Going bald trying to decide what calibre !

ormondprop

cookimonster wrote: »

In fairness Cass this is true...... but for my last few firearm purchases I have done the leg work before approaching the dealers and chatted with the local firearms officer to see the ly of the land. It's worth it and you can use this information for your next course of action.

Its worth a shot alright but make sure you know how your local station polices it, when i sold my .223 i was told i could get a .22-250 but not a .243 without a deer license, was going to get a .22-250 and later apply for a deer license with it and then upgrade to something bigger when i got around to stalking deer but bought a .204 instead, as i couldn't find a nice .22-250 around as most dealers around don't stock new ones, as most stations make you get a deer license for it and if your getting a deer license why undergun yourself with a .22-250 when you could get a .270 or any other better deer rifle

yubabill1

223 barrel could last up to 30,000 rounds. One of the many reasons I bought one.

That and the cheaper ammo.

Any 223 expanding ammo will stop any fox. Make sure to place the shot best you can, of course.

You can use cheaper FMJ's for rabbits without meat damage.

It's a jack-of-all-trades.

In the end, you can listen to us ad nauseum, but you will know deep down what you want IMHO.

vapour_trail

Thanks to everyone for the info. Was talking to a lad in the gun club this afternoon and hes put in for a .223 two weeks ago. He got a call last week from the super who was saying he wasnt comfortable granting a military calibre just for foxes. He has to go for some sort of interview during the week Sounds like Im in for a fun time in the next few weeks lads , a fun time indeed :P

yubabill1

vapour_trail wrote: »

Thanks to everyone for the info. Was talking to a lad in the gun club this afternoon and hes put in for a .223 two weeks ago. He got a call last week from the super who was saying he wasnt comfortable granting a military calibre just for foxes. He has to go for some sort of interview during the week Sounds like Im in for a fun time in the next few weeks lads , a fun time indeed :P

There are very few rounds that are not military calibre somewhere, or have been derived from military research.

I can't think of even one, offhand.

tomcat220t

yubabill1 wrote: »

223 barrel could last up to 30,000 rounds. One of the many reasons I bought one.

That and the cheaper ammo.

Any 223 expanding ammo will stop any fox. Make sure to place the shot best you can, of course.

You can use cheaper FMJ's for rabbits without meat damage.

It's a jack-of-all-trades.

In the end, you can listen to us ad nauseum, but you will know deep down what you want IMHO.

Hi yubabill, do you mind me asking where you got the info about a .223 could last up 30,000 rounds ?Sound a lot of round ,imo .
Not saying your making it up ...just interested .
Regards ,Tomcat.

tomcat220t

vapour_trail wrote: »

Thanks to everyone for the info. Was talking to a lad in the gun club this afternoon and hes put in for a .223 two weeks ago. He got a call last week from the super who was saying he wasnt comfortable granting a military calibre just for foxes. He has to go for some sort of interview during the week Sounds like Im in for a fun time in the next few weeks lads , a fun time indeed :P

Hi vapour ,the .223 REM is not a military caliber .......5.56X45 NATO is a military caliber !
Regards ,Tomcat.

vapour_trail

tomcat220t wrote: »

Hi vapour ,the .223 REM is not a military caliber .......5.56X45 NATO is a military caliber !
Regards ,Tomcat.

You, me and lads that are educated in the sport know this. The lad who decides who does and who doesnt get granted, does not... Doesnt make sense does it?

tomcat220t

vapour_trail wrote: »

You, me and lads that are educated in the sport know this. The lad who decides who does and who doesnt get granted, does not... Doesnt make sense does it?

Hi vapour,while i agree with you ...the guys who grants or not the licences shouldnt ignore the facts on calibers .
I wish you the best and if its a .223 REM your applying for you should stand your ground ,imo.
Regards,Tomcat.

cookimonster

The Garda Commissioner's Guidelines as to the Practical Application & Operation of Firearms Act, 1925 - 2009 - as amended 22/10/09 - Garda.ie

Give this a browse, there's a section on page 31 (?) that outlines recommended calibers for various quarry.

Know what's what......fore warned is fore armed (sorry for pune).

yubabill1

tomcat220t wrote: »

Hi yubabill, do you mind me asking where you got the info about a .223 could last up 30,000 rounds ?Sound a lot of round ,imo .
Not saying your making it up ...just interested .
Regards ,Tomcat.

couple of guys who've done it (not in roi)

Tommy87

yubabill1 wrote: »

It's a jack-of-all-trades.

Jack of all trades......... Master of none!!

zeissman

I dont think any standard 223 barrel would last for 30,000 rounds.
I think about 5,000 rounds would be a more realistic figure before groups would open up.
I have read about 308 barrels lasting for 10,000 rounds and also about guys having to rebarrel them after as little as 1200 rounds.
I wouldnt worry about it, a barrel will last a long time with the kind of hunting we do here.

yubabill1

zeissman wrote: »

I dont think any standard 223 barrel would last for 30,000 rounds.
I think about 5,000 rounds would be a more realistic figure before groups would open up.
I have read about 308 barrels lasting for 10,000 rounds and also about guys having to rebarrel them after as little as 1200 rounds.
I wouldnt worry about it, a barrel will last a long time with the kind of hunting we do here.

Didn't say anything about groups, but you are right, if you want to punch paper you will need a new barrel sooner.

Throat erosion is minimal in the 223, but like any barrel, if you heat it up it will wear more quickly.

I wouldn't imagine a 223 barrel with 30,000 rounds through it would be too accurate but it would suit fox hunting at 100yds or under.

By the time I put 30,000 through my 223, I'll be happy if I can hit a fox at any range ;-)

meathstevie

If you can manage to shoot slower than an MG42 or a Minimi you'll get a lifetime of hunting out of your rifle

PL05

Had a .22/250 for many years, in fact i only changed to 243 this year. Can,t comment on 223 cause never owned or used one but can tell you about 250. With regards to accuracy and nice flat trajectory, you cant go wrong. However there,s a bit of an over kill with them when round hits bone, which is one of the reasons i changed. Was shooting with a friend years back when he shot a fox with a 250 at about 100yds square in chest and i **** you not it was like the fox stepped on a land mine, he literally exploded. Have shot quite a few deer with one myself and always a lot of damage on exit when shot in chest, certainly not the case when i neck shot them, like flicking a switch, instant. Anyway if a 223 is up to the job you want it for then i,d go with it, i,d say ammo is cheaper than 250 also. The last time i bought 250 ammo i paid 38euro a box of 55gr. So what ever you decide good luck.

PL05

ormondprop wrote: »

Its worth a shot alright but make sure you know how your local station polices it, when i sold my .223 i was told i could get a .22-250 but not a .243 without a deer license, was going to get a .22-250 and later apply for a deer license with it and then upgrade to something bigger when i got around to stalking deer but bought a .204 instead, as i couldn't find a nice .22-250 around as most dealers around don't stock new ones, as most stations make you get a deer license for it and if your getting a deer license why undergun yourself with a .22-250 when you could get a .270 or any other better deer rifle

Be careful with that route. As you probably already know there,s pressure on to change the minimum legal caliber for deer hunting which at the moment is .22/250 to .240 or higher, although this is only a recommendation at the moment by various groups/bodies including coillte i,ve a feeling it will come in eventually. A few years back i had a deer license refused on grounds that .22/250 was not acceptable for reasons to do with muzzle energy etc, I rang the NPWS the next day and quickly pointed out that it stated on the application and on their web site that the legal calibre was .22/250, i got the license a few days later. The following year it was refused on grounds that 55gr bullets where not acceptable for deer hunting, so again i rang and pointed out that .22/250 using bullets not less than 55gr was clearly stated on application. The person asked me would i be prepared to use a heavier grain bullet say 65gr [his words], i agreed and had license in post a few days later. So you can see where im going with this and this is another reason why i changed calibre.

Cass

The NPWS can only enforce the law which does not mention 22/250 regardless of what is on the application. It says centre-fire rifle with bullet of not less than .22 cal & 55gr, producing 1,700ft/lb.

The reason they say 22/250 is because (in Ireland at least) that is the lowest caliber rifle with that bullet combo that produces sufficient energy to be deer legal.

The .220 Swift will also meet the criteria, but the .223 will not. While they are all 5.7mm bullets (swift, .223 & 22/250) the case (as in chambering) does not allow the lower cal such as .223 to reach the necessary energy. Probably saying that arse-ways but ya get the idea. Bullet size is not as important as chambering.

sikahuntejack

I shot all my deer last years with a 22.250 hate listening to bull**** lads saying you should not shoot deer with a 22.250 i neck shot all my deer from 70 yards to 200 yards all dropped on the spot its a savage gun , i upgraded this year to a 308 because i got permission for red deer but would have no problem going back to the 22.250 if i got rid of the 308

PL05

sikahuntejack wrote: »

I shot all my deer last years with a 22.250 hate listening to bull**** lads saying you should not shoot deer with a 22.250 i neck shot all my deer from 70 yards to 200 yards all dropped on the spot its a savage gun , i upgraded this year to a 308 because i got permission for red deer but would have no problem going back to the 22.250 if i got rid of the 308

Might be mistaken here but by lads bull****ing, i take it you mean the powers that be because i dont recall telling anyone they should,nt shoot deer with a .22/250. I just gave my opinion on caliber to chap that posted this thread, if i could have kept my 250 i would have because your right they are a savage gun. But i,ll stand by what i said, there is a bit of an overkill with them. [in my opinion] that is.

vapour_trail

Still cant decide between the .223 and .22-250 Great bit of info from everyone but Im still in the same pickle as before !

TriggerPL

Overkill ! Dead is dead simple as that !

zeissman

vapour_trail wrote: »

Still cant decide between the .223 and .22-250 Great bit of info from everyone but Im still in the same pickle as before !

Just get yourself a 204 then :P

customrifle

Go into dealers and ask to see rifles in both calibers and whichever one feels right ask him to do up paper work. If i was buying one of those calibers at the minute id search for a sako 75 varmint in 223.

PL05

TriggerPL wrote: »

Overkill ! Dead is dead simple as that !

True, but what i meant by over kill is with 250 the round tends to fragment when hitting hard areas such as bone and can cause huge damage to carcass with chest shots and you end up with quite a bit of carcass wasted. does,nt always happen but quite often does. im no expert but thats my experiance with them, and had a 250 for years. fantastic for neck shots though.

TriggerPL

PL05 wrote: »

True, but what i meant by over kill is with 250 the round tends to fragment when hitting hard areas such as bone and can cause huge damage to carcass with chest shots and you end up with quite a bit of carcass wasted. does,nt always happen but quite often does. im no expert but thats my experiance with them, and had a 250 for years. fantastic for neck shots though.

If ur getting fragmentation lad ur using the wrong bullets . And if you hit bone ul alway have meat damage no matter what your firing lad , if you want no meat damage head or neck is the only way to go . So caliber don't really come into it when you go for a deer caliber , hit a bone with any of them will give you a lot of waste

PL05

point taken. im aware that there will always be some sort of damage/waste, but do you not think that other calibers rounds hold together better when hitting target?.

TriggerPL

PL05 wrote: »

point taken. im aware that there will always be some sort of damage/waste, but do you not think that other calibers rounds hold together better when hitting target?.

No really lad if you use the likes of soft points , or non frag bullets then u shouldn't lad , I stand to be corrected

dogcityroller

Had a 22-250 for the foxes- great round but thought it was too much for foxes. Changed to a 223 a few years back and have never regretted it. Far less recoil , great availability of bullets and have taken foxes out to 355 yards at night with 60 grain vmaxes- I live in Northern Ireland and reload my own bullets- work out about 45 pence per bullet but are much more accurate than factory rounds.