opinions wanted on new rifle caliber

[b23]

If this will be a relatively shorter-ish range fun gun and you'll be shooting it a lot, I'd probably go 223.  If you'll only be shooting this a couple hundred rounds per year, just about any of the above that have been suggested could be the better choice.

[7mmfan]

Ok, lets simplify this, as some of you have brought up some good points.

The deer aspect was a pretty significant "what if" in my department. Realistically when the boy is ready to hunt, he'll have his own rifle, of significant enough caliber to not be a consideration in this department.

This gun is meant to teach shooting technique to a young one, and to have a small fun to shoot caliber that is accurate out to 300ish yards and can be reloaded or not break the bank if buying off the shelf. Most likely targets will be grouse and coyotes. Short, compact, lightweight are the key components I'm worried about.

I've never shot a 22-250 or 223 before. Is the recoil difference between a 223 and 22-250 noticeable? Is it noticeable enough to punish an 8 year old boy who is likely to be big for his age?

[HUNT JR]

As far as recoil goes neither have that much recoil but the .223 is going to be the lighter recoiling rifle in a lighter package. I couldn't imagine that it would be any issue for an 8 year old to shoot either though.

[kselkhunter]

Ok, lets simplify this, as some of you have brought up some good points.

The deer aspect was a pretty significant "what if" in my department. Realistically when the boy is ready to hunt, he'll have his own rifle, of significant enough caliber to not be a consideration in this department.

This gun is meant to teach shooting technique to a young one, and to have a small fun to shoot caliber that is accurate out to 300ish yards and can be reloaded or not break the bank if buying off the shelf. Most likely targets will be grouse and coyotes. Short, compact, lightweight are the key components I'm worried about.

I've never shot a 22-250 or 223 before. Is the recoil difference between a 223 and 22-250 noticeable? Is it noticeable enough to punish an 8 year old boy who is likely to be big for his age?

If deer is removed, then I would change my recommendation from 22-250 over to just a 223.     


An 8 year old should be fine with a 223 recoil.   Worst case you could start him on the subsonic stuff. That Atomic subsonic 223 ammo is only 188 ft-lbs of muzzle energy....that's 22lr levels.   Plus would be more useful on grouse than a full power 223 round. 

   

[hunter399]

My vote 223
If it where me I would not shoot deer farther than 200 yard maybe 250 ,I would say 300 yard if your excellent shot .A perfect lung and a shoulder shot could mean the difference between filling a tag.
With that said cheap rounds for coyotes and grouse,
A lot Better bullets for deer.
If I lived in Idaho and was hunting timber for deer 200 yard less I would hunt deer all day every day.

[h20hunter]

.223 super versatile and in the right conditions far more capable then 300. That being said I say go bigger, more versatile, and will allow for further use in various hunts for really forever. Get out the man bun, here it comes......dah dah dah 6.5 creed! Get one that will last and he will own it forever.

[b23]

Ok, lets simplify this, as some of you have brought up some good points.

The deer aspect was a pretty significant "what if" in my department. Realistically when the boy is ready to hunt, he'll have his own rifle, of significant enough caliber to not be a consideration in this department.

This gun is meant to teach shooting technique to a young one, and to have a small fun to shoot caliber that is accurate out to 300ish yards and can be reloaded or not break the bank if buying off the shelf. Most likely targets will be grouse and coyotes. Short, compact, lightweight are the key components I'm worried about.

I've never shot a 22-250 or 223 before. Is the recoil difference between a 223 and 22-250 noticeable? Is it noticeable enough to punish an 8 year old boy who is likely to be big for his age?

Of those two, based on your criteria, I'd definitely go 223 over 22-250.

Maybe even consider a CZ 527 17 Hornet in their American model. 

[huntnphool]

Ok, lets simplify this, as some of you have brought up some good points.

The deer aspect was a pretty significant "what if" in my department. Realistically when the boy is ready to hunt, he'll have his own rifle, of significant enough caliber to not be a consideration in this department.

This gun is meant to teach shooting technique to a young one, and to have a small fun to shoot caliber that is accurate out to 300ish yards and can be reloaded or not break the bank if buying off the shelf. Most likely targets will be grouse and coyotes. Short, compact, lightweight are the key components I'm worried about.

I've never shot a 22-250 or 223 before. Is the recoil difference between a 223 and 22-250 noticeable? Is it noticeable enough to punish an 8 year old boy who is likely to be big for his age?

Of those two, based on your criteria, I'd definitely go 223 over 22-250.

Maybe even consider a CZ 527 17 Hornet in their American model.

 .204 as well

[syoungs]

to me, it seems like you really want the 22-250. That in itself is enough reason for me to get one.

Realistically, for the uses that you have posted out, the .223 is a better choice. Much cheaper and more abundant factory ammo. Brass is cheap for reloading. powder is cheaper for reloading. Can reload it down to bunnyfart loads and use it for the grouse, can up it to a higher load for coyotes/deer. amazing barrel life, so it could easily turn into a hand-me down.

The recoil difference isn't that huge, but it is there. the .223 is softer shooting with factory ammo, and can be downloaded further.

If I were in your shoes, I would go .223. the barrel life, cost and recoil all drive me to thinking that its the best rifle for your intended uses, though I do understand the draw to other calibers. I own a few guns that are very redundant in their capacity, just because I can lol.

[7mmfan]

Ok, I'm leaning now. The next question would be which one to get? This gun will spend a lot of time strapped to a pack with the goal of not being in the way. Shorter, more compact and lightweight the better. Stainless and synthetic preferred for longevity. Suggestions on rifle brand/model?

Have looked at the Ruger compacts, Tikka T3Xlite compact, I believe Howa has a compact rifle as well.

[b23]

Have looked at the Ruger compacts, Tikka T3Xlite compact, I believe Howa has a compact rifle as well.

Of those three, the Howa is the only one I have any personal experience with and it was actually in a 223 with a 20in barrel, but it was more of a varmint contour and not a skinny barrel, regardless, it was a very good shooting little gun.

Never owned one, but you always hear good things about the Tikka's so I don't think you can go wrong there, either. 

I've never been much of a Ruger fan so of those three, the Ruger would be my last pick.

[Magnum_Willys]

See Howa photo above.  6#

[7mmfan]

.223 super versatile and in the right conditions far more capable then 300. That being said I say go bigger, more versatile, and will allow for further use in various hunts for really forever. Get out the man bun, here it comes......dah dah dah 6.5 creed! Get one that will last and he will own it forever.

 I'm surprised you can sit down at the bench to shoot that man bun of yours with those skinny Jean's you been wearing. At least thr shakes have worn off since you started drinking soy vanilla lattes.

[jackelope]

I can tell you with 110% certainty that if grouse is really something you’re interested in shooting with this new rifle, the 22-250  has waaayyyy too much horsepower. Think poof! and feathers everywhere nearly vaporizing your quarry.
Bad idea.

[7mmfan]

I can tell you with 110% certainty that if grouse is really something you’re interested in shooting with this new rifle, the 22-250  has waaayyyy too much horsepower. Think poof! and feathers everywhere nearly vaporizing your quarry.
Bad idea.

I've experienced the ploof with a number of different rifles over the years.  I'm quite familiar with it unfortunately    I'm thinking head shots strictly, hence the smaller, lower recoil,  highly accurate caliber.