17 IS NOT A FOXING CALIBRE.

 

We all agree that there are better suited calibres for foxes if the circumstances warrant it, but what do you say to the farmer, who has a fox taking lambs and the only rifle he has imediatley available to him, is a 17hmr? Are you seriously expecting that farmer to do nothing about it? This actually happens to me on a regular basis were oportunist foxes appear, when least expected.

One fox I shot last year, had a rear leg almost dangling off, were a mate had almost missed it with a .243, weeks before.

 

My original comment to you was were you plucked the figure of yards from??

 

I bet Charlie got home and said to his mrs "look, some b*****d almost missed me tonight!"

 

LMAO!

 

Ps - richmcgin - I put a thread on the airgun, general discussion area inviting you to describe your theory of airgun pellet deflection

[Deker 3,453]

I'm getting more than a little confused here, it seems to me that many are making assumptions that foxes only get shot at great distances, well, accept the fact that many are NOT.

 

Without doubt the majority of foxes I shoot are within 100yards, often a lot closer, certainly a few drop between 100-200yards but very few beyond 200.

 

I am well aware that some here take longer shots, well fine, and am I telling you to use a HMR at 250-300yards, I think not, so kindly do not tell me I should be using a CF leaning out of a householders bedroom window to drop a Fox at 50FEET!

 

The right tool for the job!

[richmcgin 32]

Sorry Duncan thought you asked if i had just plucked yrds out of the air, and yesi dont type too well !!! as for the 177 killing rabbits i have no doubt that it does kill well it should penetrate well with its light fast moving round but sheer stopping power comes with the heavier .22 carring more energy which is transfered into the target more efficently by a heaver round with larger surface. However Charlie caller your 177 will cause more damage at cloer ranges should the pellet hit a solid structure causing deflection within the target.

[richmcgin 32]

I fully agree Deker and must admit that most of mine are taken at under 150yards and i dont think that anyone has suggested that smaller calibres cant be used but it has been said that they have limitations and if you were to use a c/f in an urban area you should have your ticket taken away. years ago the met would not allow you to use any bigger than 22lr in any built up area dont know if its the same now.

[The Duncan 802]

Sorry Duncan thought you asked if i had just plucked yrds out of the air, and yesi dont type too well !!! as for the 177 killing rabbits i have no doubt that it does kill well it should penetrate well with its light fast moving round but sheer stopping power comes with the heavier .22 carring more energy which is transfered into the target more efficently by a heaver round with larger surface. However Charlie caller your 177 will cause more damage at cloer ranges should the pellet hit a solid structure causing deflection within the target.

lol! Tegater said about the yards plucking

I've found that if you hit the cranium of a bunny with a 12fpe pellet, be it .177 or .22, the effect is always the same The rabbits don't seem to care much about 'stopping power' as perceived by people.

[Deker 3,453]

Sorry Duncan thought you asked if i had just plucked yrds out of the air, and yesi dont type too well !!! as for the 177 killing rabbits i have no doubt that it does kill well it should penetrate well with its light fast moving round but sheer stopping power comes with the heavier .22 carring more energy which is transfered into the target more efficently by a heaver round with larger surface. However Charlie caller your 177 will cause more damage at cloer ranges should the pellet hit a solid structure causing deflection within the target.

 

:hmm:

 

Does 12ft lb mean anything to you, whilst a heavier .22 pellet will carry it's energy a fraction better than a lighter .177 pellet, the difference will have minimal effect in the field. Energy transfer will also be virtually identical as long as they both stay in the quarry? From a starting point of sub 12ft lb it isn't worth the debate!

 

What exactly do you purport to do?

Edited January 23, 2012 by Deker

[Rake aboot 4,929]

Sorry Duncan thought you asked if i had just plucked yrds out of the air, and yesi dont type too well !!! as for the 177 killing rabbits i have no doubt that it does kill well it should penetrate well with its light fast moving round but sheer stopping power comes with the heavier .22 carring more energy which is transfered into the target more efficently by a heaver round with larger surface. However Charlie caller your 177 will cause more damage at cloer ranges should the pellet hit a solid structure causing deflection within the target.

 

You sir, are what is known in common parlance, as a " Billy Bullshitter" you are talking utter crap.. I suspect you have NO experience in firearms,, and anybody that comes on here spouting about how they made "special forces" bullets,, is talking bollocks.

[richmcgin 32]

have just seen your ps Duncan about some threat or other. I would love to spend my evening discusing the atributes and terminal and external balistics or projectiles with you but i fear that from your previous comments i would be fooling myself i was to think that you would either belive or understand the content of the discussion.