12fpe hunting rifle .177 vs .22

[farmerjoe99]

I'm getting a low power disco (9fpe in .177)
and looking to set it up as a 12 fpe ,max shots per fill
close range hunter and plinking gun.
it will be used for shooting starlings and pigeons in our hay barns
were most shots are 10-25yds and I don't want/need a loud 20+ fpe rifle.
And I've been trying to figure out which way to go...
stick with .177 or buy a FX Lothar Walther barrel in .22
and set it up to shoot about 12fpe.
Thoughts?
Will one be more air efficient than the other?
Better for hunting?
long range plinking?
Joseph

[stonykill]

I'm getting a low power disco (9fpe in .177)
and looking to set it up as a 12 fpe ,max shots per fill
close range hunter and plinking gun.
it will be used for shooting starlings and pigeons in our hay barns
were most shots are 10-25yds and I don't want/need a loud 20+ fpe rifle.
And I've been trying to figure out which way to go...
stick with .177 or buy a FX Lothar Walther barrel in .22
and set it up to shoot about 12fpe.
Thoughts?
Will one be more air efficient than the other?
Better for hunting?
long range plinking?
Joseph

   Of course it is all a matter of opinion and preference.

   Efficient...... not sure if one holds an edge there other than the .177 will shoot flatter, but at the ranges you are talking not really an issue.

   .22 does hold it's FPE better at range. While I hunt with either caliber I personally prefer .22 for hunting. With that said I killed around 200 mammals last year and it was about 50/50 .177 to .22. Even woodchucks I took with both calibers. But I just feel better using a .22 for hunting.

  Long range plinking .177 is better as it fly's flatter. Better may not even be the right word to use. But long range plinking will be easier with a .177. Less pellet drop.

   I converted several of my Daisy 880's to .22. One has a LW barrel. Put the .22 LW barrel in your AG and don't look back. You will LOVE the accuracy.

   My .02.

[grauhanen]

A 12fpe .177 rifle is more than adequate for the job of shooting birds in a barn at 10 to 25 yards.  Our friends across the pond hunt with 12fpe rifles as a matter of course.  UK airgunners regularly shoot rabbits with 12 fpe guns.  That's the maximum they are allowed without a FAC.  If they can do it, there's no reason why it can't be done on this side of the pond.  The birds and bunnies aren't that much tougher here than over there.

[moorepower]

I don't know, from reading alot of posts, it looks like most in th US wear Kevlar. As for the gun, flip a coin.😎

[Ribbonstone]

Considering the range you expect, trajectory wouldn't really be a factor.  Wouldn't get any real "bonus" for the faster/flatter 12 foot pound .177, so may as well go for the .22.

[tjcib]

I am asking a question to further the conversation...

Is 12 fpe in .177 more, less, or equally likely than .22 to pass through and hit the side of the barn?

My intuition tells me that .177 might expel more of its energy in the bird, whereas a .22 might leave a hole in the side or roof.

But I am new...

[hotshot]

I'm getting a low power disco (9fpe in .177)
and looking to set it up as a 12 fpe ,max shots per fill
close range hunter and plinking gun.
it will be used for shooting starlings and pigeons in our hay barns
were most shots are 10-25yds and I don't want/need a loud 20+ fpe rifle.
And I've been trying to figure out which way to go...
stick with .177 or buy a FX Lothar Walther barrel in .22
and set it up to shoot about 12fpe.
Thoughts?
Will one be more air efficient than the other?
Better for hunting?
long range plinking?
Joseph

You only need aprox. 3 ft/lbs @ POI to dispatch those kind of birds.

.22 is more air efficient than .177 every time.

.22 is better for hunting small game as it carries more energy to the POI, e.g. my 11 ft/lb .22 air rifle will deliver 6.3 ft/lbs at 50 yards with Crosman Premier 14.3 gr pellets.

.22 pellets dump more energy into the target, whereas .177 pellets are more likely to pass through leaving a small neat hole, but far less collateral damage. Flea bites versus dog bites is how I would characterise the difference between the two calibres.

For long range plinking .22 wins again IMO, because I don't run out of mildots until 55 yards if I zero @ 25 yards and .22 pellets are less susceptible to cross-wind deviation at longer ranges.

Plus .177 pellets are more fiddly to load and the holes are generally harder to see at any kind of range.

.177 ammo is usually cheaper, but you get what you pay for and the choice is yours. 

[farmerjoe99]

Thanks for all the great info and keep it coming!

Looks like I'll be ordering the .22 barrel then
which will be nice as my other disco is .22 so
all my guns will be the same caliber.
plus .22 is a lot easier to load...
Nice to know is is perfectly capable of pigeons at 35yds with correct shot placement.
Joseph

[woogie_man]

When I had my cz s200, in .22, I was able to hit pop cans at 80 yards with ease.  The 12 ftlb will make things trickier, but it is suitable.  At 35 yards I would go with the .22, for the more "thump" at the target and the pellet will be going slow this causing less damage if you miss out get a pass through.

[Ribbonstone]

Actually, found the reverse to be true.  12 foot pound .177 tends to penetrate steel sheeting better than a 12 foot pound .22.

Think of it this way.

.177 has a frontal area of .025 square inches. Which makes the force per sqqure inch something like 480 foot pounds.  In .22, that same 12 foot pounds is delivered over .038 square inches, which works out to about 316 per square inch.

Being more hands on, shot an old galvanized tub. Was looking at 15 foot pounds (and at the range in impacted, probably down to about 13 foot pounds) and using a .25 and a .177.  Wider dents with the big pellet, holes with the little one.



I'd pretty much expect a through and through shot on birds (pigeons are bigger than most, but still hollow boned lightly built critters).  Would exit slower than they entered, and I'd guess that the .22 would deposit more energy in the bird, so would have less energy on exit.

[Frank in Fairfield]

I have to agree with Bob...
.177

[Ribbonstone]

Doesn't make all that much difference, so long as you hit the pigeon.  But not being perfect, have been known to miss.  And with typical luck, whatever the pellet finally hits would be better off not hit.

I didn't have a pigeon problem, but had a rat problem in a workshop shed and didn't want to spend a lot of time patching it up, so looked for dent-makers rather than hole-makers in case of a miss.  Which is why I shot the old tub, being a pretty close approximation of the old shed.

What i found:

1. Low energy means low velocity.  Low velocity means you can't expect even expanding pellets to really expand.
2. Wad cutters lose speed fast in air.  They also loose speed fast in every other semi-soft substance (including pigeons), so they deposit their energy quicky.
3. Going back to #1, can usually find a wad cutter that shoots well at these speeds (not true of really fast guns).
4. Avoid misses if you want to avoid patching holes.

EVERYTHING makes holes in well rusted/rotted sheet roofing.  It is almost crumbly, like shooting gram crackers.

[LDP]

12 fpe comparison:

1 .177 shoots flatter  than  .22
2 .22 is more efficient than .177
3 .177 will usually penetrate more than the .22. So pass thru is easier depending on target, pellet and penetration thru sheet metal or something similar will be higher for the .177. This is true for most situations but there always seems to be one or two exceptions.

[BigTinBoat]

12 fpe comparison:

1 .177 shoots flatter  than  .22
2 .22 is more efficient than .177
3 .177 will usually penetrate more than the .22. So pass thru is easier depending on target, pellet and penetration thru sheet metal or something similar will be higher for the .177. This is true for most situations but there always seems to be one or two exceptions.

How do you measure this?

[LDP]

12 fpe comparison:

1 .177 shoots flatter  than  .22
2 .22 is more efficient than .177
3 .177 will usually penetrate more than the .22. So pass thru is easier depending on target, pellet and penetration thru sheet metal or something similar will be higher for the .177. This is true for most situations but there always seems to be one or two exceptions.

How do you measure this?

It only applies to pcp air rifles. If you have a .177 thats set at 12 fpe and a .22 set at 12 fpe  the .22 will use less air to achieve 12 fpe.

[bokes]

IMO, at 12fpe :
.22 for chest shots on rats & pigeons indoors. Fewer passthrus, & less likely to punch holes in walls/roofing.
.177 for headshots in the field, where targets might be further away & an error in rangefinding less likely to cause a miss.

[Bryan Heimann]

At 12 fpe and under, I think .177 is the clear winner.

[Mod90]

This old debate rears its head again eh?

Honestly, in a 12 fpe gun .177 is the better pellet for the type of shooting & pests.

[BigTinBoat]

It only applies to pcp air rifles. If you have a .177 thats set at 12 fpe and a .22 set at 12 fpe  the .22 will use less air to achieve 12 fpe.

Ok I'd tend to agree if you are just talking air usage efficiency.

[RayK]

At 12 fpe and under, I think .177 is the clear winner.

I agree.  I'd prefer 8 grains at 830 fps over 14.3 grains at 615 fps.  But 14.3g 22 cal at 830 wins over even 10 grain 177 at 830 fps.

I'm glad I'm not limited to 12 fpe.

Ray