22swift

thehound

can you get a deer licence with a 22swift or would a 243 be better

hathcock

thehound wrote: »

can you get a deer licence with a 22swift or would a 243 be better

don't know of anyone with a swift licenced for deerhunting,thats not to say there isn't,but in any case it's a vermin calibre and imo not a suitable round for deer,on the other hand the .243 winchester is more than adequate for any deer you'll encounter here in Ireland.

hiddenmongoose

I shot deer with both a 308 and a 220 swift up until this season, this year the NPWS wouldnt licence the swift .You used be allowed as long as you were using 60gr bullets as this met the energy requirements but it was changed this season.Pity as I used it to great effect on some of my permissions where 100 to 150 meter shots were the most you could expect with most inside 100m.

Cass

Legally yes.

If it meets the requirements of:

• 55gr or above
• 1,700 ft/lb at the muzzle
• Is .22 centrefire or larger

Then you can have it licensed. This is legislation, and the NPWS cannot refuse a license if it meets the legal minimums.

ecr

As Cass said once u have over 55grain and I Knowlton can get 65 grain for it so should be no problem

thehound

just that i was offered a 22swift at right money and if i wanted to get deer licence would it be possible thanks for replies lads

Ghost.

243 is the better tool for the job shooting deer. 22 swift is a wicked round for fox. But if it's mainly foxing you will be doing with the odd deer during the season the swift would be up to it if you were careful and sensible with you shots. But if you plan on getting into the deer in a big way I wou definitely advise the 243. I know the swift meets the minimum requirements for deer licence but you should call the news and get a definite answer on it.

hiddenmongoose

Cass wrote: »

Legally yes.

If it meets the requirements of:

• 55gr or above
• 1,700 ft/lb at the muzzle
• Is .22 centrefire or larger

Then you can have it licensed. This is legislation, and the NPWS cannot refuse a license if it meets the legal minimums.

They told me on the phone no licence for 220 swift this year, 22-250 and up.There is also no law or legislation stating a minimum acerage needed for a deer licence but they will refuse you unless you have 100 acres.As in a previous thread on that topic I said what if you hace 50 acres puking with deer ... no licence but 100 acres with a bare handfull...licence granted.

As an aside to the op if he does try licence a swift , most factory barrells come in twists that hate the 60 gr and up, my remy vs wasnt half as good grouping with 60's as with 55gr.best of luck

Cass

Ghost. wrote: »

I know the swift meets the minimum requirements for deer licence but you should call the news and get a definite answer on it.

To what purpose.

If the law says it's the above then the NPWS cannot change this no more than the Gardaí can. They are an enforcement body, not a legislative one.

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

They told me on the phone no licence for 220 swift this year, 22-250 and up.

They also told some lads a .223 makes the legal requirements. As for what you were told, it has no basis in law so if you wanted you could fight it.

Please remember that while what i say is legally correct you need to take into account good practices, and i've said before, and still personally believe, that going for the smallest caliber is not the right thing to do. However if you have a Swift, and want to start deer shooting then the law says you can.

ecr

thehound wrote: »

just that i was offered a 22swift at right money and if i wanted to get deer licence would it be possible thanks for replies lads

It's been offered at the right money cos very few are buying the swift now you can buy 308 AMMUNITION cheaper than the swift and that's a proper deer calibre imo thay is but don't get me wrong I had a swift an it's a serious fox gun

zeissman

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

They told me on the phone no licence for 220 swift this year, 22-250 and up.There is also no law or legislation stating a minimum acerage needed for a deer licence but they will refuse you unless you have 100 acres.As in a previous thread on that topic I said what if you hace 50 acres puking with deer ... no licence but 100 acres with a bare handfull...licence granted.

As an aside to the op if he does try licence a swift , most factory barrells come in twists that hate the 60 gr and up, my remy vs wasnt half as good grouping with 60's as with 55gr.best of luck

The NPWS sent my mates application back to him last year telling him he needed 100 acres. He was not pleased and rang them and told them there was no law saying he needed 100 acres. They backed down and issued his licence.

hiddenmongoose

zeissman wrote: »

The NPWS sent my mates application back to him last year telling him he needed 100 acres. He was not pleased and rang them and told them there was no law saying he needed 100 acres. They backed down and issued his licence.

Fair play to him ! as i said you could have 50 acres polluted in them

Ghost.

Cass wrote: »

To what purpose.

If the law says it's the above then the NPWS cannot change this no more than the Gardaí can. They are an enforcement body, not a legislative one.

The purpose would be to find out for sure if the NPWS will issue a licence for a swift or not. Regardless of what the legislation is if things have changed with them and they say no the op will have the hassle free trying to convince them otherwise. Which might be easily done or it might not be. If that is the case he would probably be better off saving himself the time and hassle, pass on the swift if it's not a runner and get a 243 which is better anyway. A simple phone call will let him know exactly where he stands with his good deal with the swift.

thehound

spoke to npws on phone today wont get licence with swift and need 100 acers lady i spoke to was more than helpfull

Cass

Ghost. wrote: »

Regardless of what the legislation is if things have changed with them and they say no ........t.

Regardless of the legislation???????

Jesus wept.

thehound wrote: »

spoke to npws on phone today wont get licence with swift and need 100 acers lady i spoke to was more than helpfull

Why? Did you ask them why they are not issuing licenses that by law are legal?

hiddenmongoose

Cass wrote: »

Regardless of the legislation???????

Jesus wept.

Why? Did you ask them why they are not issuing licenses that by law are legal?

Because its Ireland and government bodies/offices ect do what they like until courts force them to follow the law.I posted earlier that they refused my 220 swift this year,one of the reasons I stepped down to a 223 this year and now have only the 308 for deer.

Ghost.

Cass wrote: »

Regardless of the legislation???????

Jesus wept.

Did he? Ill have to take your word for it. Maybe he was upset because when the op phoned the NPWS they said NO to granting as deer licence for a swift regardless of the legislation like I thought they might do. Tell him dry his eyes its not so bad, every cloud has a silver lining.

At least the op found out for sure where he stood by making the call before he purchased the swift rather than going ahead and buying it with the understanding that he would be granted a deer licence just because someone told him the legislation says so. He wouldn't have been too happy in that scenario Id imagine. It was a good idea to phone them.

In a perfect world they would have said yes because its the law but unfortunately the reality is in Ireland things are pretty much as described by hiddenmongoose. He hit the nail on the head.

Cass

As isn't it a sad state off affairs when you are willing to be f**ked over like that?

This is the crowd that was going to issue licenses, and informed people via e-mail that it was legal, for .223s for stalking.

I'll leave ya to it.

hiddenmongoose

Cass wrote: »

As isn't it a sad state off affairs when you are willing to be f**ked over like that?



I'll leave ya to it.

No its not that 'Im willing' to be ****ed over ,so come off your high horse.
I dont have the price of a solicitor to bring them to court, If I had I would.We as law abiding people/sportspersons shouldnt have to put our hand in our pockets to pay a legal team to fight for what is already legal and force gov bodies to do their job but once again this is Ireland.

Vegeta

thehound wrote: »

spoke to npws on phone today wont get licence with swift

What reasoning was given OP? I haven't read that part of the legislation recently so couldn't say for certain if there is or isn't another subsection giving them powers (via a Minister) to change this type of thing.

As others have said I don't think the swift is the best tool for the job but it wouldn't stop me making a submission for a swift if that's what I really wanted. I'd put in the submission (you can put in a submission without having to purchase the gun, could have a deposit on it) and request all correspondence in writing.

Poll Dubh

It's all about the muzzle energy - a .220 Swift can't produce the required 1700 foot pounds.

Cass

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

No its not that 'Im willing' to be ****ed over ,so come off your high horse.

No high horse, and i wasn't talking to you. I was making a statement.

I dont have the price of a solicitor to bring them to court, If I had I would.We as law abiding people/sportspersons shouldnt have to put our hand in our pockets to pay a legal team to fight for what is already legal and force gov bodies to do their job but once again this is Ireland.

Neither do i, but i still took the time today to write to the NPWS asking for an explanation of their reasons for refusing any deer legal calibre, and the legislation that says 100 acres is a minimum to get a license.

I asked them to point out any amendment to SI239/1977, and asked under what authority do they refuse a license that is written in law.

Poll Dubh wrote: »

It's all about the muzzle energy - a .220 Swift can't produce the required 1700 foot pounds.

Erm, yes it can:

50 gr 3,947 ft/s (1,203 m/s) 1,730 ft·lbf (2,350 J)
55 gr 3,839 ft/s (1,170 m/s) 1,800 ft·lbf (2,400 J)
60 gr 3,647 ft/s (1,112 m/s) 1,772 ft·lbf (2,403 J)

As 50gr is not legal then 55+ makes the necessary energy requirements.

hiddenmongoose

Cass wrote: »

Neither do i, but i still took the time today to write to the NPWS asking for an explanation of their reasons for refusing any deer legal calibre, and the legislation that says 100 acres is a minimum to get a license.

So did I at the time and got no response,did you?

As 'sparks' commented in reply to ''
can they just make this stuff up without it being law (just like the magical 100 acre issue)''
on an older thread 'deer licences refused due to declining numbers' in which I brought up the 100 acre issue, he replied..

''Yes. It's called policy and unless it violates statue law and is challenged in a court successfully, they're perfectly able to do that''.

And he is right,lots of Depts doing this sort of thing,until brought to court.It is wrong that they can just make policy like that as what is to stop the policy saying 200 acres or 300 or 1000.As with alot of our sport we need clearer defined laws and they need to be followed by those govt bodies,we the sportspersons are following things to the letter of the law and doing things right, why cant they!(We all know why!)

zeissman

I was just talking to a mate who got his deer hunting licence for his 220 swift last week.

thehound

reason i as given was there balestic expert says 22 swift cant produce 1700 foot pounds

thehound

looks like i started a right debate on balstices lads thanks for all the comments.looking at a marlin sx7 243 tomorrow

thehound

no prob cass interesting to look at all the comments and what different lads think

Cass

I've split off the other comments onto this thread.

Zxthinger

Poll Dubh wrote: »

It's all about the muzzle energy - a .220 Swift can't produce the required 1700 foot pounds.

Don't talk rubbish pd! I have factory rounds that knock out 1810ft/lbs going by the stats on the box but my extra long barrel gives me an extra 50fps than the quoted velocity an throws me well above 1810fpe
And that's with a 50grain bullet,

I have horandy 60grain HP that quote 1727fpe from 24" test barrel.

I have Norma oryx rounds 55grain bonded large game bullets that quote 1737fpe, I get more energy with longer barrel and have confirmed as much by charting drops at know distances. Btw I get 1/3moa accuracy with these rounds and that really surprised me! They are devastating rounds on both deer and fox. DRT out to 150yards!
As for HP varmint rounds, well I don't use them! Have no call to! But could be the ticket for head and neck shots if that's your thing!

Zxthinger

thehound wrote: »

reason i as given was there balestic expert says 22 swift cant produce 1700 foot pounds

I was told similar. I simply quoted the law and stated that my swift & I comply with ledgislation and was inform that my application was being refused because a""ballistics expert"" claims that no 55grain round meets the criteria! I was told that I would have to resubmit app with intended 60grain ammo to which I initally and regrettably agreed. Upon ending the call to the NPWS agent I became angry and rang back!
I explained and quoted the figures for the 55grain ammo I intended using but was meet with a point blank refusal to accept this data, after some deliberation it transpired that only 'pre-approved ammunition on a list' could be accepted for certain calibers (swift).
The upshot is that certain 55grains dont cut it! And NPWS didn't gave a exhaustive list as my norma oryx wasn't on it!
I had to make written submissions to the county wildlife manager in which I displayed the facts and linked the relevant manufactures websites.
All went smoothly and I'm shooting deer again with a swift!

If it does have a weakness, it's that the Norma stuff has poor BC's and bleeds energy fast and ironically the lower bullet weights, having high BC's due to their ballistic tipped varmint profiles, will hold higher energy at extended ranges when compaired to the Norma oryx but that the price of a premium bonded core bullet designed to smash bone and still continue on in!

tomcat220t

Zxthinger wrote: »

Don't talk rubbish pd! I have factory rounds that knock out 1810ft/lbs going by the stats on the box but my extra long barrel gives me an extra 50fps than the quoted velocity an throws me well above 1810fpe
And that's with a 50grain bullet,

I have horandy 60grain HP that quote 1727fpe from 24" test barrel.

I have Norma oryx rounds 55grain bonded large game bullets that quote 1737fpe, I get more energy with longer barrel and have confirmed as much by charting drops at know distances. Btw I get 1/3moa accuracy with these rounds and that really surprised me! They are devastating rounds on both deer and fox. DRT out to 150yards!
As for HP varmint rounds, well I don't use them! Have no call to! But could be the ticket for head and neck shots if that's your thing!

Hi Zxthinger,Norma 55gr .220 swift , by their own site is for SMALL game , not large as you stated above .What do you regard irish deer as in therms of game size ..inc red deer ?
What extra length is your swift barrel?
Regards, Tomcat.

Zxthinger

tomcat220t wrote: »

Hi Zxthinger,Norma 55gr .220 swift , by their own site is for SMALL game , not large as you stated above .What do you regard irish deer as in therms of game size ..inc red deer ?
What extra length is your swift barrel?
Regards, Tomcat.

Might have made small error quoting the manufactures spec! namely large/small game! But tbh I'm not whole concerned as anything I have shot has gone down! Including reds!

As to the barrel length it's an irrelevant point as I have tested the drops to validate the BCs and it's all good! Nothing was hitting low out to 400yards! Some stuff was coming in 1moa high when zeroed at 225yds.

I haven't pushed it beyond 150yds as it's not recommended but that suits my permissions and my style tbh.

Oh red deer! Well large for Ireland but still just deer!. And suitable for the swift if you accept the calibres limitations.
Have you ever owned a swift?
Oh barrel length! Well I think I had a 26" barrel on when I tested all this stuff!

tomcat220t

Zxthinger wrote: »

Might have made small error quoting the manufactures spec! namely large/small game! But tbh I'm not whole concerned as anything I have shot has gone down! Including reds!

As to the barrel length it's an irrelevant point as I have tested the drops to validate the BCs and it's all good! Nothing was hitting low out to 400yards! Some stuff was coming in 1moa high when zeroed at 225yds.

I haven't pushed it beyond 150yds as it's not recommended but that suits my permissions and my style tbh.

Oh red deer! Well large for Ireland but still just deer!. And suitable for the swift if you accept the calibres limitations.
Have you ever owned a swift?
Oh barrel length! Well I think I had a 26" barrel on when I tested all this stuff!

Hi Zxthinger,im sure your happy with the .220 swift for deer .What i was getting at was the limitations on game size recommend that norma place on your 55gr ammo.(small game).Just a taught!
Dont thing sika deer species are classed as small game .
Had a .220 swift for a while and like it for foxes.
Regards,Tomcat.

Zxthinger

Game size and what Norma say is a bit hit and mix! You search their site and youll find softer hitting ammo classed as for medium game!

Take a good look at a site called ballisticstudies.com iirc. You'll see a more detailed chart showing the swifts capabilities etc. Youll also see that it's quoted as not the best calibre to reach for when targeting medium game that might be as heavy as up to 260lbs. That red deer size. 

The calibre has limitations, but to be honest I haven't seen them but I stay on the safe side of cautious. 

On other point! Norma quotes this a small game callibre but after looking up 'small game' I'm left wondering if any real thought went into it's classification. 
Irrelevant of all that, Norma oryx is the only bonded factory bullet out there afaik. 
Anyway it's legal and it works and I bought if for those reasons! If they were ever to change the minimum requirement than it would be nice and polite if they allowed the holders of deer licences granted on say 22-250 and 220 swift to continue to relicence them for deer hunting until such time as they were sold on or scraped!
Personally I would have bought a 270/260rem/6.5-284 from the start but laws here being a bit anal curtailed by ambitions and forced me into the realm of the 22's. So after a bit of research I soon realised that the 220 swift would meet Garda approval as a .22cal (lol) and later it would meet the deer hunting requirements. 
The current system creates a recipe that causes firearms touting hunting enthusiasts to purchase additional firearms as they develop, as one calibre can't satisfy Garda 'approval and secure a licence' and still allow you to develop as a shooting hunter It's a systemic failure of a government that is trying to control firearms proliferation and serves as an example that stringent controls do not always achieve their goals. It's seems that it's really only a problem that effects hunters IMO as I see target shooters buying 308s and the like from the get-go, or whatever caliber best suits their needs. If hunters were allowed choose one calibre without having to justify it to the Nth degree then how many would have went for the likes of a 243 or 260rem?? 
How many here would have only ever bothered with an air rifle if they were easier to obtain or licence?
How many deer hunting rifles would be resigned to the second hand shelf if archery or shotgun slugs were permissible for deer hunting.

Things are not always as they seem,
   

tomcat220t

Hi Zxthinger,good post and pretty up sums up .220 swift .
Not all shooters put the time and research into their calibers ,ammo.ect ..as clearly you have .Fair play :cool:
Regards,Tomcat.

lakesider

tomcat220t wrote: »

Hi Zxthinger,good post and pretty up sums up .220 swift .
Not all shooters put the time and research into their calibers ,ammo.ect ..as clearly you have .Fair play :cool:
Regards,Tomcat.

Thats so true, some posters think it cant make 1700 ft/lbs......lol

tomcat220t

lakesider wrote: »

Thats so true, some posters think it cant make 1700 ft/lbs......lol

I still maintain that not all swifts are not making their advertized ammo speeds ....ive seen this first hand .Find .220 swift ammo that is for medium (sika)/large(red) game.
Regards,Tomcat.

lakesider

tomcat220t wrote: »

I still maintain that not all swifts are not making their advertized ammo speeds ....ive seen this first hand .Find .220 swift ammo that is for medium (sika)/large(red) game.
Regards,Tomcat.

and your expertise in ballistics comes from where?..the ballygobackwards firearms and ballistics college..lol

lakesider

tomcat220t wrote: »

I still maintain that not all swifts are not making their advertized ammo speeds ....ive seen this first hand .Find .220 swift ammo that is for medium (sika)/large(red) game.
Regards,Tomcat.

and your expertise in ballistics comes from where?..the ballygobackwards firearms and ballistics college..lol..im not claiming any thing thats not out there in the public domain-

Arising from a recent Deer Alliance HCAP Range Test, the question arises, is the .220 Swift a suitable round for use on our Irish deer species?




The current minimum legal calibre for use on deer in Ireland is not defined by calibre but rather by bullet weight and muzzle energy. The minimum legal bullet weight is 55 grains and the minimum legal muzzle energy is 1637 foot-pounds, Effectively, this is taken to mean the .22/250 which in the period 1972-1993 was probably the most widely used centre-fire round, although for many the preferred round was the 5.6 x 57 m.m. with 74 grain bullet.




From 1993, larger-calibre firearms became available and accepted by the licensing authority (Garda Siochana). This came about as a result of certain legal actions in the form of judicial review in the High Court against refusal of firearms certificates for calibres above .22 inch. Thus the keener deer hunters switched over to calibres such as the .243, .270, 6.5 x 55 m.m. and .308, while newcomers to deer hunting automatically went for the larger calibres.




Nevertheless, there remains a hardened corps of hunters who still use the .22/250 and in a few cases, the 5.6 x 57 m.m. This is despite the fact that unanimously, the various deer organisations, and especially Deer Alliance HCAP, are committed to the promotion and use of .240 inch, 100-grain bullet with muzzle energy of 2100 foot-pounds as the recommended minimum legal calibre for our Irish deer species.




For purposes of the Range Test element of HCAP, candidates must use the legal minimum calibre (not necessarily the minimum recommended legal, which is a different calibre). For a small handful of candidates, this has meant the .22/250. More recently, one candidate presented with a rifle in calibre .220 Swift, with 60 grain bullet. While the standard .220 Swift with 40- or 50-grain bullet does not meet the minimum legal calibre requirement, the same calibre with 60 grain bullet does, since in Winchester 60 grain, it delivers 1772 foot-pounds (2403 Joules) of energy at muzzle.



Thus Deer Alliance HCAP are satisfied that the .220 Swift with 60-grain bullet may be used for purposes of the HCAP Range Test, while strongly advocating that the minimum legal calibre should be .240 inches, with 100-grain bullet and muzzle energy of 2100 foot-pounds, for all purposes relating to the humane and effective management of wild deer.

tomcat220t

lakesider wrote: »

and your expertise in ballistics comes from where?..the ballygobackwards firearms and ballistics college..lol

You stayed to near 3 this morning talking to yourself:D:D.
The .22s are been phased out on deer by both hunters and powers that be in ireland and rightly so in my opinion .
98% of the ammo/rifle combos. dont meet the min ft/lbs in the swift caliber .
Non of the 2% that do make the min required ft/lbs are ammo built for medium/large game .
All ammo have the max recommend game size .....you think that bullet manufactures are in the habbit of underestimate their bullets capability ....quite the opposite imo.
Thats not to say in the right hands that a .220 swift can do the job.
Regards,Tomcat.

The Aussie

tomcat220t wrote: »

The .22s are been phased out on deer by both hunters and powers that be in ireland and rightly so in my opinion .

Has this been reported on by a reputable source?

I've heard this a number of times, but is it one of those rumours that grows legs and becomes fact

tomcat220t wrote: »

98% of the ammo/rifle combos. dont meet the min ft/lbs in the swift caliber .
Non of the 2% that do make the min required ft/lbs are ammo built for medium/large game .

98%??? I'm going to have to ask for a Link to that statistic sorry, or I'm just going to call Bull**** on it now! and just for the record I don't own a Swift or a 22-250, I'm in the .24 cal Tribe. But can we stick to semi realistic stories for the sake of a good debate please.

tomcat220t

The Aussie wrote: »

Has this been reported on by a reputable source?

I've heard this a number of times, but is it one of those rumours that grows legs and becomes fact





98%??? I'm going to have to ask for a Link to that statistic sorry, or I'm just going to call Bull**** on it now! and just for the record I don't own a Swift or a 22-250, I'm in the .24 cal Tribe. But can we stick to semi realistic stories for the sake of a good debate please.

Its smiple,show mean example of ammo in the swift that meet the min energy and is suited for medium/large game ?
So far one example , norma 55gr gets over the min energy line and is for small game !Sika can be up to 175lbs weight .....not SMALL game.
Regards,Tomcat.

The Aussie

You did not answer the first question!

Show me where the "powers that be" are phasing out the .22 Cals as a Deer Caliber???

Or is it just a perpetuation of a myth?

tomcat220t wrote: »

Its smiple,show mean example of ammo in the swift that meet the min energy and is suited for medium/large game ?
So far one example , norma 55gr gets over the min energy line and is for small game !Sika can be up to 175lbs weight .....not SMALL game.
Regards,Tomcat.

So where in your mathematical equation do you end up at 98%???

I would like both questions answered by the way.

hiddenmongoose

I posted back in the start of this whole thing that up until last year I used a swift for deer as well as a 308.I used the swift in my permissions where shots were averaging 80 to 150 m .I never had a walker from the swift all DRT.Thats on all species apart from reds,never used it on reds.In the right circumstances and with common sense used it is a very lethal and accurate calibre on deer.
Its not the calibre of choice if you were to have only one rifle for deer but like in my situation where I had a specific rifle for deer (308) and had a swift for foxes then why not double job it for those small permissions.
You can argue ethics all day,If its legal its legal full stop,and unless you have used a swift and on deer arguing numbers is beside the point.It filled my freezer without any runners .

tomcat220t

The Aussie wrote: »

You did not answer the first question!

Show me where the "powers that be" are phasing out the .22 Cals as a Deer Caliber???

Or is it just a perpetuation of a myth?




So where in your mathematical equation do you end up at 98%???

I would like both questions answered by the way.

Did you read post 30 ? NPSW..."powers that be"one example of a few i know of this year.
M mathematical equation is probably a Conservative one because i dont see any bullet manufacture that design .220 swift ammo for medium/large game.
Regards,Tomcat.

The Aussie

tomcat220t wrote: »

Did you read post 30 ? NPSW..."powers that be"one example of a few i know of this year.

From the same people that brought you the "you need 100 acres son" myth

Has it been written down in legislation or reported on by a reputable source as in the pipeline?

tomcat220t wrote: »

M mathematical equation is probably a Conservative one because i dont see any bullet manufacture that design .220 swift ammo for medium/large game.
Regards,Tomcat.

But they do meet the ft/lbs set out in Legislation, your defense of the "Bullet manufacturers don't design .220 Swift ammo for Mediun/Large Game" is sadly not in Legislation, making your stout defense on your theories flawed, unless your being intentionally obtuse :pac:......
Your mystical 98% is not "conservitave" it's a big steaming pile to be fair.

tomcat220t

The Aussie wrote: »

From the same people that brought you the "you need 100 acres son" myth

Has it been written down in legislation or reported on by a reputable source as in the pipeline?



But they do meet the ft/lbs set out in Legislation, your defense of the "Bullet manufacturers don't design .220 Swift ammo for Mediun/Large Game" is sadly not in Legislation, making your stout defense on your theories flawed, unless your being intentionally obtuse :pac:......
Your mystical 98% is not "conservitave" it's a big steaming pile to be fair.

I answered your questions, at least have the courtesy to answer my one on post 42.
Regards,Tomcat.

The Aussie

tomcat220t wrote: »

I answered your questions, at least have the courtesy to answer my one on post 42.
Regards,Tomcat.

What this... LOL

tomcat220t wrote: »

Its smiple,show mean example of ammo in the swift that meet the min energy and is suited for medium/large game ?

It is not in Legislation stipulating Small, Medium nor Large Game, it is ft/lbs so I just wrote off the above "Question"(lol) as nonsensical rubbish sorry, you seem fairly caught up with the whole "it's not designed for Large Game" (it's better if you say that in a Hellen Lovejoy " won't somebody please think of the children" voice)

If you want Legislation changed you should petition for it...

tomcat220t

The Aussie wrote: »

What this... LOL



It is not in Legislation stipulating Small, Medium nor Large Game, it is ft/lbs so I just wrote off the above "Question"(lol) as nonsensical rubbish sorry, you seem fairly caught up with the whole "it's not designed for Large Game" (it's better if you say that in a Hellen Lovejoy " won't somebody please think of the children" voice)

If you want Legislation changed you should petition for it...

That what i taught .....
Regards,Tomcat.

hiddenmongoose

dont see why tomcat is geting caught up as to whether the bullet was designed for deer or not.I used 60gr hp hornadys and they killed like ebola!
on that same point I have killed deer with my 308 with match bullets,168gr smks,175gr scenars and 155s .Even the most expensive hunting designed bullets often dont expand/mushroom as intended as it all has to do with what it strikes on impact,typically of course they preform better than match bullets BUT if you put a 308 sized hole in a deers head ,neck or heart it is going to drop,regardless of what bullet did it.over half the deer I dropped last year were to match bullets as the hunting bullet of my choice could not be got locally and I used the match bullets that I was zeroed with.Shot placement is what its all about, bad shot placement cannot be compensated for by bullet design.

The Aussie

tomcat220t wrote: »

That what i taught .....
Regards,Tomcat.

What?

That your wrong


Regards, The Aussie.