furthest possible fox kill

[highseas]

OK OK..I often take Bison at 12 miles with my .177 air rifle(full 12 lb mind),but I need 2 miles of holdover and not when its too windy....my DVD 'before I woke up' comes out for Xmas.

dougle ime in a very bad mood tonight so ile keep this as kind as i can muster

 

every post ive read of yours has been some funny man anser like this,helping no one and not makeing you any freinds in the meantime.

dont pick holes the blaoke was asking a question i gave him a anser you dont have to jump in with wise cracks.

infact i fear your some spoty 14 year old whos only knowlage of guns comes from the 177 under your bed (its ok i wont tell your mum) and world of warcraft. unless you have some thing decent to add to topic`s dont bother

[Bazooka Joe]

theirs a australian dvd where thet chap says he can shoot foxes at 70m all day long

 

 

I've seen that one, is his name Andre Georgescu..?

 

 

Elmer...I've had no probs out to 40-45 with No-1's,

 

As said on a previous post, pattern your gun at different ranges, you'll have a better idea then.

 

I prefer pattern over larger shot size.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Bazooka Joe

[highseas]

I've seen that one, is his name Andre Georgescu..?

wouldent be too shure chap, was he not useing AAAs? i cant realy remember but he had a cool hat

[Bazooka Joe]

Same DVD he was taking Roo's out to 600-700yds with his 308 Target Rifle..?

 

Pushing Fox out of reedbeds with his dogs, making sure the cameraman was filming, & then taking the shot.

 

One thing for sure with the gauge he was well over 50yds

[henry d]

Well, quite a lot of people have told me that some lad's from the valley's done some testing on all of the heavy 3" cartridges on the market. They tried RC's, Fiocchi's, Gamebore's, Expresse's etc. They found that the RC 50's would kill at the furthest point at 68 yards, and closely followed by Gamebore Mammouth Magnum 50g at 64 yards, and followed by Fiocchi Magnum's at 62 yards

 

Eventhough saying this, i would in no way recommend you try this, and stick to normal ranges :good:

 

OK Elmar, tell me why the above does not make sense? Did you notice the lack of shot size? Soooooo, would you condone someone using no.9`s in 50+gm? NO is the answer we are looking for, as the pattern may be good for no.9`s but it would feel a bit stingy. Then if you use 0`s AAA`s etc the pattern is poor so a fox may slip through.

 

Test your cartridge by patterning it. My thoughts are to use a large shot and copper plated (no larger than BB) and have it in 3 1/2" and it has to be buffered. Winchester XXX are the way forward and in the right hands after patterning you can shoot at a decent range.

 

really dunno why some people get so sh***y over stuff like this to be honest, ive been told something by a very good freind who i have seen shoot hundreds of times and know full well he is a FANTASTIC shot, probably better than many of us on here! and to tell you the truth he said the fox was shot through full choke through high al390 and i do beleive him, just wondered how far a shell could kill at, really dunno why people do get soo sh***y... perhaps jelousy of never shooting more then 20 yards?

 

fudd

[kdubya]

some here can still shoot fox when they are out of sight!

 

KW

[dougall]

Highseas,

I see you are a 20 year old......oh what it must be like to have lived such a full life and to know it all..The OP asked for opinion on shotguns and foxes,I gave mine in my 1st post,basically 40 yards with a shotgun.I believe this is sound advice and advice from someone who shot his 1st fox @ 15 years before your parents regret their lack of condoms.Now as a public forum all are entitled to give their opinions.To questions where I feel I have some knowledge and experience I always give a constructive view/opinion.

As an underkeeper or whatever it is you do,you could add to this discussion and advise someone who sounds inexperienced,with advice about fox shooting.And for the good of the shooting community,something in which your future is intrinsically linked,I am at a loss to understand why you feel references to the extremes of what is maybe possible helps the OP? If our keeper or anybody else went long range 'popping' at foxes they would lose their job/permission on the spot,end of.The ethics of shooting dictate that those that shoot have a responsibilty to what they shoot and how they shoot it.If you really feel your posts here have helped the OP then I genuinely fear for the future of shooting.Especially as you are working in the shooting world,how has your post helped?

[Dr_evil]

take it to PM lads

[matone]

I get the impression that more than a few people who post on here don't do much reading and/or research for themselves - witness Dr_evil's admission that he'd been told (and presumably believed) that 36g steel loads in no.4 "were the best shells out there for wildfowl shooting".

 

It's no secret that, compared to other materials, steel is balistically inferior.

 

When I was a youngster, starting out in shooting, I inhabited a more shooting-friendly world, and was lucky to get a lot of good advice from family and other contacts, and from the local gunshop.

 

But beyond that, I made a point of reading anything authoritative I could get my hands on that was relevant to shooting.

 

I subscribed to "Shooting Times", (which, I have to say, was a far better magazine then than it is now); haunted the local library; and put books on my birthday and Santa lists.

 

I've still got all those books and most of them are as relevant today as they were in the 60's and 70's. Some of them should be required reading - for example, Gough Thomas's works ("Shotguns and Cartridges", "Gough Thomas's Gun Book", and "Gough Thomas's Second Gun Book") in which he explores pattern and ballistics, amongst a whole host of other topics.

 

Just for the record, Gough Thomas was gun editor at "Shooting Times", and his reviews and tests set a standard for rigour and consistency no longer attained by the so-called experts of today.

 

While I'm at it, I suppose I might as well say that I continue to be baffled by the number of people who get 20 and 28 bores (which by and large are made too heavy), then stuff them with magnum-type loads.

 

What on earth's the point? There's no appreciable weight reduction over the 12 bore - if there were, the recoil would be punishing - and it was established long, long ago that big loads were better suited to big guns, relatively speaking.

 

It's worth remembering that the bore of a gun was, and still is, determined by the weight of a solid lead ball, exactly fitting the breech, as a fraction of a pound of pure lead - 12 bore, twelve balls, each one-twelfth of a pound; 20 bore, 20 balls each one-twentieth of a pound. And that's how the notional load for each of these bores came about.

 

Similarly, it was determined many, many years ago that in order to arrive at a compromise between portability and manageable recoil, the optimum weight for a shotgun was around 96 times the load the shooter intended to fire. Consequently, a 12 bore game-gun firing one-and-an-eighth ounce loads would be made to weigh about six-and-three-quarter pounds; a 20 bore firing three-quarters-of-an-ounce loads, four-and-a-half to five pounds.

 

The one-ounce load went (and still goes) best in a light 12 bore or a 16 bore. The huge loads contained in the various 12 bore magnum cartridges of today would be better accommodated by 10 and 8 bores.

 

There's a whole lot of stuff in books written by far more knowledgeable people than I, that deals with the adverse effects upon pellet shape, pattern and pressure of the long shot columns which are an inevitable consequence of stuffing big loads through small bores.

 

A few years ago, I came by a 16 bore side-by-side. It weighs just under six pounds, and shoots fifteen-sixteenths of an ounce of no 6 very satisfactorily. It's no burden to carry, has a liveliness you won't find in obese seven-pounds-plus 20 bores, and it kills very satisfactorily if held straight.

 

Try one and be surprised, pleased and, I hope, converted.

 

Well said that man !!!!! (By another disciple of G.T.)

[Simon123]

OK Elmar, tell me why the above does not make sense? Did you notice the lack of shot size? Soooooo, would you condone someone using no.9`s in 50+gm? NO is the answer we are looking for, as the pattern may be good for no.9`s but it would feel a bit stingy. Then if you use 0`s AAA`s etc the pattern is poor so a fox may slip through.

 

Test your cartridge by patterning it. My thoughts are to use a large shot and copper plated (no larger than BB) and have it in 3 1/2" and it has to be buffered. Winchester XXX are the way forward and in the right hands after patterning you can shoot at a decent range.

 

Sorry mate, all the cartridges were BB's

[Mike525steel]

Just spat my coffee out- brilliant!

 

I nearly choked on my tea lol

[highseas]

OK Elmar, tell me why the above does not make sense? Did you notice the lack of shot size? Soooooo, would you condone someone using no.9`s in 50+gm? NO is the answer we are looking for, as the pattern may be good for no.9`s but it would feel a bit stingy. Then if you use 0`s AAA`s etc the pattern is poor so a fox may slip through.

 

Test your cartridge by patterning it. My thoughts are to use a large shot and copper plated (no larger than BB) and have it in 3 1/2" and it has to be buffered. Winchester XXX are the way forward and in the right hands after patterning you can shoot at a decent range.

 

henry do you find them winnie xx kick a bit :blink: :blink:?? i paid £24 a box of no 4s last time i got some :o

Edited November 26, 2011 by highseas

[henry d]

henry do you find them winnie xx kick a bit :blink: :blink:?? i paid £24 a box of no 4s last time i got some :o

Not through the Xtrema and the 3" shells were ok through the 11-87 too. I prefer the Yank No.2`s for fox.

[highseas]

Not through the Xtrema and the 3" shells were ok through the 11-87 too. I prefer the Yank No.2`s for fox.

last time i used them they were thur a old sbs and a silver pigeon ( the silver pigeon was on the clay cround at collage the reaction of some of the boys to the recoil was dramatic to say the least)

[verytricky]

I am quite new.

 

But I am regularly ( each weekend ) shooting foxes on my farm at a range of 40 to 50 meters. I shoot one a night - almost two a weekend. Croydon Council like to release trapped foxes 'back in the country' right next to my farm!! The first thing they do is make for my chickens!

 

There are three entry points to my chickens that the foxes can use, and my centre point where I can wait is 40 meters from one and 50 meters from the other two. I have setup low voltage lightbulbs at these points, and watch for the foxes entry into the area, and then shoot them. I found that they would bolt if they entered the area and there was any movement, whereas now, they reach the hole, pause and look, and that is when I can shoot them. Which is why I shoot at this range.

 

I have tried Solway Magnum 50g BB; Gamebore Mammoth Magnum 50g '3' and Gamebore 3.5" magnum 63g BB I have settled using Solway Magnum 50g BB as my preferred shot. It has the same apparent 'kill' as the Gamebore 3.5" magnum 63g BB, but it does not hurt me to shoot, whereas the 3.5" does hurt quite a lot.

[samh6]

After last nights outing fowling I don't think Ill be shooting foxes again with anything under 42grms lead, stood near a pond/stream waiting for the ducks to come in and a fox came up next to me on the bank, at about ten yards I shot at him with 32grms Super steel, bowled him over, then gave him the second barrel, bowled over again then he carried on running, had a look for him in the direction he ran in but didn't find him, but it just goes to show how much stopping power is required when dealing with vermin of that size regardless of range.

[Simon123]

After last nights outing fowling I don't think Ill be shooting foxes again with anything under 42grms lead, stood near a pond/stream waiting for the ducks to come in and a fox came up next to me on the bank, at about ten yards I shot at him with 32grms Super steel, bowled him over, then gave him the second barrel, bowled over again then he carried on running, had a look for him in the direction he ran in but didn't find him, but it just goes to show how much stopping power is required when dealing with vermin of that size regardless of range.

 

But then again, you dont want them to be too close to you when shooting at. I once had a fox come up to me at about 8 yards, and the gun was loaded with some 52g BB cartridges, fired at the fox, he twisted, but kept on running. The only way i would have dropped the fox was to have it him in the head, which there wouldn't be much of left, if hit at that range :good:

[aldivalloch]

Maybe it's because I've got to go back to work tomorrow that my mood is deteriorating - or maybe it's due to just having read the last two posts....

 

Here we have samh6 and simon123 telling us that they shot at foxes at "about ten yards" and "about 8 yards" respectively, with 32 grams of steel and 52 grams of BB, again respectively. Neither fox was killed outright - in fact, it would appear that both made their escape.

 

Not that terribly long ago I had some discussions with a veterinary surgeon friend regarding the acquisition of a suitable tool for the destruction of horses and cattle. Following further guidance from within his profession he then purchased a 12 bore shotgun and some cartridges containing 32 grams of no.6 shot, because this combination is deemed powerful enough, with a shot to the front of the head, to despatch animals the size of bulls, Clydesdales and Shires.

 

Do you get my drift, gentlemen? I can tell you categorically that a clean hit IN THE RIGHT PLACE by either of you would have knocked your target off its feet, ending its life immediately. The energy of a 12 bore shotgun at ten yards is immense with even a comparatively light load.

 

samh, I see you say that you won't be shooting at foxes again "with anything under 42 grams lead".

 

simon123, you say that "you don't want them to be too close to you when shooting at".

 

Perhaps you'd both like to come back with some explanation for these statements, particularly the latter.

 

I think that you would both do very well not to shoot at foxes with anything at all until you sort out your range estimation and your shot placement.

 

I'm not sorry if this post seems critical or negative, or if it hurts your feelings. Two consecutive posts which, in essence, relate how two animals have been condemned to lingering deaths through sheer incompetence, and which neither show remorse nor seek advice, are never going to appeal to the sunny part of my nature.

[Simon123]

Maybe it's because I've got to go back to work tomorrow that my mood is deteriorating - or maybe it's due to just having read the last two posts....

 

Here we have samh6 and simon123 telling us that they shot at foxes at "about ten yards" and "about 8 yards" respectively, with 32 grams of steel and 52 grams of BB, again respectively. Neither fox was killed outright - in fact, it would appear that both made their escape.

 

Not that terribly long ago I had some discussions with a veterinary surgeon friend regarding the acquisition of a suitable tool for the destruction of horses and cattle. Following further guidance from within his profession he then purchased a 12 bore shotgun and some cartridges containing 32 grams of no.6 shot, because this combination is deemed powerful enough, with a shot to the front of the head, to despatch animals the size of bulls, Clydesdales and Shires.

 

Do you get my drift, gentlemen? I can tell you categorically that a clean hit IN THE RIGHT PLACE by either of you would have knocked your target off its feet, ending its life immediately. The energy of a 12 bore shotgun at ten yards is immense with even a comparatively light load.

 

samh, I see you say that you won't be shooting at foxes again "with anything under 42 grams lead".

 

simon123, you say that "you don't want them to be too close to you when shooting at".

 

Perhaps you'd both like to come back with some explanation for these statements, particularly the latter.

 

I think that you would both do very well not to shoot at foxes with anything at all until you sort out your range estimation and your shot placement.

 

I'm not sorry if this post seems critical or negative, or if it hurts your feelings. Two consecutive posts which, in essence, relate how two animals have been condemned to lingering deaths through sheer incompetence, and which neither show remorse nor seek advice, are never going to appeal to the sunny part of my nature.

 

Oh, mine was shot my father about 100 yards further down the wood.

Oh, and when you said "a clean hit IN THE RIGHT PLACE", which i already said and a shot at 10 yards at a target is harder to hit cleanly than say a 20-40 yard target .

 

Well when i said that i dont like foxes too close to shoot at, i had a very good reason for saying this. The main reason i said this is that there is a very high possibility that you hit the fox but do not kill it as the cartridge has not had any time what so ever to open up, never mind which choke you have in.

 

I am not going to listen to you and i am going to carry on shooting foxes.

Why the **** should i listen to you?, Do you even shoot foxes using a shotgun?, Oh and if you do shoot foxes using a shotgun, are you telling me that you have killed every single one that you've shot at???

And are you telling me that single thing that you have shot at was killed? No, did'nt think so

 

Oh an yes i do think that your in one H*ll of a MOOD

Edited January 4, 2012 by Simon123

[kent]

I'd say they should kill at that range, I've just got some Bronaghi 36g steel 4's and been told not to shoot anything closer than 40 yards if not I'll most likely shred it, said they'd have a range of about 70 yards I think

 

Also not to fire them out of a 2 3/4 chamber gun as its not gonna be able to take the pressure in most cases

 

Its a 2 3/4 shell but 1050 BAR which is the same as my RC50 3" Magnums so damn powerful for a little shell

 

 

So 52g magnums should be more than likely to kill one at 60 IMO with the right choke

 

Someones been feeding you rubbish about those steel shells mate- 40 max for a good shot 35 for an average shooter ON DUCK. Personally i wouldn't shoot a fox with them other than very very short range. Yes i have used them a lot on duck often at 20-25 yds over deeks

[kent]

The effective range of a 12 bore shotgun is around 40-45yds. Extreamly competant shots or the lucky can often tag something a slight ways further out- however is that fair or humane? Even for the sake of effective pest control your normally better waiting another opertuntity another day.

[aldivalloch]

simon123

 

Looks like I've hit a raw nerve!

 

I'm not going to get into an argument with you; all I'm going to say is that we Pigeon Watchers are all using a public forum and so must expect our posts to attract bouquets or brickbats.

 

You're absolutely right; why should you listen to me? But if you're not prepared to accept other people's reactions, why DO you post on Pigeon Watch?

 

I come on here to read what other members have to say, and, occasionally, to add my own tuppence worth. If my contributions are well received, I'm flattered; if not, I try to take it in good part on the basis that many people who post on here are far more skilled, experienced and knowledgeable than I am.

 

I've been shooting with shotgun, air-rifle and rifle for forty-three years now but I'm still willing to read, listen and learn.

 

I've found it to be a very constructive thing to do, so I recommend it to you.

 

And I do sincerely wish you well with your shooting.

[Ferret Master]

I'm always an advocate for using the correct cartridge for the job. However, I have also bore witness to foxes being shot at close range with a heavy cartridge which hasn't had a chance for the pattern to open up yet and the results were un-satisfactory until a second barrel was used.

 

I am not for one moment suggesting that if the fox had been hit square in the head or front on in the boiler room it wouldn't have immediately dropped, but at close range on a quickly moving target it is very possible to punch a hole in something the size of a fox and for it to carry on as such.

 

FM

[Guest cookoff013]

I'd say they should kill at that range, I've just got some Bronaghi 36g steel 4's and been told not to shoot anything closer than 40 yards if not I'll most likely shred it, said they'd have a range of about 70 yards I think

 

Also not to fire them out of a 2 3/4 chamber gun as its not gonna be able to take the pressure in most cases

 

Its a 2 3/4 shell but 1050 BAR which is the same as my RC50 3" Magnums so damn powerful for a little shell

 

 

So 52g magnums should be more than likely to kill one at 60 IMO with the right choke

 

someones been telling you rubbish.

36g #6 is a vert light load. for close stuff. steel and long range doesnt really work well unless t shot is used.

36g #6 is a silly cartridge really. did you know you can actually use #6 steel to shoot clays.... makes you think? eh?

[DNS]

Aldivalloch,

 

thank you for reassuring me that there are some literate forum users. I find it almost impossible to read many of the posts on PW through the haze of unusual grammar, spelling and those atrocious little faces, so your earlier post on the merits of appropriate loads was a breath of fresh air.