HW50S .177 vs. .22?

[Hare splittin]

I am sure there is thread here somewhere on this topic, but is the HW 50S better in .177 than .22?  Concerned the .22 is a little to slow at further distances for pesting/hunting.

Looking at a lighter powered all arounder that does not weigh ton and kick like a mule. Also something not as hold sensitive. what say y'all?

[tomykay12]

I have the 50s in .22, and it is an excellent rifle for shorter ranges. If you think you can shoot stuff at longer distance, get the .177, or preferably get more gun, like the R9.

[ancient1one]

A few months ago AGD was selling the HW50 in .22 for under $325. They were under powered. When Vortek made HO kits for the .22 the price went up. This just my observation/opinion.

If I was buying a HW50 it would be in .177.

I agree with tomykay12 for a few dollars you can buy an R9/HW95. A little heaver and a drop harder to cock but you get more gun.

[bokes]

How about splitting the difference and get the HW50s in .20?
One caveat tho: You have to special order this config and it will take 6-12 months wait. I ordered mine 7 months ago and hasn't arrived yet.

[Hare splittin]

Tomy what would you call effective range for the .22?

Ancient will take that into consideration, thanks.

Bokes, interesting. .20 cal would be cool. Can't say I have that much patience though.

[Motorhead]

At that power level ... the .177 IMO

[LAalex]

https://www.pyramydair.com/product/h-n-baracuda-green-22-cal-12-35-grains-domed-lead-free-200ct?p=858

These and others are lighter weight .22 cal. pellets that might stretch the .22 cal. HW50 but they do tend to be a bit more expensive.  It's easy to wrap my brain around why this rifle would be more suited to .177 but I can't help but be intrigued by the .22.  As a close range rifle rigged with a peep sight I would think it would be outstanding in .22.
By most accounts, they are easier to shoot accurately than the HW95 but I've had neither so I can't say so with any assurance.

Scotty

[JimL911]

Go for .177. If you want a .22 get the 95. With a JM kit I get about 10.5 fpe in .177. A sweet shooter if a bit heavy to cock.

[palonej]

At that power level I would also give the nod to 177.

[Mulby]

Another vote for .177. Although I wouldn't hesitate to enjoy one in .22. I have a Diana 24 in the 22 and even though it only makes a bit under 8fpe it is a joy to shoot and has a very usable range. I refreshed my 50s 177 about a year and a half ago with a PG2, and couldn't be happier.

[Calmark]

I have one in .177 cal and think its well-suited to that caliber.  One in .22 wouldn't necessarily be bad, but would make it have a little less zip, but more smack.  It all depends on which you prefer. 

[Hare splittin]

Thanks for all of the input everyone.  There are some good options  out there right now to get one of these.

Decisions, decisions...

[tomykay12]

The .22 is DEFINITELY easy to shoot. I'm guessing the heavier pellet tames the action down a little. 25-30 yards is about max for me with this rifle. Funny; if I shoot the 50s a while, then pick up the R9 in .22, the first shot feels like an armful of angry cats. It's dramatic, tk

[Booger]

At that power level I would also give the nod to 177.

Looking at all your sweet guns I would think that any power level you would choose .177