please can someone enlighten me on the pro's and con's and any other matters when considering which calibre, any thoughts would be much appreciated. 
air rifles; .177 or .22?
- Thread starter jonnie drake
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
SimonM
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
.177 has a flatter trajectory which makes long(er) shots easier.
Both are capable of dropping bunnies at legal power limits.
Scout's (for some reason unknown to me!) restrict shotting to .177
Simon
Both are capable of dropping bunnies at legal power limits.
Scout's (for some reason unknown to me!) restrict shotting to .177
Simon
Not just the Scouts Simon, the Cadet forces have the same restriction for their air rifles, I think it goes back a long way to the days of competition air rifle shooting, when the range was about 5 yards and the bell had to be rung through the tiny hole in the steel plate.
Wings
For sub 12 ft/lbs air rifles personally I see no use for an argument of the two pellets, there is only .025 between them and although there will be a difference it wont be all that great. They will both only take down the same sort of size quarry e.g. rabbits, squirrels, pidgeon etc. etc.
In the air cadets too many years ago it was .177 (with an old hanging blanket as backstop - mind you they were only kicking out about 6 or 7ft lbs).
Most paper punchers use .177, flatter trajectory and a lot more forgiving.
When I shot .22 with an HW80, I spent a lot of time zeroing my scope at 5 yard increments as .22 has quite a trajectory (like that of a brick).
In FT I used the .22 but eventually went over to the .177 side.
Hope this helps.
Liam
Most paper punchers use .177, flatter trajectory and a lot more forgiving.
When I shot .22 with an HW80, I spent a lot of time zeroing my scope at 5 yard increments as .22 has quite a trajectory (like that of a brick).
In FT I used the .22 but eventually went over to the .177 side.
Hope this helps.
Liam
.22 creates more trauma when hitting a live target also. .177 dumps more energy into it's penetration.
as said both will easily drop bunnies.
.177 flies flatter and faster and some say is less affected by wind as it is smaller.
.20 - the half way calibre is supposed to be a mix of the two but I am told that it is not great and the brands which make that calibre are limited.
.22 bigger fatter and heavier. the parabola of the pellet is more pronounced.
i use .177 myself.
.177 flies flatter and faster and some say is less affected by wind as it is smaller.
.20 - the half way calibre is supposed to be a mix of the two but I am told that it is not great and the brands which make that calibre are limited.
.22 bigger fatter and heavier. the parabola of the pellet is more pronounced.
i use .177 myself.
There is actually quite a lot of difference between the 2 calibres. How it flies, how it hits, how its affected by wind, how easy it is to be accurate, price of pellets, ease of loading, Pretty much every aspect is different.
As said already though both will do the job.
Personally i would say .22 makes the better hunting round as it never suffers from over penetration like .177 does a lot under 25 yards, Over penetration is bad, both for safety and for knock downs. Many rabbits have run off after having a .177 pass clean through their brains. That wont happen with .22
There's an old adage that seems to have been forgotten a lot of late.
.177 for feather, .22 for fur.
all the 4 air rifle cals will be fine for hunting (thou you dont mention this as a reson etc )
the .177" is the best to use due entierly to its flatter trajectory if your hunting or any other sport ie FT HFT etc where you need to shoot targets at unknown ranges as it gives you more room to judge the range at
if your shooting a set or exactly known range then this advantage is not needed etc
for accuracy .177 always used to have the edge but that was lost 10yrs ago with .22 pellets capable of 1/4" at 50yrds etc
i also palyed with eh .20 cal compromise for years and even had a custom job made etc which is very nice
if i did it again i would just stick with .177"
most important is to get the most accurate pellet for the rifle this will almost certainly be a round or domed head
learn its trajectory
practice rangfinding
know your limits and understand that these change depending on conditions ie Wind etc
ATB
Duncan
the .177" is the best to use due entierly to its flatter trajectory if your hunting or any other sport ie FT HFT etc where you need to shoot targets at unknown ranges as it gives you more room to judge the range at
if your shooting a set or exactly known range then this advantage is not needed etc
for accuracy .177 always used to have the edge but that was lost 10yrs ago with .22 pellets capable of 1/4" at 50yrds etc
i also palyed with eh .20 cal compromise for years and even had a custom job made etc which is very nice
if i did it again i would just stick with .177"
most important is to get the most accurate pellet for the rifle this will almost certainly be a round or domed head
learn its trajectory
practice rangfinding
know your limits and understand that these change depending on conditions ie Wind etc
ATB
Duncan
Last edited:
pellets make a hell of a difference. in my AA S400 if you put cheap pellets in they corkscrew towards the target and never hit, so try a few different pellets. even some of the more expensive pellets dont do well. one tin of pellets cost me only £2 less than the ones that work (AA field) and are only 0.01g lighter but wouldn't hit consistently. with the right pellets you should be able to stack pellets with a little practice at 20yds
FYGT has nailed it there mate, follow that advice and you won't go far wrong, the .177 flies flatter for longer making it a bit easier to use, lighter pellets can get blown around more though, so try out different weights.
I have been shooting for 40 years and settled on .177 many years ago.
Prefer rimfire to all of it mind you.
I have been shooting for 40 years and settled on .177 many years ago.
Prefer rimfire to all of it mind you.
The "girlie calibre" may be easier to shoot at longer ranges, but through my own experience it makes the poorer round for hunting. I'd rather miss than have a rabbit get into a burrow due to over penetration or for want of knock down power.
All sound advice about pellet selection though, if you had 2 of the same rifle they would probably shoot differently with the same pellets. Each barrel is different, not sure exactly why though. But they are.
All sound advice about pellet selection though, if you had 2 of the same rifle they would probably shoot differently with the same pellets. Each barrel is different, not sure exactly why though. But they are.
I have killed far more rabbits with the Girlie pellet than I ever did with with the .22, and never ever had one run off that had been shot through the brains, large smack and a kick out and thats it.
Killed thousands in that manner, and more rats than I care to think about.
A rabbit shot through the brain does not run off, spin around on the floor yes. But how can a rabbit with no sensory perception run off?
Sounds to me like your .22 is not making its way through the skull HillBill, that would be a very plausible explanation for your problem, lack of penetration.
Killed thousands in that manner, and more rats than I care to think about.
A rabbit shot through the brain does not run off, spin around on the floor yes. But how can a rabbit with no sensory perception run off?
Sounds to me like your .22 is not making its way through the skull HillBill, that would be a very plausible explanation for your problem, lack of penetration.
Ive had about a dozen rifles in the last 6 years, from a TX to a daystate mk3, theo S type, mfr various others inbetween, only had .177 and .22 though.
In .177 i had a Logun mk 2, an MFR, a Skan R32 and a BSA hornet. Its not one gun i have had mate, same results with all. Over penetration happens mainly below 25 yards, i have shot rabbits in the head and watched them run 50 yards before dropping, clean head shots. Its a common problem with .177, take a look on the airgun forums, do a search there is plenty discussion about it. Folk started buying .177 more when HFT took off as .22 was harder to do well with because of the loopier trajectory. The overall standard of shooting drops when folk take up the easy option, give a .177 user a .22 and they will struggle, That does not work both ways as a good .22 shooter will be a great .177 shooter.
Its like cars. Automatic or manual? easy not much work option, or more difficult but more rewarding option.
I've shot for many years V both as sport and profession i'm not exactly inexperienced mate.
I see what you say HillBill, but it's not a problem I have ever encountered. I have never once had to trace a rabbit that has been shot between the eye and the ear.
Last edited:
I'm with Hillbill on this one... I've always used a .22 for live quarry, but then I've always used springers. I've done more rat shooting than rabbit and more rabbit shooting than squirell, a fair bit of that at some very close ranges.
The only rats which got up and ran away were those which the pellet passed straight through. It was an almost non-existent occurance with a .22 BSA Airsporter (circa 11ftlbs) and almost frequent enough to be commonplace with an Air Arms Carmargue .177 (making almost bang on 12ftlbs) Both were using H&N Baracudas, equivalent to Bisley Mags. In .22 they're approx 22grains - in .177 they're approx 11grains. Half the mass but nothing like half the calibre - for a given value of power, the speed of the .177 (and therefore the penetration at closer ranges) just goes off the chart compared with the .22.
The .22 will also carry more energy further down range than the .177 for the same given power at the muzzle. Half the mass, but the radius is only 1mm different and the frontal area is 2/3rds that of the bigger pellet => much higher drag on the smaller pellet - higher drag means it's losing speed faster and therefore power faster than the bigger pellet.
With FAC or legal limit PCP air, on a bipod, where you can get the extreme accuracy at range to put a .177 pellet in the 1p piece sized slot between a rabbit's eye and his ear at 40 yards - it's definitely the calibre of choice, always assuming you're as good as your gun at those ranges.
For the vast majority of springers where accuracy at range suffers for a variety of reasons there's usually not enough difference between them to choose, provided the ranges are sensible. .22 will cause more tissue damage and delivers more kinetic energy on the way through if it does over penetrate. I've not seen a rabbit hit in the sinuses, or through the ear canal, get up and run off when hit with a .22. Can't say the same for .177 I'm afraid.
The only rats which got up and ran away were those which the pellet passed straight through. It was an almost non-existent occurance with a .22 BSA Airsporter (circa 11ftlbs) and almost frequent enough to be commonplace with an Air Arms Carmargue .177 (making almost bang on 12ftlbs) Both were using H&N Baracudas, equivalent to Bisley Mags. In .22 they're approx 22grains - in .177 they're approx 11grains. Half the mass but nothing like half the calibre - for a given value of power, the speed of the .177 (and therefore the penetration at closer ranges) just goes off the chart compared with the .22.
The .22 will also carry more energy further down range than the .177 for the same given power at the muzzle. Half the mass, but the radius is only 1mm different and the frontal area is 2/3rds that of the bigger pellet => much higher drag on the smaller pellet - higher drag means it's losing speed faster and therefore power faster than the bigger pellet.
With FAC or legal limit PCP air, on a bipod, where you can get the extreme accuracy at range to put a .177 pellet in the 1p piece sized slot between a rabbit's eye and his ear at 40 yards - it's definitely the calibre of choice, always assuming you're as good as your gun at those ranges.
For the vast majority of springers where accuracy at range suffers for a variety of reasons there's usually not enough difference between them to choose, provided the ranges are sensible. .22 will cause more tissue damage and delivers more kinetic energy on the way through if it does over penetrate. I've not seen a rabbit hit in the sinuses, or through the ear canal, get up and run off when hit with a .22. Can't say the same for .177 I'm afraid.
I read a book last year about hunting with air rifles (can't remember which one but if you look it up on Amazon it is the most well known one) and the author was a big .177 fan (apart from when ratting at close range). Reason being greater accuracy, which is the key consideration for humane hunting and this outweighed the greater energy (trauma) delivered by the .22.
I didn't get a rifle in the end as I couldn't find a shoot and am in any case about to move but I did a lot of research and from my spreadsheet (you can't beat a good spreadsheet...) I concluded that a good combo could be a .177 with a heavy grain pellet (though not the very heavy ones designed for FAC air rifles) as this would deliver as much energy/momentum (at least, mass x velocity) as a medium weight .22 at 12 ftlb.
Either way it is important to do plenty of target practice, practice, practice. If you are 'struggling' with either a .22 or a .177 you shouldn't be hunting.
I didn't get a rifle in the end as I couldn't find a shoot and am in any case about to move but I did a lot of research and from my spreadsheet (you can't beat a good spreadsheet...) I concluded that a good combo could be a .177 with a heavy grain pellet (though not the very heavy ones designed for FAC air rifles) as this would deliver as much energy/momentum (at least, mass x velocity) as a medium weight .22 at 12 ftlb.
Either way it is important to do plenty of target practice, practice, practice. If you are 'struggling' with either a .22 or a .177 you shouldn't be hunting.
Last edited:
I'm with Adze (in his last post) on this one.
I shot springers in .22 for years so am convinced of it's pros and cons regarding hunting.
When I went over to .177 for FT shooting, it was for the flat trajectory etc.
As has been said, accuracy partly comes down to your own ability to use the kit you've chosen/can afford etc.
The biggest downside regarding .177 for me is, quite simply, it's such a fiddly pellet to use with cold fingers.
Liam
I shot springers in .22 for years so am convinced of it's pros and cons regarding hunting.
When I went over to .177 for FT shooting, it was for the flat trajectory etc.
As has been said, accuracy partly comes down to your own ability to use the kit you've chosen/can afford etc.
The biggest downside regarding .177 for me is, quite simply, it's such a fiddly pellet to use with cold fingers.
Liam
