.177 Or .22

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Aren't you worried about over penetration?

[Coypu Hunter 486]

I normally wait until there's another couple of rabbits directly behind the first one, then shoot 'em all at the same time -- bullets are quite expensive, you know!

[mark williams 7,550]

Any of the calibers shot accurately will more than do the job.

My preferred caliber is .177 (by a country mile).

 

atb

[pepper 45 55]

wow thanks for that! think i'll go for the .22. oh no hang on .177!

[charlie caller 3,654]

.177 everytime mate, having said that, a .22 pellet in the right spot is just as deadly, but I prefer the faster flatter .177 I find it easier to shoot with and after 30+ years of air rifles MY conclusions are that I get more instant kills with .177, but as always others may disagree.

[mjr88 50]

.177 from my HW100s, all day long

[mark williams 7,550]

I was once told - .22 cal makes up for those people who cant shoot with true accuracy (oh no here it comes)

 

atb

Edited April 9, 2015 by mark williams

[Rez 4,957]

I was once told - .22 cal makes up for those people who cant shoot with true accuracy (oh no here it comes)

 

atb

 

Isn't it the other way round...

[mark williams 7,550]

 

I was once told - .22 cal makes up for those people who cant shoot with true accuracy (oh no here it comes)

 

atb

 

Isn't it the other way round...

 

No Rez - the hard whack of a .22 makes up for being slightly off target. I find .177 absolutely clinical on precise shot placement. Again - through branches and spindle.

[Rez 4,957]

 

 

I was once told - .22 cal makes up for those people who cant shoot with true accuracy (oh no here it comes)

 

atb

 

Isn't it the other way round...

No Rez - the hard whack of a .22 makes up for being slightly off target. I find .177 absolutely clinical on precise shot placement. Again - through branches and spindle.

Without starting a row, I'd say that .177 is for those that want an easy life and as such makes up for the (wrong word here but) skill to shoot with true accuracy. Hence, if a .22 is harder to shoot accurately, then surely those who can shoot accurately a .22 are a better shot than those use always use .177...

 

In my opinion, if you can shoot a .22 accurately, at the usual airgun distances, your a better shot than a .177 shooter. And I'm only referencing springers here, there isn't any point in bringing in PCP's in the 'argument' as they are so easy, within reason, to shoot accurately and perhaps don't rely on as much technique or shooting principles. It's actually a point I'm making that makes no sense as the springer/PCP argument also comes into play.

 

This isn't a row starter for all you 177 shooters, PCP or springer, I'm just pointing out a thought.

[Rez 4,957]

Ive just read that back to myself. Had to come to the study to re write that. Right.

 

Im not saying a 22 shooter is a better shot, what Im trying to say is that... [with PCP's], 177 is the easier round to choose for hitting the target. Naturally, its flight path is much less curved. With a 22, its just about learning your aim points, which most shooters of the 22 calibre do.

 

In the instance of 177 and 22 springers, then there both the same [apart from the tad more recoil, from a standard rifle], but again, with a much less curved trajectory, its perhaps "easier" to hit the intended target or kill zone. Hence the HFT boys preferring such a calibre.

 

Shooting a 22 springer is a much harder job all round, you have more to think about, you have much more drop and also the rifle to deal with. And so, those who shoot HFT with a 22 spring powered jobby... and get a decent score, show a somewhat refined skill all round.

 

I think.

 

[mark williams 7,550]

I don`t want a row thanks , each to their own on the caliber question.

.22 and 177 are every bit as accurate as each other on "open ground",(if you know your mill dots) in woodland, open and dense areas, .177 (for me) as the flat trajectory allows far better accuracy threading your shot through branches and spindle etc.

If we look at springer v pcp - (ive stated this many times), "Does it matter" if a pcp or a springer makes you a better shot ? I have noticed a lot of guys have an affinity with spring rifles,- fine by me if it makes you shoot more accurately.

Why would, or should we discriminate between any type of rifle or marksman ?

Billy ! you are shooting in the pcp class!

Fred ! you are shooting in the springer class !

 

Billy and Fred both shoot 5 consecutive bulls eyes each - SO ?

 

Sorry Billy you lost the match because you use a pcp which of course makes you a lesser marksman (not)

 

atb

Edited April 9, 2015 by mark williams

[charlie caller 3,654]

Ive just read that back to myself. Had to come to the study to re write that. Right.

 

Im not saying a 22 shooter is a better shot, what Im trying to say is that... [with PCP's], 177 is the easier round to choose for hitting the target. Naturally, its flight path is much less curved. With a 22, its just about learning your aim points, which most shooters of the 22 calibre do.

 

In the instance of 177 and 22 springers, then there both the same [apart from the tad more recoil, from a standard rifle], but again, with a much less curved trajectory, its perhaps "easier" to hit the intended target or kill zone. Hence the HFT boys preferring such a calibre.

 

Shooting a 22 springer is a much harder job all round, you have more to think about, you have much more drop and also the rifle to deal with. And so, those who shoot HFT with a 22 spring powered jobby... and get a decent score, show a somewhat refined skill all round.

 

I think.

 

So perhaps using your argument, it COULD be suggested that a .177 (especially in the hands of a novice) is the more humane round, if it is easier to shoot and hit the target with, then by that logic there is less chance of a poor shot and wounding the quarry????

[Dr B 186]

I actually like debates on .22 and .177 even though we have all been here 1000s of times before. However, I'm not interested in the 'what's better' question - as that question is loaded and flawed (it assumes one is better). I'm more interested in the reasons people use for their personal preference and how they make their choices work for them.

 

I will certainly be getting a .177 in future years to go with my .22s, a lot of you guys here use them, and are very effective with them, so they are clearly a very useful weapon.

 

 

One small point, if I may. The harder whack of a .22 certainly does make up for very mild inaccuracies in shot placement - but that does not mean the shooter actually is being less accurate with a .22. You can be just as accurate and still have the harder whack. Its a win win.

[Rez 4,957]

@ Charlie. Its a good point that, but on the other hand, for those who, lets say, are not as accurate as they'd like...

 

The 22 would surely be the better calibre as it hits harder and doesn't have to be so precise? Within reason. Stick it in the boiler room and your more likely to kill than with a 177, maybe. Not that Im condoning body shots, just using it as an example.

 

In a way, a poor shot with a 22, if we're calling it that, is more likely to kill than a poor shot with a 177. I personally think the learning curve with hunting and generally shooting, should be undertaken with a 22, and then the move onto the 177. Its only that way that you truly appreciate the accuracy advantages of the flatter flight path.