.22 or .177

[Batmancaver]

Hi

 

I'm new to the forum and about to purchase either a BSA Lightning XL or an Air Arms S200.

The question is, do I need .22 or .177?

I intend to do a mix of target work and hunting. The site I have permission to shoot on is over-run with rabbits so that is what I will be aiming at. It will probably also include the occassional crow and magpie.

I'm sure that this question has been asked before but I would appreciate any advice from some more experienced sir gunners.

Once I know which calibre, then all I need to do is decide which gun to go for!

Cheers.

Batmancaver

[edd]

alright mate welcome to the forum,

i have a .22 and .177 u get more punch behind the .22 and more hard hitting but then the .177 has less wind resitence and goes fatser i belive , i always go for the .22 and its bigger and has a harder hitting power

 

hope this helps regards edd

[kip270]

It's a personal thing, i have had both .22 & .177 and they both do the same thing if you can put your shot in the right place.(been hunting with air-rifle's since 1985)

[edd]

true true it is personal iv always got on better with .22 how about u ??

regards edd

[henry c]

i have owned a 22 s300 for many years and got on really well with it, however now can really see the advantges of 177 providing your an accurate shot, which for hunting you should be. if i got another airgun it would be a 177. but for a first gun the 22 is ideal, as a badly placed shot will still have stoping power.

[kip270]

I have shot many things with the .177, but as you say the .22 always seemed to have that draw to it everytime i had to choose which one to take out.The main reason i used the .177 was because my shooting partner was using my .22!!! B)

But they will both put things in the bag. The .177 shoot's slightley flatter than the .22 but this is down to the weight of the pellets because the .177 travels faster than the .22. A good average weight for a .22 is 14-15grain, but i always used a 14.5 in .22 and 8 grain in .177 B)

Edited November 25, 2005 by kip270

[SNAKEBITE]

Hi

 

I'm new to the forum and about to purchase either a BSA Lightning XL or an Air Arms S200.

The question is, do I need .22 or .177?

I intend to do a mix of target work and hunting. The site I have permission to shoot on is over-run with rabbits so that is what I will be aiming at. It will probably also include the occassional crow and magpie.

I'm sure that this question has been asked before but I would appreciate any advice from some more experienced sir gunners.

Once I know which calibre, then all I need to do is decide which gun to go for!

Cheers.

Batmancaver

You will never get a straight answer to this one. As a comparison ...............

 

.22 = Harder hitting.

Mortar like trajectory

less prone to wandering in the wind

Needs practice to get ranges sussed out.

 

.177- Flatter trajectory

Easier to suss out ranges

Can over penetrate (drill)

less forgiving if the shot is off target.

 

THIS IS A ROUGH GUIDE TO THE DIFFERENCES

 

Decide what appeals to you and then go for it.

 

(But don't go for .177 that's for girls B) Tin hat time .......... incoming.)

[blackthorn]

from an old tart. ide all ways shot with a 22 then some years ago i moved to a 177 never looked back shoot a 22 you would be quicker walking up and catching the rabbit B) put the pill in the right place and both 177 20 22 WILL KILL

[SNAKEBITE]

B) put the pill in the right place and both 177 20 22 WILL KILL

That sums it up.

 

(But that doesn't stop .177 being a bit light footed B) )

[blackthorn]

B) put the pill in the right place and both 177 20 22 WILL KILL

That sums it up.

 

(But that doesn't stop .177 being a bit light footed B) )

why where clogs when you can where pumps :(

[SNAKEBITE]

I am not going to get very far on this am I? :blink:

[1 of 5]

For a mix of targets and hunting it simply has to be .177.

You'll get arguments for each calibre for hunting but there's zero argument over which is better for targets. Anyone choosing a .22 for target work is placing themselves at a huge dissadvantage.

I use .177 for hunting rabbits with zero problems caused by the little pellet. In comparison to a rabbits brain it's still huge and gives access to shots that .22 simply can't achieve. Your effective range will be 10 yds less in .22 and as far as I'm concerned that's a fact not an oppinion.

[woodyfirst]

Age old debate! Personally, for those quarry species, I'd go with .22

 

.177 will be just as effective though- and if you're planning target shooting other than informal plinking, a .177 will definitely be a better choice.

 

I've hunted all manner of quarry with both .177 (BSA Lightning) and .22 (Weihrauch HW95) and I've found (although I admit, its probably all purely psychological) the .22 to be more effective against rabbits and rats, and the .177 better on feather.

 

I can't back this up- it may be purely coincidental, but on a couple of occassions I've shot bunnies with the .177, and the pellet has passed straight through the skull- leaving a brain dead rabbit kicking for a few minutes.

Similarly, when shooting pigeons, I've found that I'm far less likely to achieve a clean kill with a chest shot from the .22 than I am the .177

 

Its all a bit strange, but the most important thing is the accuracy of your shot. Get that wrong and your choice of calibre is irrelevant!!

 

At the end of the day, it comes down to personal choice. If you get on better with the .177, thats the calibre for you. If you prefer the .22, then go with that.

 

I'm very interested in adding a .20 to my collection when I have some spare cash; maybe that'll prove the ultimate all rounder!!

[Carcharadon]

My two pennorth is it doesn't matter which calibre you purchase, if you get enough target shooting in at different ranges you'll learn how best to compensate for the disadvantages of each calibre, while making the most of their individual advantages. get out , get practising and Learn all the posts above about the differences are correct in the information regarding each of the pro's and cons.

 

i've shot both and found them equally good in all situations.

Edited November 27, 2005 by Carcharadon

[Maori Haz]

Personally i really don't think it matters, all that matters is that you hit it in the boiler. I have a .22 AAS200 and my best friend has a .177 AAS200 and i find them both fine. My next rifle is going to be .177 though :blink:

 

MH

[Jon-Boy]

Have shot both .177 and .22, both calibres leave the barrel at 12ftlb , so i dont know about all this talk about harder hitting is all about!

 

.177 is far easier to make the shot count so, im all for .177!

[1 of 5]

if you get enough target shooting in at different ranges you'll learn how best to compensate for the disadvantages of each calibre

 

i've shot both and found them equally good in all situations.

.177 has no disadvantage over .22 for target shooting. Even windage differences are next to nothing and frankly argueable either way.

 

If you can shoot .22 at targets and can equal your best scores with a .177 then you are unique. It simply doesn't happen (unless your best .177 score is zero of course :blink:) . The laws of physics prevent this from happening. Check the UKAHFT scores for proof. Going further into target shooting I know of NO FT shooter using .22 and only a handful use .22 for HFT and even then need their own class in which to compete.

 

As I said, you can argue the toss for hunting but there is NO ARGUMENT for targets.

[1 of 5]

Have shot both .177 and .22, both calibres leave the barrel at 12ftlb , so i dont know about all this talk about harder hitting is all about!

 

.177 is far easier to make the shot count so, im all for .177!

.22 does hit harder (very slightly) as it retains energy better downrange due to better BC values. The difference in retained energy is more than lost though if you fail to hit the killzone properly. Hitting the quarry outside the killzone with 0.8 extra ft/lb is infinately worse than 0.8 ft/lb less perfectly placed so I agree with your last point.

 

.177 at 11.5 ft/lb muzzle = 7.7 ft/lb at 35 yds

.22 at 11.5 ft/lb muzzle = 8.5 ft/lb at 35 yds

 

These assume the very best BC for each calibre.

[Carcharadon]

I used the idea of shooting at targets as a means to allow the shooter to get a feel for the trajectory of each calibre not as a statement that .22 is as good as .177 for target shooting so I apologise if my post was misinterpreted. :blink: The reason most if not all target shooters use .177 is for its flatter trajectory so I agree with you there. But it doesn't mean it isn't possible (however unlikely) that a .22 can shoot as accurately as a .177 over a HFT course. In the end it is all down to the shooter since modern airrifles are easily capable of outstanding accuracy if benched. So what it comes down to is which calibre you can shoot reliably at various ranges. As my previous post stated, by putting in the hours, a shooter gets to know his gun and its trajectory.

 

PRACTICE IS THE KEY

Edited November 27, 2005 by Carcharadon

[1 of 5]

a .22 can shoot as accurately as a .177 over a HFT course.

PRACTICE IS THE KEY

A .22 is just as accurate as a .177. It's the pilot that can not extract the same level of accuracy from it when distances exceed 30-35 yds.

 

Practise IS the key, but only within the limitations of the calibre. ie you may become a better shooter of a .22 but you'll never equal the best .177 shooters. No amount of practise will allow a good .22 target shooter to compete with an equally good .177 user.

[Carcharadon]

Are you a troll ? Do you regularly make a habit of quoting only parts of sentences instead of the whole sentence in an effort to try to make yourself look clever ?

 

Read the post again.

 

You have just agreed with me that it is the shooter not the gun that makes the difference so by your own admission the calibre is unimportant.

 

oh yeah and this is definitely my last post on this topic :blink:

Edited November 27, 2005 by Carcharadon

[Marc M]

Have shot both .177 and .22, both calibres leave the barrel at 12ftlb , so i dont know about all this talk about harder hitting is all about!

 

.177 is far easier to make the shot count so, im all for .177!

.22 does hit harder (very slightly) as it retains energy better downrange due to better BC values. The difference in retained energy is more than lost though if you fail to hit the killzone properly. Hitting the quarry outside the killzone with 0.8 extra ft/lb is infinately worse than 0.8 ft/lb less perfectly placed so I agree with your last point.

 

.177 at 11.5 ft/lb muzzle = 7.7 ft/lb at 35 yds

.22 at 11.5 ft/lb muzzle = 8.5 ft/lb at 35 yds

 

These assume the very best BC for each calibre.

OK mate, substitute the word "practise" for "target shooting". Once you've done that, learn to read posts fully, then get off your high horse.

 

Practice, understand and learn the trajectory for your chosen calibre/pellet combination and you WILL be effective, if your range estimation is up to scratch.

 

It is true that the flatter trajectory of a sub 12ft/lb .177 against a .22 allows the shooter more error in range estimation, personally I've owned both calibre air guns, and have been equally as successful out hunting with them all.

 

Above all, shoot within your own limitations/ability, and enjoy the sport.

[1 of 5]

OK mate, substitute the word "practise" for "target shooting". Once you've done that, learn to read posts fully, then get off your high horse.

Why substitute one word for another? The original post says "I intend to do a mix of target work and hunting". I suggest YOU need to learn to read posts fully.

[1 of 5]

Are you a troll ? Do you regularly make a habit of quoting only parts of sentences instead of the whole sentence in an effort to try to make yourself look clever ?

 

Read the post again.

 

You have just agreed with me that it is the shooter not the gun that makes the difference so by your own admission the calibre is unimportant.

 

oh yeah and this is definitely my last post on this topic :blink:

Troll - no, are you? I've been here a while but you are new. I quote the relevant points to exclude the unimportant. It's a common practise.

 

Read again - it says nothing it didn't originally do.

 

Agreed with you - no, I stated clearly that the calibre (and therefore the gun) makes lots of difference.

 

Last post - if you've something to say then say it but be prepared to argue your point if someone thinks differently. Taking the huff and accusing people of troll-like behaviour simply makes your point look so weak that insults are necessary.

[Marc M]

"1 of 5", get a life mate and drop it, you sound anal.

 

When you say you intend to shoot a mix of targets and hunting, how formal/serious would the target side of that get?

 

I only ask cos if you DO want to compete at HFT say, then the .177 would probably be the better choice, for reasons already stated, but the fact you're looking at the spring powered Lightning may suggest otherwise... the S200 would be my choice of the two, especially if you do intend getting semi-serious with the tin chickens.

 

BUT, if you're like me, and your description of target shooting is setting up a few score cards in the garden and having a blast, the calibre choice is neither here nor there in my opinion.

 

Have fun and enjoy the sport.

 

All the best

 

:blink: