Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mark williams

Zero Ranges For Sub 12Ft Lb And Fac Air.

Recommended Posts

Well because the weathers crap and stuck indoors, I`ll raise the issue again with fac air involved also if you will.

.22 cal

 

Personally, in .22 cal, with an AA Field doing 11.5 ft/lbs I zero at 27 yds. The pellet " never goes above" the 1" kill zone from 8yds to 31.5 yds, = meaning " no hold under" required, only " Hold over" kicks in after 31.5 yds.

Some zero at 30 yds and that means your pellet is " OUT" of the 1 inch kill zone most of the flight.

 

Shoot at an extra strong mint for example,- you should hit it every time with a 27 yd zero from 8yds to 31.5 yds.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

.177 cal

 

 

Personally, in .177 cal, with an 8.4 g pellet doing say 770 ft/sec I like to zero at 38 yds.

The flight path of my pellet stays within the 1 inch kill zone from ( half inch below or above centre) from 10 yds to 41 yds.

 

The extra strong mint should be struck with every shot from 10 to 41 yds.

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

F.A.C. .22 15.9 gn AA Field at 900 ft/sec.

 

Picked this snippet of info up from the Editor of Air Gunner magazine I found in the house by accident :whistling:

 

An fac rifle using AA Fields 15.9 grain pellets travelling at 900 ft/sec gives you an extra 15 yds of flat trajectory.

Just 100 or so ft/sec more than the sub 12 ft/lb .177.

Yes the .22 retains it`s velocity better and the editor states he will hunt out to 50 yds with it,- maybe 55yds on a perfect day,- is all the extra effort to get fac worth 15 yds in .22 ?

 

A rimfire doing 90 ft/lbs and poor marksmanship will result in a rabbit running away shot because the shot placement was poor.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Should prove interesting :hmm:

 

For me though,- "accuracy" ( shot placement) "trumps power" and "fieldcraft" also "trumps power" with airguns.

 

 

Rainy afternoon becomes interesting,- I hope.

 

atvb.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Quote:- A rimfire doing 90 ft/lbs and poor marksmanship will result in a rabbit running away shot because the shot placement was poor.




This also applies to every gun including a shotgun Mark. Without doubt, accuracy and field craft are involved with all live quarry hunting sports so really providing the person actually using the gun is not an idiot and shoots to both his accurate distance limit and the gun's limit, there is no case to answer in terms of power as each gun class will have it's own 'safe' killing distance and so will the person shooting the gun.


The problem comes about when a person THINKS an increase in power (such as FAC rated guns) means greater success in the field. As FAC rated air rifles vary in power levels according to the manufacturer's specification so comparing some figures given in a magazine doesn't cover ALL FAC rated guns. For example the Rapid which is on hold for me is rated at 28fps but an FX Wildcat is rated at 47fps and I think has a power level adjustment so one set of figures is meaningless...........................but interesting none the less mate.



Phil


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Mark dose not know field craft Phil

 

he dose all his shooting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sitting on his ass

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

only saying like

 

 

 

 

 

atvbmac :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

Quote:- A rimfire doing 90 ft/lbs and poor marksmanship will result in a rabbit running away shot because the shot placement was poor.

This also applies to every gun including a shotgun Mark. Without doubt, accuracy and field craft are involved with all live quarry hunting sports so really providing the person actually using the gun is not an idiot and shoots to both his accurate distance limit and the gun's limit, there is no case to answer in terms of power as each gun class will have it's own 'safe' killing distance and so will the person shooting the gun.

The problem comes about when a person THINKS an increase in power (such as FAC rated guns) means greater success in the field. As FAC rated air rifles vary in power levels according to the manufacturer's specification so comparing some figures given in a magazine doesn't cover ALL FAC rated guns. For example the Rapid which is on hold for me is rated at 28fps but an FX Wildcat is rated at 47fps and I think has a power level adjustment so one set of figures is meaningless...........................but interesting none the less mate.

Phil

 

 

If I remember rightly, the guy on "Ted`s Holdover" rates the high powered air rifles poor in the accuracy stakes the higher the power/ less the consistency.

Without realising it Phil the figures used in the magazine article will give 28.6 ft/lbs in .22 cal and would prove very consistent for you :hmm:

Personally I would go for .177 in fac hovering between 18 to 21 ft/lbs but I feel no need to as 11.5 "ish" does the job well.

 

Good little debate, put the replies in lads, it`s still raining.

 

 

atb

Share this post


Link to post

If I recall Mark, the power issue in the footage was an HW100 in .177 sent to Ted and was wildly uncontrollable in terms of accuracy, once it had been lowered in fps, it became spot on. The main issue was that a .177 pellet was a bit flighty with too much power which makes sense.

 

It sounds like that Rapid in .22 could be just right. I have never shot an FAC .177 so have no real comment to make but for me, the idea of a .22 with a better trajectory and a slight improvement in stopping power/distance is a win win situation.

 

Still waiting for the ticket to come through before I can get me mitts on the gun though. I spoke to the firearms dept 2 weeks ago and was told it was up for final approval so no problems showing BUT as my shotgun license expires in October, I won't get the two new licenses until then. I am inclined to phone again and ask if when it is approved, to issue them and lose a month or two, at least I can have my new rifle then we can see if it is any good.........................................it's a Rapid, of course it will be good.........I hope.

 

By the way Mark................................................the sun is cracking the paving stone here mate but the sun does shine on the righteous you know, ok I'm off.

 

Phil

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

Quote:- A rimfire doing 90 ft/lbs and poor marksmanship will result in a rabbit running away shot because the shot placement was poor.

This also applies to every gun including a shotgun Mark. Without doubt, accuracy and field craft are involved with all live quarry hunting sports so really providing the person actually using the gun is not an idiot and shoots to both his accurate distance limit and the gun's limit, there is no case to answer in terms of power as each gun class will have it's own 'safe' killing distance and so will the person shooting the gun.

The problem comes about when a person THINKS an increase in power (such as FAC rated guns) means greater success in the field. As FAC rated air rifles vary in power levels according to the manufacturer's specification so comparing some figures given in a magazine doesn't cover ALL FAC rated guns. For example the Rapid which is on hold for me is rated at 28fps but an FX Wildcat is rated at 47fps and I think has a power level adjustment so one set of figures is meaningless...........................but interesting none the less mate.

Phil

 

 

If I remember rightly, the guy on "Ted`s Holdover" rates the high powered air rifles poor in the accuracy stakes the higher the power/ less the consistency.

Without realising it Phil the figures used in the magazine article will give 28.6 ft/lbs in .22 cal and would prove very consistent for you :hmm:

Personally I would go for .177 in fac hovering between 18 to 21 ft/lbs but I feel no need to as 11.5 "ish" does the job well.

 

Good little debate, put the replies in lads, it`s still raining.

 

 

atb

 

.177 is best running at now more than 15 ft/lbs ,any more the pellet comes unstable

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

If you take the .177 up too high they end up all over the gaff. I havnt got the need for fac air but if I was I'd be going .22.

Edited by treecreeper
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

My HW80 ..22 has made a really sweet transition to FAC level performance at 23.4 Ft/lbs and I zero this rifle and my sub 12 ft/lb HW77 .22 at 35 Metres range. All I need to do is a bit of hold under at short ranges and dead on at 30 to 50 metres.

 

FAC .22 gets the pellet quicker and hit harder to the rabbits heads at sensible ranges. It is NOT about any increased range distances. But the velocity at which the pellet covers the zero ranges and hit home before the rabbit has a chance to react fast and escape, as can happen to the best shot with a sub-12 .22 rifle.

 

Field craft, good marksmanship standards and a thorough understanding of you pellet's trajectory over sensible ranges is still the most important skills of all, in my experience of both aspects of air rifle power usages.

 

There is actually little adjustment to be worked out between the two rifles I have in order that one is just as effective as the other. The only real advantage is using the extra boost to get to the rabbit faster and put it down before it has a chance to react and bolt.

 

Simon

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

People spend too much time worrying about zero range on small caliber rifles.

 

Mine are;

 

HW100 .22 @ 12ft lbs: 25 yards.

Webley Patriot .25 @ 31ft lbs: 25 yards.

Anschutz 1417 @ 98ft lbs: 25 yards

 

Not until my Browning T-Bolt in .17hmr do I change to 100 yard zero.

Share this post


Link to post

My fac airgun (.22 @ 26.6 ftlbs) is zeroed at 40 yards and is a mil dot of holdover at 60 yards on 6x mag. Even at 60 yards it hits with a good crack.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just had a look Tom, they are a hansome rifle but in the photo's they look very long or perhaps it is the fore stock that makes it look long, very nice mate, very nice indeed.

 

Phil

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just had a look Tom, they are a hansome rifle but in the photo's they look very long or perhaps it is the fore stock that makes it look long, very nice mate, very nice indeed.

 

Phil

I don't think they are overly long to me but here's a pic of mine (full lentgh) next to a barrel shortened hw99 for comparison.......

 

20160822_173020_zpspfvgfogq.jpg

 

They are very slender - my Bro had the carbine version very rare and one of the nicest guns iv ever seen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×