Switching from 22 to 177

[Seanw226]

Rangefinding at night especially with NV is really difficult.

The solution that I found worked well for me was to use an IR laser sight. I used to set the laser to meet my crosshairs at 30 yards, then when I looked through the scope at night if the laser dot and the crosshairs were the same I knew it was around 30 yards. It worked a treat! I'd recommend doing that - in either .177 or .22.

What I also found when using NV for stalking rabbits was that very often I could get much closer than I could in the daytime. Quite often I could easily just walk up to rabbits - a 15 yard shot was actually quite common and getting to sub 30 yards was extremely common.

Also, when shooting at night the wind is less of a factor - very often the wind drops to almost nothing at night.

The IR laser gadget, would that work with a pulsar N750 digisite? Would I be able to see the laser beam of light or the red dot it creates on the target? Anyone else tried this?

[angrybear]

The IR laser gadget, would that work with a pulsar N750 digisite? Would I be able to see the laser beam of light or the red dot it creates on the target? Anyone else tried this?

If you get the correct frequency target designator laser you should be able to see the whole beam, but the shallow angle means you will be looking along it so it will appear more of a dot.

Easier & cheaper is to make a life size rabbit target and note how big it is on your reticle at pre measured ranges (I have no idea what ret your NV has) ie at 20yds it takes 4 dots, 30yds 3 dots, 40yds 2 dots.

[Brian.Samson]

The IR laser gadget, would that work with a pulsar N750 digisite? Would I be able to see the laser beam of light or the red dot it creates on the target? Anyone else tried this?

Yup - it comes through as a green dot through NV and it's invisible to your quarry (and to you unless you're looking through an NV scope). In fact you can put the dot directly on a rabbit's eye and it doesn't seem to spook them.

[clarky]

I found the decision easier than most.....177.
Looking at Hatchers theory (as I did all those years back) ftlb delivery doesn't matter a rats ass if the gun is producing in excess of 10.5ftlbs (a fairly easy feat even with an old HW50) because either calibre will retain enough oomph to clean kill out to 40yds with correct shot placement. Even a .177 will retain 6ftlbs at 45 to 50yds....more than enough to kill creatures upto the size of a Rabbit but where our rifle will more likely be making 11.5ftlbs....giving a surplus for margin of error.

So we forget energy retention but look closely at accuracy.
Here's my own findings.....
Pair of Theoben Rapid 7s 1998 Benched with an old 4-12 x 40 Nikko.
Zero being most reliably undertaken at 10 yards for this purpose only .....identical group at 10 yards.
20yds 1/2 inch low .22....177 1/8th above sight line (pellet still rising slightly above the point of aim)
30yds 1.2 inch low .22 ...177 back on point of aim zero after an initial rise.
35 yds 1.9 inch low .22 .....177 1/8 inch low
40yds 2.3 inch low.........177 1/2 inch low
45yds 2.9 inch low.........177 3/4 inch low.

My conclusion realised the .22 zeroed at 10 meters had a vertical group size of almost 3 inch potential when shot at the various ranges but the .177 was still within 1 inch or well within the recommended kill zone.
Case closed...easier and more reliably accurate as a pure point of physical laws and only one zero being required for most of your sub 40yd shooting.
Only argument I can think of is that some guns are not as good in .177....especially springers but choosing a gun efficient in .177 cal leaves the .22 argument mute.

[Russ6357]

Interesting Clarky - however consider a little breeze that moves from 2-3 to 4-5 mph (and that's not much breeze) moving left to right and then vice-versa - well then at 45 odd yards you have about an inch and 1/2 left to an inch and a 1/2 right - which in such a situation gives 3 inches of potential eddy and miss/wound potential that although improved by better pellets remains pretty darn close irrespective of .177 or .22.

Sub 12 unless its really still or the breeze is constant I think it's too much of a crap shoot much beyond 35 yards and a lot less in some situations.

[gsxrman]

I found the decision easier than most.....177.
Looking at Hatchers theory (as I did all those years back) ftlb delivery doesn't matter a rats ass if the gun is producing in excess of 10.5ftlbs (a fairly easy feat even with an old HW50) because either calibre will retain enough oomph to clean kill out to 40yds with correct shot placement. Even a .177 will retain 6ftlbs at 45 to 50yds....more than enough to kill creatures upto the size of a Rabbit but where our rifle will more likely be making 11.5ftlbs....giving a surplus for margin of error.

So we forget energy retention but look closely at accuracy.
Here's my own findings.....
Pair of Theoben Rapid 7s 1998 Benched with an old 4-12 x 40 Nikko.
Zero being most reliably undertaken at 10 yards for this purpose only .....identical group at 10 yards.
20yds 1/2 inch low .22....177 1/8th above sight line (pellet still rising slightly above the point of aim)
30yds 1.2 inch low .22 ...177 back on point of aim zero after an initial rise.
35 yds 1.9 inch low .22 .....177 1/8 inch low
40yds 2.3 inch low.........177 1/2 inch low
45yds 2.9 inch low.........177 3/4 inch low.

My conclusion realised the .22 zeroed at 10 meters had a vertical group size of almost 3 inch potential when shot at the various ranges but the .177 was still within 1 inch or well within the recommended kill zone.
Case closed...easier and more reliably accurate as a pure point of physical laws and only one zero being required for most of your sub 40yd shooting.
Only argument I can think of is that some guns are not as good in .177....especially springers but choosing a gun efficient in .177 cal leaves the .22 argument mute.

Very good post man........ .177 lot more forgiving..... think about FT or HFT...which actually use large kill zones
Almost everyone who wants to score well uses .177 cos if ya dont hit the kill ya dont score
Relying on a calibre 1mm larger in diameter but double the weight makes no sense , in case ya miss the vital and hope the pellet does enough damage anyway
Shooting anything living should be humane and not a roulette.
Use 177 and head shots only

[clarky]

Very good post man........ .177 lot more forgiving..... think about FT or HFT...which actually use large kill zones
Almost everyone who wants to score well uses .177 cos if ya dont hit the kill ya dont score
Relying on a calibre 1mm larger in diameter but double the weight makes no sense , in case ya miss the vital and hope the pellet does enough damage anyway
Shooting anything living should be humane and not a roulette.
Use 177 and head shots only

Thanks dude.
This test was conducted in 1998 using benched Rapids which were the Bees Knees back then.....still are I think.

I agree with the other comment regarding the wind issue but I never have been able to call it in favour of one calibre when it comes to wind. I.E .22 less effected due to mass versus .177 at around 850fps moving an awful lot faster, being in the air for much less time to be affected.
Ofcourse we can talk wind effects and pellet types all night long, especially light weght .22 or heavy .177 but fact remains, on paper, the .177 is more accurate through the vertical plane....in my experience the most difficult to control and the greatest margins.
I ran off 5 groups yesterday and have them here, Using a Daystate Huntsman.
The pellets never stray laterally more than about 20mm but string double this across the various ranges I shot.
It must suggest that group sizes are effected much more by vertical stringing unless wind is high.
This must make .177 more accurate.
This Huntsman (pre Regal) is wonderful in .177 by the way.

[Seanw226]

Yup - it comes through as a green dot through NV and it's invisible to your quarry (and to you unless you're looking through an NV scope). In fact you can put the dot directly on a rabbit's eye and it doesn't seem to spook them.

But what am I looking for as I can't find anything on internet or YouTube that shows how this works?

[Brian.Samson]

But what am I looking for as I can't find anything on internet or YouTube that shows how this works?

It's been a few years now since I had an NV scope, but I used a "Corsak infrared laser". There were two models available when I bought mine - one with turrets to make it easier to zero and one's that didn't have a turret that were cheaper but not very easy to zero. (I had the cheaper one that wasn't very easy to zero).

I don't know what the NV lads use now or whether you can still buy them. Maybe someone on the NV sub forum will know.

[timmytree]

But what am I looking for as I can't find anything on internet or YouTube that shows how this works?

There seems to be a few people interested in the laser set up, a member on AAOC, "Morgan" uses a system he calls "LOAS" or laser on a stick!
Basically the laser is mounted higher than the scope but both zeroed at one point. Not exactly sure what the rest of the kit is but he is no friend to the rabbits! A search on AAOC may give you some more info.

[angrybear]

But what am I looking for as I can't find anything on internet or YouTube that shows how this works?

If you want a IR target designator there are some on the bay but it's just another gizmo to set up & learn.

TBH I think you've confused yourself & need to start again from scratch, use chairgun to get the best zero range for your rifle, zero the sight to the rifle & shoot some targets at night to get confidence in the set-up, the easiest way to range find at night is as I said before to learn how big a rabbit (or your given target) is on your ret at 20-30-40yds.

I'm assuming that you have already tested for the best grouping pellet in YOUR rifle & in daylight it all works correctly.

[danco1987]

TBH I think you've confused yourself & need to start again from scratch, use chairgun to get the best zero range for your rifle, zero the sight to the rifle & shoot some targets at night to get confidence in the set-up, the easiest way to range find at night is as I said before to learn how big a rabbit (or your given target) is on your ret at 20-30-40yds.

Second that. When I first started using night vision, range estimation took a bit of time getting used to. I drew a bunny sized target on a piece of white card and marked out various ranges and practised at each range to help get used to the size of a rabbit's head. I took note of the number of mildots wide the head was at each distance using my chosen magnification. I practise and zero before I start shooting rabbits each night so it's fresh in my mind - works well.