Author Topic: Need some advise on choosing between a few calibers. (Read 5481 times)

JimG · « **on:** August 05, 2007, 10:28:33 AM »

Need a small bore for varmints and fur. Don't want an oddball/obsolete or wildcat caliber. Something common is what I'm looking for. However I'm not sure of what best suits my needs. Have a couple of .22lr rifles and a couple .22lr pistols so that area of need is filled. However I've got nothing between .22lr and .308Win. I can't call in coyotes close enough for either the 20 or the 12 gauge and both destroy the fur of course. Looking at everything from ground squirrels to coyotes including the fur-bearers in between. The calibers I'm looking at are .17HMR .22 Hornet .204, .223, 22-250. I would think that the .223 and 22-250 would be too much for the fur-bearers. I'm leaning more to the .22 Hornet or the .17HMR. I've never even seen a .17Rem but I'd be interested in more info on one though. The coyotes would be somewhat close, say under 150-200 yards. What say all of you.

SuperstitionCoues · « **Reply #1 on:** August 05, 2007, 11:23:10 AM »

I would say that the .17 falls into your category of oddball or wildcats, IMHO.

If you want something common, go for a .223 or a .243. A .223 is not overbore for what you are after. Consider it a .22LR on steroids.

~Ace~ · « **Reply #2 on:** August 05, 2007, 11:33:48 AM »

Quote

The coyotes would be somewhat close, say under 150-200 yards. What say all of you.

.223 will fill the need Very well, out to 300 yards on Yotes. Ammo is Common and plentiful (tho not what it was) The Hornet is anenic at the ranges your talking, and the HMR is not even a option in my mind. ~Ace~

Ponydog · « **Reply #3 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:27:40 PM »

The .223 cost a third of what it does to shoot a .204.....but......lol...well don't get me started...I have both, and a 22-250.......and when it comes to my favorite, after all three , I pick up the .204 It's a CZ 527 Varmint.....walnut and blued....and I will never sell it or trade it..it shoots flatter and farther.....smaller weight...32 and 34 gr for me does best.....my 2 cents

Don Fischer · « **Reply #4 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:32:45 PM »

After you decide on the cartridge, give a good deal of thought to the bullet you use. I've heard all kinds of things about bullets for fur that all contradict themselves. What I found myself is that a heavy bullet constructed for game and fired at a lower velocity is much easier on pelts than lighter faster bullet's designed for gee-wiz veolcity and distruction.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 05, 2007, 01:47:51 PM »

You will get many answers to this one. I do not think you can beat a 223 for an all around cartridge. If you have to buy your ammo or reload, it really makes the most sense. I have a 17 HMR and it is really a fine round, but it has it's limitations. I would not even think of it for coyotes unless they are with in 50 - 75 yards and you use a head shot. A 22 Hornet is a nice cartridge but is not cheaper to shoot than a 223 and has a 100 - 150 yd shorter range. Bullet selection is key to saving fur. You want one that will go all the way through like a 55 FMJ. It will have two small holes to repair or one that will penetrate a little then blow up, but not too soft or it will blow a big hole on the hide. The faster cartridges are very expensive to shoot in comparison to the 223. You get more performance at a cost. You can buy 223 ammo any where ammo is sold. You can not say that about some of the others. You can buy the 223 in a Handi rifle for about $200 - $230 or a Stevens 200 for the $300 range. So it will not break the bank buying the rifle. I still think the 223 is the best way to go if you are only going to have 1.

JimG · « **Reply #6 on:** August 06, 2007, 01:42:30 AM »

A Hornet is really only a 100-150 yard cartridge?! I would of thought it would be more of a 200 yarder or maybe longer. As for the rifles themselves I'm looking at Howa's in .204/.223/.22-50 and CZ's in .22 Hornet and .204. I have not seen many .17HMR chambered rifles in gun shops lately as they are very popular around here. I've had a few CZ rimfires in the past and still have one and they all have been good to great (have not shot my 452 American as of yet) and my .308 Howa so far has been excellent. They have a bull barreled .204 Howa in a Houge stock at the shop that has gotten my attention but I'm just not sure of the .204 round. Just some more of my thoughts on this subject.

beemanbeme · « **Reply #7 on:** August 06, 2007, 07:16:46 AM »

Get a .223. In a standard twist: 12 or 14, don't try to make it into a poor mans .243, shoot 50-55gr bullets thru it. Yes you can shoot milsup ammo in it in with 55gr bullets. Remanufactured ammo is so cheap (and pretty good stuff) that you can't really save money by reloading. You just get ammo tailored for you rifle. As a fur gun, I tried several different bullet designs in several different weights. All of them worked some of the time. Other times, I spent a lot of time sewing up holes. FMJ bullets were an utter failure. Small hole in, small hole out. And they killed the coyote. But the coyote never seemed to realize he was dead until he was in the next county.

Catfish · « **Reply #8 on:** August 06, 2007, 07:26:11 AM »

The best factory round for hide hunters that with take up to coyote is the .17 Rem. It is better than the .204 in my opinion, and I own both. I also own several wildcats in .17, .22 and .25 cal. and other than the .17 Ackley Hornet the .17 is the best fur gun and it hits hard enough to put down coyote with any reasonable hit, and the bullets stay in.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 06, 2007, 02:50:48 PM »

The 22 hornet is 150 - 200 yard cartridge although 200 is pushing it some. They consider the 221 Fire Ball a 200 yard cartridge and it has more sting than a Hornet. Read my post closer, you will see that I said the 223 is 100 - 150 yards longer than a 22 Hornet. The Hornet is a good cartridge, but again if i was to only have one it would be the 223. It can do it all, it just is a little over kill at short range and not as long as a 204 or 22-250. If you wanted to get two guns then a 17 HMR or a 22 Hornet along with a 22-250 or 243 would be nice for instance. But just one to do it all, give me the 223.

Grumulkin · « **Reply #10 on:** August 06, 2007, 11:11:20 PM »

Get the 22-250. You can limit fur damage by choosing the appropriate bullet.

trotterlg · « **Reply #11 on:** August 07, 2007, 01:39:18 PM »

Find your self a nice 17 Remington, I use one in a model 10 Savage with 30gr Bergers. 25's are OK and will just drop a Coyote where it stands, I only use the 30's because the rifle shoots them better. If you think you can limit the fur damage with a 22-250 by choosing a proper bullet then I will call BS, it just doesn't work that way, go shoot some Coyotes and then come back and tell us that. A nice little hornet will do well for you, but the 17 CF's are the proper Coyote round. The .204 is just a wantabe round, not up to the 22-250 and not as classy as the 17 Rem. .223's are only good if you are either really cheap or poor. Larry

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 08, 2007, 02:14:18 AM »

Like i said , you will get a lot of different answers on what the ideal cartridge will be. As with any thing when you select a cartridge you compromise. Be it cost, range, availability, performance, etc. You said basically that you wanted a varmint cartridge that will do it all out to 200 yards. If it is fur bearing critter then you want to save hides. I really think that a 17 HMR and a 22 hornet should be limited to no more than 150 yards, period. If you want to limit your shooting to that range then either one would work, but for wood chuck size and up I would limit the 17 HMR to 125 yards and head shots only at that range. This thread has turned to coyotes as the main theme. As far as coyotes are concerned and you are limiting your shooting to 200 yards, any of the center fire cartridges from the 17 Remington up through the 22-250 will work. The 17 Remington and Ruger 204 will in all likelihood not shoot through anything wood chuck size or bigger and will take out any thing smaller with authority out to 400 yards or so. With the 224 caliber guns you will need to be careful about selecting bullets that will not shoot through or will not blow up on the surface to save hides. As you have seen from the above posts there are many differing opinions on what the best hide saver gun is. Again it is a compromise, I guess that is why you are having trouble deciding on which is the "best". There is no best. That is why they sell all of those different calibers and cartridge sizes. I have already stated what my choice would be and why, but that is strictly my choice. You also stated that you "Don't want an oddball/obsolete or wildcat caliber." As far as oddball cartridges are concerned, that is a matter of opinion too. I will not go there. I have always had a love affair with 224 caliber cartridges for my own reasons. But that is just my opinion. Everyone has opinions. Bottom line if you do not consider it oddball ( I have 3 221 Fireballs, a great 200 yd round) then any of the cartridges from the 17 Remington and up will work at the ranges you have stated and probably a little longer. This is your choice, base it on what gun you like. It sounds as if you are not limited on funds for a rifle and you purchase your ammo, not reload. Look at the ammo availability (including bullet types), cost (how much are you going to shoot? 20 rounds a year, 2000 rounds a year?) and the gun you can get the caliber in the gun that is available to you. Base it on those factors. Good luck, you will not go too wrong with any of the center fire stuff.

JimG · « **Reply #13 on:** August 08, 2007, 09:47:58 AM »

Going to consult some ballistics tables to see if I can muddy the waters some more. Something about the .22 Hornet or the .204 is calling my name though.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 08, 2007, 02:07:22 PM »

Let us know which one you choose.

beemanbeme · « **Reply #15 on:** August 08, 2007, 02:22:20 PM »

Grumulkin, I've shot a lot of coyotes with a 22-250 and never really found an appropriate bullet. What might that be?

~Ace~ · « **Reply #16 on:** August 08, 2007, 02:27:07 PM »

Quote

The .204 is just a wantabe round, not up to the 22-250 and not as classy as the 17 Rem. .223's are only good if you are either really cheap or poor. Larry

Is that why the .223 is BY FAR the Most popular Yote round in North America ? Most Yote hunters must be Poor White Trash

Anemic .17 Calibers are about Useless on Yotes in the East for all but the occasional opportunistic shooter. It may work on small mangy yotes in other parts of the country, but aside from Self Proclaimed "Coyote Gods" and their followers, I see Very few people on that bandwagon...

~Ace~

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 08, 2007, 03:55:05 PM »

I agree that the 223 is the one to beat for the applications originally stated here. I think JimG had his mind made up before we started in. He was looking for re-enforcement. If he though a 45-70 is what he wanted then by golly that is what he was going to get no matter what we said. I tried my best to convince him that the 223 was the best for this application and so had others with their choice. I think we are getting all worked up over something that means nothing. It is a personal choice. If you are only going to shoot 50 rounds a year, it does not make much difference what you are going to shoot as far as cost. If you are going to shoot 2000 rounds, the difference in the ammo savings will pay for your new rifle. I do not think that is any thing to sneeze at. If you noticed Larry did not say the 223 would not work for this application. He just said it was for the cheap or the poor. Count me in the cheap group.

Ammo and reloading supplies are on the rise. I can not be insulted that easy. I can not see paying a premium price just to shoot something different and in the end does the same thing or nearly so, but that is a personal choice, isn't it

trotterlg · « **Reply #18 on:** August 08, 2007, 05:02:55 PM »

It would be a very hard sell to convince me that a round specifically developed by the military to kill a 200 pound person would be the best thing around to shoot a 25 pound puppy with. It is cheap, it is common, and it will get the job done, it will also kill an Elk, but there are just better solutions to both problems than a 223. If you want to use something other than whats best for the task, do it, people use the wrong tool all the time for things and get away with it, just don't expect to obtain the results you would get if you used the right thing. If the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems will look like nails. Larry

~Ace~ · « **Reply #19 on:** August 08, 2007, 05:09:35 PM »

The .223, Nor it's Heavier charged cousin were EVER designed to Kill a human, and they would be a Very poor choice for that job... The NATO 5.56 round was chosen as it WOUNDED Man sized (Most Well onder 200Lb) soldiers, and it took 2 to carry the wounded. Just a small bit of research will prevent these mistakes

And the Fact that the .223 Has killed and Will continue to kill more Predators in this country than Any other gun, tho it is To Small in some circumstances....

trotterlg · « **Reply #20 on:** August 08, 2007, 05:39:49 PM »

JimG: If you have a range around, ask and see if you can find someone with one of the CF 17's, I will bet they would be happy to let you shoot it. They are a great pleasure, and you can watch hits directly in your scope, they are the best thing around if you don't want blown up pelts. A .204 would be second choice (or third if you would consider a Hornet) but the 204 just doesn't have the same feel as a 17. Take a look at this little video clip of a Coffee cup being killed off at 100 yards, this is 17 Rem with 30 gr Berger BT's, free recoil off a bench. These thing are really fun rifles. Guess if you want an all purpose tool you should go with the .223, they are clearly the best thing since sliced bread. Larry

http://www.22-250.com/cup.wmv

JimG · « **Reply #21 on:** August 09, 2007, 01:27:54 AM »

No I really didn't have my mind made up first. However I probably am doing my self a disservice by limiting myself to only two brands of rifles, I'll admit that. I could have access to other calibers by looking at other brands. Howa's one big fault is limited chamberings. I've made a decision and that is I need two distinctly different rifles. One for walking and one for distance if you get my drift. The bull barreled Howa would frankly stink for walking the edges of fields and woods and creek banks. However a shorter, sporter contoured barreled, light weight, lower velocity/energy rifle would not be as effective as a heavy rifle chambered in a fast higher energy cartridge for precision shots at distance. Everyone knows that including me, I was just hoping to combine the two into one. Ain't gonna happen. Sooooooo......I'll just get one now and the other later. Right now I have a need for a longer distance rifle. As for the .17Rem, no one to my knowledge owns one nor have I ever seen one in the 4 gun shops in my locale. So it's a no go. I'll probably get a .17HMR or a .22 Hornet for the smaller fur-bearers and either a .204, .223 or 22-250 for the yotes. I need a yote gun now so I'm off to the shops to see what all they have. The Howa's though are at the top of my list.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 09, 2007, 03:48:51 AM »

I said this would open a can of worms. Everyone has their personal choice, that is why they make so many different case sizes in different calibers. It is a matter of personal choices and what is available to you. I also said that it would be better to have two guns. Better yet 5 guns. I do have a 17 HMR and what a round it is, within it's limits. I shot a young wood chuck this summer at about 75 yards. It was so violent that it blew part of his lungs out through the in hole...no exit. it was the Hornady 17 grain v-max. Shoot, flop, end of story. If the distance was going to much more than that I would have made a head shot. You can buy rifles in just about any configuration from light weight to heavy weight, stainless steel laminated to blued walnut. Just about everybody that makes guns, makes the 17 HMR. You can buy ammo anywhere ammo is sold. You can get 20 grain bullets with a little heavier jacket. But it does have it's limits. The 22 Hornet has been around for years and refuses to die. It too can make 1 shot kills on everything including deer. Not the best for deer, but smaller stuff out to 150 -200 yards, it is deadly on. 200 yards is pushing it some....really. Then you get to the longer range stuff. You have not mentioned the 243 as a possible choice. I am going out on limb here a little...The best long range cartridge that is widely available is the 243. I do not own one so there is no bias here. If it will save hides, is a matter of debate. Some will say yes and some will say no. Some will say the 204 is best for long distance because you can see the bullet hit. Same for the 17's. The 243 is as long or longer with less wind drift. It does get windy around here and it is a factor for really long shots like it or not. If you put the bullet where it needs to go, then you do not need to see where it went....you know. Some say the 22-250 is best and it is a great cartridge. They are all good and have their fans. I think the 17's and 204 are less critical as far as bullet choice to save hides and they will get the job done. I should mention that if you miss, you probably will not get a second chance so seeing the bullet hit is not really a factor. There are proponents for every caliber/chamber out there. It is a propitiatory cartridge, but the 19 Calhoon cartridge family does a fine job. It kind of splits the difference between the 17's and 204. I really like the 221 FireBall in a rifle (you can get it in a CZ). It has it's limits too, 250 yards is the very furthest it should be used at and that is pushing it a little. With in that range and a 40 grain V-Max stepping out at 3300 fps you will have one dead coyote with no exit hole. But I have to admit the last two fall into the odd ball category, but that is opinion too. Some would say that all of the 17 calibers are odd balls. Some would say the 204 is an odd ball. Have I helped you here? I seriously doubt it. It all comes down to personal preference. I think you can make any caliber that has been mentioned work with bullet selection. That can be difficult, because what if you run into a coyote at 100 yards, then have one at 450 yards. The bullet that will do good at 100 yards will not necessarily do good at 450 and vise-versa. Compromises. compromises. Your final choice is not going to change my mind or anyone else for that matter on what is the "best". Make your choices for your reasons and be happy

I still would like to know what your choice is. Maybe we can stir it up some more.

Mac11700 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 09, 2007, 04:38:10 AM »

I got a great 223 HV Winchester...it's big & heavy...and with the right loads will be my main varmint rifle...If I was just wanting a pure varmint gun for walking field edges where the shots would be under 150-200 yards...I would get one of the most accurate cartridges available and put a low power scope on it...My choice would be a 222...I haven't taken any since pelt prices dropped to practically nothing...but...I have shot bunches of yotes from near & far with one...and never spoiled a pelt with it..BTW...the 222 was designed as a varmint cartridge...but gives BR accuracy..and reigned #1 there until the PPC cartridges came out...

Mac

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 09, 2007, 05:39:59 AM »

Here, here, Mac. I really like the 222, I have one. I danced all around it suggesting the 221 FB and 223. It will do all that you say, but he did not want to consider it...odd ball I guess. Like I said every one has their idea what an odd ball is.

I think he has his heart set on a 22 Hornet for this purpose. You can get a new 222 in a CZ and it does not weight 10 pounds either. There are used ones around too. They were very popular from the mid 50's into the early 80's. The 222 was THE one to have in the 60's and into the 70's for all kinds of varmint and predator hunting. It is still used a whole lot in Europe. Personally I do not save the hides, too much bother for what you get, I just want a few less coyotes around. They mess too much with the wild game and they kill a pet once in a while.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #25 on:** August 09, 2007, 08:55:26 AM »

To answer the orginal post....get the .223. It will fill the need for your little varmits and will take out your coyotes as well.

As for the .223 and the .222, the .223 is simply the .222 on steroids. It's just the .222 case blow out to take more powder and make that little pill move faster.

Oh, I shoot groundhogs out to 400 yards with my .223. Bang....hit....crawl 10 feet....die. Works every time.

Dave

kombi1976 · « **Reply #26 on:** August 09, 2007, 02:51:16 PM »

If you want a straight out fur gun the 17 Rem is hard to go past.
It's used almost exclusively by guys who shoot foxes for their pelts here in Oz.
But there are a few problems....
The first is wind.
Anything as light as a 25gr bullet gets blown about on windy nights.
Also, factory loads are prohibitively expensive, at least compared to .223.
And lastly, to have a rifle that will time after time give head shots on foxes out to 400yds you need to change the bbl every 1000 shots.
Yep.....THAT often.
So if you don't desperately need to save fur like that the others are right.
Pick a .223, choose the right bullet for minimum for damage, and use it.
There are plenty of good and relatively inexpensive varmint models that will give you accuracy out to 300yds, let alone the 150 to 200 you need.

nomosendero · « **Reply #27 on:** August 09, 2007, 03:07:15 PM »

Quote from: ~Ace~ on August 08, 2007, 02:27:07 PM

Quote
The .204 is just a wantabe round, not up to the 22-250 and not as classy as the 17 Rem. .223's are only good if you are either really cheap or poor. Larry

Is that why the .223 is BY FAR the Most popular Yote round in North America ? Most Yote hunters must be Poor White Trash Anemic .17 Calibers are about Useless on Yotes in the East for all but the occasional opportunistic shooter. It may work on small mangy yotes in other parts of the country, but aside from Self Proclaimed "Coyote Gods" and their followers, I see Very few people on that bandwagon... ~Ace~

"Cheap or poor", I see.

That's why so many $1,000.00+ Target AR's are sold, like the RRA I have & enjoy& all of the Kimbers, Coopers, custom rifles, etc that are sold every year. I always have a few varmit calibers in the safe & I try differnt ones, but I ALWAYSkeep a couple of 223's.

Check it out! http://www.6mmbr.com/223Rem.html

trotterlg · « **Reply #28 on:** August 09, 2007, 06:34:08 PM »

.223's are used the most because there are more of them, there are more of them because they are functional and cheap to shoot. Just because there is more of something does not mean it is the best. Goes back to the tool thing, you will use the tools you have, not because they are the best for the job but because you can put your hands on them. To properly kill a Coyote you need a round which is neither over kill or under kill, the .223 is over kill, a 22 Mag is under kill, the 17 CF's work out just right, there may be something better, I just haven't seen it yet, but I may tomorrow. Some people get it and some people don't, I get it, you don't, nothing wrong with that, there will always be people who get it and people who don't, I'm happy and you seem happy. Good luck with the Doggies. Larry

lucky guy · « **Reply #29 on:** August 09, 2007, 08:07:10 PM »

Quote from: trotterlg on August 09, 2007, 06:34:08 PM

the .223 is over kill, a 22 Mag is under kill, the 17 CF's work out just right,

You can load the 223 down to hornet levels (or 22 mag) or go up to the more common 223 loads. That's a pretty nice option if you reload.

Also if you reload the 204 isn't more expensive than the 223, just not as many bullet choices.