Caliber Advice

RS98

Hi lads,

I've been using a 22LR for a good few months now, for target shooting but also for bunnies. Problem is I'm not getting the range that I need with the . 22. I was thinking of applying for new caliber. From what I've read, the 17 HMR is affected a lot by the wind, and it's relatively windy where I live, especially in the winter. I'm looking for a caliber that shoots as flat as the HMR without the super light bullet that goes all around the place in a breeze.

I've seen few foxes around the place so I'm leaning towards a 22 hornet at the moment, to step foot into the centerfire world.

What I'm wondering is, is it too soon to step up into centerfires or should I get an intermediate caliber first, like the hmr or 22 wmr, and suffer the wind the limitations?

Also, is it difficult to obtain a centerfire rifle license and would I be better off going for a 223 instead of a hornet? (from what I've seen they're a bit cheaper for the ammo) To be honest, 223 seems a bit overkill as it's primarily for rabbits with occasional foxes only.

Any advice appreciated
Oh and apologies for the number of questions
RS

Cass

RS98 wrote: »

From what I've read, the 17 HMR is affected a lot by the wind,

The HMR gets a bad rep when it comes to wind. Yes it is affected but its a smaller, lighter bullet than the 22 with the only saving grace that it's going a hell of a lot faster.

The HMR has the exact same wind drift as a 22lr. Not worse, perhaps slightly better. The only saving factor being it's flatter. So if you were to fire your 22 at a rabbit at 200 with your 22 (on a 50 yard zero) you'd need to adjust your scope or hold 4+ feet over the rabbit. If it was in a 10mph wind you might have to hold off nearly a foot.

Now compare that to the HMR. The hmr with a 100 yard zero only needs 4 inches of adjustment or hold over to reach 200 yards. In the same 10 mph wind the hmr will get blown off just under a foot.

Here is a side by side comparison i made some time back.

I've seen few foxes around the place so I'm leaning towards a 22 hornet at the moment, to step foot into the centerfire world.

The Hornet was one of the first rifles i had and a great little one it was too. However in the world of 223s it's simply outclassed. The Hornet, in my opinion, is not that much better than the hmr for distance and wind to warrant moving up to it.

The Hornet would be better than the hmr over distance and in wind, but only by a magrin of about 10%. So in a 10mph wind over 200 yards (with 100 yard zero) the Hornet might use 1 inch less elevation and perhaps an inch or two of wind adjustment.

Basically your firing a 22 bullet at HMR speeds. Plus my Hornet used to destroy the rabbits. I had to go for head shots all the time otherwise the body and meat was useless. Anything that wasn't damaged was ruined by the insides being damaged by the bullet.

What I'm wondering is, is it too soon to step up into centerfires or should I get an intermediate caliber first, like the hmr or 22 wmr, and suffer the wind the limitations?

My advice would be NOT to change the 22lr, but instesad go for a larger, centrefire, caliber to compliment the 22. TheHornet would be an improvement and the HMR too (with the Hornet edging the contest between the two) however if you want to learn longer distance shooting, and are not overly concerned with meat damage then look to the 223.

It's superior ballistics, better ammo choice, abilty to reach out to 600 yards with any factory rifle/bullet combo and much better knock down power it's hard to beat.

Also, is it difficult to obtain a centerfire rifle license and would I be better off going for a 223 instead of a hornet? (from what I've seen they're a bit cheaper for the ammo) To be honest, 223 seems a bit overkill as it's primarily for rabbits with occasional foxes only.

The 223 license won't be hard if you already have a firearm. It's still classed as a small or varmint caliber. So your land permissions/gun club membership will suffice. It'll be exactly like applying for the 22lr.

If the 223 isn't your cup of tea you have other options like the 17 Remington (a centrefire) but you're back into centrefire and the same issues (meat damage, etc) as the 223. However the 17 Remington is not as prevalent as the 223 so ammo availalbility won't be a easy to find or as varied as the 223.

123shooter

A lighter bullet will suffer more from wind drift than a heavier bullet in any caliber and being as a .17 will most likely have the lightest bullet because of it's size then there is your problem. 15 - 17 grains is air rifle pellet weight.

A .22wmr or magnum will have bullet weights of 30, 40, 50 grains and velocities of 1750 - 2250fps. You will not need ear defenders and could get away without a suppressor. Bullets are cheap approx €15 per 50 and you shouldn't get meat damage unless close. As regards power (wait for the arguments) well without claims I can tell you they will go through a 3" fence post at 100yds so possibly ideal for your spec?

.223 will have bullet weights of 55 - 75 grains and velocities 2750 - 3250fps. You will need ear protection as they wake the dead so you will need a suppressor. Bullets are about €18 for 20 and you will most definitely get meat damage. As regards power, you should have no problems at most shootable ranges.

RS98

Thanks for the detailed info Cass. I forgot to mention that I won't be giving up the 22LR cause I need it for gallery shooting at the club anyway and, well, it's too much fun and very easy to feed.

My range isn't rated for 223 though so I'll need a few more permissions I presume?

223 looks like the best choice for me so. Time to go door knocking.

Thanks
RS

RS98

123shooter wrote: »

A lighter bullet will suffer more from wind drift than a heavier bullet in any caliber bur being as a .17 will most likely have the lightest bullet because of it's size then there is your problem. 15 - 17 grains is air rifle pellet weight.

A .22wmr or magnum will have bullet weights of 30, 40, 50 grains and velocities of 1750 - 2250fps. You will not need ear defenders and could get away without a suppressor. Bullets are cheap approx €15 per 50 and you shouldn't get meat damage unless close. As regards power (wait for the arguments) well without claims I can tell you they will go through a 3" fence post at 100yds so possibly ideal for your spec?

.223 will have bullet weights of 55 - 75 grains and velocities 2750 - 3250fps. You will need ear protection as they wake the dead so you will need a suppressor. Bullets are about €18 for 20 and you will most definitely get meat damage. As regards power, you should have no problems at most shootable ranges.

Is the wmr close to the hmr in terms of trajectory?

RS

123shooter

RS98 wrote: »

Is the wmr close to the hmr in terms of trajectory?

RS

The heavier the bullet the less affected by wind but then it is more affected by drop (arcing). So then you need more power to compensate this to give the bullet a flatter trajectory. So basically you are always trying to catch up and add other problems (noise - recoil) as you go.

If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own but it doesn't work like that and this round isn't particularly the fastest round and isn't a flat trajectory round.

Having a flat trajectory is not really that great a problem as long as the bullet is heavy enough to withstand the wind and can deliver the punch when it arrives.

The wmr is known to deliver more penetration because of bullet weight than the hmr at same ranges approx 100yds. After that the hmr drops off more because as it loses its velocity then the lighter bullet loses its punch and is also because lighter and slowing more susceptible to wind. (Correction -- This is incorrect as penetration appears to be down to bullet type as both calibres if hunting rounds expand on impact and the inaccuracy comes when the bullet becomes subsonic which the wmr does first as it's the slowest and happens at approx 150+ yds on a 40 grain bullet but at this range the wmr is delivering more punch over .17. A lighter 30 grains .22wmr bullet would obviously give you a longer range before going subsonic. The .17 appears to give you another approx 100+ yards before it becomes subsonic over a 40grain wmr. But at the longer range its effectiveness is ??. As regards wind, I cannot find anything definite that at 100yds the .17 is more affected by wind over the wmr. This may be helpfull .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF3mmbxAWnI )

The wmr fell out of favour because I believe it was the max you could have up until a few yews back and then people opted for a longer range more powerful gun like the .223.

But then the .223 isnt perfect because if you want to use the heavier 75 grain rounds you need a rifle with a 1:8 twist to stablise the bullet where most I think are 1:12 twists more suitable to the 55 grain lighter bullets.

For rabbits and the odd fox a .223 is well over the top and I think a hornet may be as well......but?? it is all down to you.

Cass

123shooter wrote: »

A lighter bullet will suffer more from wind drift than a heavier bullet in any caliber and being as a .17 will most likely have the lightest bullet because of it's size then there is your problem. 15 - 17 grains is air rifle pellet weight.

Over shorter distances lighter rounds can be better or the same as heavier bullets whether in the same or different calibers due to increased velocities of the lighter round.

As the round travels over greater distances the superior ballistics or the heavier bullet will trump the lighter one.

.223 will have bullet weights of 55 - 75 grains and velocities 2750 - 3250fps. You will need ear protection as they wake the dead so you will need a suppressor.

Any supersonic round will create a sonic bang. So anything that fires a bullet over 1,300 fps is going to create this. That includes HMR, WMR, Hornet, 17 Remington and 223.

Bullets are about €18 for 20 and you will most definitely get meat damage. As regards power, you should have no problems at most shootable ranges.[/QUOTE]

123shooter wrote: »

The heavier the bullet the less affected by wind but then it is more affected by drop (arcing).

As said above weight can be compensated for with speed over a given distance. So the HMR is flatter, and less prone to drift than the WMR regardless of the bullet weight of the WMR round.


Also check the range is HV rated. I know some ranges that cannot even fire HV (high velocity) rounds so even if the rifle/round is rimfire it cannot shoot certain rounds when on the range.

More permissions would be better, but if you have a couple from your 22 application (assuming you applied for it for hunting as well as target work) then use these again.

Having a flat trajectory is not really that great a problem as long as the bullet is heavy enough to withstand the wind and can deliver the punch when it arrives.

Th difference between the HMR and WMR even at a short range of 100 yards is not small. Depending on bullet choice there can be anythign from 3 inches to 7 inches of a difference in POI between the two with the HMR coming off the best each time.

So the WMR delivers 25% (average) more energy a short range, but its drop and wind drift are as bad if not worse than a 22lr, and not close to the HMR.

The wmr is known to deliver more penetration because of bullet weight than the hmr at same ranges approx 100yds. After that the hmr drops off more because as it loses its velocity then the lighter bullet loses its punch and is also because lighter and slowing more susceptible to wind.

Again the HMR is better than te WMR in the wind, its flatter, and for a 25-10% reduction in energy between 50 to 200 yards the WMR is simply outclassed.

The wmr fell out of favour because I believe it was the max you could have up until a few yews back and then people opted for a longer range more powerful gun like the .223.

The Hornet has been around longer than the WMR and is superior to it. The WMR is out of favour because it's obsolete. It has its followers who will defend it to the last, but the numbers speak for themselves.

But then the .223 isnt perfect because if you want to use the heavier 75 grain rounds you need a rifle with a 1:8 twist to stablise the bullet where most I think are 1:12 twists more suitable to the 55 grain lighter bullets.

You can get 223s in 1:12, 1:9. 1:8, 1:7.75, 1:7 and with custom barrels you can choose what twist rate.

Howevr any factory rifle in 1:12 will shoot any bullet from 40gr to 55gr, and shoot it well.

For rabbits and the odd fox a .223 is well over the top and I think a hornet may be as well......but?? it is all down to you.

You just said how poweful the WMR is, so more power, more impact energy and more damage.

This is where shot placement comes into it. Head shots and the body is intact. For shot placement you want a caliber that is not as badly effected by the wind, drop over longer distances and still carries enough energy to drop your quarry.

HMR can do this, as can the 223, better than the WMR.

I'm not slating the WMR for the sake of it, but if the OP is looking for a step up the WMR is not the way to go. It's a glorified 22lr with no better ballistics. Yes the WMR is flatter than the 22, but the wind drift of the WMR will be almost identical to the 22lr.

If you're going to upgrade then lokmat something that offers more than what you have, not offers the same thing is a slightly different manner.

Cass

RS98 wrote: »

Is the wmr close to the hmr in terms of trajectory?

RS

No.

The HMR is better than the WMR. Its flatter and less affected by the wind than the WMR.

With a HMR and WMR zeroed at 100 yards the HMR will have a drop of approx 8 inches out to 200 yards while the WMR will drop double that (18 inches). Also if both were fired in the exact same wind conditions (say a 90 degree cross wind of 10mph) then the HMR would experience HALF the wind drift of the WMR. If you used a heavier, say 40-45gr round in the WMR then this drift would be even worse, and could be as much as 3-4 times that of the HMR.

As for energy, IOW impact energy. The WMR has the HMR bet on this factor but only to a certain point. Again with both zeroed at 100 yards. The Muzzle energy of the WMR is 30-40% more than the HMR. However as you go out to 100 yards this difference falls to just 10%.

If you use a lighter bullet in the WMR (say 30gr as opposed to 40-45gr) then by 200+ yards the HMR is actually retaining more energy than the WMR.

My range isn't rated for 223 though so I'll need a few more permissions I presume?

If your range is not rated for 223 then i'd be careful if you want to shoot targets. My reason for saying this is the range may not be centrefire rated, meaning if you intend to shoot it at the range it will eliminate the Hornet, 17 Remington, 223, and any other cenrtrefire caliber.

123shooter

Well Cass I must be wrong on everything so I will bow out except to say.........

I was comparing the wmr to the hmr I was never comparing the wmr to the .223.

As regards penetration of the wmr and hmr, there are quite a few vids doing same.

wmr obsolete?.......On Boards.ie maybe but used probably as much as any other calibre around the world.

I have never needed ear protection from firing a wmr.........but thats just me.

I have wmr and .223 1:8



I hope RS98 is happy with his choice.

Cass

123shooter wrote: »

Well Cass I must be wrong on everything so I will bow out except to say.........

I don't want to start a row, in fact i'm actively trying to avoid it. There is no need for one, and if we cannot come on a forum used for discussion and continue in that discussion without taking offence or throwing the dummy out of the pram then there is nothing i can say to you other than it's your choice.

This is a discussion forum and to give the above answer belittles and undermine anything you've said before. I gave a point in my first post, you came out with your post, then i tried to debate those points. All you've done as a rebuttal is to say you'll "bow out".

Come on, surely you must have something to say on the matter. Argue the points about wind drift, drop, effectiveness, etc?

123shooter wrote:

I was comparing the wmr to the hmr I was never comparing the wmr to the .223.

Throughout my post i was comparing the WMR to the HMR as i mentioned both calibers frequently in my reponse to your post and RS98s. As way of a reminder:

Cass wrote: »

So the HMR is flatter, and less prone to drift than the WMR regardless of the bullet weight of the WMR round.

Cass wrote:

Th difference between the HMR and WMR even at a short range of 100 yards is not small.

Cass wrote:

So the WMR delivers 25% (average) more energy a short range, but its drop and wind drift are as bad if not worse than a 22lr, and not close to the HMR.

Cass wrote:

Again the HMR is better than te WMR in the wind..........,

Cass wrote: »

The HMR is better than the WMR. Its flatter and less affected by the wind than the WMR.

Cass wrote:

With a HMR and WMR zeroed at 100 yards the HMR will have a drop of approx 8 inches out to 200 yards while the WMR will drop double that (18 inches).

Cass wrote:

WMR then this drift would be even worse, and could be as much as 3-4 times that of the HMR.

Cass wrote:

The Muzzle energy of the WMR is 30-40% more than the HMR.

Cass wrote:

If you use a lighter bullet in the WMR (say 30gr as opposed to 40-45gr) then by 200+ yards the HMR is actually retaining more energy than the WMR

I also compared the WMR, briefly, to the 223, Hornet and 22lr:

Cass wrote:

The Hornet has been around longer than the WMR and is superior to it.

Cass wrote:

HMR can do this, as can the 223, better than the WMR.

Cass wrote:

It's a glorified 22lr with no better ballistics. Yes the WMR is flatter than the 22, but the wind drift of the WMR will be almost identical to the 22lr.

123shooter wrote:

As regards penetration of the wmr and hmr, there are quite a few vids doing same.

This is what i was talking about above, about debating your position.

I won't argue on energy or penetration. The WMR has the HMR bet, but by a margin that i would not consider to be enough to warrant going from a .22lr to WMR or even HMR for that matter.

123shooter wrote:

wmr obsolete?.......On Boards.ie maybe but used probably as much as any other calibre around the world.

In Ireland, it's obsolete. The rest of the world is irrelevant as the OP lives in IReland, Shoots in Ireland and will have to buy and sell his firearms in Ireland.

Other than the fact that some dealers don't have any in stock, some are actually refusing to accept WMR as trades. The same applies to Hornet. I've heard of people being refused any trade or deal when it comes to them too.

123shooter wrote:

I have never needed ear protection from firing a wmr.........but thats just me.

Unless you have a decibel meter you won't know the exact difference between a WMR and other HV rimfires, or small caliber centrefires, but i'd advise using ear protection whenever possible. The effect is cumulative not always instant.

123shooter wrote:

I have wmr and .223.

Had a WMR, HMR, 223, 223, Hornet, etc, etc.

123shooter wrote:

........and lifes too short.

As above at the start you either make a case for your opinion or don't. I've made mine for the hmr over the WMR and in my opinion the OP should look to the 223 for his next step up.

yubabill1

Just to throw in my 2c worth (FWIW).

I've had 22LR, 17HMR , 22Hornet and have had a 223 for a good few years. Like the OP, mostly bunnies and the odd fox.

Personally, I have a lot of respect for the 22WMR.

I've always only had one rifle and I find the 223 a jack-of-all-trades (and master of none) but it suits what I like to do shooting-wise.

I agree with everything Cass said in his original reply, only to add that I shoot bunnies with 223 FMJ, which are cheaper and cause virtually no meat damage. I have killed bunnies to just over 200yds with FMJ and never had a runner (or even a dying one when I got there). I generally heart-shoot, but if you get one along the spine you will pulverise the meat to nothing.

Now guys here have warned that FMJ will ricochet more easily than expanding bullets and this is true - I'm very careful and have a lot of shooting where there are no houses, but I have got the occasional ricochet over the years (I actually even got one with a shotgun, once) so a word of warning there.

Cass

As i said above i'm not out to slate one caliber over another for my own personal reasons, but in keeping with the topic of the thread and the question of the OP moving from a 22lr up to a WMR in my opinion is a mistake.

The conversation went off on a tangent about ballistics making it seem like i'm making a case for the HMR. Well actually i'm not. The HMR, imo, is superior to the WMR and better than the 22lr by a degree, but if i had the choice of either of those two or the 223 i'd be going to the 223.

I've been there, and i assume we all have, when you move up a caliber only to discover a very short time later that you should have gone more.

123shooter

I am not trying to be a fan of anything just what I know or have seen.

Cass wrote:

In Ireland, it's obsolete. The rest of the world is irrelevant as the OP lives in IReland, Shoots in Ireland and will have to buy and sell his firearms in Ireland.

Other than the fact that some dealers don't have any in stock, some are actually refusing to accept WMR as trades. The same applies to Hornet. I've heard of people being refused any trade or deal when it comes to them too.

That is a valid point, but the reasons of that are many and some could be there aren't many dealers left compared to say 9 years ago.

Another way of looking at what you put there is that he may pick up a cheap gun because it fits what he needs it for where what is popular would cost more and be overkill.

I thought I had made my point earlier when I said............

123shooter wrote:

If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own but it doesn't work like that and this round isn't particularly the fastest round and isn't a flat trajectory round..........and.............and then people opted for a longer range more powerful gun like the .223.

I bought a .223 thinking at that time I would have everything I need but there are drawbacks and limitations through having a more powerful gun and this is what I referred too regards the shooting he wanted to do which was bunnies and the odd fox. In fact I purchased a new wmr after my .223 because of similar requirements. I too at that time had read about it being obsolete and not powerful for foxes etc on here but peoples vids on youtube persuaded me as regards what actually happens. Perhaps I am a fool?

I was just trying to give my 2 pennies worth on what I know and have experienced and the vids I have seen regards the queeries of mine similar to RS98's.

minktrapper

Y'all forgot about BC. The .17 has a slimmer body therefore less for the wind to catch. So a .17 Hornet would be the way to go. Extremely fast, more or less the same trajectory as the.223.

Cass

First off, i've edited your post above. not changed anything you wrote,
just fixed the quotes so its clear who said what.

123shooter wrote: »

I am not trying to be a fan of anything just what I know or have seen.

I'm not dismissing what you're saying merely arguing the points you made about the WMR being better int he wind, etc. than the HMR. It's simply not.

Yes it packs more of a punch than the HMR, but that is the only area in which the WMR is better than the HMR.

As for your experiences well i'd accept nothing else. Don't want someone regurgitating something they read.

That is a valid point, but the reasons of that are many and some could be there aren't many dealers left compared to say 9 years ago.

No there aren't and like you said at some point it was popular because you couldn't license anything else or like i said we don't have access to the varied and plentiful amount of other calibers/rounds.

Another way of looking at what you put there is that he may pick up a cheap gun for what because it fits what he needs it for where what is popular would cost more and be overkill.

Not what i mean at all.

First off i dislike the term overkill. There is no such thing. Dead is dead. Now if it comes down to meat damage, vs no meat damage a point could be argued for shot placement over caliber, but that is another days outing.

I'm not turning this into a "go for a 223 debate". Go for the HMR if he wants something small. MY objection to the WMR is simply there is better out there. There is no need to go for a 223 if the OP will not use it much. Plus the 223 is far better and cleaner than a WMR or HMR at dispatching foxes. As you don't eat them meat damage is irrelevant and considering the 223 can do this repeatedly at distances of three, four and five times the effective range of a WMR and HMR then the choice is obvious.

I thought I had made my point earlier when I said............

If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own but it doesn't work like that and this round isn't particularly the fastest round and isn't a flat trajectory round..........and.............and then people opted for a longer range more powerful gun like the .223.

That is a ridiculously over simplified way of looking at things.

There is no such beast as the all round rifle. Sure a large caliber like a 243 would do anyone in Ireland for all their shooting. The drawbacks being any rabbits would be destroyed, but it's be effective on foxes and deer. Also you couldn't shoot certain competitions (the OP said he is a member of a range).

So we all must have a few rifles to suit the various types of shooting we do. When we narrow it down to a specific type of shooting this automatically narrows the choice o caliber down to a few. You say the thw WMR is a good rifle and if someone was starting out i'd agree, but still would not suggest it. The OP is looking to upgrade to something better. Other than being flatter than his current 22lr with more punch, the WMR offers nothing else.

My suggestion of the HMR was because of it's superior ballistics, flatter shooting, better wind bucking properties than that of the WMR and the .22lr.

However if the OP wanted to go further i suggested looking at the 223 as this would fill the needs of a more powerful rifle/round, much, much fatter shooting, far more impact energy, all allowing for better shot placement and cleaner killing of any game. You won't look at something at 200 yards and wonder how much hold or will it drop it as would be the case with the WMR and the HMR.

I bought a .223 thinking at that time I would have everything I need but there are drawbacks and limitations through having a more powerful gun and this is what I referred too regards the shooting he wanted to do which was bunnies and the odd fox. In fact I purchased a new wmr after my .223 because of similar requirements.

If it's bunnies 90% of the time and the odd fox at a reasonable distance then i'd still vouch for the HMR over the WMR. The HMR is flatter, better wind bucking and not being a smart arse, but i've yet to hear you argue this. So the WMR carries a little more punch. As i said above it's 25% or so at the muzzle (which is irrelevant) and only 10% at the target. So at the muzzle the WMR is production roughly 330 ft/lbs to the HMRs 240ft/lbs. At 100 yards the WMR can produce in the region of 130 to 165 (depending on bullet) however the HMR produces 130 - 145ft/lbs.

I too at that time had read about it being obsolete and not powerful for foxes etc on here but peoples vids on youtube persuaded me as regards what actually happens. Perhaps I am a fool?

Youtube is like the old saying about papers never refusing ink. You have hundreds of thousands of "experts" all uploading their videos with "proof" about how something is beter than the other thing. Some videos are good while others have you wondering how these people got a firearm in the first place.

I read about something before buying and then if i want more info i'll go to the range, or people i know with them and check. Unfortunately you get an awful lot of the "i have one so everything else is sh*t" attitude. Once you filter out the 90% that is bullcrap and use the remaining 10% to compare then you'll come to the right decision.

I was just trying to give my 2 pennies worth on what I know and have experienced and the vids I have seen regards the queeries of mine similar to RS98's.

The OP is as free to ignore my posts as he is anyone elses. All we can do is offer advice, debate/argue the points and let the OP make up his own mind.

I have no allegiance to any one caliber. I've owned and shot more of them than i can remember over the years. I gone off some, and on more than one occasion bought a caliber i've had before multiple times.

I'll offer up my best advice based on my experiences. If i've never shot one or know nothing about it you'll know because i won't post. Its why you never see me post about working dogs. Never owned one, bred one, trained one or used one. So i know nothing about them.

minktrapper

.17 Winchester super magnum rimfire? Relatively cheap to feed. Contemplating getting one myself in the not so distant future.

123shooter

I suppose to finish my participation here is to say just a few things to clarify.

In my opinion and experience with my .223. 'Overkill' Well that to me means the target is destroyed in someway or an annoyance or restrictive where it can be used safely/correctly (in my circumstances). This is why I later purchased my wmr which did the job with out destruction of my target........And in my circumstances didnt annoy my neighbours. I didn't purchase the hmr because at the ranges I was shooting at I didn't want destruction I wanted penetration/knock down. Maybe I was wrong?

Wind. I never had charts just looked at here and youtube........Ho hum. Ahh well I like the wmr. It is cheap to run and I find does the job for me anyway.

Best of luck RS98 I hope you are happy with your choice.

RS98

Thanks for the replies, exactly what I was looking for. I've decided to go for the . 223

RS

yubabill1

RS98 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies, exactly what I was looking for. I've decided to go for the . 223

RS

123shooter made valid points about the noise. Just something to consider and you could always get a suppressor.

Cass

yubabill1 wrote: »

123shooter made valid points about the noise. Just something to consider and you could always get a suppressor.

As i said above you're going to get a sonic crack its just a matter of degree as to the increase in heard report of a particular caliber. A suppressor will help to reduce this heard report, but frankly if anyone bases a rifle choice of the level of the sonic crack (only in supersonic calibers/rounds) then all other factors are moot. IOW if you want quiet stay with the 22lr and suppressor. If you want effective go for the right rifle/caliber ad then try to reduce the issues such as heard report that might be of concern.

However a hmr and even a 223 are by no means loud. not when compared to other, much larger calibers. I've also found in real world experience that barrel length can have an adverse effect on this heard report.

123shooter wrote: »

The wmr is known to deliver more penetration because of bullet weight than the hmr at same ranges approx 100yds. After that the hmr drops off more because as it loses its velocity then the lighter bullet loses its punch and is also because lighter and slowing more susceptible to wind. (Correction -- This is incorrect as penetration appears to be down to bullet type as both calibres if hunting rounds expand on impact and the inaccuracy comes when the bullet becomes subsonic which the wmr does first as it's the slowest and happens at approx 150+ yds on a 40 grain bullet but at this range the wmr is delivering more punch over .17. A lighter 30 grains .22wmr bullet would obviously give you a longer range before going subsonic. The .17 appears to give you another approx 100+ yards before it becomes subsonic over a 40grain wmr. But at the longer range its effectiveness is ??. As regards wind, I cannot find anything definite that at 100yds the .17 is more affected by wind over the wmr. This may be helpfull .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF3mmbxAWnI )
.

Apologies in the delay replying. As the post was edited and not a new post i never knew it was changed so only getting to answer now.

Here are three comparisons. All the 17 variables are with a 17gr V-Max bullet. However the first set is with a 30gr WMR round and the second set a 40gr round. I also threw in a 50 gr round to cover all bases. The wind condition is set at 10mph with a direct 90 degree crosswind. All zeros are 100 yards.

I've made a red and black mark on each set of variables. The black line indicates the point at which the bullet falls into the transonic stage, and the red line subsonic. If you look at these markers and then the wind drift you'll see a direct correlation between them.


17gr HMR - vs - 30gr WMR



17gr HMR - vs - 40gr WMR



17gr HMR - vs - 50gr WMR

RS98

The loudest thing I've shot is unmoderated 22 HV. The moderator doesn't make much of a difference to them tbh. How does hmr and 223 compare to unmoderated 22HV?

123shooter

RS98 wrote: »

The loudest thing I've shot is unmoderated 22 HV. The moderator doesn't make much of a difference to them tbh. How does hmr and 223 compare to unmoderated 22HV?

My problem is i am surrounded on 3 sides by mountains and hills. I am used to noise with my work but oh boy when the .223 went out for the first time:eek:

The wmr is up on a .22 but not by that much i think at the muzzle but it still makes the dogs bark about half a mile away if quiet. Then the .223 is a lot louder than a 12 bore.

Cass

The 223 will be louder than the 22, even using HV.

High velocity 22 rounds are in the transonic to supersonic margin. IOW they are breaking the sound barrier so you will get a crack. The 223 is not only breaking it, but the case is larger, the bullet traveling much faster and the heard report is louder as a result. However stick a mod on and the report, especially at the shooter, is greatly reduced.

The bullet will still create a sonic crack but it's not possible to silence a supersonic round and while you can get sub sonic ammo for a 223 (it's as rare as hen's teeth unless you reload) they are terrible. Drop like a stone and basically undo all the reasons for going for a 223.

The HMR is a smaller bullet than the 22 or WMR but it uses the WMR's case necked down to take the smaller bullet. So in temrs or noise the WMR and HMR would be close to identical both moderated and unmoderated.

Here is a 223 with a suppressor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWqpJGJ300Y

Now here is a video of a lad comparing HV to subsonic rounds in a 22lr. Don't mind the entire vidoe just try to compare the first two shots he fires (the HV rounds) to that of the 223 above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC1W0LnDBdw

While videos are not a great way to comparing and frankly real world results could differ it'll give you an idea.

RS98

minktrapper wrote: »

.17 Winchester super magnum rimfire? Relatively cheap to feed. Contemplating getting one myself in the not so distant future.

I didn't think that was popular in Ireland. I don't think I've seen any rifles or ammo for it so far

minktrapper

Not yet my good man not yet. We must give it a chance. Virtually all fox's are within 150 when shot so this is a very doable bullet out to maybe 200 yds. And a lot cheaper than the.17 hornet to feed.

RS98

Very valid points from both of ye. I'll keep my eyes open for a good deal on both 223 rifles and 17 hmr's. Anyone got any recommendations for a sub €800 223 or 17?

Fastnet50

Realistically shooting bunnies with a .22 rimfire is an easy task. It is not difficult to get within 75 yds to a rabbit on any terrain and a good H/V round will dispatch a rabbit from that range easily (even in a moderate wind). The advantage is .22 rounds are cheap as chips as opposed to Hornet or .223 rounds. The occasional fox will drop on this calibre if you can get within 50 or 60 yds and can shoot at least with moderate accuracy. I can not see a good reason to spend a lot of money on a round that at long range is likely to destroy the meat.

BattleCorp

RS98 wrote: »

Thanks for the detailed info Cass. I forgot to mention that I won't be giving up the 22LR cause I need it for gallery shooting at the club anyway and, well, it's too much fun and very easy to feed.

My range isn't rated for 223 though so I'll need a few more permissions I presume?

223 looks like the best choice for me so. Time to go door knocking.

Thanks
RS

I don't see why you can't apply for a .223 for target shooting even though your range isn't rated for one.

Fair enough, you can't shoot it at your range as it isn't rated for centrefire, but what's to stop you shooting it in competitions at other ranges that are rated for it?

RS98

BattleCorp wrote: »

I don't see why you can't apply for a .223 for target shooting even though your range isn't rated for one.

Fair enough, you can't shoot it at your range as it isn't rated for centrefire, but what's to stop you shooting it in competitions at other ranges that are rated for it?

It'd be excellent if that was the case, as I hate asking for new permissions, and also would like to do a few comps in the future. But few questions though, what if the Super asks how I'm going to train for competitions with nowhere to shoot at aside from in the field? (Note that I already have a large permission but I lost the sheet and I don't want to ask for it in writing again)

Or am I overthinking this? I'm asking cause he called me in to have a chat with me for my 22 application. I hope he only does this for first time applicants.

Is the competition a 'good reason' on its own? And can I use it for hunting as well if I got the gun for competitions?

I feel like I'm asking a sh!te tonne of questions

RS

BattleCorp

RS98 wrote: »

It'd be excellent if that was the case, as I hate asking for new permissions, and also would like to do a few comps in the future. But few questions though, what if the Super asks how I'm going to train for competitions with nowhere to shoot at aside from in the field? (Note that I already have a large permission but I lost the sheet and I don't want to ask for it in writing again)

There is nothing in law that says you must train for competitions. The only stipulation is that you use your firearm for target shooting so the Super probably shouldn't use that as a reason for refusing your application.

You aren't allowed to do target shooting in a field so that is out as a place to practice.

Or am I overthinking this? I'm asking cause he called me in to have a chat with me for my 22 application. I hope he only does this for first time applicants.

I'd say that he won't call you in again. But if he does, then all you have to do is tell him why you need the gun (target shooting/hunting/vermin control).

Is the competition a 'good reason' on its own? And can I use it for hunting as well if I got the gun for competitions?

Yes, target shooting is considered a good reason for owning a firearm. I've several that have been licenced to me solely for target shooting.

If you want to use the gun for hunting as well as target shooting, I think you will have to get the written permissions. It's no big deal really. Write out a letter along the lines of what I've written below and get the farmer to sign it. You'll need 2 permissions.



To whom it may concern,

I __________(farmer's name)_________give permission to _______(your name) to shoot on my lands at (farmer's land address) .

Regards,

(farmer's signature )

_____(date)_________________

123shooter

RS98 wrote: »

It'd be excellent if that was the case, as I hate asking for new permissions, and also would like to do a few comps in the future. But few questions though, what if the Super asks how I'm going to train for competitions with nowhere to shoot at aside from in the field? (Note that I already have a large permission but I lost the sheet and I don't want to ask for it in writing again)

Or am I overthinking this? I'm asking cause he called me in to have a chat with me for my 22 application. I hope he only does this for first time applicants.

Is the competition a 'good reason' on its own? And can I use it for hunting as well if I got the gun for competitions?

I feel like I'm asking a sh!te tonne of questions

RS

And you could end up like me thinking do I really need this thing or would I get more shooting and enjoyment with something else smaller/less powerful.

Like I said at the beginning "If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own."

RS98

123shooter wrote: »

And you could end up like me thinking do I really need this thing or would I get more shooting and enjoyment with something else smaller/less powerful.

Like I said at the beginning "If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own."

Thanks for your concern man, I do appreciate it. But I can always sell the gun with minimal loss if it doesn't suit me. At least I get that experience right?

I know it's a bit of a hassle going through the whole process, but I'll buy a hmr if the 223 doesn't pan out.

Again, thanks for trying to stop me from making a mistake but I think I need to try, after reading this whole thread.

I'll let you know in a few months if you were right haha.

RS

123shooter

RS98 wrote: »

Thanks for your concern man, I do appreciate it. But I can always sell the gun with minimal loss if it doesn't suit me. At least I get that experience right?

I know it's a bit of a hassle going through the whole process, but I'll buy a hmr if the 223 doesn't pan out.

Again, thanks for trying to stop me from making a mistake but I think I need to try, after reading this whole thread.

I'll let you know in a few months if you were right haha.

RS

Hey you have to try anything at least once........well not everything. :eek:

On this point though as Cass knows I joined here to sell my .223 a few months back, and no expense was spared when purchasing it with top of the range scope, mounts, bipod and other bits. All in all I suppose €2000 maybe more.

Now ask a dealer what he will give you s/h or what some others private sale will give you and then you will understand a little more.

Possibly guns are the worst thing to ever try to sell to recover anywhere near what they cost you. Try 30 - 40% if you want a sale.

sniperman

yes you are right 123.a good loss has to be expected when selling on,i have sold a good few things on here at considerable loss,buts thats it i suppose.

RS98

If I was going down the competition route, would I fill in my club details in the "authorized pistol/rifle club" section in the fca1, as it doesn't specify that the centerfire rating factor?

And BattleCorp, this is deviating from the original thread so apologies but do you just knock on the doors of people living near you, even if you don't know them personally.

RS

RS98

123shooter wrote: »

Possibly guns are the worst thing to ever try to sell to recover anywhere near what they cost you. Try 30 - 40% if you want a sale.

Well that's a grim return!

123shooter

RS98 wrote: »

Well that's a grim return!

Yes you are correct and they would possibly be top figures. Depressing ain't it.

So after all this I eventually got my point across.. A few pints in the pub and a good natter is so much easier to explain things.

BattleCorp

RS98 wrote: »

And BattleCorp, this is deviating from the original thread so apologies but do you just knock on the doors of people living near you, even if you don't know them personally.
RS

It's always easier to ask farmers that you know but if you don't personally know any farmers, do any of your friends know any farmers? Maybe they could put in a good word for you with them.

Failing that, your only option is to go knocking on doors. Be prepared for a lot of "no's" though. Farmers are often reluctant to let strangers shoot on their land.

RS98

Tried a friend who's family had a huge farm. Twas a No though. Still stings. Only thing I've going for me is that I shoot on my neighbours land and can use the "I shoot on paddy's farm down the road".

Cass

123shooter wrote: »

Like I said at the beginning "If having more power or a bigger bullet was the answer then a .50 caliber would be the only gun to own."

No it wouldn't.

It's too simplistic an answer and not even an answer at that, More like a soundbite.

If you were, as you put it, to just go for the biggest caliber then i'd have a 308 for my rimfire comps, a 308 for my deer, a 308 for my clays, and a 308 for all my other shooting.

There are different calibers for different reasons and if i go by that logic then the same can be said for going to the smallest/lesser caliber. How would a WMR work out at 1,000 yards. At clays, bullseye 360, Gallery, deer, pheasant, etc.

123shooter wrote: »

Possibly guns are the worst thing to ever try to sell to recover anywhere near what they cost you. Try 30 - 40% if you want a sale.

sniperman wrote: »

yes you are right 123.a good loss has to be expected when selling on,i have sold a good few things on here at considerable loss,buts thats it i suppose.

If anyone has got into shooting with the view to make money and is not an RFD then you're wasting your time.

Few things in this life will increase in value. Your new car looses thousands before you drive it off the forecourt. Some things will decrease in value slower than others, but it's down to brand and popularity.

223s have always been a steady seller. They are a popular round with a large and varied ammo selection that is widely used around the world. Now as i said earlier the world market is grand, but not very relevant to us. Ireland has it's own little niche. We have our own favorites, and also our "steadfasts". Those things that never change like CZ .22lrs, etc.


My point is if you get into this sport thinking about the resale value of a gun you haven't bought then you've lost the point of the sport.

Also the above point about a 30-40% drop in resale price is very harsh and not truly accurate, imo, but it is not caliber specific. IOW anything can and will loose money.Be that 223, WMR, HMR, etc.

Cass

To RS98.

You pick the type of shooting that you do the most. You pick a caliber that suits that shooting. Then look at the other shooting you do and see how that caiber measures up. If 90% of your shooting is rabbits at 150 yards or less, and perhaps 4 to 5 foxes per year then you look for something that suits rabbit shooting and tailor your shooting to deal with the occasional fox.

Apply the same thing to a different situation. You shoot rabbits mostly, but also deal with foxes for 7 months of the year and the shooting can vary from 50 to 250 yards. Then you need something to do both types of shooting. Something that will humanely kill both at short and longer distances.

Then another situation which must be factored in is the quarry. Do you eat the rabbits and is meat damage important. Well this dilemma can be solved by correct caliber choice, but also ammo choice in a given caliber.

I use ballistic tipped bullets. They provide excellent penetration and dump all their energy on impact. The will destroy a rabbit and cleanly kill a fox. I don't use the rabbit meat, well not nearly as much as i used to, so meat damage is not important to me. What i do kill goes to a local lad for his dogs. As for foxes, i don't eat them so meat damage is irrelevant. All i'm concerned with is a clean kill which i know the 223 will provide each and every time. Even those times i'm not fully on my game and my shot placement is not 100%.

now when i go rabbit shooting i bring my 22lr. I leave the 223 at home. If i see a fox, and he is well within range i might take a shot, but more than likely will let him off and return later with the 223.

When i'm out deer hunting i bring the 308, when clays the shotgun, when doing bullseye 360 the 9mm, etc, etc. IOW i bought more guns and each one is more specific to a certain type of shooting than the other.

There is no such thing as all round type of gun. IOW one gun/caliber, that does everything excellently.

123shooter

Cass wrote: »

No it wouldn't.

It's too simplistic an answer and not even an answer at that, More like a soundbite.

Terribly sorry.

If you were, as you put it, to just go for the biggest caliber then i'd have a 308 for my rimfire comps, a 308 for my deer, a 308 for my clays, and a 308 for all my other shooting.

Not what I meant at all obviously.

There are different calibers for different reasons and if i go by that logic then the same can be said for going to the smallest/lesser caliber. How would a WMR work out at 1,000 yards. At clays, bullseye 360, Gallery, deer, pheasant, etc.

Of course there are different calibres for different reasons that has been my point.

If anyone has got into shooting with the view to make money and is not an RFD then you're wasting your time.

Few things in this life will increase in value. Your new car looses thousands before you drive it off the forecourt. Some things will decrease in value slower than others, but it's down to brand and popularity.

I agree but who mentioned or implied about making money from shooting? Not me.

223s have always been a steady seller. They are a popular round with a large and varied ammo selection that is widely used around the world. Now as i said earlier the world market is grand, but not very relevant to us. Ireland has it's own little niche. We have our own favorites, and also our "steadfasts". Those things that never change like CZ .22lrs, etc.

????

My point is if you get into this sport thinking about the resale value of a gun you haven't bought then you've lost the point of the sport.

Also the above point about a 30-40% drop in resale price is very harsh and not truly accurate, imo, but it is not caliber specific. IOW anything can and will loose money.Be that 223, WMR, HMR, etc.

Possibly some get more, possibly some get less. I was offered €400.00 for truly immaculate without a mark or blemish for my gun from a dealer (unseen) which cost €1400.00 with the mounts which amounts to less than 33%. I suppose I could have got a little more but at those prices my thoughts were:- Why let someone else profit from my misfortune. So he stays hungry. The gun stays put and I ain't lost a thing.

Cass

Not what I meant at all obviously.

Not that obvious. Explain so.

Of course there are different calibres for different reasons that has been my point.

It's not clear so perhaps as i asked above you might explain it. Clearly.

I agree but who mentioned or implied about making money from shooting? Not me.

Ok i'll be more specific. If you buy a gun thinking it won't loose money then think again.

????

What exactly confuses you? I assume that is what the question mark means, but as above you don't explain very well so it's hard to know.

Possibly some get more, possibly some get less.

Bit of a change from a 40% loss.

I was offered €400.00 for truly immaculate without a mark or blemish for my gun from a dealer (unseen) which cost €1400.00 with the mounts which amounts to less than 33%.

Taking you on your word being offered is a far cry from selling for a loss.

123shooter

Jeezus :eek:

Cass wrote: »

Not that obvious. Explain so.

It's not clear so perhaps as i asked above you might explain it. Clearly.

Because the if for rabbits and the odd fox then something that isn't as loud (without silencer) or as powerful that is could destroy the target then some other caliber not so powerful may suit...........possibly a wmr or as you suggest another option a hmr?

Ok i'll be more specific. If you buy a gun thinking it won't loose money then think again.

I agree and that applies to most things I think but some things drop more than others.

What exactly confuses you? I assume that is what the question mark means, but as above you don't explain very well so it's hard to know.

It is irrelevant to how the conversation started. It only went that direction because you took it there. So why keep mentioning it?

Bit of a change from a 40% loss.

Thought I said 30-40% loss.

Taking you on your word being offered is a far cry from selling for a loss.

Dotting the I's and crossing the T's.......why? I can only tell you my story. I am not going to waste my time on boards.ie making up stories for no reason. Perhaps if it suits I/we all should contact each other on this shooting forum via PM and then our replies will not be subject to such scrutiny or offend?

Cass

123shooter wrote: »

Because the if for rabbits and the odd fox then something that isn't as loud (without silencer)

That doesn't explain the 50bmg point? Having a bigger and more powerful round does not require 50cal, not 338, not even 308. In fact it doesn't even require a large or magnum caliber rifle. But it does need something that is only slightly bigger than a 22lr.

The 223 would be louder than a WMR, but the HMR and WMR would be the same in terms of heard report, with the HME ballistically better than the WMR. However the difference in 223 to WMR can only be judged by a decibel meter and not guess work based on perception.

I agree and that applies to most things I think but some things drop more than others.

I find the custom or "unusal" stuff drops far more than the everyday stuff, Tikka, CZ, etc. all seem to hold their value well as they are popular ans sought after.

Then caliber plays a role. Some calibers fall in and out of favour and as a result prices rise and drop. However some calibers will always remain low as RFDs refuse to accept them or offer pittance for them meaning it has a knock on effect to anyone else selling one. WMR falls into this category in my experience and so does calibers like the 6.5x55 which i think is a cracking caliber.

It is irrelevant to how the conversation started. It only went that direction because you took it there. So why keep mentioning it?

It's a point i made. You can read it or not, but i'm free to post it.

Thought I said 30-40% loss.

Yeah, 40% like i said you said.

Dotting the I's and crossing the T's.......why? I can only tell you my story. I am not going to waste my time on boards.ie making up stories for no reason.

I didn't say you were, i said taking you on your word.

Perhaps if it suits I/we all should contact each other on this shooting forum via PM and then our replies will not be subject to such scrutiny or offend?

Nope.

It's a discussion forum so it stays on the forum. If all discussion took place via PM the forum would be pointless.

123shooter

Cass wrote: »

That doesn't explain the 50bmg point?

Meaning that a .50 caliber would be the largest most powerfulist that most people would come across/know about and would do all things required by most people who shoot with a rifle.

It's a discussion forum so it stays on the forum. If all discussion took place via PM the forum would be pointless.

But other people than yourself have a point of view on things for all kinds of reasons whether you think they are right or wrong.

They may not be as experienced or as skilled as others at getting their points of view across when in print than verbally but they try because as you say it's a forum.

tac foley

Cass, just to make a small point in favour of the old 6.5x55SE - yesterday we had a guest shooter zero-ing session, where people who are not actually club members can make use of our facilities to zero their rifles for the season on a proper zeroing range using our chronographs.

Eight turned up, and five of them had 6.5x55SE calibre rifles - three of them with brand-new Blaser, SAKO and Howa rifles.

I have a comment to make about some of the ammunition, but I'll start another thread about that.

tac

ezra_

tac foley wrote: »

Cass, just to make a small point in favour of the old 6.5x55SE - yesterday we had a guest shooter zero-ing session, where people who are not actually club members can make use of our facilities to zero their rifles for the season on a proper zeroing range using our chronographs.

Eight turned up, and five of them had 6.5x55SE calibre rifles - three of them with brand-new Blaser, SAKO and Howa rifles.

I have a comment to make about some of the ammunition, but I'll start another thread about that.

tac

Is there really any practical difference (from either shooter's or the target's perspective) between a .308 and 6.5x round at the range that most average hunter's shoot at?

Cass

123shooter wrote: »

But other people than yourself have a point of view on things for all kinds of reasons whether you think they are right or wrong.

There is no right or wrong.

I'm giving mine and others are free to give their opinion. I happen to be talking with you, somewhat directly, but others are still free to chime in as they have done.

They may not be as experienced or as skilled as others at getting their points of view across when in print than verbally but they try because as you say it's a forum.

The written word has no context so when you write something it doesn't always translate as clearly as it does when you write it.

I've done this myself. Had a thought in my head, knew what i wanted, but no matter how i write it it still doesn't convey the opinion i want to give.

tac foley wrote: »

Cass, just to make a small point in favour of the old 6.5x55SE .......................

You don't have to convince me about the 6.5, it's a personal favorite. It seems to have fallen out of favour here. I know from when i had mine that ammo choice was terrible, constant availability of your chosen ammo is also a factor. The the price. The average box of ammo was in the €40+ mark. Now some was slightly cheaper, but if it didn't work in my rifle what good is cheap ammo.

tac foley

ezra_ wrote: »

Is there really any practical difference (from either shooter's or the target's perspective) between a .308 and 6.5x round at the range that most average hunter's shoot at?

Nope. Just thought it was an interesting point that the old Swede is just highly thought of over a hundred and twenty years after its introduction.

The recoil is lighter, too, for those with a smaller frame - younger shooters or women shooters or younger women, even.

tac

RS98

What's the cheapest 223 ammo you can buy in Ireland? They seem to cost €1 per trigger pull for the cheapest stuff I found. Is that about right?

RS