.22 or .25 Best hunting caliber?
- Thread starter Anthony Jarvis
- Start date
If " under 40 yards ... sparrows, squirrels and possums " and one simply can not make a clean shot in .177 I would agree with bigtinboat.
John
John
Upvote 0
You can tune a lot of PCPs up in pressure, but it may effect accuracy. For the same fps, a larger caliber will carry more weight, more distance and retain more energy.
Granted, there are a lot more .22 pellet varieties on the market. But, given the choice, one of the new ballistic slugs in .25 would be my choice over the same slug in .22.
Granted, there are a lot more .22 pellet varieties on the market. But, given the choice, one of the new ballistic slugs in .25 would be my choice over the same slug in .22.
Upvote 0
So how does the
JSB Exact Beast Diabolo 177
compare to the
JSB Diabolo Exact Jumbo Express .22 Cal
if both are shot with a muzzle velocity of 900 fps?
Upvote 0
i believe, speaking to when you ramp the fps over 1000 is when you start seeing the gaps (or when you drop it below 600..ish, jsut guessing there.). From what i've seen, topping 1000 you can start seeing .177 destabilize over longer distances, where as a heavier (larger) caliber will maintain stability. If you go lower fps, the heavier caliber wont be effected by wind as much, but it looses energy faster because gravity and has a much more drastic arch and thus more difficult to shoot.
When you start throwing the .22 jumbo monsters, or the .177 beast etc. into the mix you simply are getting closer to the benefits of having the next caliber up. So if you are shooting 177 and always using the largest, heaviest 177 you can find and tuning your 177 gun up to shoot faster to compensate for the heavier pellet, why not jsut go with a .22 right out of the gate that has the same grains and the gun is already built to preform for that weight of pellet?
the argument for "best" caliber is really chasing the tail, it is all about what the conditions and purpose are. Heavier, larger calibers will always be more effective for killing, you can't fight mass and physics. But larger calibers take more energy to throw, more time filling, more noise. Where as smaller calibers are quieter, higher shot count, and for certain game, are ideal hunting tools. In my book the .22 is still the best middle ground for energy, fps, shot count and noise, which makes it great for a plinker and hunter. On either side of it you are simply dialing into what your specific situation desires.
When you start throwing the .22 jumbo monsters, or the .177 beast etc. into the mix you simply are getting closer to the benefits of having the next caliber up. So if you are shooting 177 and always using the largest, heaviest 177 you can find and tuning your 177 gun up to shoot faster to compensate for the heavier pellet, why not jsut go with a .22 right out of the gate that has the same grains and the gun is already built to preform for that weight of pellet?
the argument for "best" caliber is really chasing the tail, it is all about what the conditions and purpose are. Heavier, larger calibers will always be more effective for killing, you can't fight mass and physics. But larger calibers take more energy to throw, more time filling, more noise. Where as smaller calibers are quieter, higher shot count, and for certain game, are ideal hunting tools. In my book the .22 is still the best middle ground for energy, fps, shot count and noise, which makes it great for a plinker and hunter. On either side of it you are simply dialing into what your specific situation desires.
Upvote 0
Here's what Ted himself has to say on the subject (@2:50 to 4:00):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DImiWYmrGsk&t=31s
Upvote 0
G
Guest
Guest
Thanks for the heads up. The flavor smelled right but I couldn't place the taste.
Upvote 0
my opinion after hunting with all 3. I would go with the .22 .177 is too light for larger animals to consistently kill them. and .25 can be to big for very small animals, plus less shots and costs a bit more to shoot. .22 is very versatile for everything depending on pellet choice and it is a bit cheaper to shoot with more shots.
Upvote 0
Makota, there certainly is a strong argument for the .22. I almost had to flip a coin in deciding between a .22 and .25. The .22 has a lot going for it over the .25: A wider choice of good hunting rounds (it can shoot Polymags!), lighter, shorter. But, I finally had to go with the .25 because I'm a hunter and I need the extra stopping power and wind-bucking ability. If I was a plinker, I'd definitely go with the .22. If I was a target shooter, it's the .177. It really is all about what you want it for, right?
Upvote 0
My thoughts are If shot into ballistic gel I would think the .177 would travel further into the gel but with a smaller penetration wound where as the .22s penetration wound would be bigger but with less penetration into the gel due to the initial shock/Impact on the gel due to the bigger diameter of the 22 which would be comparable to hitting a animal. I’ve shot barn swallows and striped gopher with both and prefer the .22 over the .177.
Upvote 0
.177cal for paper,.22cal for feather,.25cal for fur,.30cal for hair.Think that's how the rhyme goes.The argument is bollocks anyways if you cant shoot good.And that's 90percent of the keyboard marksmen on this site.I shoot to kill and put food on the table,out on nights you wouldn't put the cat out.most people on this site are laptop couch shooting know nothing know-alls.Its a dumb age old question meant to cause poopty pointless discussions.
Upvote 0
