Can the .177 Replace All?

[fwbsport]

Yes it can.  What about your ideas with the .177 compared to bigger calibers.  Why does anyone need more than a .177?

[null]

My experience .22 is a replace all for hunting humanly.

However, you can bring food on the table (large game included) with .177 with the right setup and of course, the right shot placement.

In terms of plinking and targets, .177 is a replace all.

However, if it was the only thing I had available to me during an apocalyptic situation, then yes, I wouldn't be complaining. It's better than nothing.

So to directly answer your question: Yes, it technically can be.

[nced]

Yes it can.  What about your ideas with the .177 compared to bigger calibers.  Why does anyone need more than a .177?

LOL...."ideas" for some is that a .40 PCP is "needed" to bring down a 3 pound squirrel yet another "idea" for others is that a .177 & .22 is adequate for 150 pound hogs. Remember the Gamo sales pitch from years ago where a .177 pellet gun was used to dispatch a pig?



Anywhoo......for ALL my airgunning (including hunting squirrels) the "skinny pellet" works better than both the .20 and .22 cal pellet with my HW95 power level springers. Out to my 30 yard zero distance it didn't matter if the pellet was .177, .20 or .22, however past this distance the loopier trajectory of the "fatter pellets" made precise pellet placement problematic.

[Mr.P]

I don't understand the "flat trajectory" expectation for the caliber .177. 

Caliber doesn't matter it's all about speed and gravity right?   How far can you get during that one second time in which the bullet will drop 5 m?  Doesn't matter if it's .177 or .25 if it goes 1000m during that one second.  Or am I missing something?


I have a .25 that shoots just as fast as my .177. So 7.4 grain .177 pellet going at 1025 FPS will have the same approximate flight path as .25 at that same speed.  But I expect the .25 would perform better at distance because of its higher mass and greater inertia. 

As far as I can figure, .177 should have worse performance at any velocity compared to larger calibers because the .177 will me more susceptible to external forces.


I guess what I interpret this to mean is that for most people it has been easy and cheap to get a fast .177 and not as easy to get a gun that can shoot heavier projectiles at those same velocities.

[north country gal]

For me, these one caliber do it all discussions have the same relevance as one gun do it all discussions, which is basically, zip. Just not me at all on either count. These topics make for fun discussions, though, so go for it. It's all in good fun.

Oh, we do have more 177s than any other caliber, because we are strictly target shooters and the bulk of our shooting is 30 yards or less, but we also have 20s and 22s and who knows, I might get an itch to try a 25 at some point. Hey, why not? Bet a 25 could really ring the steel at 30 yards.

[Oldgringo]

All of my airguns are .177 caliber and that suits my 30 yard target and spoon shooting just fine.

[nced]

I don't understand the "flat trajectory" expectation for the caliber .177. 

Caliber doesn't matter it's all about speed and gravity right?   How far can you get during that one second time in which the bullet will drop 5 m?  Doesn't matter if it's .177 or .25 if it goes 1000m during that one second.  Or am I missing something?


I have a .25 that shoots just as fast as my .177. So 7.4 grain .177 pellet going at 1025 FPS will have the same approximate flight path as .25 at that same speed.  But I expect the .25 would perform better at distance because of its higher mass and greater inertia. 

As far as I can figure, .177 should have worse performance at any velocity compared to larger calibers because the .177 will me more susceptible to external forces.


I guess what I interpret this to mean is that for most people it has been easy and cheap to get a fast .177 and not as easy to get a gun that can shoot heavier projectiles at those same velocities.

Selective reading?

"Caliber doesn't matter it's all about speed and gravity right?"
LOL....that's the point since the speed is dependent on the springer!

"I don't understand the "flat trajectory" expectation for the caliber .177. "
From my reply.........
"works better than both the .20 and .22 cal pellet with my HW95 power level springers", also, the sectional density plays into "trajectory".

"As far as I can figure, .177 should have worse performance at any velocity compared to larger calibers because the .177 will me more susceptible to external forces. "
Yep, I agree, however my Beeman R9 and HW95 doesn't shoot as fast with .20 or .22 cal pellets.
"I guess what I interpret this to mean is that for most people it has been easy and cheap to get a fast .177 and not as easy to get a gun that can shoot heavier projectiles at those same

Hummmm....perhaps it also means that some shooters aren't interested in buying/pumping air, counting shots and the extra expense of a "life support system" needed to fill the gun from a "high pressure bomb". Some shooters aren't even interested in carrying around a 4 foot long 15 pound piston gun/scope! LOL, when I tried out the .20 cal from my R9 I needed to use a "high stress hold sensitive tune" to get 820fps from a .20 cal Beeman FTS pellet whereas I was shooting 7.9 grain Crosman Premiers at 900 with a much softer less hold sensitive tune. The "cherry of top" with the .177 dome was that it was every bit as effective on tree squirrels as the .20 Beeman FTS and it was easier to "hit the mark" past my zero distance.

Anywhoo, as mentioned I shot .177 HW springers for a few years, drank the "fatter pellet mo gooder KoolAid" and bought a .20 R9, then swapped out the .20 barrel for a chopped and choked .22 barrel. After a season and half of .20/.22 pellet shooting I sold both barrels, reverting back to .177 cal never to look back! Explaining again ,out to my 30 yard zero distance it didn't matter if the pellet was .177, .20 or .22, however past this distance the loopier trajectory of the "fatter pellets" made precise pellet placement problematic." It made no sense to me to change from something that simply worked best and I have need of no other, especially if it includes lugging around a gun heavier than my HW95 or especially if it includes  buying/pumping air, counting shots and the extra expense of a "life support system" 

The subject of the OP was "Can the .177 Replace All?" and my reply was simply that FOR ME it does.

[Motorhead]

REALLY ?  are we so bored that this silly subject needs to be talked about for the umpteenth time

.177 does better than any other calibers when a small pellet making a small hole with lower power at close to moderate distance in required.
True enough ...

REPLACE ALL ..... Not a chance !!

[nced]

REALLY ?  are we so bored that this silly subject needs to be talked about for the umpteenth time

.177 does better than any other calibers when a small pellet making a small hole with lower power at close to moderate distance in required.
True enough ...

REPLACE ALL ..... Not a chance !!

Yep....fer sure 

[bantam5s]

Yes it can.  What about your ideas with the .177 compared to bigger calibers.  Why does anyone need more than a .177?

I need more than .177 because. 20 exists.

[Mr.P]

I don't even need an airgun but I have 5.  Need doesn't enter into it for me at all...  yet here I am needing another Airgun.  I "need" a big bore.

[Ash]

I don't understand the "flat trajectory" expectation for the caliber .177. 

Caliber doesn't matter it's all about speed and gravity right?   How far can you get during that one second time in which the bullet will drop 5 m?  Doesn't matter if it's .177 or .25 if it goes 1000m during that one second.  Or am I missing something?


I have a .25 that shoots just as fast as my .177. So 7.4 grain .177 pellet going at 1025 FPS will have the same approximate flight path as .25 at that same speed.  But I expect the .25 would perform better at distance because of its higher mass and greater inertia. 

As far as I can figure, .177 should have worse performance at any velocity compared to larger calibers because the .177 will me more susceptible to external forces.


I guess what I interpret this to mean is that for most people it has been easy and cheap to get a fast .177 and not as easy to get a gun that can shoot heavier projectiles at those same velocities.

What you are missing is the mass or weight of the projectile. You would need a 7.4g .25 pellet to make your example valid. A 30g .25 would hit the ground in a shorter distance than a 7.4g .177 fired at the same speed and angle. The same properties that help it buck the wind help it buck the air resistance caused by gravity.

While you technically could do almost anything with a .177, ammo options make it easier to cover more bases with more calibers. You would really need more than one rifle or barrel at the minimum to shoot that wide of a range of ammo well so why limit it to one caliber?

[Nomadic Pirate]

Yes it can.  What about your ideas with the .177 compared to bigger calibers.  Why does anyone need more than a .177?

Not even close,...to the 1st question.

Many, many needs for bigger calibers,...to the 2nd question.

[Mr.P]

I'm not sure that weight or mass is important in terms of what I was describing. I was just referring to how "flat" a trajectory is, and that's just a function of how far the pellet travels in the time that it drops.  If two pellets travel the same distance in the same time and one of them weighs 10 times as much will still follow more or less the same path.  It's like if you drop a bowling ball and a BB they hit the ground at more or less the same time. This is not correct?

[PG in San Diego]

I may be wrong, Ive never been good at math but I think this is the formula to determine if caliber is universal; 

Wind factor  X FPS + (Length of the yard ) / (Money in wallet + # of rifles you own) – kids college fund/ 401K      = Caliber
                      Cans of pellets you own + Scope cost / Target backstop thickness or # pounds of Quarry


 

[PG in San Diego]

BTW, I do think .177 is universal subject to the quarry size and distance.

[Mr.P]

I have zero credibility here since my need is to shoot whatever I feel like in my 11m suburban garage range!  New hobby, thank you pandemic.  You noticed all those missing pellets this year?  That was me.

So at the moment  I have a few .177, .22 magnum springer, vanilla .25 pcp, and steroid .25 pcp and crazy as it sounds the 'Roided .25 is my most adaptable.  I can pump it up to a valve locked state At 3900 psi and shoot 33.5 grains at anywhere from 600-900 FPS with small hammer spring tweaks .  Add some moderate spring load and I can shoot those same slugs supersonic.  If I shoot at Or only pump to 2500-3100 psi I can shoot 50 grain slugs at 1000+ FPS and still not have maxed out the hammer spring. For me, it seems perfect.  Some days I only shoot up at higher pressure from 3900 down to 3000 and when I'm done it's still perfectly primed to shoot the heavier slugs without refilling. 

I know reliability and consistency from shot to shot are paramount for others so this is just for my own case.   I also know that an 11 m garage ranch is not really testing out the limits of anything. Other than maybe the nosiness of my neighbors. 

[Nomadic Pirate]

I don't understand the "flat trajectory" expectation for the caliber .177. 

Caliber doesn't matter it's all about speed and gravity right?   How far can you get during that one second time in which the bullet will drop 5 m?  Doesn't matter if it's .177 or .25 if it goes 1000m during that one second.  Or am I missing something?


I have a .25 that shoots just as fast as my .177. So 7.4 grain .177 pellet going at 1025 FPS will have the same approximate flight path as .25 at that same speed.  But I expect the .25 would perform better at distance because of its higher mass and greater inertia. 

As far as I can figure, .177 should have worse performance at any velocity compared to larger calibers because the .177 will me more susceptible to external forces.


I guess what I interpret this to mean is that for most people it has been easy and cheap to get a fast .177 and not as easy to get a gun that can shoot heavier projectiles at those same velocities.

The " .177 has a flatter trajectory " is old news from back in the day when the only power plant was springers, nowadays it means nothing since you have PCPs that will shoot any caliber as fast as a .177 can travel.

Some will still bring that argument up once in awhile, but today it's completely worthless

[Mr.P]

This is what I was thinking- kept seeing those posts and it was making me wonder what was going on.

[AKM]

These type or discussions crack me up. Next it will be; "Can a Springer Replace All".