Jump to content

.177 Or .22


Recommended Posts

Also a good and interesting argument, there, and I do genuinely find the calibre controversy that has raged for years and will do for many more, hugely intriguing, but after 30+ years of shooting with air rifles of all kinds, .22 and .177 I honestly hand on heart, think that in a sub 12ftlbs rifle, .177 kills better, a bad shot is a bad shot irrespective of calibre, and I dont really buy into the margin for error thing with air rifles, any more than I do with stalking rifles, a gut shot deer is a gut shot deer no matter if its shot with a .222 or a .30-06, take woodpigeon body shots for instance, I have killed hundreds over the years with a side on body shot with a .177 if I was using a .22 I would not take a body shot on a woody, I have seen far too many over the years fly off after being hit with a .22, yes I have seen some drop, but not nearly as many as with .177 shots.

  • Like 1
Link to post

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here we go...........   Both mate. It doesn't matter. Honestly. Hit the spot and its dead.   Learn your aim points with a .22     Mount your glass as low as possible for a .177 and just aim dea

YES REZ!   It really lifts them and throws them to one side. Puts a big hole right through the skull.   The strangest encounter I ever had with a rat and my HW80 was about 15 years ago but I'll ne

Really I just think .22 is better for rabbits and .177 is best for feather. Calibre is a tool to be used but, if you shoot .177 with all confidence then that's what is working for you. For others it's

Posted Images

Surely the fact that a .177's flight path is much flatter shouldn't make it an amateurs calibre. You have to be just as good of a marksman to drop quarry with the .177. The hold over/ under can be the same as a .22's if you push the distance out a bit (obviously in low wind).

Yeah your a good shot if you can headshot rabbits at 45 yards with a .22, you'd be even more skilled if you could do it with a slingshot.

why make it hard for yourself? :huh:

A better rifle doesn't mean any less of a marksman. :victory:

  • Like 4
Link to post

Also a good and interesting argument, there, and I do genuinely find the calibre controversy that has raged for years and will do for many more, hugely intriguing, but after 30+ years of shooting with air rifles of all kinds, .22 and .177 I honestly hand on heart, think that in a sub 12ftlbs rifle, .177 kills better, a bad shot is a bad shot irrespective of calibre, and I dont really buy into the margin for error thing with air rifles, any more than I do with stalking rifles, a gut shot deer is a gut shot deer no matter if its shot with a .222 or a .30-06, take woodpigeon body shots for instance, I have killed hundreds over the years with a side on body shot with a .177 if I was using a .22 I would not take a body shot on a woody, I have seen far too many over the years fly off after being hit with a .22, yes I have seen some drop, but not nearly as many as with .177 shots.

 

Great post, and points all well made. :thumbs:

 

Of course, others have similar experience and come to the opposite conclusion which is why such debates are interesting. I tend to find that pigeons drop with a .22 at the ranges I shoot (out to 35-40yds max), as long as the shot placement is spot on. At these distances the pellet is still carrying over 70% - 80% of its energy, and so the animal should drop if the pellet is in the right place.

 

For me its not "what calibre is better?" - but what calibre works best for you. :thumbs:

  • Like 4
Link to post

Exactly. I use a .177 on magpies from about 20 yards out to 45 yards. Closer than that, I use .22, because I find that the .177 pellet tends to zip straight through the chest at close range, whereas the .22 drops 'em. That's with FAC springers, at any rate -- 13 fpe in .177, 16 fpe in .22

  • Like 1
Link to post

Also a good and interesting argument, there, and I do genuinely find the calibre controversy that has raged for years and will do for many more, hugely intriguing, but after 30+ years of shooting with air rifles of all kinds, .22 and .177 I honestly hand on heart, think that in a sub 12ftlbs rifle, .177 kills better, a bad shot is a bad shot irrespective of calibre, and I dont really buy into the margin for error thing with air rifles, any more than I do with stalking rifles, a gut shot deer is a gut shot deer no matter if its shot with a .222 or a .30-06, take woodpigeon body shots for instance, I have killed hundreds over the years with a side on body shot with a .177 if I was using a .22 I would not take a body shot on a woody, I have seen far too many over the years fly off after being hit with a .22, yes I have seen some drop, but not nearly as many as with .177 shots.

I`m with Charlie Caller here - when a wood pigeon presents a heart/ lung shot through trees, branches or spindle i have "no hesitation" in taking that shot with the .177 calibre as it smashes through the breast bone and through the heart, lungs and exits.

I will not use .22 for pigeon heart/ lung shots, - head and between the shoulder blades yes.

I own two HW 100`s one in .22 and one in .177. The .22 is never out of the cabinet.

  • Like 1
Link to post

.22 shooters aim off more for distance but .177 shooters aim off more for wind.

I think it takes more skill to aim off for wind than it does for distance as distance is a constant, however wind(especially in s wales) is ever changing. It could be argued that .177 is a harder calibre to get consistant shot placement than a .22 on any given day. :hmm: .22 forgives shot placement due to wind, .177 forgives misjudged distance.

  • Like 1
Link to post

We might disagree mate but that does not mean others might.

 

A good debate

 

atb

Indeed.

 

The post after yours. I'm a better shot with my 22 97 than I am with any of my 177's. I don't know what that's means, but it's kinda nice to know for me. I prefer 22 than 177, even on the course, it's a sweeter round, as accurate as any, and delivers proper whack on game.

  • Like 3
Link to post

My God, there's a hundred different answers here but it all leads to the same conclusion. It's how you shoot with what you have to shoot with. And how you use it. And what you use it against!, that really decides the outcome of the pellet debate.

 

I've come to a simple conclusion about which is best.

 

BOTH OF THEM. FOR SPECIFIC, EFFECTIVE VERMIN-CULLING TASKS!

 

I loath and detest the notion of unintentionally wounding my quarry. For me, both calibres are a tool to be used for the job to be done that reduces the risk.

That's why I have both calibres in my choices of rifle and an FAC .22 HW80 rifle on my licence, for certain vermin like mink, which are fast-moving, very twitchy, tough-skinned and you need to get the pellet hitting home faster with more kinetic energy than a sub-12 ft/lb rifle delivers. You can of course use sub-12 ft/lb rifles of either calibre; but the chances are, at 35 yards and over, the animal will move its head, just before your pellet reaches the intended spot and a fatal wounding resuits. Or you miss altogether.

 

The trouble with rabbits is that they too, can move just as you release the trigger. Because of this, I use .22 for rabbits as this being a larger pellet, has greater impact and shock area than a smaller .177. But that is not to say a .177 pellet is less effective because it is not.

 

Shoot either calibre pellet into the brain of a small animal or bird and you will kill it instantly!

 

But, by my experience, I have found .177 hits on rabbits have not always been successful in killing them outright on the spot. I've shot rabbits in the head with .177 and seen the poor things scream in agony into the undergrowth with eyes shot out, or, through the nasal passages. Unless you can GUARANTEE you can hit the brain every shot, every time with a .177 pellet you will find there is always a greater risk of fatally wounding the rabbit than is the case with .22. Possibly more times than most of us would care to admit to.

 

For birds such as corvids and pigeons I like to use the .177 as a hit with this, pretty well anywhere in the head is instant death. Heart and lung shots are more successfully effective with the better penetration power of .177 pellets better able to punch through tough feathers than .22 sometimes can.

 

I'm still undecided on which is actually best for squirrels.

These are extremely tough-skinned animals and I've seen a few survive a head-shot .22 hit; long enough to die with a fall from the branches some moments after being shot. Even my FAC HW80 .22 is not a dead-stopper unless I can get a clear shot on the head of a squirrel. I once hit one in the upper body with this cannon of an air rifle and it ran on to die slowly at the base of a tree. But as a rule, I take my HW80 out for squirrels to be sure of a humane kill as often as I can.

 

.177 does the job but, again, it HAS ABSOLUTELY GOT TO BE A BRAIN SHOT or it just doesn't stop the animal dead in its tracks.

 

I actually do not take any pleasure from killing every living thing I come acros but, I do it because I believe in conservation as well as controlling a pest with humanity and a respect for it not having to suffer a lingering death from gunshot of any kind. I take a pride in my marksmanship and train myself very seriously for the task of shooting to control live animals and rodents who, unfortunately have to have their numbers reduced.

 

Rats are another thing and have to be destroyed wherever we find them. But even these creatures have a right to die as painless and humane a death as possible.

 

The Anti-shooting brigade out there will always view me as an evil murdering b*****d who loves to kill a defenceless creature, regardlessly for fun.

 

This is a million miles from the truth with me. And it must be the same for all of us. How you derive your satisfaction from your shooting is a matter for you alone. For me, it's the swift, clean kill every time, as far as possible. But whatever the reasons for our shooting, let's never be, what we are always accused of being by the ignorant and blind stupid both.

 

All the best Gentlemen.

Pianoman

Edited by pianoman
  • Like 4
Link to post

Here here.

 

I have had rabbits shot with my HW100, like a definite neck shot, just below the jaw [we all know the clinical accuracy of a 100], and the f*ckers leap up in the air, and bloody leg it about 10 yards as the pellet hasn't delivered enough blow to even shock the animal. Its like they've been stung hard to drop dead a short distance away.

 

Every target shot with my 22 hasnt.

Link to post

If there were awards for the best posts in this Forum I think Simon would need to make more room in his trophy cabinet! :thumbs: Great post Simon (and Rez).

 

As I have said in this thread earlier, both calibres do the job, but we may, as shooters, be better with different ones. So the question, "Which is the best" is a nonsensical question. Pardon the pun, but its what's known as a 'loaded question' - as it forces a particular answer in a situation when there may not be one.

 

For me, purely personally, I prefer .22. They hit hard (even more so with the best pellets) and that extra thwack is important for me.

 

Simon - I've shot wild mink with a sub 12ft-lbs HW80, stone dead, head shots at 25yds (ish) so the power is certainly there in the gun. However, as I have said repeatedly on here, I don't shoot at all beyond 40yds, and typically try to stick to 35yds. These are restrictions I place on myself, and this does not reflect any failing in my kit. Within these ranges, and assuming my shot placement is good, the animal is doomed.

 

I like Simons argument about possible different calibres for different quarry. I find squirrels are tough little buggers. When I started shooting them years ago, I noticed they were, at times, harder to kill instantly than rabbits and wondered about that. I came to the conclusion that, the squirrel brain is simply much smaller and requires more skill at the same distances - so I was probably just missing the main point of impact. I would certainly have had more runners with .177. They still died of course, but not as instantly as I'd have liked. I studied some anatomical maps of the squirrel to locate, from multiple angles, where the bulk of the brain and brain stem is, and then practiced on this illustration as a target to improve my shot placement, specific to the squirrel. That improved things greatly. :thumbs: So nothing to do with calibre, more to do with my inaccuracy at that time.

 

Because I don't shoot at the ranges some of you guys here do (>40yds), head shots on birds are easier and I don't experience, on the whole, what some people here describe. I also find heart shots are effective for Magpies, Pigeons at these ranges, though nothing beats a head shot. I also find the much touted 'curved trajectory' is not as much of a problem at these ranges - even in dense woodland.

 

Great chat lads :thumbs:

 

  • Like 2
Link to post

Point taken but there are times that head shots just aren't on. I think its just the beauty of a 22, you get the extra "reassurance" perhaps. Each to there own :)

 

I taken your views mate.

  • Like 3
Link to post

Point taken but there are times that head shots just aren't on. I think its just the beauty of a 22, you get the extra "reassurance" perhaps. Each to there own :)

 

I taken your views mate.

And that to me is the beauty of the .177, I have seen exactly the same thing as Timmytree, .22 pellets bouncing off woodies, I cant honestly ever remember a .177 doing that, and as for squirrel body shots, I totally agree with Simon a head shot is best, but I have killed many many squirrels with heart and lung shots, stone dead, although I have to admit with both calibres, but I would say more with the .177, as I think the extra penetration on tough skinned tree rats, helps the pellet reach a vital area better.

  • Like 1
Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...