22-250

[724wd]

are head/neck shots so much harder with larger caliber guns   ?  i hit a cow at the base of the skull with my 30/06 at 250 yards and she dropped in her tracks (jerked the trigger.  was shooting for the shoulder  ).  not an ounce of wasted meat, and with the '06, if she had kept moving, body shots would probably have been more effective than a .22 caliber.

[wreckerman5357]

I think it sucks that there has to be regs for what equipment we can/can't use (to some extent).  Hate to see the good ones punished for the actions of the ones that ruin it.  People should know when what equipment is suitable and the limitations.  With that being said, if there was a way to prevent the 'wrong' use or at least most-then I'd say allow the .22 centerfires.  I've seen plenty of animals taken with .222, .223, .22-250, and .220 Swift in other states.  Mostly deer but a few preferred the .22-250 for elk.  They did head/neck shots on the animals and they worked great.  The ones not shot in the head/neck...well, long days tracking or loast oanimals.

I do not endorse .22 centerfires for deer or elk hunting and would not use one. I do agree with you that we do not need laws prohibiting their use. A lot of the people that can't use them effectively can't use any rifle effectively.

[sirmissalot]

The difference in a .22 caliber bullet, compared to a .24 caliber bullet; a .02 difference, has very little effect on terminal performance. A well placed .22 caliber bullet, will kill just as well as a .30 caliber bullet. The difference in my opinion is mainly penetration. A 100 grain bullet will penetrate better than a 50 grain bullet (provided they are both good weight retaining bullets), so a shot not placed so well, say quartering towards or away, needs a better penetrating bullet. Roy Weatherby did tests in Africa shooting guns like a 257 weatherby, vs 300 weatherby, vs 375 H&H. In many of the animals the smaller caliber guns outperformed the larger ones, he credited this to a higher velocity smaller bullet.

That being said, when I was younger and hunted with a 243 single shot, I think every deer and antelope I shot dropped in its tracks. I now shoot a 300 weatherby and can't remember an animal I have recently shot that dropped instantly. I shot a deer from under 20 yards a couple years ago with a 44 mag rifle, 300 grain bonded bullet, the deer died but didn't drop like I would have thought it would.

Not at all saying I think a 22-250 should be used for deer, let alone an elk. As everyone knows a well placed shot is much more important than bullet diameter.

[bobcat]

A .25 Auto handgun with minimum 4 inch barrel is legal for deer, elk, and bear. So why not a 22-250 for deer?

[JimmyHoffa]

From what I saw when skinning animals shot by .22 centerfires, there was a difference in terminal performance.  The size/weight increase might not seem a big deal, but even if a rib/shoulder was hit with say an '06 the bullet still kept pretty much on a straight path.  With the varmint guns, we'd find the bullet stuck in the spine or it had gone off on a different angle and came out the throat.  With head/neck shots it didn't matter, but the body shots seemed to really alter the path of the little bullets.  For animals larger than deer, like elk, the same thing was basically happening with even larger calibers like the .243 win.  Most of the guys I knew that used the small guns did so because that was what they were used to.  Their folks started them off hunting at an early age and needed a gun that wouldn't kick and cause them to flinch. 

[demontang]

My time with a 22 centerfire I would shoot a deer with one loaded with the partition or other well built bullet. I wouldn't use it on bear or elk etc, but if you can wack a cougar with one a deer shouldn't be a problem.

[724wd]

A .25 Auto handgun with minimum 4 inch barrel is legal for deer, elk, and bear.

which is also dumb.  why did they do away with the minimum energy requirements?

[bobcat]

which is also dumb.  why did they do away with the minimum energy requirements?

Yes it is. They did away with all those rules a few years back when their goal was to simplify the regulations.

[demontang]

I thought the same thing on handguns, but when was the last time you saw a 25 auto with a 4" barrel?

[bobcat]

I thought the same thing on handguns, but when was the last time you saw a 25 auto with a 4" barrel?

   Yeah I know, there may not be such a thing, but the minimum is 24 caliber and a 4 inch barrel. How about a 38 Special with a 4 inch barrel? I know that combination exists and I wouldn't want to use it as my primary elk gun.       (or a 9mm)

[demontang]

Lol yea my 45 acp has a 4" barrel don't think I would shoot an elk with that either.

[uplandhunter870]

i dont see why not. id rather physics limit my caliber choices than the government. it all comes down to bullet selection and shot placement just like every other "this caliber or that caliber" discussion. you can make a  bad shot with a larger caliber weapon just as easy as a smaller one.

we are never going to filter out all of the poor shots, one weekend a year warriors, or the "i can make that 700yd shot with my 243" types, so there are always going to be lost game and injured game either dying a slow painfull death or wandering the hills with a slug in their hip as results of questionable low percentage level shots

i love my 22-250 and can shoot one ragged hole groups at 200 yards i am confident i can humanely kill a deer with it but i will never find out as my .243 is much lighter, just as accurate and easier to pack around.

[724wd]

i dont see why not. id rather physics limit my caliber choices than the government. it all comes down to bullet selection and shot placement just like every other "this caliber or that caliber" discussion. you can make a  bad shot with a larger caliber weapon just as easy as a smaller one.

correct and thought-provoking point you bring up.  but is there a line to be drawn?  a .22 short behind the ear will drop nearly anything in it's tracks, but should you be legally allowed to hunt with one?  At some point every hunter will make a poor shot, and with larger caliber weapons, the chance of immobilizing the animal with subsequent back-up shots increases.

we are never going to filter out all of the poor shots, one weekend a year warriors, or the "i can make that 700yd shot with my 243" types, so there are always going to be lost game and injured game either dying a slow painfull death or wandering the hills with a slug in their hip as results of questionable low percentage level shots

shhhhhh..... the anti's might hear you!  but unfortunately it's true!   

[high country]

watch a critter take a dirt nap after catching a 53gr tsx and tell me they are not enough gun........you will go from saying nay to wow.

[724wd]

what kind of critter?  prairie dog?  moose?