Probably Been Done Before But 223. Or 22-250 For Fox ?

[ianm 2,594]

 

 

 

Why's that then? Are the foxes deader?

 

 

Ha ha.

 

I guess that depends where you shoot them!

 

It's all about mistakes and margins.

 

 

While I agree in theory that more ft-lbs should be more forgiving if you do cock up the shot..... In reality, my opinion of that is, its simply not true!

 

That is based on the fact that I've shot a 220 swift and .223 week in week out for over two years.... both using 40grn Nosler BTs....

 

There is a considerable speed difference between the two with the swift pushing over 4000fps (slightly faster than the 22-250).... But having seen hundreds of foxes shot with both calibres using the same bullet...None is more deadly than the other... I've seen just as many foxes run after a direct hit in the boiler room from the swift as I have the .223.

 

There are obviously pros and cons to both....the main advantage I see with the faster rounds are, they are marginally flatter, but when lamping 99% of shots are sub 250m anyway so can you really take advantage of that inch or two once past 200...... Personally I think with either calibre you will end up with the same result, but one will be a bit louder and use a bit more powder....

 

 

I agree and also I don't! Again I believe it comes down to energy transferrence. TBH, I'm not impressed by the .220 Swift. No doubt it's the most powerful .22cf vanilla, but again I personally agree with you in so far as I don't believe you get the same energy transferrence as some of the lesser rounds. Maybe it's just too fast. To my eyes, the most explosive .22Cf's are (well bit of licence with the 1st one on the .22 bit) .204 Ruger, .22-250. Personally not convinced by the .204 because whilst the destruction is impressive, there have been some issues in the past with the calibre and certain bullet weights. .22-250 certainly impresses. The others fall somewhere in between in destruction in my opinion. I suspect .220 swift might be better on small deer, (although ironically there you don't want explsovie performance and would probably choose a round to suit with more controlled expansion), but on fox I've seen more explosive results from .22-250. Only my opinion though and others may disagree.

 

What I would say personally though, is any .22CF will despatch fox very well within it's own limitations of reasoanble range. As Charlie says, if you need more gun, for more range, look to the .243 and a light round. At the end of the day, the choice of .22CF calibre or .22CF vs .243, in the OP's instance is more liekly to come down to range considerations and ballistics than mere out and out terminal performance. Where out and out range isn't an issue, then choice come down to the usual considerations - cost, noise, margin for error etc.

 

 

 

 

 

The only issues with .204 are in your head, have you ever owned one and used it nightly for several years. No thought not!

 

Buy one, stop clap trapping on here, then come back in a couple of years with an informed opinion instead of making it up as you go along, ( sat in your armchair of course ).

[Deker 3,453]

There is no right or wrong answer to the OP.

 

The calibre/ammo decision should be based on land and quarry, not personal opinion of others.

 

Many love the 22-250, frankly I don't get it, if you need that much simply get a .243 and have done. A .222 or .223 will do all but anything a 22-250 can do in the right hands. If distance is an issue then you will be much better with the .243 again over a 22-250, because in reality a 22-250 will only give you a few yards on the .223!

 

ATB!

[DeerhoundLurcherMan 997]

I agree Deker, but the reason some will have the .22/250 instead of the .243 is that they, like me don't have an open ticket and the land they have permission to shoot on is only cleared for .22 centrefire.

[Alsone 789]

 

 

The only issues with .204 are in your head, have you ever owned one and used it nightly for several years. No thought not!

 

Obviously Ian it must all be in my imagination:

 

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2416895

 

http://www.trapperman.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/5319779/Re:_.204_Pelt_Damage

 

http://ukvarminting.com/forums/topic/20235-bullet-break-up-204/

 

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=454154

 

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f30/help-204-ruger-139482/index2.html

 

I could go on. Suffice to say there's plenty of evidence out there of genuine users experiencing splash with .204. Most seems to be restricted to particular bullet weights or brands. As I said above, there's no doubt the terminal performance of .204 is up there with the best of the .22 CF's provided you don't get any bullet issues. If you've got bullets that work consistently, then I'm not going to knock it.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Alsone

[cheggs1978 0]

223 all you need plenty of power and range,barrel last longer,no problem getting ammunition if you want to shoot further get a 243

[Graham M 36]

Just read this and I'm amazed at how upset people get over these issues. I had a really accurate .223 Remington..............which I sold because I thought I needed a .243 because I was shooting over bigger fields. Turns out I still shoot foxes at @ the same distance only now it costs twice as much to reload. I have a .308 for deer so the .243 sees little use in that dep't. So unless you need a rifle that will double up as a deer rifle, stick with a .223.

Had a run-in some years ago with an armchair warrior who was adamant that a 22-250 was "Too much gun for foxes". Turned out he was a target shooter who had just started shooting in the field................................and, of course, knew everything.

 

If you want a particular rifle, be it .204Rug, .222Rem, .223Rem, .22-250Rem or even a humble .22Hornet then go for it. Just don't base your choice on urban legend and hearsay.

 

G

[charlie caller 3,654]

Spot on Graham, I have shot dozens of foxes with the .22 hornet when I had it, very rarely feeling undergunned, sure my .243 can double the range of the hornet and probably quite a lot more, do I often need the extra? Probably no more than a few times a year.

[David Aiken 253]

.243! Cover most UK requirement and as you have 600 acres..........

[Dutch hunter 2]

It's personal that's all.

 

I've been shooting with 22-250 for some years nog and i'm very happy with it. Reload them myself and it al works very well so it's just been great fun for me.

 

My friend shoots with .243. I think that's a great one also.. But once you stick to something..

 

If you ask me.. There are now bad kalibers, only bad shooters...

[foxtrotoscar 35]

Just read through this thread and no surprises TBH. I have all three main players for fox .223, 22-250, and .243. Don't ask me why! All do the job very well at realistic ranges. The only cal I saw mentioned in this thread which I feel isn't well suited is the .17 HMR. I've shot a few with it at close range. Not convinced it's humane (enough gun) myself and headshots on fox are a no no for myself so unsuitable for fox IMO, although legal.

Edited May 25, 2016 by foxtrotoscar

[SportingShooter 0]

Just read through this thread and no surprises TBH. I have all three main players for fox .223, 22-250, and .243. Don't ask me why! All do the job very well at realistic ranges. The only cal I saw mentioned in this thread which I feel isn't well suited is the .17 HMR. I've shot a few with it at close range. Not convinced it's humane (enough gun) myself and headshots on fox are a no no for myself so unsuitable for fox IMO, although legal.

As I was reading your post, I could hear that can of worms being flung right open!

[Deker 3,453]

 

Just read through this thread and no surprises TBH. I have all three main players for fox .223, 22-250, and .243. Don't ask me why! All do the job very well at realistic ranges. The only cal I saw mentioned in this thread which I feel isn't well suited is the .17 HMR. I've shot a few with it at close range. Not convinced it's humane (enough gun) myself and headshots on fox are a no no for myself so unsuitable for fox IMO, although legal.

As I was reading your post, I could hear that can of worms being flung right open!

 

 

[walshie 2,804]