Which calibre for Fox ??

[darren_mc 1]

Each to their own but I went for 22-250 as when used for foxing upto 300 yards it is pretty much just point and shoot, you don't really have to think about holdover because it shoots so flat, aim for the largest centre of mass you can see and over it will go. And the added advantage is in Scotland it is a legal calibre for Roe Deer. There isn't a right answer i suppose just a few personal preferences!

 

But then, so is 223...

 

 

and the .222

[Deker 3,453]

deker there is no difference in noise to a 22/250 and a 223. not that you would no the difference when shot side buy side. the ammo is around the same as 223 from what i have seen lately, and alot of different brands are stocked in most stores

 

Lets start by saying again I suggest a 22-250 is the dedicated Fox tool!

 

But Sorry chap, I have to dissagree on noise, I have shot side by side with a .22-250 and the noise issue was apparent immediately! Choice of factory ammo is also wider for .223 than for 22-250, different situation if you are reloading!

 

That's why my choice would be .223!

 

ATB!

 

well my rifle with ase mod shooting next to my mates 223 with same mod you wouldnt no the difference. also i shoot with a lad that has 22/250ai with ase mod and even he said his rifle now was less noise then his old tikka 223 with t4 on it.

 

maybe its just down to what mod you have ?

 

Noise is always a personal thing and without meters is going to be impossible to tell, but not worth getting ouselves wound up about it!

 

ATB

[jamie g 17]

sorry deker i wasnt having a pop at you about it. it depends what mods you got. for instant today i was zeroing my rifle in with some new ammo and my friend mike made comment about the 22/250 noise. he said mine was less noise with the ase mod on it.

then a lad he has been shooting with before with 222 and t4 on it. i agree your never really no with out sound meter. and all depends on the surounding area you shoot in.

[jamie g 17]

its ok the 243 being even flatter then 22/250 and deer legal but the lads question was what foxing rifle. and fact is most forces wont give you 243 just for fox. you have to have deer to.

 

if the hmr sells i mite get 243 as we have just be given permission to shoot roe when the land owner wants them controlled and the in season of course.

 

just have to wait and see.

[ivanh 4]

.22-250 and .223 are the most poular .22 fox calibres. Both work fine with the .22-250 giving you the extra legs if you shoot many over 300 yards.

 

Id stay away from.222 and veer towards the .223.

 

Also consider the others such as .204 ruger ( alove it or hate it calibre from what I have gathered ), or .243 if youve the opportunity to controll deer as well.

 

Read up on previous posts using search button as theres loads of information already on this subject.

 

Id avoid a rimfire for foxing as a centerfire has more chance of ensuring a clean kill if you were to misplace your shot.

 

Ive never shot .22 hornet but if you were maybe willing to re-load that would be a suggestion also.

Id stay away from.222?

Edited November 9, 2009 by ivanh

[jamie g 17]

whys that the 222 is easy to reload for. very accurate and great foxing round with 40 grain ammo. mild shooting to.

[fensaluki 35]

Have to agree... I use the 22.250 .22 Hornet And the .222 and have done for many years and my personal fave by far is the .222

 

The .222 is nice and mild to shoot.No need for a heavy barrel making it nice and pointable and has pleanty enough power to stop charlie at 300yrds with a well taken shot.

 

most of the rifles mentioned will do the job nicely and its all down to personal pref. I always use to take the 22.250 along for shots over 250yards but to be fair I'm more accurate out to 300yrds with my .222 and I'm not one for taking shots much further than that any way.

 

The hornet is a lovely little round also but you must be very awear of your limits and distances with it and do need to be even more accurate with it else you could end up with pleanty of wounded fox's about and nobody wants that hey?

 

What ever cal you choose I wish you many happy nights out with your new smoke stick

[Mr_Logic 5]

The 222/223 debate has been done to death. No issues with either, but if I was buying new I would get a 223, because it's just as accurate and has a little bit more speed and grunt. Only a little bit, but why get the slightly inferior one?!

[jamie g 17]

The 222/223 debate has been done to death. No issues with either, but if I was buying new I would get a 223, because it's just as accurate and has a little bit more speed and grunt. Only a little bit, but why get the slightly inferior one?!

 

we could say that about all rifles ttho. someone says get 22/250 its better then 223. and then someone says get 243 its better then 22/250.

 

then get a 260 its better then 243 and so on. i like some of the older 222 rifles because they are built to very high spec. and the rifles on the marlket now build wise dont compare.

[nod 285]

I had the .243 put on my ticket but before i had the cash to get a rifle the fao rang and said that there were too many people already on the land that i had, 17 to be exact, the farmer just let anybody get there ticket on his land. So i had to get some more land, luckly with my job i get to go to a lot of farms and soon had some new land, but because there wasn't any deer on that land i had to have a variation, i too thought about what one and ended getting the .223 i dont need anything bigger for fox it will take them out at the ranges that i am comfortable shooting at and also cheaper to run, i got a good deal on a howa with a wildcat mod but to be honest the bang doesn't make that much difference cause the fox wont hear it, every body will have different reasons for each calibre but they all do the same job, IMHO cheers nod

[Deker 3,453]

The 222/223 debate has been done to death. No issues with either, but if I was buying new I would get a 223, because it's just as accurate and has a little bit more speed and grunt. Only a little bit, but why get the slightly inferior one?!

 

we could say that about all rifles ttho. someone says get 22/250 its better then 223. and then someone says get 243 its better then 22/250.

 

then get a 260 its better then 243 and so on. i like some of the older 222 rifles because they are built to very high spec. and the rifles on the market now build wise dont compare.

 

Like he said, the 222/223 debate has been done to death and intrinsically nothing wrong with either.

 

But times chance, and it isn't simply power, if you are NOT into reloading, and buying new today the .223 seems to make more sense!

[Mr_Logic 5]

The 222/223 debate has been done to death. No issues with either, but if I was buying new I would get a 223, because it's just as accurate and has a little bit more speed and grunt. Only a little bit, but why get the slightly inferior one?!

 

we could say that about all rifles ttho. someone says get 22/250 its better then 223. and then someone says get 243 its better then 22/250.

 

then get a 260 its better then 243 and so on. i like some of the older 222 rifles because they are built to very high spec. and the rifles on the marlket now build wise dont compare.

 

Not my point, if we talk in terms of power then we should all be using 120mm depleted uranium rounds on rabbits...

 

The .222/.223 debate is a specific niche, because the power and powder requirements of the calibres are so similar. There is no situation when one can be used but the other can't. With, say, 223 vs 22-250, you have lots of considerations such as powder usage and barrel life to consider, but with the 222/223, there is no great difference - 223 is just marginally better and more available. Therefore, why get a .222?

[jamie g 17]

Not my point, if we talk in terms of power then we should all be using 120mm depleted uranium rounds on rabbits...

 

The .222/.223 debate is a specific niche, because the power and powder requirements of the calibres are so similar. There is no situation when one can be used but the other can't. With, say, 223 vs 22-250, you have lots of considerations such as powder usage and barrel life to consider, but with the 222/223, there is no great difference - 223 is just marginally better and more available. Therefore, why get a .222?

 

fact is mr l you can get 222 very cheap and will do what the 223 will do.

 

plus you have the bonus of not only getting a cheap 222 but the build of some of the older ones

would cost you a fortune to buy in that spec for 223 today.

 

i can see what your saying about the 223 is the most popular rifle to have. but some people want to be different.

barrel wear is a problem people make up. just fox control a barrel will last 1000's of rounds

 

i do agree with you tho if you want a rifle for fox control and range use 223 is the best. it will do everthing you want it to. and reloading for it is cheap. others just like different things

Edited November 11, 2009 by jamie g

[Mr_Logic 5]

I agree you can get a .222 nice and cheap, why the other day I saw a brand new Tikka T3 for about 500 notes, not getting that in 223 for that money!

[Airborne9 4]

Quick update

 

Just spoke to my FEO and been told that they have no problem with aproving 17 HMR for fox, which im pleased with,because it may be a case that i can only get clearence for my smaller permission, at least i no i'll be covered.

As with the larger calibre have been advised to put .222 / .223 on the form.

If all goes well; what stainless synthetic options have i got in the 17 HMR thats reliable and consistant ? funds not a problem as ive got a rifle to chop in.

 

Regards