20 Calibre saves a lot of hassle discuss

[gsxrman]

Why, when there are tools to fill the gaps ?

Not really anti .20, I just don't see the point as they don't fly as flat, or hit as hard and generally they are the two reasons for choosing either .177 or .22.
The point is, it's like choosing either one, but coupled with most of the benefits of the other included, not being able to understand that is typical "HFT/competition mentality"

Bet you have note pads and drawings of different trajectories and either aim points or adjustments on scope for every rig.
NO
Carrying all that kit sounds slow, laborious and tedious.
So what ? I'm not in a race

I take my rifle, and I know every adjustment as its all I use. Like instinct or auto pilot. By the time you set yourself up, get comfy, range the quarry, adjust or settle with an aim point Id have shot half a dozen rabbits. What do you do when your quarry moves, range again and again and again, or if you have a .22 or .25 and quarry goes out to 40m+.
So do I most of the time, if the quarry moves I might stalk a bit closer or I might adjust the POA,
If it moves a long way, I just don't take the shot, because it's not a competition I don't have to try & hit everything I see !

.177 out to 50-55 is all ya need, whether it be airgun quarry or FT/HFT, it does it all and well.
There's that, 'I must take the shot' HFT/competition mentality again, just because you can doesn't mean you should, 50-55yds is beyond sensible sub12 hunting range, far too much can effect the shot, stalk closer.

Runners with a .177, ya missing a vital period, bigger pellet and more power doesn't help, you still missed a vital, = wounded animal. Maybe not for long but still suffering. Shame we aren't closer to each other, then I could show you first hand how clinical my rig is, like I have done many times before.
Bigger pellet/more impact energy does help, as does a larger surface area which transfers more terminal energy to the prey,

Tools should go .177, .22LR or .17HMR, .243.

Ya know I agree with nearly everything you say there AB, at sub 12 the difference in power retention between .20 and .177 is actually very little and it is 0.5mm wider in diameter. There is no real world advantage.
If you get a placebo effect from using a larger heavier calibre then fair enough, as all calibres will do the job if you hit the mark. Its just easier with .177 to be more clinical.

[gsxrman]

This wasn't at any time, what's the best cal thread though was it

Depends how you look at it,
".20 -
As well as being the best all round Uk power caliber it saves so much hassle
Discuss

OP makes a statement and almost demands "discuss". Which is what we are doing. Some believe he is right, some don't, there go, a discussion happens to air differing points of view.
Which is what this is.

[prosport.177]

So expensive - compared to what ?


https://www.uttings.co.uk/c1006-177-pellets/brand=jsb/


https://www.uttings.co.uk/p103636-ha...-250-hnftt20p/

When I had .20 about 8 years ago the pellets were knocking on 14 quid a tin compared to 5 or 6 quid for jsb.177
and 7.50 .22
Never look at prices of .20 pellets now as have no interest in the cal..

[prosport.177]

Exactly, negative comments with no basis in fact.

Was this for me?

It was based on my findings on the .20 cal 8 years ago when .20 pellets were more than double the price of .177

I have never ventured back to .20 and maybe all pellet prices are now in line with each other..

Aside from that , there is not much selection of .20 ammo and if you do not find a pellet to suit your barrel what is the option?

[PCPShooter]

Diana used to make .20 guns but I don't think they have for some time now; I would like a .20 HW80 barrel old type

On 20 cal I've found the star nut barrels to be spot on, which did worry me a bit too

[PCPShooter]

Was this for me?

It was based on my findings on the .20 cal 8 years ago when .20 pellets were more than double the price of .177

I have never ventured back to .20 and maybe all pellet prices are now in line with each other..

Aside from that , there is not much selection of .20 ammo and if you do not find a pellet to suit your barrel what is the option?

I've never hears of a 20 cal rifle that didn't shoot FTT or JSB the best, that's why the others faded away ..

[MrGreengrass]

My .20 Sheridan Silver Streak was accurate with H&N Pointed of all things.
Sold it as it wasn't practical for rat shooting..too much pumping and messing counting pumps as it was the 2 shot affair.
Bought a new FWB 124 from Ramsbottoms,..177. 4x32 ASI on RWS Hobby..much better...flattened a few thousand rats with that one.
Fwiw, my mate still has the Sheridan after all these years and it still works fine, hasn't been apart either...the old rocker safety model and he still has my old Sharp.

[angrybear]

I can see past .177, have used all calibres and FAC air. Like Mr Bear says it could be HFT mentality, but my opinion is also based on a lot of experience. I have also said many times HFT and FT is a hunting simulation competition. Go take your .20,.22 and .25 and see how you get on. Every plate you hit is a wounded animal!!

I could do all my shooting with any of the other calibres, but it wouldn't be as easy as with .177, and that is my main point, .177 sub 12 is the easiest to get on with and achieve good results so surely this makes it the best calibre sub 12.

Except it isn't really,
because in competition you must take every shot, and take it from a pre-set location & shooting position, which just doesn't apply in the field.

Your last line for me absolutely nails it, and I've tried not to use the word throughout;

" .177 is the "easiest" to get on with "

Yes, and that's why it's the most popular, but I disagree that 'easiest or popular' bear any relevance to being "the best" across the board.

[Muskett]

I'm with gsxman on this discussion.

The .20 is a compromise. It isn't as flat shooting as a .177, nor has the wallop of the .22. It limits maximising advantages of prioritising either velocity or weight; just gets stuck in the middle somewhere.

So what is the point? Because they are fun, and just something different to try. If velocity doesn't really matter much, nor weight, then not a bad choice. Still have to sort out the ballistic drop and everything else required.
Limited pellet choice might not allow for much tweaking to get the absolutely best that can be had unless just lucky.

If hitting the mark is the priority with 12ft/lbs air rifles then most people find the flatter shooting .177 easier to do that at all normal ranges; which makes it the "best". If you can do the same with all the other calibres then there isn't a "best". Few can.

FAC then everything changes.

[gsxrman]

Except it isn't really,
because in competition you must take every shot, and take it from a pre-set location & shooting position, which just doesn't apply in the field.

Your last line for me absolutely nails it, and I've tried not to use the word throughout;

" .177 is the "easiest" to get on with "

Yes, and that's why it's the most popular, but I disagree that 'easiest or popular' bear any relevance to being "the best" across the board.

Well yes there has to be some kind of rule system, but the parameters for hunting are the same with HFT especially, and most "discs" are larger than the "kill area" of the quarries brain. Targets are critter shaped most of the time and set at real life distances and angles, just like the field. Rats on ground at 15 yards, squirrel in a tree at 25 yards etc, which of them would you not take in the field.
I know it is not for everyone, but it defo makes a point if you have a go, and it definitely opened my eyes and made me a much better hunter with an air rifle.

[HW777]

I'm with gsxman on this discussion.

The .20 is a compromise. It isn't as flat shooting as a .177, nor has the wallop of the .22. It limits maximising advantages of prioritising either velocity or weight; just gets stuck in the middle somewhere.

This all revolves around pellet design and weight, how is a .20 11.4 grain pellet a compromise compared to a 8.4 grain .177 pellet and what is the lightest well made .22

The .177 is a tad to light, .22 is too loopy to shoot at range.

So for those in the know, .20 offers velocity pellet weight and range out in the field.

Now who can we find to twist the arm of H&N ? To offer their old range of .20 pellets.

For a 10 grain .20 pellet would really level the field against those that are to narrow minded to see the potential of .20 @ 12fpe

[zephyr]

I have also said many times HFT and FT is a hunting simulation competition.

I’m not disagreeing with you - I thought that as well, as do others I have chatted with over the years. Maybe I misunderstood when HFT was born out of FT, or has history been re-written by those who weren’t there, or maybe it is just the progression of the sport? Admittedly more and more silhouettes are of geometric shapes or non-quarry creatures (birds of prey, wolves, monkeys, bulls and a whole host of different birds) or other things (Aeroplanes, hand grenade and dragons). But the feedback from official UKAHFT sources is that HFT is a target competition and not meant to simulate hunting (despite ’Hunter’ being part of the name), which is used to explain some of the rules.

This doesn’t add anything to the calibre debate, but does let me express some of my ‘grumpy old man’ views to somebody other than my long suffering wife and kids.

[gsxrman]

This all revolves around pellet design and weight, how is a .20 11.4 grain pellet a compromise compared to a 8.4 grain .177 pellet and what is the lightest well made .22

The .177 is a tad to light, .22 is too loopy to shoot at range.

So for those in the know, .20 offers velocity pellet weight and range out in the field.

Now who can we find to twist the arm of H&N ? To offer their old range of .20 pellets.

For a 10 grain .20 pellet would really level the field against those that are to narrow minded to see the potential of .20 @ 12fpe

Again, an 8.4 pellet is too light for what?
.177 heavies are 10-10.5 where the .20 is 11-14 or there abouts. So the .2 offers a little bit more mass but is loopier due to weight and slightly increased frontal size.
If someone made a 10 grain .2, it would still be slightly larger than .177 and probably longer, and in my experience and testing has proved that a shorter well made pellet is more stable in the wind than a longer one, therefore the .2 would still lose out on stability, trajectory and power retention to a 10 grain .177 premier, but no one is going to do this unless the lead ban forces the .177 out.
I aren't narrow minded, all my comments come from years of experience and masses of testing.
I don't believe in needing hitting power, I believe in accuracy. This alone is why at sub 12 .177 beats .2, .22, .25.

Sniper uses a .3 round and usually trained to aim centre mass, if he hits enemy in shoulder or stomach the round goes straight through and doesn't achieve instant kill. Same shot with a .5 round would destroy the shoulder but again not achieve instant kill. Yet both rounds would instant kill, if he hit his mark. Hit a man in the "ski mask" with a .22LR and its instant kill. I know someone will say but "so and so" lived with a bullet in his head for days etc., 99% of the time the "ski mask" shot is instant kill whether it be a man or airgun quarry.

So sub 12, hit the mark, using .177 makes this more achievable. If you cant and need "hitting power" then go 40ftlb and .25 or better still just use a Rim.

[brian747]

i have an easy solution to this debate, i shoot all calibres
and own or have owned all of them, i currently own.177, .22,
.20,.25,in springers and pcp,s,i like to shoot them all,
there is only one important thing--ACCURACY.!!!!!!!
atb brian

[Muskett]

This in heaps ^

Those defending the .20 have to narrow the goal posts so .20 seems to have the advantage.
Pin point accurate with any of the calibres and they all work fine.