The best fox shooting caliber

[hill billy]

This question has probably been asked before but i just wanted to find out your views on the subject because im thinking of changing from a .22 hornet thanks very much

jason

[dunganick]

if you want no questions asked raw performance for purely fox, 22-250, its just the most destructive callibre on foxes,

 

dont over look the 6.5

[hill billy]

i have only used a 22-250 on the odd ocasion because my uncle has one and i personally think that there ain't no flies on it, but i think people are going for .243s these days just because you can shoot both dear and foxes with them and they work wonders on both

Edited May 7, 2005 by hill billy

[dunganick]

yes, that is true, but in answer to your question for a pure foxing round, 22-250

 

if you want a jack of all trades and ammo cost isnt an issue its go to be 6.5, and its even large enough to take on the larger deer species

[red_stag88]

I think your wrong there Dung, the .308 is the jack of all trades. Empty brass is cheap (as its the millitary 7.62). Busts up foxes well but it can tackle red, fallow and even elk and boar. Having said that, a .30-06 is more apt for the last four.

 

I voted for the .223 because it is again a military round with lots of cheap brass. It also, like the .30 rounds, has a wide range of loads to suit situations. It is relativly flat shooting, and suffers less fouling than a .22-250

[dunganick]

these days its difficult to get a 308 on a varmint ticket

 

there for it for fits its right to be a jack of all trades

 

still stand by the 6.5

[rjimmer]

I don't think many, if any, on here have enough field experience of all the calibres on the list to be able to make a decision!

Edited May 8, 2005 by rjimmer

[hill billy]

i know one bloke who did use his 30-06 to shoot a fox on one odd occasion but he said he wouldn't ever again because he always takes them to show the farmer and he said he took most of it in plastic bags and that was shooting it the the head then the bullet going down the length of it's back

[dunganick]

ive used all of the above apart from the 220 swift, and if you want expansion, which with foxes is pretty much what you want, then you cant go far wrong with a 22-250,

 

if you want deer legal, 243 or 6.5

[Stalker_2]

Sorry mate but the 223 will do everything the 22-250 will with half the powder. I shot a lamp shy fox the other evening from the roof rails on my wagon using a 50grn Ballistic Tip. It completely penetrated the fox dropping it on the spot at 282yds, it got there and delivered 600ftlbs of bad news to Charlie.

 

If you want to take them further out than 500yds then yes…the 22-250, but the 243 is far superior at those ranges than any 22. Most shooters wouldn’t raise a rifle to a fox at long range (500 plus yds)…so why waste the powder for short/medium range work.

 

Cheers

S_2

[JRDS]

Alot depends on your circumstance and the area in which you are shooting I would say. I use a 223 and find it perfectly adequate as nearly all my foxing is over a lamp and I don't shoot at long ranges most are under 150 yards. It is mild shooting and moderated it is quiet hence not alerting the whole neighbourhood to your activities. If you need the range then a 22-250 or 204 would seem the way to go or as said shoot lighter bullets through a 243.

[rarms]

I couldn't see where your vote offered .22 air rifle? I wouldn't shoot foxes with anything else :lol:

[rarms]

>I don't think many, if any, on here have enough field experience of all the calibres on the list to be able to make a decision!

 

Good point

[Sergeant]

If I had to choose one it would have to be .223, I'm quite likely to get it on my ticket and the brass is cheap and its easy to shoot. If there is a gun that I would really like then it would be .308 or 7.62, awesome round, accurate and with relatively easily controlled recoil.

[Gemini]

Prior to Dunblane I used to use .308 for fox. It was quite simple then and no-one thought much of it. I used to stoke it up with 45 grns of Reloader 12 can’t get that now) pushing a 110 grn JHP. This was a 10% reduced load but was bloody accurate, so I left it at that.

It did no more damage than my .243 does now and with very low recoil by .308 standards. Wish I could have carried on using it, but the powers-that-be decided that it was “Too powerful for foxes”, so I sold it and bought a .222.

Lovely little rifle for fox, in fact better than .223 IMHO, but one that seems to be becoming obsolete. Shame really as it is a beautifully soft shooting round.

G.M.

[hill billy]

I knew you could take things out to 300 yards with a 22-250 but i didn't know they were good out to 500 yards, i don't think i would use a rifle out to 500 yards though because thats a very long way and a lot can go wrong along the root

[Gemini]

A 22-250 will shoot out to 1000yds, and if you were to sight it in, and were skilled enough, you could probably shoot 10 inch groups with it… in the right conditions.

BUT! You are not using it for target practice, you are using it for vermin control which means that you want to be sure that you are going to hit your quarry at a variety of distances, so 500 yds is really not on unless you have set up for that distance and know that your quarry will be shot at that one particular setting.

But how can you know this???

The answer is you can’t. So you set it up at the optimum point-blank range and use it out to whatever distance this covers.

With a 22-250 on fox this may be something like 250 yds, which means that you can aim at a 3 inch target and hold dead on from 50 yds out to 300 yds without having to worry about holding over or under.

Don’t quote me on those figures as I am only giving you an example, but you get the idea.

G.M.

[Stalker_2]

Real world ballistics.

223 Rem

50grn BAL Tips at 3432fps.

Barrel 23.75

Coef=.127 at 600’amsl

Temp 12c

Scope ht 1.87’

Sight in at 250yds.

Gives

000yds -1.87

050yds +0.43

100yds +1.90

150yds +2.42

200yds +1.84

250yds +0.00

300yds -3.30

 

It generates 567ftlbs at 300yds. This is what I mean about not needing the 22-250 to kill Charlie at 300yds. The above is achieved using just 26.4grn Benchmark in my Sako.

 

The 22-250 with a 24' barrel would burn 37grn of H380 giving 3547fps with the same bullet to achieve the most accurate load. This is the most accurate load listed.

 

The fasted listed load for this bullet wt is 3897fps burning 41grn of H380 powder. It is by no means the most accurate load and therefore should not be used at longer ranges and by that fact alone defeats the object of the exercise.

 

Cheers

S_2

Edited May 11, 2005 by Stalker_2

[Highlander]

My god...talk about being baffled by science. I was always taught that fieldcraft and stalking skills, getting close to your quarry or getting the quarry close to you was the primary aim. Some of you guys (if your not b*** s*******) should be shooting for Britain at those ranges. Maybe some of you do for all I know but isn't it asking for trouble shooting quarry out at those ranges in this li'l ol' country of ours??? You might be a terrific shot but doesn't a clean (safe) kill at 100yds make for a better sportsman than one at 300/500/or more, even if it is safe!

[Stalker_2]

I guess that’s the difference mate…I don’t do it for sport, and yes I used to shoot for my country…only those targets used to shoot back. :unsure:

[Gemini]

I guess that’s the difference mate…I don’t do it for sport, and yes I used to shoot for my country…only those targets used to shoot back.

Love it B)

 

 

Highlander old son, I wasn’t advocating shooting things at that distance, just giving examples.

As for shooting for my country, no, I don’t wear the right school tie I’m afraid, even though I can quite happily show you a copy of the rifleman with my name in the top 10 UK short-range target shooters. :unsure:

As for vermin control, most of my shooting is done well under 200 yds but it is very satisfying to be able to take the odd long shot, and this is where I feel the .243 and 70grn bullets comes in handy as it is very flat out to 250yds and only drops by @ 3 inches at 300yds.

G.M.

[dunganick]

exatly that, ive not got much to put to my name......hopefully i can fix that

 

but as has been said.....its just the idea that you can take shots that far if you want to

 

just reminds you how impressive these things are, that you can blat a bunny further than you can see with the naked eye

[JRDS]

The biggest factor in long range shooting is not the drop but the windage, trajectory charts and real world shooting lying down in mud with a 20 mph wind blowing to take your shot mean take it as close as you can.

[Stalker_2]

I think almost everyone knows that mate…especially those of us that have been trained to do it properly. Your point regarding the wind (especially as 20mph is a strong X wind) should be obvious to even the dimmest or untrained marksman/women. I think it should also be remembered that what is long range for some, is a bread and butter shot for others. It all depends on the training, skill and experience of each individual.

 

Just for the sake of discussion I apply windage to every shot I take regardless of calibre/range. Shooting at a rabbit at 100yds with a 22lr subsonic without allowing for the 7mph X wind is going to result in a miss depending on which way the rabbit is sitting. The same rabbit and the same X wind at 20yds will still require me to consider the wind. This is basic marksmanship skills. Part of this same skill requires me to understand how all the prevailing conditions may affect my weapon system. That is the sight, me, the rifle and ammunition. E.g. am I shooting uphill or downhill? Am I shooting in hot or cold conditions, especially when I zeroed in one and shoot in another? How is the light affecting me? The list is as long as the required accuracy dictates…it’s up to the shooter to decide what’s important and what’s not for each and every situation. Of course it does help if they have the training to understand the relevant factors in the first place, but with training all this analysis happens without any conscious effort on the part of the shooter. The other benefit of training and understanding is that you can make your life much simpler. Using the data I collated for my weapon system, I know that if I zero the rifle for 250yds I can forget about making allowances for any range from 0 to 300yds when out shooting foxes at night…as long as I choose a kill zone to cater for the possible 3’ error.

 

 

Cheers

 

S_2

[JRDS]

Might be obvious to you with a built in windometer, but when I hear people talking about 400 yard shots etc it obviously isn't. :unsure: