Centrefire novice question.

[ianm 2,594]

2 hours ago, philpot said:

Thank you deker, barrel twist was the next item as I want to be able to use on the range as well as for foxing so twist is important for range work as I understand it.  I was advised that a 1in12 for example, would not be suitable for range work unless I had, say three shots,  rest it to cool down etc etc whereas a 1 in 9 would be fine for everything, I think that was the right way round.  Howa 1500, 223 is a 1 in 9 but I think the Tikka T3x is a 1 in 12.

A bit of a mine field is this but I cannot afford to get it wrong which is why I am looking into the situation in advance of putting in for the variation.

Thanks for the advise guys, I am out of my depth here but you know that.................

Phil

Right so we have gone from a foxing/deer allrounder to a foxing/deer,target shooting rifle. I wouldn't know if any of those calibres are suitable for the type of target shooting you intend to do because i don't shoot targets. However if you intend to shoot targets then i don't believe a light sporter barrel is the option to go for, i would think the varmint barrel may be more suitable. Twist rate for 243 is generally 1-10.

[Sausagedog 7,381]

9 minutes ago, Meece said:

Pretty  much  as it is.  All this about new calls and old calls,  it's all a loads of nonsense. Dead is dead. It boils down to how deep your pocket is and how  much are you going to shoot.  Number 1 = top of the pops. =243 it will do the lot, but it is noisy and the ammo ain't cheap. = How deep is your pocket.?  ... if your just after Fox,  #2 =  22.250. Again ammo expensive and noisy. A 243 case necked down to 22. 3600 fps  #3 = 223 std round. #4 = 222 cheaper because gone out of fashion but exceptionally sweèt and accurate then if you want something a little different and a bit rarer the 220 swift or probably the king 1.7 Rem cf.  (Not 17HMR).   I would love to try a 1.7 Rem cf . == 4000+fps. Piano string accuracy out to 400 yes. But you got to ignore all the negative hype and myth stories about barrel wear and wind deviation ect.  It's like all the nonsense that is said about the 270 win. Again you don't need to drive a Ferrari flat out round town or shoot at stuff 2 miles away with a 20 power scope. Use fieldcraft to get close and you can use a 22lr.

Ps. I've got rifles in aĺl the above except the 1.7rem so I'm not biased towards any of them. =situation, size of land distance of shot, cost. How dead is dead.?

By 400 Meece 17Rem is dropping off rapidly mate. Keep it to 300 and it's ok.

And honestly, it's pants in a 10mph+ wind.

[Meece 1,957]

2 minutes ago, Sausagedog said:

By 400 Meece 17Rem is dropping off rapidly mate. Keep it to 300 and it's ok.

And honestly, it's pants in a 10mph+ wind.

Push it hard enough and it isn't  but like I've previously written,  although I'm confident taking a 300 yard shot nearly everything is about eighty paces. Thet way I can identify the target and not splog someone's  stray dog. 

[Meece 1,957]

15 minutes ago, ianm said:

Right so we have gone from a foxing/deer allrounder to a foxing/deer,target shooting rifle. I wouldn't know if any of those calibres are suitable for the type of target shooting you intend to do because i don't shoot targets. However if you intend to shoot targets then i don't believe a light sporter barrel is the option to go for, i would think the varmint barrel may be more suitable. Twist rate for 243 is generally 1-10.

Yes I agree with this.  If you are going to shoot completion on a range it is a target rifle not a hunting setup. Different beast. You don't take your Ford focus onto a race track and try to compete with a purpose built  race car.   Mind a lot of blokes go on ranges and just blast away. Some don't even check what thet did on the target.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Meece

[ianm 2,594]

15 minutes ago, Meece said:

Pretty  much  as it is.  All this about new calls and old calls,  it's all a loads of nonsense. Dead is dead. It boils down to how deep your pocket is and how  much are you going to shoot.  Number 1 = top of the pops. =243 it will do the lot, but it is noisy and the ammo ain't cheap. = How deep is your pocket.?  ... if your just after Fox,  #2 =  22.250. Again ammo expensive and noisy. A 243 case necked down to 22. 3600 fps  #3 = 223 std round. #4 = 222 cheaper because gone out of fashion but exceptionally sweèt and accurate then if you want something a little different and a bit rarer the 220 swift or probably the king 1.7 Rem cf.  (Not 17HMR).   I would love to try a 1.7 Rem cf . == 4000+fps. Piano string accuracy out to 400 yes. But you got to ignore all the negative hype and myth stories about barrel wear and wind deviation ect.  It's like all the nonsense that is said about the 270 win. Again you don't need to drive a Ferrari flat out round town or shoot at stuff 2 miles away with a 20 power scope. Use fieldcraft to get close and you can use a 22lr.

Ps. I've got rifles in aĺl the above except the 1.7rem so I'm not biased towards any of them. =situation, size of land distance of shot, cost. How dead is dead.?

You need to stick to bird books!

22.250 is not a necked down 243 it is a necked down 250.3000 savage cartridge.

I have tried several 17 rems and they are not a patch on 22.250 or .204 cartridges.

[Meece 1,957]

7 minutes ago, ianm said:

22.250 is not a necked down 243 it is a necked down 250.3000 savage cartridge.

Yes. Thank you for the correction.

[Sausagedog 7,381]

52 minutes ago, Meece said:

Push it hard enough and it isn't  but like I've previously written,  although I'm confident taking a 300 yard shot nearly everything is about eighty paces. Thet way I can identify the target and not splog someone's  stray dog. 

After  three years and a few thousand rabbits and couple hundred fox's shot all year round with one I will stick to my comments thanks

Edited June 1, 2020 by Sausagedog

[philpot 4,928]

Ah we are getting the wrong end of the stick here gentlemen, my fault.  When I refer to range shooting, it is for my pleasure not competition, not interested in that. We are having a 300mt range being put together and only 10mins from my cottage so when I said about getting the twist rate right, it is a sporting gun which at times will be used on the range and  for fox plus very occassionly the odd muntjack...................thats it.  I may well shoot 50 - 100 rounds of wmr on our own range for pleasure and this is what I have in mind for the 222 / 223 / 243 but not the same number of shots at the price they are.  

Hope that explains my interest in these guns.

Phil

[dixyhmr 62]

Bigger isn’t always better. 
I always pick up the .223 9 times out of ten as I like the fact it’s quiet, cheap accurate, doesn’t blur my nightvision with heat and smoke and it drops foxes well.

if it’s windy and I’m shootingnon big fields il use the .243.

if I had to pick one it would be .223

[shovel leaner 7,648]

Hi Phil , All I can add to what has been said is down to money . You mentioned that you may start reloading. After your initial set up cost of kit . You will find that the .223 is cheaper . Simply put , the small rifle primers are a bit cheaper than the large rifle you need for .243 the bullets themselves a bit cheaper , but it’s the powder you will use in a .243 , roughly the powder you use in two .243s is enough for three .223s . 

[Alsone 789]

17 hours ago, Meece said:

Pretty  much  as it is.  All this about new calls and old calls,  it's all a loads of nonsense. Dead is dead. It boils down to how deep your pocket is and how  much are you going to shoot.  Number 1 = top of the pops. =243 it will do the lot, but it is noisy and the ammo ain't cheap. = How deep is your pocket.?  ... if your just after Fox,  #2 =  22.250. Again ammo expensive and noisy. A 243 case necked down to 22. 3600 fps  #3 = 223 std round. #4 = 222 cheaper because gone out of fashion but exceptionally sweèt and accurate then if you want something a little different and a bit rarer the 220 swift or probably the king 1.7 Rem cf.  (Not 17HMR).   I would love to try a 1.7 Rem cf . == 4000+fps. Piano string accuracy out to 400 yes. But you got to ignore all the negative hype and myth stories about barrel wear and wind deviation ect.  It's like all the nonsense that is said about the 270 win. Again you don't need to drive a Ferrari flat out round town or shoot at stuff 2 miles away with a 20 power scope. Use fieldcraft to get close and you can use a 22lr.

Ps. I've got rifles in aĺl the above except the 1.7rem so I'm not biased towards any of them. =situation, size of land distance of shot, cost. How dead is dead.?

I personally don't agree. The reason why for me the emphasis is on terminal effect and flat shooting is flat shooting is easier to accurately place without detailed scope adjustments and terminal effect buys you a margin for poorly placed shots / wind affected shots.

If everything was perfect in life, we'd be shooting foxes at 400 yds with .22 LR HV's because technically at 400yds 42ft lbs is still lethal to fox. The reality is energy requirements are guesstimates and shots rarely occur with range marksman like accuracy in the field. What extra terminal effect buys you therefore is a margin for error on bullet placement for where you make a mistake, there's a wind gust or the subject moves. You don't need a nuclear cannon (unless planning on clearing a whole county in 1 night), but for me I'd rather purchase a bit more hydrostatic shocking effect over a slightly milder calibre and increased risk of a wounding. To that end, one reason why I'm such a fan now of .204 is because it's low recoil and terminal effect is second to none amongst .22's. I've seen swifts do less damage. Overkill, maybe, but comforting knowing you have an extra margin to cock up. That said everyone is different and calibre is a personal choice.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Alsone

[walshie 2,804]

1 hour ago, Alsone said:

I personally don't agree. The reason why for me the emphasis is on terminal effect and flat shooting is flat shooting is easier to accurately place without detailed scope adjustments and terminal effect buys you a margin for poorly placed shots / wind affected shots.

If everything was perfect in life, we'd be shooting foxes at 400 yds with .22 LR HV's because technically at 400yds 42ft lbs is still lethal to fox. The reality is energy requirements are guesstimates and shots rarely occur with range marksman like accuracy in the field. What extra terminal effect buys you therefore is a margin for error on bullet placement for where you make a mistake, there's a wind gust or the subject moves. You don't need a nuclear cannon (unless planning on clearing a whole county in 1 night), but for me I'd rather purchase a bit more hydrostatic shocking effect over a slightly milder calibre and increased risk of a wounding. To that end, one reason why I'm such a fan now of .204 is because it's low recoil and terminal effect is second to none amongst .22's. I've seen swifts do less damage. Overkill, maybe, but comforting knowing you have an extra margin to cock up. That said everyone is different and calibre is a personal choice.

204 is a 20 cal, not a 22.  

17 Hornet will be most upset to be thrown on the Alsone scrapheap now you have a new favourite. 

[Sausagedog 7,381]

1 hour ago, walshie said:

204 is a 20 cal, not a 22.  

17 Hornet will be most upset to be thrown on the Alsone scrapheap now you have a new favourite. 

[delswal 3,817]

See what you have started here Phil, next time you think that you are asking a simple question for advice think again lol.

 

Now just sticking my nose in, the man asked about .222 / .223 / or the .243 so why do you always quip in with your opinions on 204's  Rem17 or the pigging Hornet.

 

[philpot 4,928]

I was looking at a really nice .222 Tikka whilst in the rfd the other day Del, just a passing view but I might take that one off the rack next time I am in.

Phil