Why not the .22?

G

gunner4391

New member
I don't know why, but a lot of people on this forum seem to like to take out groundhogs with the 223 instead of the 22...I personally don't see the need for the extra power and I have taken a good amount of groundhogs so far with me little marlin 60 with hollow point 22. The way i see it is I can shoot more groundhogs for less money and then use the leftovers for rabbit, ferral cats, and squirrels. Anyone got a reason for this preference to .223 or even larger?
 
:My personal opinion would be range. one can take dogs at any range one really desires. I've shot them at 400 yds and I know people can go further than that. With a .22 rim, any longer than 100 and your getting way out there. I'm not saying it can't be done, but the bullet takes a heck of a lot longer to get there. I love my ruger 10/22 and I know it could take them out that far, but it is cool to take them out further.

So, I guess ballistics is the bottom line.

again, my opinion. and as we all know, opions are like buttholes. everyone's got one and they all stink.:)
 
I agree with extra range as well. I've hunted them with a buddy who was using a .22-250 and the additional range with that the .22-250 provided really made a difference for him.

I was using a .22 and the fall off made shots longer than 100 yards pretty tough.
 
gunner,

i use .22 Lr and WMR or flinters 90% of the time now

i hunt often ( tomorrow and sunday too)

goats bunnies cats 'roo's

a shot to the brain box on a goat or roo is a 4"dia target

plenty of folks shoot 2" groups with WMR at 300 meters

plenty shoot 2" with LR at 200M

so why not in the hunt ??

i only shot a ground hog once when visiting the US

and a few Nutria things , ( man they taste bad) so am no expert but from what i remember thier skull aint no razorback's it aint much more stronger than a dog's ( excuse the comparision dog lovers)

.22 is plenty good to do the job

.223 rem is nice
5mm is good too

but .22LR is cheap and versitile

just my 2 cents

cheers

jack
 
I use a .22 LR because it's cheaper and for me more sporting to get closer to the game. Not knocking those who use CF's, if it was my hay field I'd probably see things differently.
 
Where I go to shoot prairie dogs shots range from 100-500 yards so I prefer the .223 for them but I'll use the .22lr for the short (100 yards and under) range shots.
 
I can think of 2 reasons not to use a 22LR on woodchucks:

1- You need to hit them in the head to anchor them. Beyond about 75 yd, most people will have a hard time hitting a woodchuck in the head. It's not impossible with an accurate 22, but most people won't take the time and limit themselves to head shots.

2- Related to the advice above, if you are shooting woodchucks (marmots) in a pasture or hay field and there are others about, any shot other than a head shot will have them squealing and all the other woodchucks will go underground for a long time. Even with a centerfire, they are not alarmed by the shooting, but by alarm calls from their buddies. When you hit them with a 223 or 22-250, they don't squeal.
 
.223 is all about being "trendy". There are many, many, many, many, many, many calibers that outperform it in every catagory BUT... "Trendy"

ar15.jpg
 
I love using my marlin m60 for groundhogs and yep it's much cheaper.So far i have taken 3 g/h's this summer with it and haven't had to take a second shot yet.Dang things are murdering my garden and yard.

Though i have thought of using a 308 just for fun.:eek:
 
Because .17, .20, and .22 caliber center fires are just more fun. .22 LR is still the king of cheap but they loose effectiveness reall fast. I don't hunt prairie dogs which is my main reason for owning these rifle, I shoot them. I test my skill at range estimation and the accuracy of my loads rather than belly crawl within range of a .22 lr. Punts and splashes are somthing you will never get with the .22 rimfires as well.

.223 is all about being "trendy". There are many, many, many, many, many, many calibers that outperform it in every catagory BUT... "Trendy"
Click to expand...
I don't see it as trendy I see it as cheap, I can handload 50 rounds of .223 for less money than 50 rounds of .22 WMR that my rifle likes to shoot. Cheap makes it popular not "Trendy". Plus what calibers really ouperform it? Sure you got faster and flatter ones but dead is dead and out to 300 +/- the .223 is pretty good at killing vermin with light weight bullets. Throw some heavy bullets in with a fast twist barrel and you can reach out to 600 yards no problems if you have the skills. The .223 is offerd in a wider selection of rifles and twist rates making it a far more versitile cartridge than most others for targets and vermin.
 
Last edited:
Marlin 60 22 on groundhogs I stay 65 yards or under, easy to do since I ranged my field. 100 yards with the 22 LR only on paper, nothing that breathes. I don't like having to shoot something twice and I don't like missing.
 
if you are shooting woodchucks (marmots) in a pasture or hay field and there are others about, any shot other than a head shot will have them squealing and all the other woodchucks will go underground for a long time. Even with a centerfire, they are not alarmed by the shooting, but by alarm calls from their buddies. When you hit them with a 223 or 22-250, they don't squeal.
Click to expand...

I have killed hundreds, probably a couple thousand, woodchucks and all but a couple hundred of them with a 10/22. I have NEVER, not one single time, had a woodchuck squeal after being shot with a 22.

Inside 75 yards or so I have also never had one get away that was shot from the front legs on forward.


To answer the OP:

As others have said, it's all about range. I now use a 204 ruger. It can kill them farther than I can hit them.
The 22 was fine when my primary concern was how expensive CCI Stingers were at $5/50. As soon as I had a real job the price of ammo seemed less important too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top