Quote Originally Posted by Neil. View Post
Problem with .20 is the selection of ammo
Some barrels like X some like Y. with .177 and .22 you have a vast array to chose from. With .20 you dont.

And anything on the general licence can be terminated with a .177. A 4.5 mm hole in the head is just as terminal as a .22. Airgun ammo sub 12lbs doesn't carry enough energy to make any difference with regard to Hydrostatic shock.
Surely an advantage, far less faffing around pellet testing

Actually there is quite a reasonable amount of hydrostatic shock (soft tissue damage) even with sub 12 if you cross section the wound channel.
(that may not be true of .177 I don't know, I don't use it)

As usual on the subject I refer back to the 4 calibre comparison from AGW,
.20 happened to be the most efficient sub 12 calibre.

Those of us who shoot it know how good it is as a hunting calibre,
I strongly suspect many of those who rubbish it, will either have never used it or only on a target range