Switching from 22 to 177

[Owillingham]

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.

I like that idea, may give that a go myself.

[Waylander]

Ok I'm interested to hear from people who switched from 22 to 177 for hunting. Being a staunch 22 man I got fed up with the loopy trajectory of 22 and heard how accurate and how flat the trajectory of 177 is, so I bought a 177. Personally I'm finding it difficult, I don't think the accuracy is any better. 177 pellets also have a loopy trajectory. Ok they go further but when they hit home the power has gone. People have mentioned heavier pellets like bisley mags and logun penetrators, is this the answer to getting more kills? With such a small kill zone, a smaller lighter pellet and add in the wind etc I'm beginning to think the switch was big mistake.

.22 rimfire

Better than any air rifle

Waylander

[GoodWILLHunting]

.22 rimfire

Better than any air rifle

Waylander

It depends on the ground and whats on it/behind it, a rimmy round is too unreliable on ground with stones and rocks, too much opportunity for that irish Rick to take your eye out That would upset your your pipe smoking

[HandyAndy]

Hi man ..... Just to jump in again, Have used only .177 for last 10 years now,previously used both. My favourite .22 was a Taunus using HN Field Target Trophy ,very accurate
But the flatter trajectory beyond 35yds is a massive bonus, like having extra 10ftlbs. If you experienced bunnies running away i suggest it was an accuracy issue as a .100 calibre pellet(theoretically) would more than do the job. A .22 calibre bullet would drop a human stone dead shot through the brain. Like i said before either of the calibres is adequate if ya hit the spot .

Quite right, shot placement is the key.

I have shot deer that dropped on the spot, then some that have run on over 40 yards, the main reasons are shot placement and the effect of the bullet doing its job effectively on hitting the target. Close up shots in my experience on deer do not see the bullet being able to expand to its full potential and thus creating the biggest possible wound channel, this is similar in the case of the smaller .177 pellet in the example I gave before with the through and through scenarios.

All projectiles will have an ideal distance whereby it will release its full potential of energy to the target. This coupled with the correct placement is the key to the success of the hunt. I guess the .22 and its ability to deliver more energy at sub 12ft/lb ranges is "easier" once you have mastered the loopy trajectory and accurate range finding skills or just good Olde experience.

Hence where I mentioned practice, practice and more practice.

[gsxrman]

Quite right, shot placement is the key.

I have shot deer that dropped on the spot, then some that have run on over 40 yards, the main reasons are shot placement and the effect of the bullet doing its job effectively on hitting the target. Close up shots in my experience on deer do not see the bullet being able to expand to its full potential and thus creating the biggest possible wound channel, this is similar in the case of the smaller .177 pellet in the example I gave before with the through and through scenarios.

All projectiles will have an ideal distance whereby it will release its full potential of energy to the target. This coupled with the correct placement is the key to the success of the hunt. I guess the .22 and its ability to deliver more energy at sub 12ft/lb ranges is "easier" once you have mastered the loopy trajectory and accurate range finding skills or just good Olde experience.

Hence where I mentioned practice, practice and more practice.

Could go on forever with this debate man ....Ha Ha ..... Anything with a hole drilled through its brain is not gonna run/fly away
Everybody takes Dear and Fox with body shots so ya will get the odd one where shock alone is not enough to drop them and they will try to escape(its instinct)
I hit a woody years ago with a .22 Field Target Trophy right between the shoulder blades at about 40yds and it flew about 50yds before its wings folded and it crashed down
That was when i decided head shots only for me
I have shot all airgun quarry from young rats to rabbits and all the corvids with .177,used all weights and style pellets
I have found that a good well made domed pellet that we use in FT or HFT is the best as they are more accurate over distance.
Just punch a hole through its brain at 10 or 55yds and it drops
A sniper can take out a target at 1.5km with a 7.6mm round , and will use same rifle and calibre at 150yds ....
Stay cool man and keep shooting

[TORNADOS7]

I swapped from .22-.177 a while back and to be quite honest with you matey I struggled a bit with it, correct holdover etc but have since bought a pcp in .22 so at the moment I have a 95k in .177 and a Venom Viper in .22 and to be honest they're both as accurate as each other by virtue of .177 vs recoil-less PCP...

Unless you can afford to lose money if it doesn't work out, my advice would be to stick with what you know !

Also shot placement isn't quite as critical with .22, I've taken a shot or two with the .177 that didn't exactly go to plan but I know the full well the .22 would have pulled it off, on the flip side .177 forces you to concentrate on head shots rather than any other area, great for your on aim stability !!!

The main problem I'm struggling with at the moment is finding a decent scope where the p.o.i doesn't shift when you alter the magnification or parallax, unlike my "Nikko Airking" or my "Hawke Reflex" or my blah blah blah !!!

[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?

[gsxrman]

Ok I'm interested to hear from people who switched from 22 to 177 for hunting. Being a staunch 22 man I got fed up with the loopy trajectory of 22 and heard how accurate and how flat the trajectory of 177 is, so I bought a 177. Personally I'm finding it difficult, I don't think the accuracy is any better. 177 pellets also have a loopy trajectory. Ok they go further but when they hit home the power has gone. People have mentioned heavier pellets like bisley mags and logun penetrators, is this the answer to getting more kills? With such a small kill zone, a smaller lighter pellet and add in the wind etc I'm beginning to think the switch was big mistake.

Ok man... What rifle and pellets you using ?
What range are you zeroed at ?
Do you do much target shooting ?

[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

[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?

[Seanw226]

Ok man... What rifle and pellets you using ?
What range are you zeroed at ?
Do you do much target shooting ?

I'm using a daystate air wolf tactical 177, jsb exacts 8.4 grn, zeroed at 35 yds. I don't do target shooting ie belong to a club, I practice in the field when zeroeing with paper targets.