Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

MINIMUM DEERHUNTING CALIBER

  • 28-11-2009 9:44pm
    #1
    foxshot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32 ✭


    Hi all just wondering whats the minimum caliber for deer hunting in ireland? can you shoot deer in ireland with .223 or .220 swift? thanks again
    Foxshot


«1

Comments

  • #2
    No6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,489 ✭✭✭No6


    No foxshoot, the minimum listed on the NWPS form is I believe a 22 50 but a 243 is probably the lowest caliber you should be looking at.


  • #3
    elius
    Registered Users Posts: 1,204 ✭✭✭elius


    No think your looking at a 22.250 243 etc


  • #4
    clivej
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,061 ✭✭✭clivej


    Simular question was asked last week

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055745308


  • #5
    bunny shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,096 ✭✭✭bunny shooter


    22.250 is legal minimum, however 220 swift is legal too with 55 grain bullets ;), .223 not legal at all

    Realistically, .243 should be minimum.


  • #6
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    The legal minimum is .22 calibre centre fire with energy of 1700 ft lbs and a 55 grain bullet.

    .22-250 and .220 swift both meet those criteria.

    But as bunny says you shouldn't be thinking of anything less than .243 because it's available, more appropriate and readily licensable for the purpose.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    berettadt10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭berettadt10


    Lads, the legal min requirnment is now .243 with the ministers new bill, it was min 22/2250 with 55g round. Swift was never legal in this country to get a Hunting licence.
    Cheers


  • #8
    bunny shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,096 ✭✭✭bunny shooter


    berettadt10 wrote: »
    Lads, the legal min requirnment is now .243 with the ministers new bill, it was min 22/2250 with 55g round.

    Where is this ?
    berettadt10 wrote: »
    Swift was never legal in this country to get a Hunting licence.
    Cheers

    I know of 1 x Swift licenced by NPWS to shoot deer :eek:


  • #9
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    bunny shooter wrote: »
    Where is this ?



    I know of 1 x Swift licenced by NPWS to shoot deer :eek:
    well if someone got a deer lic on 220 swift there is a problem as min cal is 22.250 the bit of info is the 22. 250 not 220. so someone has fxuked up i know the swift is more than up to the job but the law is the law if the person filled in the deer lic its on it the have to fill in cal make and bullet weight so unless i see the lin i think its a load of bollxx im shooting deer 23 years and i dont listen to ****e like this prove it or remove it please if its right i will hold my hands up but im still hanging on to my post


  • #10
    rowa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,296 ✭✭✭rowa


    its a bit stupid not allowing the swift as it has identical ballistics to the .22-250 , but anyway i think the min should be the .243 , better calibre all round .


  • #11
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    rowa wrote: »
    its a bit stupid not allowing the swift as it has identical ballistics to the .22-250 , but anyway i think the min should be the .243 , better calibre all round .
    i have to disagree with the 243 as being the min cal i shot deer when 22.250 was the most you could have i still thing its better than 243 i have 23 years experience shooting deer so im sure i can make a decent comment on it i have a 308 at the moment and am happy with it also have a lic for 270 that i would not part with i think the 243 is a perfect fox round and hard to beat but i have seen a far to many deer running on hit with them i am intitled to my veiw as i have seen it ouer the years shooting i had a 5.6 but went back to 22.250 savage neck shooting round bit messy on heart and lung shooting but done the job the biggest problem is lads to much choice in rounds stick with the old reliable ones wont let you down


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    bunny shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,096 ✭✭✭bunny shooter


    steyrman wrote: »
    well if someone got a deer lic on 220 swift there is a problem as min cal is 22.250 the bit of info is the 22. 250 not 220. so someone has fxuked up i know the swift is more than up to the job but the law is the law if the person filled in the deer lic its on it the have to fill in cal make and bullet weight so unless i see the lin i think its a load of bollxx im shooting deer 23 years and i dont listen to ****e like this prove it or remove it please if its right i will hold my hands up but im still hanging on to my post

    Under the law a 220 Swift with a 55 grain bullet exceeds the minimum power level required therefore it is legal. Some lad/ladies opinion does not supersede the law, however, we all know this is not necessarily reality :rolleyes:

    As was already stated here sometimes it all depends on who deals with the application or who you know, same as everything else in this country :mad:


  • #13
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    bunny shooter wrote: »
    Under the law a 220 Swift with a 55 grain bullet exceeds the minimum power level required therefore it is legal. Some lad/ladies opinion does not supersede the law, however, we all know this is not necessarily reality :rolleyes:

    As was already stated here sometimes it all depends on who deals with the application or who you know, same as everything else in this country :mad:
    hi bunny the 220 will not ever exceed the min cal as the law states 22.250 min the swift falls short of legal requirements simple answer the 220, swift cannot and will not match the 22.250 on paper for deer shooting no matter what it can do on the range i tryed for a lic on one 15 years ago and was refused it as it did not meet the legal end of it i would love to see the lic for deer shooting with the swift on it as many of the deer shooters on this site


  • #14
    ronboy
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭ronboy


    I have to agree with steyrman the 22.250 is a brilliant round. I use one for deer aswell and love it. There is no subsitute for accuracy and that is one accurate round


  • #15
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    There's no minimum specified chambering in the Wildlife Act. SI 239 of 1977 details the requirements for a firearm to be used for hunting deer. They are that it should be of at least .22 calibre, with a muzzle energy of at least 1700 foot pounds. Ammunition must be at least 55 grains. Here is the source. The .220 Swift will make this threshold and so is legal for use on deer. Please stop saying the .22-250 is the minimum calibre by law, because there's no actual law to support you, as there are several cartridges in the same region, equivalent to the job, and comparable to the .22-250. I've filled out the NPWS form as well, and that little section is badly put. It should read .22-250 "or equivalent", as that is what the law states.


  • #16
    HUBERTUS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 57 ✭✭HUBERTUS


    A .220 Swift fires a bullet the same diameter as the .22/250 ie. .224 inches.
    In 1972 at the time of your legislation Norma ammo for the Swift was 50gr in bullet weight but the muzzle energy was 1877 foot/pounds.
    It had surplus energy but lacked the weight.
    At that time Remington .22/250 ammo was advertised as having 1770 ft/lbs with the 55gr bullet.
    Norma advertised theirs as 55gr SPS bullet at 1637 ft/lbs.

    In 1982 the Remington 55gr ammo was listed as having 1699 ft/lbs.
    Norma reduced their bullet weight for the .22/250 to 53gr.

    The whole thing was a mess !

    Many knowlegeable people at that time turned to the 5.6X57 RWS cartridge which had been developed in Germany for shooting Roe and Chamois.
    It fired a 74gr bullet known as the `kegelspitz`with a muzzle energy of 1910 foot/pounds.

    I had a 5.6X61 Vom Hofe Super Express on my Irish licence for a few years, this was the ultimate at that time with a 77gr bullet and 2350 foot/pounds of energy.

    Currently Remington advertise their .243 ammo as having slightly less than 2000 ft/lbs of energy, only slightly more powerful than the 5.6X57 RWS !
    So much for progress as many on these forums think the .243 is the ultimate.
    Believe me it is not, I have two .243 rifles [ shortly one only ] yet I always pick up the .270 when I go out to shoot a Deer.

    HWH.


  • #17
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    There's no minimum specified chambering in the Wildlife Act. SI 239 of 1977 details the requirements for a firearm to be used for hunting deer. They are that it should be of at least .22 calibre, with a muzzle energy of at least 1700 foot pounds. Ammunition must be at least 55 grains. Here is the source. The .220 Swift will make this threshold and so is legal for use on deer. Please stop saying the .22-250 is the minimum calibre by law, because there's no actual law to support you, as there are several cartridges in the same region, equivalent to the job, and comparable to the .22-250. I've filled out the NPWS form as well, and that little section is badly put. It should read .22-250 "or equivalent", as that is what the law states.
    the differance between that section badly put and what it should read is a summons if you are stopped with on the deer and a 220. swift rifle on the application from it states note; the minimum calibre weapon for hunting deer is a rifle of 22/250 calibre which uses bullets weighing not less than 55 grains ; there is no add ons or mention of other calibre under it and no matter what is said the swift is still .220


  • #18
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    steyrman wrote: »
    the differance between that section badly put and what it should read is a summons if you are stopped with on the deer and a 220. swift rifle on the application from it states note; the minimum calibre weapon for hunting deer is a rifle of 22/250 calibre which uses bullets weighing not less than 55 grains ; there is no add ons or mention of other calibre under it and no matter what is said the swift is still .220

    The form isn't the law steyrman, the wildlife act is. .22-250 is a .22 calibre as well. Here's the full comparison:

    |.22-250|.220 Swift
    Bullet diameter|.224 in|.224 in
    Neck diameter|.254 in|.260 in
    Shoulder diameter|.414 in|.402 in
    Base diameter|.469 in|.445 in
    Rim diameter|.473 in|.473 in
    Case length|1.912 in|2.205 in


    Bullet weight|Velocity|Energy|Velocity|Energy
    |.22-250||.220 Swift||
    40 gr|4,224 ft/s|1,585 ft·lbf|4,213 ft/s|1,577 ft·lbf
    50 gr|3,945 ft/s|1,728 ft·lbf|3,947 ft/s|1,730 ft·lbf
    55 gr|3,786 ft/s|1,751 ft·lbf|3,839 ft/s|1,800 ft·lbf
    60 gr|3,580 ft/s|1,708 ft·lbf|3,647 ft/s|1,772 ft·lbf


    The swift in 55 grain is longer, faster and has more energy than the .22-250 and exceeds the requirements under the wildlife act. It's perfectly legal to use, but as I said in an earlier post, it's better to use the .243 or greater as there's no reason to use a .22 centre fire calibre.

    Would you actually read the link it wasn't me posted?


  • #19
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    steyrman wrote: »
    the differance between that section badly put and what it should read is a summons if you are stopped with on the deer and a 220. swift rifle on the application from it states note; the minimum calibre weapon for hunting deer is a rifle of 22/250 calibre which uses bullets weighing not less than 55 grains ; there is no add ons or mention of other calibre under it and no matter what is said the swift is still .220

    Anyone who issues a summons in that situation is going to take one in the hole from the world's most useless legal professional in court, since the law is absolutely, incontrovertibly, explicitly clear that a .220 Swift will make the grade and is perfectly legal to use provided you have a deer hunting licence. Might also be worth noting that where it says "minimum", the .220 Swift exceeds the .22-250 by a small margin, so it qualifies there too.


  • #20
    deerhunter1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,711 ✭✭✭deerhunter1


    foxshot wrote: »
    Hi all just wondering whats the minimum caliber for deer hunting in ireland? can you shoot deer in ireland with .223 or .220 swift? thanks again
    Foxshot

    I always thought a 223 (5.56) was legal for deer, i know people who had them for years for deer hunting.

    Would the super give me a licence for this


  • #21
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    well lads if you would like to ring npws in the morning and ask them if its ok to use the 220 swift or anything else under what is stated on the form your more than welcome i would like to see the the hunting lic the was granted for the swift i know its up to the job but i is not a deer hunting round here the start at 22/250 and up we dont make the laws just work with them it good that people still like the swift i have stated i owned one for 7 years burnt a barrel out and rebarreled it its still shooting as good as new


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Would you please, for sanity's sake, read the *ACTUAL LAW* I've linked to above, which gives the requirements. The simple fact is that the .220 Swift meets those requirements. It *IS* a deer-hunting calibre in Irish law. You state we don't make the laws, merely work with them, and you're right, so why don't you read the one above?


  • #23
    deerhunter1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,711 ✭✭✭deerhunter1


    steyrman wrote: »
    well lads if you would like to ring npws in the morning and ask them if its ok to use the 220 swift or anything else under what is stated on the form your more than welcome i would like to see the the hunting lic the was granted for the swift i know its up to the job but i is not a deer hunting round here the start at 22/250 and up we dont make the laws just work with them it good that people still like the swift i have stated i owned one for 7 years burnt a barrel out and rebarreled it its still shooting as good as new

    Yep I would like to see it as well, the minimum is 22/250 the 220 was never on the list


  • #24
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    deerhunter1 wrote: »
    Yep I would like to see it as well, the minimum is 22/250 the 220 was never on the list

    There is no "list". There are a set of requirements, which I've linked to above. The .220 Swift meets them. In Irish law, it's a deer-hunting calibre.


  • #25
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    steyrman wrote: »
    well lads if you would like to ring npws in the morning and ask them if its ok to use the 220 swift or anything else under what is stated on the form your more than welcome
    The .220 swift is over the .22-250, not under it. It's a bigger case, larger load, same size bullet, what's smaller about it?
    i would like to see the the hunting lic the was granted for the swift i know its up to the job but i is not a deer hunting round here the start at 22/250 and up we dont make the laws just work with them it good that people still like the swift i have stated i owned one for 7 years burnt a barrel out and rebarreled it its still shooting as good as new
    There are quite a few out there. In fact if you do a bit of a search on this forum you'll probably find a few people who have got them for deer.

    And nobody's advising anyone to get a .22 of any flavour for deer, just pointing out the actual law and not the made up stuff.


  • #26
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    deerhunter1 wrote: »
    I always thought a 223 (5.56) was legal for deer, i know people who had them for years for deer hunting.
    Nope, doesn't even come close.

    Weight|Velocity|Energy
    55 gr|3,240 ft/s|1,282 ft·lbf
    60 gr|3,160 ft/s|1,330 ft·lbf
    69 gr|2,950 ft/s|1,333 ft·lbf
    77 gr|2,750 ft/s|1,293 ft·lbf


  • #27
    steyrman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭steyrman


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    There is no "list". There are a set of requirements, which I've linked to above. The .220 Swift meets them. In Irish law, it's a deer-hunting calibre.
    on your deer lic it states min cal 22/250 not any less so i take it its 22/250 and above i have read the law that you stated and agree with you but its on paper it dont mention any lower the above you can quota it to me all day try your local ranger office and see what you come back with i was refused a deer hunting lic on the swift 15 year ago my paper work was sent back to me because i put down 220. swift with 55 grain bullet weight most of the factory rounds are 40 grn and 50 not to many stock 55 or 60 grain as the would tumble and end up keyhole on paper this happened with the 60 grn more as the rate of twist did not suit as i have stated i would like to see the deer hunt lic that was granted on the 220 swift the problem is what we have and want are 2 different things i know in uk the allow stalkers to use 222,223, on roe and munjac but thats there thing im not worried what the have my main point is i was refused a deer lic with the swift has the law changed on it if it has i hold my hands up but if not were back to normal


  • #28
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    The law has been there since 1977. It has not changed. The issue is that if the NPWS refused you for the .220 Swift, it doesn't mean it's not deer-legal, just that in that instance they decided not to grant a licence for it. They're under no obligation to do so as far as I know. They could hypothetically refuse a .243 if the issuing officer deemed it marginal or insufficient for the deer in the area you're planning to shoot. In any case, as RRPC highlights, the .220 Swift is a more powerful calibre than the .22-250. There's not much in the difference, but it's there.


  • #29
    rowa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,296 ✭✭✭rowa


    steyrman wrote: »
    on your deer lic it states min cal 22/250 not any less so i take it its 22/250 and above i have read the law that you stated and agree with you but its on paper it dont mention any lower the above you can quota it to me all day try your local ranger office and see what you come back with i was refused a deer hunting lic on the swift 15 year ago my paper work was sent back to me because i put down 220. swift with 55 grain bullet weight most of the factory rounds are 40 grn and 50 not to many stock 55 or 60 grain as the would tumble and end up keyhole on paper this happened with the 60 grn more as the rate of twist did not suit as i have stated i would like to see the deer hunt lic that was granted on the 220 swift the problem is what we have and want are 2 different things i know in uk the allow stalkers to use 222,223, on roe and munjac but thats there thing im not worried what the have my main point is i was refused a deer lic with the swift has the law changed on it if it has i hold my hands up but if not were back to normal

    but rrpc is correct , if you had a deer hunting licence and several rifles including a .220 swift and decided one morning to use it to take a deer and did so , were stopped by a ranger and charged with using an unsuitable rifle and taken to court , you'd win your case because the swift ballistics are demonstrably in excess of the minimum required by the law, all's it takes are a weighing scales and a chronograph , it would be throw out of court .
    that having been said ,this is ireland and the law is sometimes a hindrance to those who inforce it , e.g. a pistol ban for thirty odd years that had no basis in actual law.


  • #30
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    You were probably refused the swift because there were larger calibres available then. The point is that the 22-250 is the minimum because as the chart above shows, it is a lower powered calibre than the swift (with a 55grain bullet).


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    foxshot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32 ✭foxshot


    thanks lads great info there and nice debate to!
    foxshot


  • #32
    happyjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭happyjack


    Would a deer shot with a 22.250 or either a .220 swift using a 55 grain bullet in the exact same spot know the difference between the two calibers?

    I've met loads of deer hunters who have used both calibers for years very successfully on deer, and in a Ruger 77 action all bulletweights 40 to 60 did not tumble, cant vouch for the remington 700 swift.

    I think the problem is to do with the bullets weight, it's hard to get 55 grain bullets designed for shooting deer in the swift, that said again I dont think the deer would know the difference,

    I read an articule by the famous Townsend Whelan some years ago, and in it he stated that nothing killed deer faster or better up to 200 yards with heart shots than a .220 swift, that was in and around 1935, long before the 22.250. He stated that deer shot with this caliber dropped as if fataly electricuted!

    I think you can argue calibre all day, shot placement is more important or comes first at least, but I have heard old knowledgeable deer hunters say they would prefer the 22.250 as a fox/varmint and serious deer round over the .243win.

    Just to wind you all up good oh, I'd love a 44remington magnum in a fast handling lever action for fast shots on deer in very close cover, I've got sciatica and it would help my bad back, plus fast handling. In the states millions of deer have been killed with the old 44/40.
    Old hunters in the states reckon that to 150 yards nothing anchors a deer better than a 44 magnum slug, it has the exact same energy as the 22.250 all the way to 300 yards and would be deer legal if not classed as a restricted firearm/caliber. Plus with 44 specials it would be truly subsonic using a moderator, zero noise, not very little but zero, same as a wee 22.

    Oh I'll just have to keep on dreaming.

    HJ:)


  • #33
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    happyjack wrote: »
    Would a deer shoot with a 22.250 or either a .220 swift using a 55 grain bullet in the exact same spot know the difference between the two calibers?

    I've met loads of deer hunters who have used both calibers for years very successfully on deer, and in a Ruger 77 action all bulletweights 40 to 60 did not tumble, cant vouch for the remington 700 swift.

    I think the problem is to do with the bullets weight, it's hard to get 55 grain bullets designed for shooting deer in the swift, that said again I dont think the deer would know the difference,

    I read an articule by the famous Townsend Whelan some years ago, and in it he stated that nothing killed deer faster or better up to 200 yards with heart shots than a .220 swift, that was in and around 1935, long before the 22.250. He stated that deer shot with this caliber dropped as if fataly electricuted!

    I think you can argue calibre all day, shot placement is more important or comes first at least, but I have heard old knowledgeable deer hunters say they would prefer the 22.250 as a fox/varmint and serious deer round over the .243win.

    Just to wind you all up good oh, I'd love a 44remington magnum in a fast handling lever action for fast shots on deer in very close cover, I've got sciatica and it would help my bad back, plus fast handling. In the states millions of deer have been killed with the old 44/40.
    Old hunters in the states reckon that to 150 yards nothing anchors a deer better than a 44 magnum slug, it has the exact same energy as the 22.250 all the way to 300 yards and would be deer legal if not classed as a restricted firearm/caliber. Plus with 44 specials it would be truly subsonic using a moderator, zero noise, not very little but zero, same as a wee 22.

    Oh I'll just have to keep on dreaming.

    HJ:)

    It's pretty hard to achieve 1700 foot pounds with the .44 magnum. This month's Shooting Sports has a review of the Ruger 77/44 carbine, and it seems pretty hard to make the grade. Paper figures don't convert well to real life. You're looking at hot handloads was the overall assessment. Personally, I think if you were looking at short ranges, particularly in woodland or the like, it'd be excellent, though anything outside about 100 yards was pretty much out, according to the article. Basically, the end result was that it'd be for the novelty value, and it was surpassed by so many other things that it wasn't worth the detractions.


  • #34
    deerhunter1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,711 ✭✭✭deerhunter1


    happyjack wrote: »
    Would a deer shoot with a 22.250 or either a .220 swift using a 55 grain bullet in the exact same spot know the difference between the two calibers?

    I've met loads of deer hunters who have used both calibers for years very successfully on deer, and in a Ruger 77 action all bulletweights 40 to 60 did not tumble, cant vouch for the remington 700 swift.

    I think the problem is to do with the bullets weight, it's hard to get 55 grain bullets designed for shooting deer in the swift, that said again I dont think the deer would know the difference,

    I read an articule by the famous Townsend Whelan some years ago, and in it he stated that nothing killed deer faster or better up to 200 yards with heart shots than a .220 swift, that was in and around 1935, long before the 22.250. He stated that deer shot with this caliber dropped as if fataly electricuted!

    I think you can argue calibre all day, shot placement is more important or comes first at least, but I have heard old knowledgeable deer hunters say they would prefer the 22.250 as a fox/varmint and serious deer round over the .243win.

    Just to wind you all up good oh, I'd love a 44remington magnum in a fast handling lever action for fast shots on deer in very close cover, I've got sciatica and it would help my bad back, plus fast handling. In the states millions of deer have been killed with the old 44/40.
    Old hunters in the states reckon that to 150 yards nothing anchors a deer better than a 44 magnum slug, it has the exact same energy as the 22.250 all the way to 300 yards and would be deer legal if not classed as a restricted firearm/caliber. Plus with 44 specials it would be truly subsonic using a moderator, zero noise, not very little but zero, same as a wee 22.

    Oh I'll just have to keep on dreaming.

    HJ:)
    Dont know of any deer that shoot with 22.250 or 220 swift or any deer that shoot :D. I do agree with you though.


  • #35
    foxshooter243
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,461 ✭✭✭foxshooter243


    I think you can argue calibre all day, shot placement is more important or comes first at least, but I have heard old knowledgeable deer hunters say they would prefer the 22.250 as a fox/varmint and serious deer round over the .243win.


    HJ:)[/quote]

    I dont think they were that knowledgeable HappyJack, the 243 with a 58 grain v max will shoot flatter and hit harder than either the swift or 22-250 with the added bonus of being able to use 100 grain bullets for deer, better choice would be the 243 to cover both applications.:)-you would come close with a 60 grain bullet in the swift loaded hot but you would need to find a rifle with a 12 twist to use it in.


  • #36
    CJhaughey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,907 ✭✭✭✭CJhaughey


    +1
    Those 58g V-max Hornady rounds are something else not much under 4000Fps.
    I only have a few rounds left, must get another box for fantastic Mr Fox.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    happyjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭happyjack


    deerhunter1 wrote: »
    Dont know of any deer that shoot with 22.250 or 220 swift or any deer that shoot :D. I do agree with you though.


    Fe*k it, sorry typo error, got me lovely there, shoot shot, shot shoot.

    HJ:)


  • #38
    happyjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭happyjack


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    It's pretty hard to achieve 1700 foot pounds with the .44 magnum. This month's Shooting Sports has a review of the Ruger 77/44 carbine, and it seems pretty hard to make the grade. Paper figures don't convert well to real life. You're looking at hot handloads was the overall assessment. Personally, I think if you were looking at short ranges, particularly in woodland or the like, it'd be excellent, though anything outside about 100 yards was pretty much out, according to the article. Basically, the end result was that it'd be for the novelty value, and it was surpassed by so many other things that it wasn't worth the detractions.

    I've shot a Marlin lever action in .357 magnum and I was very impressed with it's quick handling and lovely point. Check the 44 magnum rifle tables, a 44 magnum fired out of a rifle barrel equals 22.250 caliber ballistics all the way to 300 yards. I've never fired a 44, but I've read 4 different write ups in guns and ammo that stated the 44 in a rifle is a great round on deer, hogs and black bear all the way to 150 yards.

    This would not be true in a pistol, but fired out of a rifle the 44 has 50% more power.

    What impressed the American gun writers was the knock down power this caliber has, plus the fact it handles really well in carbines.

    I dont agree on shots taken on moving game unless by an expert. But I do enjoy shooting game from a standing unsupported position, as I've trained a lot for Mexican silhouette. For me, just speaking for myself, rifle shots from a fixed bipod set up get boring after a while, and to my mind it takes far more skill to shoot and kill live game from the standing position with out a bipod or sling.

    I'd recommend that hunters train in advance of trying this, I'd suggest shooting at clay pigeons and the distance at which you can reliably hit them 9 out of 10 shots is the kill distance/range that the hunter could stretch his hunting skills to, a foxes head is about 3.5 / 4" inches wide.

    I killed two foxes once in the same field, I shot the 200 yard fox first and his poor comrade that was closer at 50 yards both from the standing unsupported stance using a Ruger .220 Swift and I still remember that hunt even though it's some years ago now.

    Shooting at running game is another story altogether.

    To my mind its worth having a 22 bolt action rifle for trainning and then when you go hunting the skills learnt with the smaller caliber transfer over. Trainning with a centerfire rifle is just to expensive for my pocket.

    The only thing stopping me from trying a 44 Mag on deer is that it is now classed as a restricted caliber and we all know whats happening to restricted guns these days.

    HJ:)


  • #39
    Dancing_Priest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 362 ✭✭Dancing_Priest


    I'm not a hippy, I've never hunted, I know nothing about hunting (except I like the end result in my pot!). But can the average lad really kill a deer outright with a .22 or .243?


  • #40
    jwshooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,612 ✭✭✭jwshooter


    Dancing_Priest wrote: »
    I'm not a hippy, I've never hunted, I know nothing about hunting (except I like the end result in my pot!). But can the average lad really kill a deer outright with a .22 or .243?

    there is so much crap on this forum from lads that have shot feck all deer .

    only for 1972 ,no one would be using a 22.250 for deer work or a the 5.6x57 .
    for that matter even a 5.6x 61 Hubert hope you agree .

    why the hell would any one want to under arm themselves. 243 should be a min and let me tell you its a cal that should be only be used by a cool hand.


  • #41
    Dancing_Priest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 362 ✭✭Dancing_Priest


    One of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the idea of taking up hunting myself is the thought that I might bollix things up. I think that you at least owe it to the animal to do the job properly.
    It's one of the few things that I find standing in my way. Even my (Vegetarian) girlfriend has no problem with the idea of me earning my dinner!:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    jwshooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,612 ✭✭✭jwshooter


    Dancing_Priest wrote: »
    One of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the idea of taking up hunting myself is the thought that I might bollix things up. I think that you at least owe it to the animal to do the job properly.
    It's one of the few things that I find standing in my way. Even my (Vegetarian) girlfriend has no problem with the idea of me earning my dinner!:rolleyes:

    just might be handier for you to buy or get a butchered animal off some one .

    do you like venison ? .im sure your girl friend would be fond of this meat if she got it once .


  • #43
    Dancing_Priest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 362 ✭✭Dancing_Priest


    jwshooter wrote: »
    just might be handier for you to buy or get a butchered animal off some one .
    Like I said, I do like the results!
    jwshooter wrote: »
    do you like venison ? .im sure your girl friend would be fond of this meat if she got it once .
    She's a very serious veggie, But at the same time doesn't go "ugh!, yuck!" when I order a Carpaccio, that's more than can be said for some 'meaty' people I know, so I leave her as she is. :cool:


  • #44
    happyjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭happyjack


    jwshooter wrote: »
    there is so much crap on this forum from lads that have shot feck all deer .

    only for 1972 ,no one would be using a 22.250 for deer work or a the 5.6x57 .
    for that matter even a 5.6x 61 Hubert hope you agree .

    why the hell would any one want to under arm themselves. 243 should be a min and let me tell you its a cal that should be only be used by a cool hand.


    Sorry to say it, but the 243 winchester is a hairdressers gun, enough said.

    HJ:)


  • #45
    happyjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭happyjack


    Dancing_Priest wrote: »
    One of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the idea of taking up hunting myself is the thought that I might bollix things up. I think that you at least owe it to the animal to do the job properly.
    It's one of the few things that I find standing in my way. Even my (Vegetarian) girlfriend has no problem with the idea of me earning my dinner!:rolleyes:


    Where you from dancing Priest? Do you know where theres some deer in your area? Can you get shooting rights off a farmer? If your worried about hunting, why not take up fishing, sea fishing is great, no license needed, your girl friend might like the odd mackeral!

    HJ:)


  • #46
    CJhaughey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,907 ✭✭✭✭CJhaughey


    happyjack wrote: »
    Sorry to say it, but the 243 winchester is a hairdressers gun, enough said.

    HJ:)

    Firearms History would prove you wrong, The .243 is a fine round, available anywhere and with excellent ballistics, I am not saying the .270 is not but for a lot of usage it is overkill and risks overpenetration on light skinned animals such as foxes.
    Horses for courses and all that.
    Both calibres have proven themselves for many years but for individuals that are recoil sensitive the .243 might well be the difference between developing a flinch or not.


  • #47
    sako 85
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 191 ✭✭sako 85


    happyjack wrote: »
    Sorry to say it, but the 243 winchester is a hairdressers gun, enough said.

    HJ:)


    What a stupid comment. enough said.


  • #48
    clivej
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,061 ✭✭✭clivej


    Dancing_Priest wrote: »
    I'm not a hippy, I've never hunted, I know nothing about hunting (except I like the end result in my pot!). But can the average lad really kill a deer outright with a .22 or .243?

    I was talking to a man on the land where I stalk and he was telling me how they USED to shoot deer with a 22lr and shotguns, In the Good Old Days. So yes in the correct circumstances these animals can be shot with these calibres. BUT NOT NOW it is against the law of this land.
    Dancing_Priest wrote: »
    One of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the idea of taking up hunting myself is the thought that I might bollix things up. I think that you at least owe it to the animal to do the job properly.
    It's one of the few things that I find standing in my way. Even my (Vegetarian) girlfriend has no problem with the idea of me earning my dinner!:rolleyes:

    Thats why you get plenty of shooting in BEFORE you take up stalking.

    And why talk about using anything under a .243 when we all know that a .243 is the starting calibre to use for deer. There are lots of hunters that use this calibre and you can use it for the fox shooting as well.

    Ask 2 people what cal to use for deer and you will get 2 different answers.


  • #49
    sako 85
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 191 ✭✭sako 85


    IMO it’s not about having the largest calibre possible, it’s about knowing your limitations and your firearms. Shot placement is the key.


  • #50
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Shot placement is key, but so is having a decent margin for error. Put a decent chunk of lead in the right place at the right speed and the animal will die; however, use a slightly bigger round, put more lead two inches away a bit faster, and it'll still die, while it would not be so clean with the smaller round. Using enough gun is just a courtesy to the animal, and you owe it to yourself not to cause yourself unpleasant moments watching anything making a break for it after you've shot it badly.

    The use of .22 centrefires here is one thing, and another in the UK. Hell of a lot of difference between roe and muntjac and our own smallest official species. I'm sure Swifts and .22-250s will kill sika all day long, and I know they have done, but it wouldn't be my first choice for the job.


  • #51
    Dancing_Priest
    Closed Accounts Posts: 362 ✭✭Dancing_Priest


    happyjack wrote: »
    Where you from dancing Priest? Do you know where theres some deer in your area? Can you get shooting rights off a farmer? If your worried about hunting, why not take up fishing, sea fishing is great, no license needed, your girl friend might like the odd mackeral!

    HJ:)
    Sorry for the late reply.
    I'm just at the base of the Slieve Blooms, I don't even own a gun!
    I get most of my venison from a buddy in Donegal :o and the birds either comes from 'The Poacher' or umm, well... LIDL :rolleyes:

    Like I said, the GF has never tried to 'convert' me, so I return the favour. ;)


  • Advertisement
Advertisement