Step up from WMR

[Underdog]

If it is part of the sportsmans charter to be full of principled bull then I want no part of it.

 

You fill your boots sir.

 

 

I'll just keep doing what I do, getting the job done, giving ground nesting birds a chance large and small, farming my rabbits for autume harvesting, looking for injured or poor deer and protecting landowners various investments.

 

You stay perched on your lofty judgmental high chair looking down on us minions, scorning and tut tutting.

 

U.

[al4x]

The n550 will pick up eyes at long ranges but shooting them is another thing.the furthest i have shot a fox with my n550 is 130 yards and at that range the dot is covering most of the body,i'am sure its much better with a doubler.but up to 100 yards it works well.having read all these posts i think the hornet is the perfect gun in power terms, but availablity of guns (i want a stainless synthetic) and ammo is just not good enough.so its still down to 222 or 223 and there seems very little to seperate them.

 

bornfree

 

That's interesting on the n550 and I guess may be worth trying the doubler. There isn't a lot between the .222 and .223 the .222 is a little milder but nothing major it's also not quite as popular for getting ammo and guns. Really see what your local guys hold and go with it. Then I'd try the doubler see how you get on as let's face it it's nice if you can see eyes to be able to identify properly and shoot. I rarely shoot over 100 with nv as you can observe more and wait but it's nice to be able to if needed. I've now taken to lamping till we see eyes then just going to nv works well and I can see more this harvest being taken at a decent range

[al4x]

I note that in your long (and colourful) reply that not one of your bullet points attempts to contradict the one single criticism that I made. Perhaps because for a Sportsman it's indefensible.

 

Sometimes vermin control isn't sporting it's just the way it is vice versa if you can pick and choose which foxes you shoot it shows how necessary your shooting is, really you could just take up photography and have the same result

[wymberley]

Sometimes vermin control isn't sporting it's just the way it is vice versa if you can pick and choose which foxes you shoot it shows how necessary your shooting is, really you could just take up photography and have the same result

 

Or shoot the pesky thing the following day. There always is one.

[kent]

I know what you mean and this is not in the context or ring hole shot foxes but.... I think it is actually a good thing to get into the habit of "expecting" to take a 2nd shot. whether you need to is an entirely different matter

I don't know many pro-stalkers but those that I do almost insist on a client's quick reload for the potential follow up shot.

 

nothing worse than seeing something wriggle down a hole or disappear over a horizon whilst you are high fiving.

 

text book std proceedure cover a downed beast till your sure and aproach in a psision to make another if posible.

[kent]

Whatever you say Sir.

 

I will exercise my free speech whether or not some don't like hearing the truth.

 

I know of no one that shoots fox's extensivly that has not had cause for at some time for a fast follow up shot. Anyone that shoots alot of deer will have a similar situaton arise.

 

Some scorn singleshots for this very reason.

 

You call my post abominable, I call your reply the council of crows.

 

To imply to inexperienced that a rifle is like a death ray and only one shot is all that is ever needed smacks of little experience in the field, certainly not other than fun outings.

 

Kent even admits about two lost to a shotgun, does this trouble me? No, why, should it? It troubles me no more than someone using poisen for rats. Now thats a contradiction in terms Mr.

 

Only taken around thirty deer over the years, two of which were saved from being potentially lost from a fast second shot. Not many fox, I struggle to remember when the bag is around 800 over the years.

 

The deer was shot at 60yds perfect and ran like hell for the forest and I had no dog then. My ability to reload fast after being taught to expect the worse enabled me to get a fast second in her to which she went down. Both entries were about 2" apart.

 

 

It is unrealistic to think one can be clinically precise all the time, there are to many variables and you would do well to remember whether experienced or not Murphy's law!

 

Just why is it you folk try to shield the truth? Do you really think it will make any difference?

 

U.

 

 

The deer has no relevance to your comment about shooting them up the rear with a WMR, that action is most commomly not going to end well and shouldn't even be considered.

 

To put my loosing two back in contex, one took a 63 grm load of BB in its chest at around 40yds, was knocked off its feet and got up and fell down a clew hole (deep gourge) it was heavilly vegitated and very steep with a flooded steam at the bottom. we had hounds but they paid little interest (often the case once they are dead) no way was i going down it to search although i looked at trying. the other was shot at facing me through a gate at 30 yds, i should have hit it but it appeared unharmed and no scent was found to follow ( i wouldn't shoot through a gate again). In conext again two out of very many.

 

Heavy deer calibre rifles are very capable of cleanly killing on a back ender, it is no different to going through a stag realy. WMR is on its limit with fox and great care should be taken on correct placement, the OP is having this very issue.

 

By the way whats the lever action a 30 cal?

[Underdog]

Your accusation Kent that I suggested shooting fox's up the behind with a 22wmr has left me perplexed!

 

Can you quote where I said that please?

 

I too avoid frontal shots with a shot gun unless less than 15yds, side on through the ribs and it is soon over.

 

The carbine is a 30wcf.

 

I applaud the op for using the wmr as he has. I think it is a wonderful little round and have seen many many excellent results from it. I also applaud moving upto Hornet, 222 or 223.

 

All I ask is that it be recognised that moving up for want of a better description will not be as like a wave from a magic wand and errors and unforseens will still give problems.

 

The wrong bullet from one of the cals suggested could hit a front leg and blow up. Parradoxley(is that spelt correct) the wmr with a traditional bullet like the ones the op is using would stay in tact and make the vitals, probably. In my experience I found that to be also a benefit of using a hornet as well. In my 222 of years ago I continued to use Speer 52gr hp bt match bullets over all the plastic tipped jobs and always found to get good penertration and expansion even on the shot where it does not go to plan. Even the same bullets in Hornet worked very well with a 1/14" twist.

 

I wish the op the best of luck and I hope he does not miss that wmr too much

 

U.

[wymberley]

Sometimes vermin control isn't sporting it's just the way it is vice versa if you can pick and choose which foxes you shoot it shows how necessary your shooting is, really you could just take up photography and have the same result

 

Yep, I bow to your opinion. I see now how things can change in 6 short years. Rabbit to fox at a stroke.

[bornfree]

Your accusation Kent that I suggested shooting fox's up the behind with a 22wmr has left me perplexed!

 

Can you quote where I said that please?

 

I too avoid frontal shots with a shot gun unless less than 15yds, side on through the ribs and it is soon over.

 

The carbine is a 30wcf.

 

I applaud the op for using the wmr as he has. I think it is a wonderful little round and have seen many many excellent results from it. I also applaud moving upto Hornet, 222 or 223.

 

All I ask is that it be recognised that moving up for want of a better description will not be as like a wave from a magic wand and errors and unforseens will still give problems.

 

The wrong bullet from one of the cals suggested could hit a front leg and blow up. Parradoxley(is that spelt correct) the wmr with a traditional bullet like the ones the op is using would stay in tact and make the vitals, probably. In my experience I found that to be also a benefit of using a hornet as well. In my 222 of years ago I continued to use Speer 52gr hp bt match bullets over all the plastic tipped jobs and always found to get good penertration and expansion even on the shot where it does not go to plan. Even the same bullets in Hornet worked very well with a 1/14" twist.

 

I wish the op the best of luck and I hope he does not miss that wmr too much

 

U.

 

I took the n550 off the WMR last night and put a normal scope on as i was going to see what the RFD would give for it on a trade in.however after zeroing it i shot some nice 5/8" groups at 87 yards(its an odd distance i know but its the furthest i can shoot inside at the moment)and this evening i head shot a few rabbits between 70 and 100 yards so i may keep it and get a 222 if they let me.

 

bornfree

[wymberley]

Good luck. You should be OK as they're 3 totally different calibres. I don't know if the same applies where you are but we're able to "right off" a calibre/rifle if it has a dedicated NV sight. My Force actually lead me along the path when I broached the subject, "are you asking if you can have it or are you telling me that you need it?" "I need it." "Then, of course you can have a second 22 Hornet to use with NV." I reckon you could possibly "lose" either the WMR or a 222.

[Underdog]

Sounds like a good rifle bornfree.

 

You will get an aditional on your licence no probs

 

U.

[bornfree]

Yes its a CZ 455 I'am sure it was not that accurate when i first got it.maybe it takes 2 or 3 hundred shots to run it in.mind you its still rubbish with 30 or 33gr ammo the target looks like its been shot with a shotgun

 

bornfree

[Underdog]

Yes its a CZ 455 I'am sure it was not that accurate when i first got it.maybe it takes 2 or 3 hundred shots to run it in.mind you its still rubbish with 30 or 33gr ammo the target looks like its been shot with a shotgun

 

bornfree

 

I prefered the standard 40grainers, they seemed to penertrate better in my opinion.

 

Friend of mine use to get the CCI solid 40grn and gently file the jacket tip off years ago when it's all we could get, did ok!

 

U.

[njc110381]

Sometimes vermin control isn't sporting it's just the way it is vice versa if you can pick and choose which foxes you shoot it shows how necessary your shooting is, really you could just take up photography and have the same result

 

There's a difference between unsporting and cruel. My shooting isn't sporting - I shoot deer from the cab of my truck, pigeons that have landed in the pattern when decoying etc. That's not sport, it's doing a job.

 

To smash up a foxes back end with a rifle so as to slow it down enough to take a follow up is just plain wrong. Lets face it that's what's written between the lines of a couple of posts here and I'm afraid I'll never agree with that. It's wrong and any land owner who expects me to do such a thing can stick their permission. I'm not going to do it and that's that!

[kent]

I have lost count of all the fox's I have had to shoot up the jacksie to get the job done. I know many a shepherd, gamekeeper and land owner that would of been none to happy if I turned down a chance. Remember, I don't believe in apeasing the general public what so ever, they want my guns no matter how much I brown nose them!

 

None survived and did not suffer unduly, no worse than a poor shotgun shot!!

 

The only cal in my limited experiance to end a fox's murderous carear instantly is a 308 up the jacksie.

 

I think it is fool hardy bitching over rights and wrongs in this game. I have seen far more injured fox's from shotguns and fouled up high speed bullets irrespective of the fox's position on the shot. It's a bloody buisness and thats that.

 

Would I do one up the jacksie with a wmr this side of hundred? Sure I would, I know there would be a very good chance to get a second shot on it after anyway.

 

U.

 

 

There you go underdog, the last paragraph

[Underdog]

There you go underdog, the last paragraph

 

I did, my apologies.

 

U.

[gixer1]

Have to say - I have never ha to with a WMR - but whoever said it wouldn't be capable obviously hasn't used a WMR - the foxes I have shot with it have had gaping great wounds - one of which was shot squarely in the chest - it exited round about it's stomach and was dead instantly - I can't see a WMR having any problem if the shot was Texas heart.

 

Pretty much any cf will cut a fist sized hole in a fox with relative ease (exclude the now 17 hornet thing as I have never even seen one!) but the WMR by no means struggles either.

 

Regards,

Gixer

 

Regards,

[Catweazle]

The Yanks often quote OGW, optimum game weight, a formula they have derived from real-world experience of killing various critters.

 

Do any of you consider this measure reasonable ? I ask because the 40grn WMR is given an OGW at 100yds of just 5 lbs, the HMR even less. Obviously they don't use an UTAOGW ( up the **** optimum game weight ).

[gixer1]

The Yanks often quote OGW, optimum game weight, a formula they have derived from real-world experience of killing various critters.

 

Do any of you consider this measure reasonable ? I ask because the 40grn WMR is given an OGW at 100yds of just 5 lbs, the HMR even less. Obviously they don't use an UTAOGW ( up the **** optimum game weight ).

 

The ogw really isn't followed much even in the USA - they push WMR WAY further than we would - although most of the shots I have seen are walked onto the target (I'm in the USA just now so can comment on this.

 

I wouldnt say a 100 yard T.H.S isn't something that should really be done with WMR but then I'd only shoot with mine to about 80 yards...

 

Regards,

Gixer

[bullet boy]

A step up from a WMR is of course a Centrefire rifle and any of the .22CF Calibres are good enough for Fox.

A lot of people use higher calibres than a .22CF for mainly Fox which bemuses me as the .22CF is good enough!

I use a .22-250 and am very happy with it!

ATB in whatever you choose.

[rapid rich]

A step up from a WMR is of course a Centrefire rifle and any of the .22CF Calibres are good enough for Fox.

A lot of people use higher calibres than a .22CF for mainly Fox which bemuses me as the .22CF is good enough!

I use a .22-250 and am very happy with it!

ATB in whatever you choose.

 

Excellent, sensible and logical reply

 

 

Rich

[wymberley]

The Yanks often quote OGW, optimum game weight, a formula they have derived from real-world experience of killing various critters.

 

Do any of you consider this measure reasonable ? I ask because the 40grn WMR is given an OGW at 100yds of just 5 lbs, the HMR even less. Obviously they don't use an UTAOGW ( up the **** optimum game weight ).

 

The game weight table bottoms out before it gets to fox. There is a constant in the formula which requires a change if it's to be used for vermin type bullets. Unfortunately, there is no immediately available information on what makes up that constant although it would appear that sectional density is in there somwhere. It would seem that the formula breaks down at the low end of the scale possibly because it moves outside of its design parameters. I use it for fox and it appears good (for my needs) once you step into CF territory.

[kent]

The Yanks often quote OGW, optimum game weight, a formula they have derived from real-world experience of killing various critters.

 

Do any of you consider this measure reasonable ? I ask because the 40grn WMR is given an OGW at 100yds of just 5 lbs, the HMR even less. Obviously they don't use an UTAOGW ( up the **** optimum game weight ).

 

the problem is there are too many variables. A pheasant and a wild mallard are about the same weight i guess but the Duck takes more killing. At the end of the day the most critical factor is placement a 30 cal through the neo-cortex of the brain aint any more deadly than a .17 or .22 along the same path and the result is always gonna be dead

[wymberley]

the problem is there are too many variables. A pheasant and a wild mallard are about the same weight i guess but the Duck takes more killing. At the end of the day the most critical factor is placement a 30 cal through the neo-cortex of the brain aint any more deadly than a .17 or .22 along the same path and the result is always gonna be dead

 

Ah! "The real world" was mentioned. A 243 could kill a stag with the shot placement you describe at 2000 yards. I do not know whether the OGW is good bad or indifferent. All I do know is that, for me and fox, it does the trick. But if one is to be critical, surely to be fair, one should do so within the theatre for which it was designed and in this case, as said, that is the real world.

[kent]

Ah! "The real world" was mentioned. A 243 could kill a stag with the shot placement you describe at 2000 yards. I do not know whether the OGW is good bad or indifferent. All I do know is that, for me and fox, it does the trick. But if one is to be critical, surely to be fair, one should do so within the theatre for which it was designed and in this case, as said, that is the real world.

 

Yes, the variables are many. Placement, std accuraccy, terminal bullet effects. at the end of the day OGW becomes bull.

 

To look on extreames worked on Muzzle energy the 12 bore slug would be well capable of quite large game, yet take it out to 200 yds and i should rather have a .222 in my hands anyday. A 6mm 100grn deer bullet is a lot less likely to achieve a clean bang flop kill on a broadside on fox than say a .22 hornet with a 45 grn varmint bullet in my experiance also- 100grn tough bullets have a tendancy to pencil hole! - yet i bet it gets a bigger OGW than the little hornet

 

"the theatre for which it was designed" yep agree 100% that has nothing to do with silly calculations does it? just general practical knoledge and experiance of what works and is likely to work