220/250 what is it ?

whitecrow

hi all very new to this. have been asked to shoot some deer by a farmer. i have an ordnary .22 drono, now i know that is to small for deer. i was just woundering if a .223 is big enough for a premet to shoot deer

Rovi

Hi whitecrow, welcome.

Not entirely sure what "an ordnary .22 drono" is, but .223 Remington isn't legal for deer in this country.

Unless things have changed very recently, .22-250 Remington is the legal minimum calibre, but there's talk of increasing that minimum to .243 Winchester.

E. Fudd

whitecrow wrote: »

hi all very new to this. have been asked to shoot some deer by a farmer. i have an ordnary .22 drono, now i know that is to small for deer. i was just woundering if a .223 is big enough for a premet to shoot deer

And also remember that you'll require a permit to shoot them!

Sharpie

whitecrow wrote: »

hi all very new to this. have been asked to shoot some deer by a farmer. i have an ordnary .22 drono, now i know that is to small for deer. i was just woundering if a .223 is big enough for a premet to shoot deer

Maybe you mean .22 brno??? If so it is definetly not suitable or legal.

If there is deer on the land the permit may not be the problem as they seem to take about 2-3 weeks. The problem is that as far as I know you have to have this before you can apply for large calibre rifle. The gun licenses seem to be taking a long time (where I am anyhow) at the moment so getting set before the season ends would be a push. You might be lucky...

Deer seasons - http://www.wilddeerireland.com/Seasons.html

culcuie

I inquired about this last week and still 22-250 with 55grn bullet is min. but there is an eu. proposal to have this changed to rounds of 100grn (243 min)or bigger

swift220

Hi all can you also shoot deer with a swift and 55g bullet

It wasn't me!

I don't believe you can, insufficient energy I think.

Umiq88

swift is a more powerful round than a .22/250 so no reason you should not be able to.

I remember the argument coming up before and maybe whoevers handing out the permits arent familiar with the calibres but .220 swift runs the same bullet as a .22/250 about 200fps faster so energy is greater.

culcuie

psittacosis wrote: »

swift is a more powerful round than a .22/250 so no reason you should not be able to.

I remember the argument coming up before and maybe whoevers handing out the permits arent familiar with the calibres but .220 swift runs the same bullet as a .22/250 about 200fps faster so energy is greater.

true but as in most cases with our sport the ones that have the know how have no inlfuance with the decision makers

It wasn't me!

Yeah, as far as I know it's capable of taking deer, but can't legally be used to do so.

bunny shooter

Swift is not legal ! Just confirmed it wth the wildlife ranger !

swift220

Thanks for that lads but i cant understand how the 22-250 is legal and the swift isnt even the swift has more power

bunny shooter

swift220 wrote: »

Thanks for that lads but i cant understand how the 22-250 is legal and the swift isnt even the swift has more power

When did common sense come into it ? Powers that be and "experts" decided the rules. Educated fools

John Griffin

bunny shooter wrote: »

When did common sense come into it ? Powers that be and "experts" decided the rules. Educated fools

The Rangers are right they actually know whats in the wildlife act and they do bother to look up the ballistics charts. The heaviest factory loaded 220 swift round available in this country is a 52grain fereral V-shok with Muzzle Energy in Foot Pounds 1694. Fine for muzzle energy but not for grains. The vast majority of other ammo makers only make them up to 50 grains. There may be some out there loading them with 55 and 60 grains but thats not what this caliber was designed for anyway. No hunter has ever produced a 220 swift bullet to the wildlife service in this country that met the criteria of the wildlife act. It has been tried by several to get a Deer hunting licence with a .220 swift (and also .223) and stating they were using 55 grain bullets, each time they were contacted and failed to meet the requirements. 55grain bullets that meet the requirements are rare. And yes i know the deer would never know which it was hit by, but the law has to draw a line somewhere.

Yes there are some educated fools in the wildlife service but don't tar all Rangers as fools, they actually have firearms experts, people that were born and bred into shooting and who were so passionate about it they made it their career aswell as their pastime. Or do you have a problem with all government services and authority?

meathstevie

Remington Accutip in .223 are 55g

culcuie

John Griffin wrote: »

The Rangers are right they actually know whats in the wildlife act and they do bother to look up the ballistics charts. The heaviest factory loaded 220 swift round available in this country is a 52grain fereral V-shok with Muzzle Energy in Foot Pounds 1694. Fine for muzzle energy but not for grains. The vast majority of other ammo makers only make them up to 50 grains. There may be some out there loading them with 55 and 60 grains but thats not what this caliber was designed for anyway. No hunter has ever produced a 220 swift bullet to the wildlife service in this country that met the criteria of the wildlife act. It has been tried by several to get a Deer hunting licence with a .220 swift (and also .223) and stating they were using 55 grain bullets, each time they were contacted and failed to meet the requirements. 55grain bullets that meet the requirements are rare. And yes i know the deer would never know which it was hit by, but the law has to draw a line somewhere.

Yes there are some educated fools in the wildlife service but don't tar all Rangers as fools, they actually have firearms experts, people that were born and bred into shooting and who were so passionate about it they made it their career aswell as their pastime. Or do you have a problem with all government services and authority?

Point well put but truth be told its not the round that matters as much as the distance and that can't be regulated eg. 243-70 grn @ 350m + is less effective even with perfect placement than 223-64grn at under 150m(I used many different cal. in the USA with equal effect at responsible distances without problems)
"education is for more important than leglisation"

John Griffin

meathstevie wrote: »

Remington Accutip in .223 are 55g

They don't meet the muzzle energy requirement, I know of no .223 round that will. Its only got 1282ft/lbs needs to be 1700 or greater.

Extract from S.I. No. 239/1977 — Wildlife Act, 1976 (Firearms and Ammunition) Regulations, 1977.

"Centre-fire rifles of not less than ·22 calibre with a muzzle energy of not less than 1,700 foot pounds
Any bullet for use in such rifles, weighing not less than 55 grains."

culcuie wrote: »

Point well put but truth be told its not the round that matters as much as the distance and that can't be regulated eg. 243-70 grn @ 350m + is less effective even with perfect placement than 223-64grn at under 150m(I used many different cal. in the USA with equal effect at responsible distances without problems)
"education is for more important than leglisation"

I agree with you totally, you can't regulate for distance, most shots are taken under 100m and anybody shooting beyond 300m is being irresponsible. I'm all for education, i actually deliver quite a bit of it, but you will always have idiots that just don't give a sh1t.
Personally i use a .25-06 with 117grains and rarely take animals past 200m, its not that i wouldn't be able to, its just that there is an increased margin for error and i don't want to risk injuring an animal. If people want to prove their ability to shoot long distances they should go to the midlands range. Deer are not for target practice.
I used a 22-250 for a while and took alot!! of deer with it and found it great, but it has it's limits. I've seen alot of people hunting deer that wouldn't hit the broad side of a barn. They should not be using smaller calibers, at least when they have some thing with a bit of punch most of the animals they wound won't suffer too long.

culcuie

John Griffin wrote: »

They don't meet the muzzle energy requirement, I know of no .223 round that will. Its only got 1282ft/lbs needs to be 1700 or greater.

Muzzle energy is all good if you are holding the gun against the head of the animal but its the energy of the bullet at the distance that counts and from the reserch that I have done its 700-800 ft/lbs is the excepted min. This is available in many more rounds and doesn't give trough and trough like in heavy cals.
if you check the balistics on the 22/250 and the heavier .223 the can be matched and ever surpassed out to 200 m and exceed the 800 ft/lbs
( federal balistics http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ballistics/
if I'm wrong please can you tell me the required ft/lbs for Eire

culcuie

PS. hornady make 60grn with 1727ft/lbs @ muzzle in 220 swift
and who makes a 55grn 22/250 over 1700ft/ lbs anyway as I serched and couldn't find one

Double Barrel

The problem is not particularly the cartridge as it is the bullet. Bullets for the Swift are usually designed to kill varmint's (not much penetration and high fragmentation),- practice and match type, (neither are non-expanding), - not big game. Big game bullets are designed for penetration and controlled expansion(mushrooming).

At one time Federal Cartridge Co. offered a .220 Swift in a premium 55 grain (Speer) Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullet at a muzzle velocity of 3700 fps. and that would qualify as a big game bullet.
All Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullets start as a 'solid bar of gilding metal'. A large cavity is formed in the front half of the jacket to hold the pure lead core. 'The core and jacket are fusion-bonded at very high temperature, resulting in a molecular bond between the core and jacket. Final forming produces a long nose with a protected point."

Hydrostatic shock, speed kills.

"P.O. Ackley, “Handbook for Shooters & Reloaders.” , his chapter entitled “Killing Power” in Volume I, something that Ackley called “shockdown power” rather than “knockdown power.” His premise is simply that the more speed increases, the more shock increases. And when speed passes the threshold of 4,000 feet per second, a whole new dynamic is created - one that cannot be equaled with lesser speed, no matter how large the bullet. His classic test, which proved his point, was conducted by shooting bullets into ½-inch-thick steel-armor plate from the frontal area of a U.S. military half-track. At a distance of 30 feet, he shot a .270 Win with 100-grain bullets, a .30-06 with military-issue, solid-steel, armor-piercing bullets, and a .220 Swift with a 48-grain bullet. The results were astounding. The .270 bullet left a shiny spot on the armor plate and did not penetrate at all. Two shots from the .30-06 armor-piercing bullets left shallow craters .070 and .098 inch respectively. The little .220 Swift bullets consistently burned 3/8-inch diameter holes completely through the ½-inch armor. The results spoke for themselves. Crossing the threshold of hypervelocity created a dynamic as a result of shock that cannot be achieved any other way."

It wasn't me!

I like that information, interesting facts.

culcuie

problem with that is a lot super fast swift bullets won't expand properly and end up going right trough under 150m even 52grn hollows will do this longways on foxes at sub 100m

bunny shooter

John Griffin wrote: »

The heaviest factory loaded 220 swift round available in this country is a 52grain fereral V-shok with Muzzle Energy in Foot Pounds 1694.

Yes there are some educated fools in the wildlife service but don't tar all Rangers as fools, they actually have firearms experts, people that were born and bred into shooting and who were so passionate about it they made it their career aswell as their pastime. Or do you have a problem with all government services and authority?

Firstly, I have 55 grain hornady swift in my safe as we speak ! Factory loaded and bought in a gun shop in this country !

Secondly, I was referring to the fools in the DOJ !

culcuie

bunny shooter wrote: »

Firstly, I have 55 grain hornady swift in my safe as we speak ! Factory loaded and bought in a gun shop in this country !

Secondly, I was referring to the fools in the DOJ !

only around 1650 ft/lbs @ muzzle which is not enough as quoted above by our gov. rep.

bunny shooter

culcuie wrote: »

only around 1650 ft/lbs @ muzzle which is not enough as quoted above by our gov. rep.

Not the point I was making, read the quote, it states 52 grain heaviest, I sate I have 55 grain :rolleyes: