Suitable "first" rifle

Michael Angelo.

Hi guys, I would appreciate any help from ye in suggesting a good first rifle for me I want to get into "lamping" foxes and that. If ye could add links to check out that would be excellent. I would just like to compliment and thank cavan shooter and John Galway for their excellent input into the hunting forum. Iv used it as a point of referance over the last few months. Thanks in advance

Tackleberrywho

Michael Angelo. wrote: »

Hi guys, I would appreciate any help from ye in suggesting a good first rifle for me I want to get into "lamping" foxes and that. If ye could add links to check out that would be excellent. I would just like to compliment and thank cavan shooter and John Galway for their excellent input into the hunting forum. Iv used it as a point of referance over the last few months. Thanks in advance

Whats your budget and experience level (if any)

Dupont

dont no much about rifles but theres plenty on here that will help you out. at a gun dealer he said a bruno .22 hornet(i think) was a step up from .22 and that it was good for foxes crows and cheap to run .it came with scope and very clean for 350 and the place it was in isnt renowned for being cheap

Tackleberrywho

Dupont wrote: »

dont no much about rifles but theres plenty on here that will help you out. at a gun dealer he said a bruno .22 hornet(i think) was a step up from .22 and that it was good for foxes crows and cheap to run .it came with scope and very clean for 350 and the place it was in isnt renowned for being cheap

TBH
A Hornet will mow foxes, but it is not a very accurate round, and ammo is limited.

If I wanted a Foxer a .17HMR for a Newbie, or a .223 for a person with prior shooting experience.

However, for €350 with a scope a .22 Hornet is ample

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

TBH
A Hornet will mow foxes, but it is not a very accurate round, and ammo is limited.

:eek::mad: WTF? Since when. Its good for 180+yds and will give a good clean kill as always in the right hands, and i'm not talking about someone with 20 years experience. Also ammo, can be gotten anywhere. 3 shops i've been in over the last week/week and a half had a minimum of 5 brands/types.

If I wanted a Foxer a .17HMR for a Newbie, or a .223 for a person with prior shooting experience.

Thats spot on.

However, for €350 with a scope a .22 Hornet is ample

Hornet
.17 hmr

Either of these two calibers are an excellent rifle and very capable of dropping foxes, rabbits and any other vermin. Second hand "ready to shoot" rifles can be gotten for that money, simply shop around.

ormondprop

if you want a rifle for only lamping foxes i would stay away from a rimfire, yes they can kill a fox but they are not the best tool for a job, in my opinion the best for foxing is a .204, .223 .220 swift or .22 hornet, more range and harder hitting and perfect for foxing

if you want to shoot rabbits and crows aswell a .17hmr is a good compromise

Cass

ormondprop wrote: »

............ in my opinion the best for foxing is a .204, .223 .220 swift ........

Absolutely, but not for a first time rifle owner. Too powerful and more range - ie. more room for something to go wrong. Start small and work up.

ormondprop

totally agree with you ez, although if he has a shotgun and is used to firearms a hornet might be a good starter

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

:eek::mad: WTF? Since when. Its good for 180+yds and will give a good clean kill as always in the right hands, and i'm not talking about someone with 20 years experience. Also ammo, can be gotten anywhere. 3 shops i've been in over the last week/week and a half had a minimum of 5 brands/types.

I saw a BRAND new Hornet that a mate of yours could not get to group many years ago. I did say they would MOW a fox

Thats spot on.



Hornet or
.17 hmr

Either of these two calibers are an excellent rifle and very capable of dropping foxes, rabbits and any other vermin. Second hand "ready to shoot" rifles can be gotten for that money, simply shop around.

Just a snippet of Hornet info
http://www.hornady.com/store/22-Hornet-35-gr-V-MAX/
And .17HMR info, the Hornet is Harder hitting
.In there day a Hornet was the Bees Knees, however they have become unpopular these days for recently more available sexier calibres .223 and .204 which is one of the newest calibres on the Market.

In my opinion, If you have experience in firearms a .223 is a fine choice as a fox rifle, John Galway's Rifle being a fine example of one.
http://www.hornady.com/store/223-Rem-55-gr-V-MAX-Moly/

The .223 is flat but cheap to feed, and will drop foxes under a lamp out to 300 yards in experienced hands.

However, in small fields a lesser calibre will do, I';d pick .223 as it has the added option of range, and would put any Hornet to shame in accuracy terms

johngalway

First thing I'd like to know is why do you want to get into lamping foxes? And what part of the country are ya from? What previous shooting experience have you, if any?

To "learn" shooting, then I'd say forget about the foxing for a while and get a .22lr for paper & target shooting, plus bunnies. Get's you used to the wind, shooting safely in practice, getting used to shooting a rifle - doing everything consistently from breathing, to cheek weld, to trigger squeeze, blah, blah, blah.

I've no experience with Hornets, good to 180-200 I believe as Ez says - when you know the rifle/calibre.

I disagree (what's new :pac: ) with buying a HMR as a foxing rifle. I'd shoot a fox with most calibres from .22lr/HMR upwards, but in the correct circumstances.

For a dedicated foxing rifle it's my opinion that a centrefire calibre should be the minimum. With rimfires for "oppertunistic" or ambushing foxes - say near buildings, in relatively controlled situations, etc.

I keep rattling on about "margin of error" in shooting live animals. Getting accuracy level of X practicing on paper targets in a rested state in good weather doesn't automatically transfer that same accuracy level into a hunting situation, where the wind speed and direction may be different, it may be dark, could be wet, you may be breathing real hard, shivering cold, and so forth. So the margin of error is much reduced when you shoot say a 40 grain ballistic tipped .223 bullet at 150 yards as opposed to a 40 grain hollow point subsonic .22lr round, basically, the .223 will make a big expanding mess inside while the .22lr round may pretty enter the fox without deforming much. The idea for a fast clean kill is to put the bullet into a vital area, brain/heart/lungs, and do as much damage as possible while hopefully expending all the bullets energy inside the fox (I like not having exit wounds).

Centrefire ammunition is almost all more expensive than rimfire ammunition. This is why it's recommended to start with a rifle which is cheap to shoot, the shooting learning curve is much less disheartening when you're shooting .22lr subs costing 8 or 9c, compared to say a ballistic tipped round which, if bought in certain places, may cost you €1.50 or €1.60 per shot! Things can get expensive, fast.

As for centrefire foxing calibres, I suppose .223 is the most popular now. .17REM, .204Ruger, .22Hornet, .222, .220Swift (I'm unsure as to whether .22-250 requires a deer cert) would be ones to note, all having advantages and disadvantages of their own.

Plenty of rifle brands out there, Anschutz, Sako, Tikka, Remington, CZ, and others, and lots of models as well.

I would suggest, and hope you take this the right way, that you only get into foxing for the right reasons and not simply because you can There's more satisfaction to be had that way.

landkeeper

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

TBH
A Hornet will mow foxes, but it is not a very accurate round, and ammo is limited.

If I wanted a Foxer a .17HMR for a Newbie, or a .223 for a person with prior shooting experience.

However, for €350 with a scope a .22 Hornet is ample

well that's the first time in 30 years of rifle shooting and 20 years of hornet ownership that anyone has ever said it's not an acurate round my old hornet with remington ammo was by far one of the most accurate rifles out to 200 yrds i have had the pleasure of owning 10 shots into an old pound coin from a rest no problem
in fact i'd prefer it as a foxing rifle to a .17hmr any day ,but the hmr is i suppose more versatile and considerably cheaper to run .you should be able to pick up a hornet resonably enough as they have fallen out of favour somewhat but make no mistake they are an excellent fox rifle especially for lamp work and don't wake up the parish like some of the other options
i use a 223 these days andhave shot a lot of foxes with the lamp there is not one of them i wouldn't have killed with the hornet either ,
there is a better choice of bullet weight available for the other 22 centrfires but that really shouldn't matter as once you find the right one for your rifle stick to it

ormondprop

a .17 hmr will kill foxes safely at around 120 yards a hornet at 180 a swift at over 300 no problem and other calibres will shoot further but the main deciding factor should be at what distance can you and will you shoot them at and then buy a rifle that fits you requirements,
i use a hornet and 9 out of 10 foxes we meet are within range for it as the land around me is hilly and lots of small fields, so for lamping foxes a hornet does me perfect, but saying that i really want to upgrade to a .204 just so i can do more daytime long range varminting on crows and magpies, this is where the hornet falls down as after 200 metres the bullet drops rapidly

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote:

ezridax wrote:

I saw a BRAND new Hornet that a mate of yours could not get to group many yeras ago. I did say they would MOW a fox.

I never said this so why are you quoting me as saying so?

Tackleberrywho wrote:

Just a snippet of Hornet info
http://www.hornady.com/store/22-Hornet-35-gr-V-MAX/
And .17HMR info, the Hornet is Harder hitting

/facepalm.
I gave an opinion from owning a Hornet years ago. You quote a page found from google with no real world experience, and definitely not helpful to a newbie that may not have a grasp on ballistics, etc.

In my opinion, If you have experience in firearms a .223 is a fine choice as a fox rifle, John Galway's Rifle being a fine example of one

Yes, and he has been shooting for years. Plus the OP said this will be his FIRST rifle. Even owning a shotgun is not enough experience to say you can safely use a rifle especially one that is capable of 500+yd shooting.

The .223 is flat but cheap to feed, and will drop foxes under a lamp out to 300 yards in experienced hands

Cheap. If you buy cheap ammo. The Hornady website you referenced. Buy ammo for a .223 from Hornady and you are looking at €28 per box. Yes it can be gotten for as little as €11, but then the same can be said for any caliber ammo. There are cheap rounds and expensive rounds.
Also you say "in experienced hands". Once again the OP states its his first rifle.

Tackleberrywho

ezridax wrote: »

I never said this so why are you quoting me as saying so?



/facepalm.
I gave an opinion from owning a Hornet years ago. You quote a page found from google with no real world experience, and definitely not helpful to a newbie that may not have a grasp on ballistics, etc.
I have a lot of experience of a hornet, we only got the internet in 2007, I had experienced them many years before then
I witnessed a brand new Hornet, a brand new S&B scop and shot by a Competitive shooter that would NOT group smaller than 1.5" @:100


Yes, and he has been shooting for years. Plus the OP said this will be his FIRST rifle. Even owning a shotgun is not enough experience to say you can safely use a rifle especially one that is capable of 500+yd shooting.
My case point is Dusty87, whom I have experienced with a .223 and is a fine success story, after I witnessed him popping a greycrow @almost 200 yards (first rifle)

There are cheap rounds and expensive rounds. ** €10-27
Also you say "in experienced hands". Once again the OP states its his first rifle.

I apologise for using Hornady to show facts and figures, however.............
Their facts and figures are incredibly accurate
And can be broadly used as a guide reference.(in my experience)

At the end of the day, a rifle is a rifle.
I know fellas who's first rifle was a .308! (and are amazing shots)

I know fellas who were shooting when jesus was in short pants, whom could not hit a fox past 75 yards with any rifle:eek:

My first fox Kill was with a .22lr back in the late 90's with winchester HV's.
Nobody used Subs back then. In fact everone wanted Hyper velocties.

I killed more foxes with a .22lr than any of the rifles I have owned, However; A centrefire .22 is the only Job for a fox.

1 shot , 1 kill.
I've never seen a fox get up after a .223 , I have had to out more than one .22yellow Jacket or CCI Stinger into a Madra Rua.


I don't google life Ezridax, I live it

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

At the end of the day, a rifle is a rifle.
I know fellas who's first rifle was a .308! (and are amazing shots)

Sorry, but i don't agree to that belief. I would no more suggest giving a large caliber rifle to a new comer any more than i would to someone with shotgun (only) experience. I do not hold to the arguement that once you can handle the recoil of a shotgun you will be fine with a fullbore rifle.

Yes being able to handle the kick is a great help, but thats were the similarities start and end. Knowing about distance, backstop, scope, adjusting, placement is vital. A shotgun at its best is effective to a max of 100 yards. A .308 is only getting started.

I know fellas who were shooting when jesus was in short pants, whom could not hit a fox past 75 yards with any rifle:eek:

But according to your last stament "A rifle s a rifle" so would you like to be the far side of a field when one them opens up with a .223, .243, .270, .308. I wouldn't.

My first fox Kill was with a .22lr back in the late 90's with winchester HV's.
Nobody used Subs back then. In fact everone wanted Hyper velocties.

Okay.?

I killed more foxes with a .22lr than any of the rifles I have owned, However; A centrefire .22 is the only Job for a fox.

Not the only job, but admittedly the better job. Especially at longer distances. Again though a newbie should start small, and short and work up as their skill level increases.

I've never seen a fox get up after a .223

I have. With .220 swift also. Why? New lad, new rifle, no experience, and out on his merry way. Looks, sees, and pulls the trigger. No concept of shot placement, bullet effectiveness, etc.

I don't google life Ezridax, I live it

Well if the engineering thing doesn't work out for you, advertising would be right up your street.:rolleyes:

It wasn't me!

No issue with someone's first rifle being a centrefire as long as they have the support infrastructure to help them out. To be honest, I don't think anyone can afford to make any mistakes in learning with a .22LR that they couldn't make with a centrefire. Anyone needs at the very least a mentor to tell them about all the things ezri mentioned, be it a .22LR or a .308, and a club environment is great. I'm much more keen to see lads get an appropriate tool for the work they intend to do than that they get something to learn on but which isn't appropriate to their needs. If someone can afford to learn to shoot rifles on a .223 then that's fine, as far as I'm concerned, provided they have the help to learn safely, but cost aside, I feel the same way about a .22LR. I think for someone to just go out and learn things the hard way as they go along is just too dangerous. Everything hinges on the amount of support they have available to them. To be honest, it's a wonderful advocation for the training licence.

Tackleberrywho

It wasn't me! wrote: »

No issue with someone's first rifle being a centrefire as long as they have the support infrastructure to help them out. To be honest, I don't think anyone can afford to make any mistakes in learning with a .22LR that they couldn't make with a centrefire. Anyone needs at the very least a mentor to tell them about all the things ezri mentioned, be it a .22LR or a .308, and a club environment is great. I'm much more keen to see lads get an appropriate tool for the work they intend to do than that they get something to learn on but which isn't appropriate to their needs. If someone can afford to learn to shoot rifles on a .223 then that's fine, as far as I'm concerned, provided they have the help to learn safely, but cost aside, I feel the same way about a .22LR. I think for someone to just go out and learn things the hard way as they go along is just too dangerous. Everything hinges on the amount of support they have available to them. To be honest, it's a wonderful advocation for the training licence.

+1

I grew up on motorbikes, I started on a Learner leagal bike, did a test then migrated on to a bigger and bigger bikes. Having said that I knew fellas who started on bigger bikes and were no more or less experienced at riding than I I was after the same period.

If a young fella learns to shoot properly and safely on a centrefire I say why not.

The DF used to give GPMG's to 16 year olds (after extensive training)
I do believe training licences should be easier got, I'd love to put one or two of y nephews on my licences when they are old enough(I believe this age should be 12 for .223 (due to size and weight of the Rifle)

Years ago every Father/Uncle/Grandfather thought the younger generation to shoot. I believe this is a good ethos to nurture.

Op, It's down to money and experience, If you can afford it, buy a centrefire. Join a range, put a few hundred rounds down range, get to know your rifle like an extension of your Arm (Then think about lamping)
Go lamping as a lamp man with a few others, you will learn a lot from watching and listening . When you have studied the fields by day (and the background) you can migrate on to lamping.

In my day the only way to get a rifle was to be 21 or hold a shotgun for a while (I went shotgun route as I could not wait until 21)

OnTheGame

I shot a rabbit in the head last month with a 22 hornet at 194yards (stepped out) so i wouldnt say its inaccurate but im not arguing thats its very accurate.
I would say chose the hornet due to being a centrefire but still being .22 caliber for first licence point of view and bein more powerful than the .17 for longer range shots. practice makes perfect or as near to it
Suppose licensing depends on what the sergeant thinks.

dev110

I would have to suggest a .22lr as well as it will teach all the basics like wind breathing etc well it did for me. I have had a .22lr for nearly 2 years and I'm only now thinking of moving up to a .223

clivej

Michael Angelo. wrote: »

Hi guys, I would appreciate any help from ye in suggesting a good first rifle for me I want to get into "lamping" foxes and that. If ye could add links to check out that would be excellent. I would just like to compliment and thank cavan shooter and John Galway for their excellent input into the hunting forum. Iv used it as a point of referance over the last few months. Thanks in advance

Well my answer would be to get BOTH the 22lr and the 223.
With 22lr you can get plenty of practice and it won't cost a fortune to run. You'll always keep it for rabbits and crows.

Then with the 223 you can put your practice in action and go for the foxes.

A GOOD dealer will have both in second-hand so that will keep the cost down.

Michael Angelo.

Thanks a million for all the advice!!!