A Question that i would like awnsered if anyone can.
Why in this country can you not use a .220swift to shoot Deer and you can use a .22-250??
considering that the 220swift is more powerfull and is faster.
both bullets are .224" in diam
I cant figure it out
I can't swear to it ..
But isn't .243 the minimum approved calibre for deer .
It used to be 22-250 , but I thought it had changed.
no you can still use .22-250 it is the minimum caliber..
To see info regarding why the 220swift is a more supierior round than the 22-250 look here..
It's probably as goofily simple as ".220 Swift only has a .220 bullet (and is called after a bird ), sure that's only an ordinary gun; the .22-250 has a bigger number in it (a '250' ), so it's definitely much bigger and is therefore suitable for deer".
More than likely decided upon using the same 'expert guidelines' that the firearms Guards use for determining firearm power in ascending numerical order of nominal calibre.
on a rifle license a .22lr and a .220 swift are classed as the same calibe and the same gun. but the round is completely different
Well we know that the gardai are stupid!!
But i looked up deer licences this morning just typed in "deer ireland " in google and its the 2nd one down and it states from the wildlife act 1976 and it says that the minimum caliber is .220-250 with a 50gr bullet or more..
and this was put together by the national deer assocation ireland one would think that they would know better..
Blanket statements like that won't help things, I reckon.
ahh twas a bit of sarcasm i'd say
Too True!! im glad some of us have a sence of humour
but anyway back to topic
I just wonder will this rule regarding the swift be changed or mabye if a letter was wrote to the national deer association pointing out the facts and pointing out that an error was made?
There are very few 220 swift loads out there which would be at all suitable for deer, most of them are light varmint loads. The same could be said for most 22-250 loads, but the wider available selection meant there were a few that could be pressed into service when nothing else was available.
.22-250 was around in the Irish market a lot earlier than .220 swift became popular here (ironic given the swift is the older round), which probably explains why one was selected as allowable and the other wasn't.
Anyway, even though lots of deer have gone down to neckshots with 22-250, but given more suitable calibres are available now, the question has to be asked why bother with a marginal one?
Yes i see where you are coming from. its just something that came up the other night and i just wondered what your view here on it was..
I know there are lots of calibers available here that are suitable for deer it was just a matter of princable i suppose
Thanks for the info
i agree with civdef there most of the .220 swift rounds for sale here are designed for shooting foxes and such i have a swift and i buy 40 gram rounds which is the only one my dealer has for sale and minimum round for a deer is 50 gram.
Im nearly certain i know of someone that uses a .220 swift for deer and he's licenced
the swift is faster than the .22/250 which in turn increase's the energy of the bullet and killing power just because there isnt alot of suitable bullets made for .22 swift for deer doesnt mean there isnt any
i dont think pushing up the limit is fair what about the person that shoots around 5 deer a year and uses the gun for shooting bunnies and foxes as well why make him pay more for ammo when he doesnt have to of course a bigger calibre would be better for a heart lung shot but whats wrong with a head neck shot with a fast accurate bullet as long as it gets the job done every time with one shot i dont see the problem
I normally use 52gr remington psp or 55gr federal bthp 60gr in my swift have no problem getting them in waterford..
1 Imperial (Avoirdupois) Pound = 7000grains = 453.5924grams (0.4535924kg)
The '50gram' bullet in the above quote would be 771.62grains.
That's the sort of thing you'd find on the business end of a .50BMG or a .557 Tyrannosaur.
It would undoubtedly be (spectacularly) effective on deer, but I doubt we'll ever see the Parks and Wildlife people requiring it.