Why did you choose

[foby75]

.22 as that was the calibre most people used in my developmental years. My pal got a new BSA Mercury in .177 early 80s and we all had .22 so we all shared experience of the two calibres prevalent at the time. Never had a bias but have tended to buy and use .22 for pest control. If you know the capabilities and and limitations of the pellet and what pushes it, combined with being able to consistently hit the humane kill area, those are the critical considerations. Used a .177 Theoben for rabbit control on a farm a while back and that was exceptional. Have never had the opportunity to learn and try .20 or .25.

[TonyL]

.22 as that was the calibre most people used in my developmental years. My pal got a new BSA Mercury in .177 early 80s and we all had .22 so we all shared experience of the two calibres prevalent at the time. Never had a bias but have tended to buy and use .22 for pest control. If you know the capabilities and and limitations of the pellet and what pushes it, combined with being able to consistently hit the humane kill area, those are the critical considerations. Used a .177 Theoben for rabbit control on a farm a while back and that was exceptional. Have never had the opportunity to learn and try .20 or .25.

I haven't hunted for years now but when I did, I mainly used .22 for the same reasons. These days, if I were to hunt again, I'd be more than happy to use any of the four calibres mentioned and accuracy / shot placement is king. Affordability and choice would probably steer me more towards the two longer established favourites.

[Neil54]

I use both. Mostly .22 at the moment.
I use .25 in barns for pigeons sometimes.

[rapidresponse1]

i use 22 mainly because i was getting fly offs with 177

[gsxrman]

.177 as it is accuracy that kills and not calibre. If you upscale the ".177 to rabbit ratio" to human size then the calibre equivalent is about an "inch". So .177 is more than big enough, does enough damage but is naturally more accurate simply because of its dimensions.
I don't like the explanation "if I'm a bit off the larger calibre still does the job", only my opinion mind but you shouldn't accept being "a bit off" when it comes to live quarry. Paper or metal targets don't suffer.
Accuracy is king, full stop, so the best hunting pellet is the tightest grouping pellet in real world conditions in the most accurate calibre.
Of course, if the mark can be hit every time then calibre is irrelevant from .177 to .30 and beyond but generally at varying ranges and at sub 12 most people will shoot tighter groups with a .177 than the other calibres.

[where's it gone]

I think that many years ago most shooting was done with open sights and .22 gave more near instant deaths and therefore became first choice to hunt with. We've all heard about the hydraulic impact effect of the pellet in relation to size, ie, what is going to hurt more, being hit by a push bike or a car both travelling at 15 mph or, a grain of sand hitting you at 90 mph or a house brick at 2mph ? More so nowadays, it's what is more commonly available and your success at the target. I love .22 for hunting and .177 for target. This is not totally true as I sometimes hunt fly's around the paper target holder with a .177, less of an overkill.

[bill57]

I think that many years ago most shooting was done with open sights and .22 gave more near instant deaths and therefore became first choice to hunt with.

Perhaps you've nailed it here? Back in the days where scopes on air rifles were a rarity and open sights were the norm, most shooters would be unlikely to shoot at live quarry beyond, say, 35 yards, so the added drop of .22 was not such an issue. We are also talking about pre-myxmatosis days when rabbits were everywhere and a lot easier to hunt.

[Muskett]

.177 as it is accuracy that kills and not calibre. If you upscale the ".177 to rabbit ratio" to human size then the calibre equivalent is about an "inch". So .177 is more than big enough, does enough damage but is naturally more accurate simply because of its dimensions.
I don't like the explanation "if I'm a bit off the larger calibre still does the job", only my opinion mind but you shouldn't accept being "a bit off" when it comes to live quarry. Paper or metal targets don't suffer.
Accuracy is king, full stop, so the best hunting pellet is the tightest grouping pellet in real world conditions in the most accurate calibre.
Of course, if the mark can be hit every time then calibre is irrelevant from .177 to .30 and beyond but generally at varying ranges and at sub 12 most people will shoot tighter groups with a .177 than the other calibres.

This again, and again, and again. ^
Why my reach for rifles are .177. When I do use a .22 then its farmyard ranges only, and in truth closer than that. If you are well familiar with any calibre and can hit perfectly then it really doesn't matter what calibre.

All that matters with 12ft/lbs air rifles is pellet placement. Heck, 10ft/lbs rifles will be as lethal to normal effective hunting ranges. Your effective range is to hit a polo mint sized target in all positions and conditions on the day. Normal critters just aren't big, nor tough, though vitals to hit are tiny.

[T 20]

I tend to buy any gun I'm offered at the right price, and I never worry about what caliber it is.

Being in the farming community I do tend to get offered far more old .22" guns than .177" ones as .22" seems to have always been bought by farmers for pest control --- .177" being for bell targets and ladies.

I still prefer .22" as it's easier to get a .22" springer upto 12ftlbs, and to be honest at the short distances I tend to shoot at now there's little advantage in a .177's flatter trajectory.




All the best Mick