.22lr accuracy - paper punching testing

[Deker 3,450]

thats obvious beucase foxs are regualry within 200 y. i saw 2 last night at 110 yards. sadly i had the wrong gun.

like your 600 y experiment i have my own at 180y with the rimmy. does not mean i am going to attempt a crow out to that range with the rimmy as 150 is my limit for that. and yes i can hit the plastic magpie centre mass pritty much every time in low and medium winds with the rimmy at 150 so why not?

 

the very fact that you have tried a 600y experient is good as you were testing out your rifles and ur ability which is good in my view, thus knowing what you kit can do. but best not to critise me for dowing the same with my rimmy as i am entittle to do the same and as the threat states its just paper punching.

 

militray personel shoot out to 600 y with the standard nato round and that is very similar to the .223 and they are shooting at people so you gun is perfectly capable at that range if the taliban come knocking on your door!! but i never hinted that i you or anyone would be shooting anything at that rang. nor have i said i will shoot a crow at 180y.

 

anyhow i digress, i have never had a problem with cant with or without a spirt level, but i have had many cross over problems (pardon the pun) due to poor british craftsmanship

 

i will put this contact down to bad crossover

 

You are still missing the point entirely, 600 yards with a .223 at a range isn't an experiment, the rifle is well known to be perfectly capable at that distance under range circumstances, 1000 is capable, 1200 yards may be an experiment with it! My .223 1,300ft lb, your .22lr with Eley subs less than 100ft lb! :hmm: We have a lot of different calibres and types of ammo for a reason! I don't have any crow examples but this may help to explain what I mean, hit a rabbit at 150-200 yards with a .22lr and the odds are you may spend some time looking for the hole it made, this bunny was hit at about 180 yards with a .223 Ballistic tip! The rest of it is spread around several counties!

 

:laugh: military personal shoot and hope with a SA80 at 600 yards! :yes: The standard Nato 62g ball RG 5.56 ammo, as used by our military, is in the order of 10,000lb higher pressure than a conventional .223, and is about as accurate as a pea shooter (ok.... slight exaggeration), RG ammo in 5.56 is appalling!

 

You suggested the crows were 180 yards, apparently you are happy to try and shoot them at 150 with a .22lr, range it 10 yards out either way or get a gust of wind and you will either miss by a country mile or injure it, like I have said, targets are not fieldwork.

 

Crows at 150 yards is not the domain of the .22lr in my book, too many variables, and the fact the farmers wife doesn't like noise doesn't make it the right gun. Part of hunting is to make sure you are not under gunned, so when that shot turns up that wasn't as perfect as you wanted the job still gets done. Routinely, when you go out, you shoot within the capabilities of the tool you use, not on the extreme limits of the tool. 100-150 yard crows are at the extreme limit of a .22lr in anyones book. We all challenge ourselves from time to time in the field, but you don't go out every day to test the limits of yourself and your rifle on live quarry, you do that on targets!

 

My opinion, I suspect you have a different opinion!

Edited January 31, 2012 by Deker

[thursodog 353]

Still plenty left to eat on that one and probably lovely and tender!!!......

[thursodog 353]

just read through a few other posts yes dont worry ladies came here for a reason and as soon as that is done iam away, mind you that said i have had a proper giggle with you armchair shooters,!!!!!!!!!! and it all started because i dared to disagree about the use of 17hmr on foxes over 100 yards. !!!!!!!!!!!

just read through a few other posts yes dont worry ladies came here for a reason and as soon as that is done iam away, mind you that said i have had a proper giggle with you armchair shooters,!!!!!!!!!! and it all started because i dared to disagree about the use of 17hmr on foxes over 100 yards. !!!!!!!!!!!

Let us know when your done and we'll organise a leaving party for you, don't wait up it could be a late one for the guys!!!!!!

[doyler 0]

Well done mate .

[thursodog 353]

Cracking looking dog there doyler.

[riflehunter583 58]

thats obvious beucase foxs are regualry within 200 y. i saw 2 last night at 110 yards. sadly i had the wrong gun.

like your 600 y experiment i have my own at 180y with the rimmy. does not mean i am going to attempt a crow out to that range with the rimmy as 150 is my limit for that. and yes i can hit the plastic magpie centre mass pritty much every time in low and medium winds with the rimmy at 150 so why not?

 

the very fact that you have tried a 600y experient is good as you were testing out your rifles and ur ability which is good in my view, thus knowing what you kit can do. but best not to critise me for dowing the same with my rimmy as i am entittle to do the same and as the threat states its just paper punching.

 

militray personel shoot out to 600 y with the standard nato round and that is very similar to the .223 and they are shooting at people so you gun is perfectly capable at that range if the taliban come knocking on your door!! but i never hinted that i you or anyone would be shooting anything at that rang. nor have i said i will shoot a crow at 180y.

 

anyhow i digress, i have never had a problem with cant with or without a spirt level, but i have had many cross over problems (pardon the pun) due to poor british craftsmanship

 

i will put this contact down to bad crossover

 

You are still missing the point entirely, 600 yards with a .223 at a range isn't an experiment, the rifle is well known to be perfectly capable at that distance under range circumstances, 1000 is capable, 1200 yards may be an experiment with it! My .223 1,300ft lb, your .22lr with Eley subs less than 100ft lb! :hmm: We have a lot of different calibres and types of ammo for a reason! I don't have any crow examples but this may help to explain what I mean, hit a rabbit at 150-200 yards with a .22lr and the odds are you may spend some time looking for the hole it made, this bunny was hit at about 180 yards with a .223 Ballistic tip! The rest of it is spread around several counties!

 

:laugh: military personal shoot and hope with a SA80 at 600 yards! :yes: The standard Nato 62g ball RG 5.56 ammo, as used by our military, is in the order of 10,000lb higher pressure than a conventional .223, and is about as accurate as a pea shooter (ok.... slight exaggeration), RG ammo in 5.56 is appalling!

 

You suggested the crows were 180 yards, apparently you are happy to try and shoot them at 150 with a .22lr, range it 10 yards out either way or get a gust of wind and you will either miss by a country mile or injure it, like I have said, targets are not fieldwork.

 

Crows at 150 yards is not the domain of the .22lr in my book, too many variables, and the fact the farmers wife doesn't like noise doesn't make it the right gun. Part of hunting is to make sure you are not under gunned, so when that shot turns up that wasn't as perfect as you wanted the job still gets done. Routinely, when you go out, you shoot within the capabilities of the tool you use, not on the extreme limits of the tool. 100-150 yard crows are at the extreme limit of a .22lr in anyones book. We all challenge ourselves from time to time in the field, but you don't go out every day to test the limits of yourself and your rifle on live quarry, you do that on targets!

 

My opinion, I suspect you have a different opinion!

 

Hi Deker

 

As i want to give you an interesting reply i have given a little though for you so here we go...

 

i agree with many things you have said and also disagree with many too. like you say it is important not to overstretch your guns killing range with live quarry which deserves our respect and we must be greatful we can shoot it at all for meat or sport. in fact we are privaliaged to do so and should be grateful we are at the top of the food chain.

 

however i disagree that you say i should just get out there and stop fannying around because no matter what you say time spent practicing and homing ones skill (before shooting live quarry), finding the limitations of ones self and kit and drilling good technique is developed on the range and in simulated situations which one hopes to encounter when shooting live game. in others words muscle memory and learning and improving. it best to learn in trainning that learn in theature! - have you ever heard this? so i disagree and i say time spent on the range is never wasted, thats why we have so many shooting ranges around the country and the world - a place to train and thats why we have won so many wars together with our kit and our ability to say we will never retreat and never surrender.

 

back to the main concern....

I think you are missing the point here, and also being to general which is not avisable.

 

MISSING THE POINT:

the point is a matter and question of three things:

 

1. effective killing power for the animal.

2. consitancy

3. acuracy

 

1. at 150 yards with eley sub = approx 50ftlbs. is this enought to kill a crow???? + i use exspanding ammo.

2/3.consitancy i can hit a plastic magpie centre mass (accuracy) at 50 - 100 -150 every time pritty much if the wind is not to bad.

 

if the wind is to bad i will not be shooting at any crows past 50 yards.

 

so my quesitin to you is why shouldn't i hunt to that range???

 

TO GENERAL Deker:

actually it is bad to generalise, why becuase labling a caliber or type of gun is no good. it is a matter of the indivial kit and shooter. some ammo is crap some guns are crap, some shooters are crap. any of the three = bad accuracy and consiteney so i would say in if any of these three were bad then range on a crow with a .22lr should be limited to 40 yards out of respect for the quarry. if shooter is good, and gun is good and ammo is crap then maybe 70 yards. do you get what i am saying here, what i am saying is placing a limited on a calibre or type of setup is to genral and short sighted. more important is to test the shooter and kit so see what its INDIVIDUAL PERFORMACE IS then decide where to draw the line. HENCE ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHERE I SHOULD DRAWN THE LINE. I feel that the line is 150 yards in my specific instance or in my case, but not all cases are the same. good testing BEFORE hunting is herefore key to find the limit on ones self and kit.

 

I also think in an idea world .223 is perfect for rabbit, for pest control in some situation say on a scottish moor or somthing like that, but lets get back to reality deker, as rabbit is a major pest and we don't all live on scottish moors and we don't all have deep pokets its not always sensible to spend lots of money on expensive .223 bullets when a rim fire bullet will do the same job cheaper and in some cases quieter. and yes i have see the damaged a .223 will do to a rabbit a bit like fireworks night for all the red mist guys out there. but many times, .223 is to loud, to expensive (rabbits are major pest in large numbers which means a high cost to control them = not viable), to powerful (safety issues in some situations with backstops), thats another reason why i think using that as a comparision is not really a good one.

 

and yes your shooting at 600 y was an experiment, what elese could it be. if you experiment with your gun why shouldn't i be abe to, after all its just paper.

 

all that said the debate is very interesting.

[riflehunter583 58]

painting the grass red

[richmcgin 32]

thats obvious beucase foxs are regualry within 200 y. i saw 2 last night at 110 yards. sadly i had the wrong gun.

like your 600 y experiment i have my own at 180y with the rimmy. does not mean i am going to attempt a crow out to that range with the rimmy as 150 is my limit for that. and yes i can hit the plastic magpie centre mass pritty much every time in low and medium winds with the rimmy at 150 so why not?

 

the very fact that you have tried a 600y experient is good as you were testing out your rifles and ur ability which is good in my view, thus knowing what you kit can do. but best not to critise me for dowing the same with my rimmy as i am entittle to do the same and as the threat states its just paper punching.

 

militray personel shoot out to 600 y with the standard nato round and that is very similar to the .223 and they are shooting at people so you gun is perfectly capable at that range if the taliban come knocking on your door!! but i never hinted that i you or anyone would be shooting anything at that rang. nor have i said i will shoot a crow at 180y.

 

anyhow i digress, i have never had a problem with cant with or without a spirt level, but i have had many cross over problems (pardon the pun) due to poor british craftsmanship

 

i will put this contact down to bad crossover

 

You are still missing the point entirely, 600 yards with a .223 at a range isn't an experiment, the rifle is well known to be perfectly capable at that distance under range circumstances, 1000 is capable, 1200 yards may be an experiment with it! My .223 1,300ft lb, your .22lr with Eley subs less than 100ft lb! :hmm: We have a lot of different calibres and types of ammo for a reason! I don't have any crow examples but this may help to explain what I mean, hit a rabbit at 150-200 yards with a .22lr and the odds are you may spend some time looking for the hole it made, this bunny was hit at about 180 yards with a .223 Ballistic tip! The rest of it is spread around several counties!

 

:laugh: military personal shoot and hope with a SA80 at 600 yards! :yes: The standard Nato 62g ball RG 5.56 ammo, as used by our military, is in the order of 10,000lb higher pressure than a conventional .223, and is about as accurate as a pea shooter (ok.... slight exaggeration), RG ammo in 5.56 is appalling!

 

You suggested the crows were 180 yards, apparently you are happy to try and shoot them at 150 with a .22lr, range it 10 yards out either way or get a gust of wind and you will either miss by a country mile or injure it, like I have said, targets are not fieldwork.

 

Crows at 150 yards is not the domain of the .22lr in my book, too many variables, and the fact the farmers wife doesn't like noise doesn't make it the right gun. Part of hunting is to make sure you are not under gunned, so when that shot turns up that wasn't as perfect as you wanted the job still gets done. Routinely, when you go out, you shoot within the capabilities of the tool you use, not on the extreme limits of the tool. 100-150 yard crows are at the extreme limit of a .22lr in anyones book. We all challenge ourselves from time to time in the field, but you don't go out every day to test the limits of yourself and your rifle on live quarry, you do that on targets!

 

My opinion, I suspect you have a different opinion!

 

Hi Deker

 

As i want to give you an interesting reply i have given a little though for you so here we go...

 

i agree with many things you have said and also disagree with many too. like you say it is important not to overstretch your guns killing range with live quarry which deserves our respect and we must be greatful we can shoot it at all for meat or sport. in fact we are privaliaged to do so and should be grateful we are at the top of the food chain.

 

however i disagree that you say i should just get out there and stop fannying around because no matter what you say time spent practicing and homing ones skill (before shooting live quarry), finding the limitations of ones self and kit and drilling good technique is developed on the range and in simulated situations which one hopes to encounter when shooting live game. in others words muscle memory and learning and improving. it best to learn in trainning that learn in theature! - have you ever heard this? so i disagree and i say time spent on the range is never wasted, thats why we have so many shooting ranges around the country and the world - a place to train and thats why we have won so many wars together with our kit and our ability to say we will never retreat and never surrender.

 

back to the main concern....

I think you are missing the point here, and also being to general which is not avisable.

 

MISSING THE POINT:

the point is a matter and question of three things:

 

1. effective killing power for the animal.

2. consitancy

3. acuracy

 

1. at 150 yards with eley sub = approx 50ftlbs. is this enought to kill a crow???? + i use exspanding ammo.

2/3.consitancy i can hit a plastic magpie centre mass (accuracy) at 50 - 100 -150 every time pritty much if the wind is not to bad.

 

if the wind is to bad i will not be shooting at any crows past 50 yards.

 

so my quesitin to you is why shouldn't i hunt to that range???

 

TO GENERAL Deker:

actually it is bad to generalise, why becuase labling a caliber or type of gun is no good. it is a matter of the indivial kit and shooter. some ammo is crap some guns are crap, some shooters are crap. any of the three = bad accuracy and consiteney so i would say in if any of these three were bad then range on a crow with a .22lr should be limited to 40 yards out of respect for the quarry. if shooter is good, and gun is good and ammo is crap then maybe 70 yards. do you get what i am saying here, what i am saying is placing a limited on a calibre or type of setup is to genral and short sighted. more important is to test the shooter and kit so see what its INDIVIDUAL PERFORMACE IS then decide where to draw the line. HENCE ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHERE I SHOULD DRAWN THE LINE. I feel that the line is 150 yards in my specific instance or in my case, but not all cases are the same. good testing BEFORE hunting is herefore key to find the limit on ones self and kit.

 

I also think in an idea world .223 is perfect for rabbit, for pest control in some situation say on a scottish moor or somthing like that, but lets get back to reality deker, as rabbit is a major pest and we don't all live on scottish moors and we don't all have deep pokets its not always sensible to spend lots of money on expensive .223 bullets when a rim fire bullet will do the same job cheaper and in some cases quieter. and yes i have see the damaged a .223 will do to a rabbit a bit like fireworks night for all the red mist guys out there. but many times, .223 is to loud, to expensive (rabbits are major pest in large numbers which means a high cost to control them = not viable), to powerful (safety issues in some situations with backstops), thats another reason why i think using that as a comparision is not really a good one.

 

and yes your shooting at 600 y was an experiment, what elese could it be. if you experiment with your gun why shouldn't i be abe to, after all its just paper.

 

all that said the debate is very interesting.

like it.

[Deker 3,450]

Hi Deker

 

As i want to give you an interesting reply i have given a little though for you so here we go...

 

i agree with many things you have said and also disagree with many too. like you say it is important not to overstretch your guns killing range with live quarry which deserves our respect and we must be greatful we can shoot it at all for meat or sport. in fact we are privaliaged to do so and should be grateful we are at the top of the food chain.

 

however i disagree that you say i should just get out there and stop fannying around because no matter what you say time spent practicing and homing ones skill (before shooting live quarry), finding the limitations of ones self and kit and drilling good technique is developed on the range and in simulated situations which one hopes to encounter when shooting live game. in others words muscle memory and learning and improving. it best to learn in trainning that learn in theature! - have you ever heard this? so i disagree and i say time spent on the range is never wasted, I have never said that, I have qualified my responses thats why we have so many shooting ranges around the country and the world - a place to train and thats why we have won so many wars together with our kit and our ability to say we will never retreat and never surrender.

back to the main concern....

I think you are missing the point here, and also being to general which is not avisable.

 

MISSING THE POINT:

the point is a matter and question of three things:

 

1. effective killing power for the animal.

2. consitancy

3. acuracy

 

1. at 150 yards with eley sub = approx 50ftlbs. is this enought to kill a crow???? + i use exspanding ammo. What are Eley Subs if not expanding?

2/3.consitancy i can hit a plastic magpie centre mass (accuracy) at 50 - 100 -150 every time pritty much if the wind is not to bad.

There is no debate about the retained energy of a .22lr sub at 150 yards to stop a rabbit, etc, your problem is always going to be accuracy and consistency IN THE FIELD, it isn't a target range! I can achieve V Bulls at 200 yards with my .22lr, sometimes, that doesn't mean it is suitable to use in the field at that distance! My .223 has more than enough energy to kill a rabbit at 2 MILES, and my .308 probably at about 3 Miles, but I don't go out and try.

 

if the wind is to bad i will not be shooting at any crows past 50 yards.

 

so my quesitin to you is why shouldn't i hunt to that range???

Because the range isn't the Field and the opportunity to replicate a one off cold shot in the field is not the same as on the range. I know MANY target shooters who regularly shoot out to 1000 yards, and their accuracy is incredible, yet, with their skills they would not consider live quarry at anything like that distance. Go down to ANY .22lr club and ask their team members their thoughts on 150 yard crow bashing work with a .22lr. They may well invite you to join them if you show them your target work, but they won't say the calibre is suitable for daily field use at that distance!

 

TO GENERAL Deker:

actually it is bad to generalise, why becuase labling a caliber or type of gun is no good. it is a matter of the indivial kit and shooter. some ammo is crap some guns are crap, some shooters are crap. any of the three = bad accuracy and consiteney so i would say in if any of these three were bad then range on a crow with a .22lr should be limited to 40 yards out of respect for the quarry. if shooter is good, and gun is good and ammo is crap then maybe 70 yards. do you get what i am saying here, what i am saying is placing a limited on a calibre or type of setup is to genral and short sighted. more important is to test the shooter and kit so see what its INDIVIDUAL PERFORMACE IS then decide where to draw the line. HENCE ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHERE I SHOULD DRAWN THE LINE. I feel that the line is 150 yards in my specific instance or in my case, but not all cases are the same. good testing BEFORE hunting is herefore key to find the limit on ones self and kit. Suggesting 100-150 yards is at the extreme range of a .22lr for daily field work is not to general, it is a fact. Suggesting 60-80yards may be to far with a .22lr for others may also be true. Where is your zero? A 40g .22lr has an arc like falling off a cliff at distance, wherever your zero, it is also slow and susceptible to winds, heat eddies and atmospheric variations you cannot even see. Add to that triggers and shooters variables and the answer is simple. It is not predictable enough for consistent humane kills at those distances. That is not just down to an individuals performance, it is down to the calibre and ammo as well.

 

I also think in an idea world .223 is perfect for rabbit, for pest control in some situation say on a scottish moor or somthing like that, but lets get back to reality deker, as rabbit is a major pest and we don't all live on scottish moors and we don't all have deep pokets its not always sensible to spend lots of money on expensive .223 bullets when a rim fire bullet will do the same job cheaper and in some cases quieter. and yes i have see the damaged a .223 will do to a rabbit a bit like fireworks night for all the red mist guys out there. but many times, .223 is to loud, to expensive (rabbits are major pest in large numbers which means a high cost to control them = not viable), to powerful (safety issues in some situations with backstops), thats another reason why i think using that as a comparision is not really a good one. You just don't get it do you.

 

and yes your shooting at 600 y was an experiment, What are you talking about, all I can assume is you are calling ALL target work an experiment! what elese could it be. if you experiment with your gun why shouldn't i be abe to, after all its just paper.

 

all that said the debate is very interesting.

 

I have been doing this a VERY long time, I have 8 FAC tools and an assortment of shotguns and air rifles/pistols. This is how I make a living and is also my sport, and despite what many think I will be the first to admit I don't know it all. What my experience has brought me is familiarity with MANY rifles and ammo types, I have a good idea of the suitability and limits of each, and their different ammo, in many many situations, that's why I have so many rifles, 2 of them are .22lr, the rest are all different, I take out the most suitable rifle for every job, I don't take out a .22lr to shoot foxes at 200 yards, and I don't take out a .308 to shoot a fox in a Hay Barn at 20 yards! I don't know how much experience you have, but you obviously lack multiple calibre experience, and your comments show a naivety of inexperience whatever you may think, I am not making that suggestion as an insult, but you are just not getting it, for instance, where have I suggested you get a .223 to shoot your bunnies/crows, yet you launch into a they are too expensive and noisy and not required response. I can't help thinking that if you tried the likes of a HMR, WMR, Hornet, .204, .223 etc you would understand why a .22lr is not a 150 yard Daily Crow bashing tool, despite what you think now!

 

Like I have said, my opinion! Then again you could always listen to richmcgin who will be more than happy to tell you I know squat diddly and I'm talking out of my backside.

 

[richmcgin 32]

Actually i did say that some of the stuff you say Deker is good stuff but i also said that some of it is dribble in my opinion.

I dont much like the agumental approach some people on here have some times it is better to express an opinion and leave it there. but i must admit that a good discusion can be informative and helpful to all. as you can imagine i have followed this tread and foresaw Riflehunter`s responce and if you look back to the original post and your reply, you should have just called him a liar and been done with it.

Just my opinion you understand.

[Simonrees 45]

My eyes are bleeding after reading that green font!

[thursodog 353]

GONE SHOOTING :whistling: :whistling:

[riflehunter583 58]

Hi Deker

 

As i want to give you an interesting reply i have given a little though for you so here we go...

 

i agree with many things you have said and also disagree with many too. like you say it is important not to overstretch your guns killing range with live quarry which deserves our respect and we must be greatful we can shoot it at all for meat or sport. in fact we are privaliaged to do so and should be grateful we are at the top of the food chain.

 

however i disagree that you say i should just get out there and stop fannying around because no matter what you say time spent practicing and homing ones skill (before shooting live quarry), finding the limitations of ones self and kit and drilling good technique is developed on the range and in simulated situations which one hopes to encounter when shooting live game. in others words muscle memory and learning and improving. it best to learn in trainning that learn in theature! - have you ever heard this? so i disagree and i say time spent on the range is never wasted, I have never said that, I have qualified my responses thats why we have so many shooting ranges around the country and the world - a place to train and thats why we have won so many wars together with our kit and our ability to say we will never retreat and never surrender.

back to the main concern....

I think you are missing the point here, and also being to general which is not avisable.

 

MISSING THE POINT:

the point is a matter and question of three things:

 

1. effective killing power for the animal.

2. consitancy

3. acuracy

 

1. at 150 yards with eley sub = approx 50ftlbs. is this enought to kill a crow???? + i use exspanding ammo. What are Eley Subs if not expanding?

2/3.consitancy i can hit a plastic magpie centre mass (accuracy) at 50 - 100 -150 every time pritty much if the wind is not to bad.

There is no debate about the retained energy of a .22lr sub at 150 yards to stop a rabbit, etc, your problem is always going to be accuracy and consistency IN THE FIELD, it isn't a target range! I can achieve V Bulls at 200 yards with my .22lr, sometimes, that doesn't mean it is suitable to use in the field at that distance! My .223 has more than enough energy to kill a rabbit at 2 MILES, and my .308 probably at about 3 Miles, but I don't go out and try.

 

if the wind is to bad i will not be shooting at any crows past 50 yards.

 

so my quesitin to you is why shouldn't i hunt to that range???

Because the range isn't the Field and the opportunity to replicate a one off cold shot in the field is not the same as on the range. I know MANY target shooters who regularly shoot out to 1000 yards, and their accuracy is incredible, yet, with their skills they would not consider live quarry at anything like that distance. Go down to ANY .22lr club and ask their team members their thoughts on 150 yard crow bashing work with a .22lr. They may well invite you to join them if you show them your target work, but they won't say the calibre is suitable for daily field use at that distance!

 

TO GENERAL Deker:

actually it is bad to generalise, why becuase labling a caliber or type of gun is no good. it is a matter of the indivial kit and shooter. some ammo is crap some guns are crap, some shooters are crap. any of the three = bad accuracy and consiteney so i would say in if any of these three were bad then range on a crow with a .22lr should be limited to 40 yards out of respect for the quarry. if shooter is good, and gun is good and ammo is crap then maybe 70 yards. do you get what i am saying here, what i am saying is placing a limited on a calibre or type of setup is to genral and short sighted. more important is to test the shooter and kit so see what its INDIVIDUAL PERFORMACE IS then decide where to draw the line. HENCE ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHERE I SHOULD DRAWN THE LINE. I feel that the line is 150 yards in my specific instance or in my case, but not all cases are the same. good testing BEFORE hunting is herefore key to find the limit on ones self and kit. Suggesting 100-150 yards is at the extreme range of a .22lr for daily field work is not to general, it is a fact. Suggesting 60-80yards may be to far with a .22lr for others may also be true. Where is your zero? A 40g .22lr has an arc like falling off a cliff at distance, wherever your zero, it is also slow and susceptible to winds, heat eddies and atmospheric variations you cannot even see. Add to that triggers and shooters variables and the answer is simple. It is not predictable enough for consistent humane kills at those distances. That is not just down to an individuals performance, it is down to the calibre and ammo as well.

 

I also think in an idea world .223 is perfect for rabbit, for pest control in some situation say on a scottish moor or somthing like that, but lets get back to reality deker, as rabbit is a major pest and we don't all live on scottish moors and we don't all have deep pokets its not always sensible to spend lots of money on expensive .223 bullets when a rim fire bullet will do the same job cheaper and in some cases quieter. and yes i have see the damaged a .223 will do to a rabbit a bit like fireworks night for all the red mist guys out there. but many times, .223 is to loud, to expensive (rabbits are major pest in large numbers which means a high cost to control them = not viable), to powerful (safety issues in some situations with backstops), thats another reason why i think using that as a comparision is not really a good one. You just don't get it do you.

 

and yes your shooting at 600 y was an experiment, What are you talking about, all I can assume is you are calling ALL target work an experiment! what elese could it be. if you experiment with your gun why shouldn't i be abe to, after all its just paper.

 

all that said the debate is very interesting.

 

I have been doing this a VERY long time, I have 8 FAC tools and an assortment of shotguns and air rifles/pistols. This is how I make a living and is also my sport, and despite what many think I will be the first to admit I don't know it all. What my experience has brought me is familiarity with MANY rifles and ammo types, I have a good idea of the suitability and limits of each, and their different ammo, in many many situations, that's why I have so many rifles, 2 of them are .22lr, the rest are all different, I take out the most suitable rifle for every job, I don't take out a .22lr to shoot foxes at 200 yards, and I don't take out a .308 to shoot a fox in a Hay Barn at 20 yards! I don't know how much experience you have, but you obviously lack multiple calibre experience, and your comments show a naivety of inexperience whatever you may think, I am not making that suggestion as an insult, but you are just not getting it, for instance, where have I suggested you get a .223 to shoot your bunnies/crows, yet you launch into a they are too expensive and noisy and not required response. I can't help thinking that if you tried the likes of a HMR, WMR, Hornet, .204, .223 etc you would understand why a .22lr is not a 150 yard Daily Crow bashing tool, despite what you think now!

 

Like I have said, my opinion! Then again you could always listen to richmcgin who will be more than happy to tell you I know squat diddly and I'm talking out of my backside.

 

 

freezing tonight not a rabbit or fox in sight!

 

deker lad i obviously have much less experience that yourself if what you say is true, and no i have not shot the rifles such as .17 rem and .204 which would be an excellent crow bashing round if a little expensive and high maintenance. sometimes the way you write comes across as a little arrogant at times fact. i always listen to other peoples views and arguments before dismissing then if not reasonable as you never know something someone else has to say may just be right no matter how much experience one has!

however its obvious you are the one that don't get it as you cannot dispute that if the accuracy, consistency and effective killing power is there then its enough for the job and really there is no argument. its just that you cannot accept that you are wrong for a change. factually a number of different types of weapon will do the job in question very well including the .22lr. i am sure the others will do the job better. that does not mean the .22lr is not up to the task if ammo, shooter and gun are working well. fact is and that you cannot accept, that people all around you and in every forum shoot vermin at these sorts of ranges all the time admitted or not with .22lr. sure some will be missing but others won't be. no matter how much you do or say many many people will be shooting out further than me. people shoot crows magpie and the like further out than what i will be doing. me my ammo and gun is capable out to 150 max - fact.

 

an no the .22lr is quiet stable in reasonable winds what you said is just incorrect. i would have though with your expeince you would know this.

 

alot of experienced shooters and hunters have told me this before .22lr 40 grain holds well in the wind!! i cannot belive you say it does not. a very good shooter who shot for 40 years told me this.

 

so like i said some of the things u say i agree with and others i don't.

 

just out of interest, from your experience do you think it possible to regularly hit at small target like a magpie's centre mass at 600yards with your .223? if you can as i can with .22lr at 150y then your comparison in an older post is reasonable and i will accept it a reasoable. but if you cannot 9/10 times then your comparison is a little far fetched.

Edited February 4, 2012 by riflehunter583

[Deker 3,450]

You haven't read what I have said, you haven't understood, and you have misquoted and put your own slant on things to justify your case. Perhaps one day you will understand!

:bye:

Edited February 3, 2012 by Deker

[tegater 789]

Hi Deker

 

As i want to give you an interesting reply i have given a little though for you so here we go...

 

i agree with many things you have said and also disagree with many too. like you say it is important not to overstretch your guns killing range with live quarry which deserves our respect and we must be greatful we can shoot it at all for meat or sport. in fact we are privaliaged to do so and should be grateful we are at the top of the food chain.

 

however i disagree that you say i should just get out there and stop fannying around because no matter what you say time spent practicing and homing ones skill (before shooting live quarry), finding the limitations of ones self and kit and drilling good technique is developed on the range and in simulated situations which one hopes to encounter when shooting live game. in others words muscle memory and learning and improving. it best to learn in trainning that learn in theature! - have you ever heard this? so i disagree and i say time spent on the range is never wasted, I have never said that, I have qualified my responses thats why we have so many shooting ranges around the country and the world - a place to train and thats why we have won so many wars together with our kit and our ability to say we will never retreat and never surrender.

back to the main concern....

I think you are missing the point here, and also being to general which is not avisable.

 

MISSING THE POINT:

the point is a matter and question of three things:

 

1. effective killing power for the animal.

2. consitancy

3. acuracy

 

1. at 150 yards with eley sub = approx 50ftlbs. is this enought to kill a crow???? + i use exspanding ammo. What are Eley Subs if not expanding?

2/3.consitancy i can hit a plastic magpie centre mass (accuracy) at 50 - 100 -150 every time pritty much if the wind is not to bad.

There is no debate about the retained energy of a .22lr sub at 150 yards to stop a rabbit, etc, your problem is always going to be accuracy and consistency IN THE FIELD, it isn't a target range! I can achieve V Bulls at 200 yards with my .22lr, sometimes, that doesn't mean it is suitable to use in the field at that distance! My .223 has more than enough energy to kill a rabbit at 2 MILES, and my .308 probably at about 3 Miles, but I don't go out and try.

 

if the wind is to bad i will not be shooting at any crows past 50 yards.

 

so my quesitin to you is why shouldn't i hunt to that range???

Because the range isn't the Field and the opportunity to replicate a one off cold shot in the field is not the same as on the range. I know MANY target shooters who regularly shoot out to 1000 yards, and their accuracy is incredible, yet, with their skills they would not consider live quarry at anything like that distance. Go down to ANY .22lr club and ask their team members their thoughts on 150 yard crow bashing work with a .22lr. They may well invite you to join them if you show them your target work, but they won't say the calibre is suitable for daily field use at that distance!

 

TO GENERAL Deker:

actually it is bad to generalise, why becuase labling a caliber or type of gun is no good. it is a matter of the indivial kit and shooter. some ammo is crap some guns are crap, some shooters are crap. any of the three = bad accuracy and consiteney so i would say in if any of these three were bad then range on a crow with a .22lr should be limited to 40 yards out of respect for the quarry. if shooter is good, and gun is good and ammo is crap then maybe 70 yards. do you get what i am saying here, what i am saying is placing a limited on a calibre or type of setup is to genral and short sighted. more important is to test the shooter and kit so see what its INDIVIDUAL PERFORMACE IS then decide where to draw the line. HENCE ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHERE I SHOULD DRAWN THE LINE. I feel that the line is 150 yards in my specific instance or in my case, but not all cases are the same. good testing BEFORE hunting is herefore key to find the limit on ones self and kit. Suggesting 100-150 yards is at the extreme range of a .22lr for daily field work is not to general, it is a fact. Suggesting 60-80yards may be to far with a .22lr for others may also be true. Where is your zero? A 40g .22lr has an arc like falling off a cliff at distance, wherever your zero, it is also slow and susceptible to winds, heat eddies and atmospheric variations you cannot even see. Add to that triggers and shooters variables and the answer is simple. It is not predictable enough for consistent humane kills at those distances. That is not just down to an individuals performance, it is down to the calibre and ammo as well.

 

I also think in an idea world .223 is perfect for rabbit, for pest control in some situation say on a scottish moor or somthing like that, but lets get back to reality deker, as rabbit is a major pest and we don't all live on scottish moors and we don't all have deep pokets its not always sensible to spend lots of money on expensive .223 bullets when a rim fire bullet will do the same job cheaper and in some cases quieter. and yes i have see the damaged a .223 will do to a rabbit a bit like fireworks night for all the red mist guys out there. but many times, .223 is to loud, to expensive (rabbits are major pest in large numbers which means a high cost to control them = not viable), to powerful (safety issues in some situations with backstops), thats another reason why i think using that as a comparision is not really a good one. You just don't get it do you.

 

and yes your shooting at 600 y was an experiment, What are you talking about, all I can assume is you are calling ALL target work an experiment! what elese could it be. if you experiment with your gun why shouldn't i be abe to, after all its just paper.

 

all that said the debate is very interesting.

 

I have been doing this a VERY long time, I have 8 FAC tools and an assortment of shotguns and air rifles/pistols. This is how I make a living and is also my sport, and despite what many think I will be the first to admit I don't know it all. What my experience has brought me is familiarity with MANY rifles and ammo types, I have a good idea of the suitability and limits of each, and their different ammo, in many many situations, that's why I have so many rifles, 2 of them are .22lr, the rest are all different, I take out the most suitable rifle for every job, I don't take out a .22lr to shoot foxes at 200 yards, and I don't take out a .308 to shoot a fox in a Hay Barn at 20 yards! I don't know how much experience you have, but you obviously lack multiple calibre experience, and your comments show a naivety of inexperience whatever you may think, I am not making that suggestion as an insult, but you are just not getting it, for instance, where have I suggested you get a .223 to shoot your bunnies/crows, yet you launch into a they are too expensive and noisy and not required response. I can't help thinking that if you tried the likes of a HMR, WMR, Hornet, .204, .223 etc you would understand why a .22lr is not a 150 yard Daily Crow bashing tool, despite what you think now!

 

Like I have said, my opinion! Then again you could always listen to richmcgin who will be more than happy to tell you I know squat diddly and I'm talking out of my backside.

 

 

freezing tonight not a rabbit or fox in sight!

 

deker lad i obviously have much less experience that yourself if what you say is true, and no i have not shot the rifles such as .17 rem and .204 which would be an excellent crow bashing round if a little expensive and high maintenance. sometimes the way you write comes across as a little arrogant at times fact. i always listen to other peoples views and arguments before dismissing then if not reasonable as you never know something someone else has to say may just be right no matter how much experience one has!

however its obvious you are the one that don't get it as you cannot dispute that if the accuracy, consistency and effective killing power is there then its enough for the job and really there is no argument. its just that you cannot accept that you are wrong for a change. factually a number of different types of weapon will do the job in question very well including the .22lr. i am sure the others will do the job better. that does not mean the .22lr is not up to the task if ammo, shooter and gun are working well. fact is and that you cannot accept, that people all around you and in every forum shoot vermin at these sorts of ranges all the time admitted or not with .22lr. sure some will be missing but others won't be. no matter how much you do or say many many people will be shooting out further than me. people shoot crows magpie and the like further out than what i will be doing. me my ammo and gun is capable out to 150 max - fact.

 

an no the .22lr is quiet stable in reasonable winds what you said is just incorrect. i would have though with your expeince you would know this.

 

alot of experienced shooters and hunters have told me this before .22lr 40 grain holds well in the wind!! fact i cannot belive you say it does not. a very good shooter who shot for 40 years told me this.

 

so like i said some of the things u say i agree with and others i don't.

 

just out of interest, from your experience do you think it possible to regularly hit at small target like a magpie's centre mass at 600yards with your .223? if you can as i can with .22lr at 150y then your comparison in an older post is reasonable and i will accept it a reasoable. but if you cannot 9/10 times then your comparison is a little far fetched.

What amazes me, is the shooters that slag of the .17hmr because of the wind, but say the .22rf is better!

The .22rf is probably the worst round out there for the wind.

 

I have to work very hard to get long kills with the hmr, but the .22 should be treated with the same respect.