I wanted to add something to Tom Anderson's excellent points for debate.

There is an advantage that can be used in certain situations but it has to be taken with a large grain of salt. And enough mv at the muzzle to be effective. And enough terminal velocity at the poi.

Its possible to create a larger wound channel with a .177 caliber air rifle with hollow point pellets but there are several caveats.

I've had some higher powered .177 air rifles which shot Crow Magnum or RWS Super Hollow Point pellets well to around thirty to thirty five yards. That's with my airguns and at my personal skill level. But these are (and were) airguns which had accuracy I could keep to under an inch rested out past forty yards with these dedicated hunting air rifles. The problem is that hollow point pellets act like parachutes the farther out they fly. That's the problem. They "waver" the farther out they fly because velocity conspires against that cup maintaining wind resistance during flight.

On top of that, a given shooter may not even have an airgun which likes any hollow point pellets available well enough that they could be used effectively, even to forty yards. Thirty yards might be more realistic but let's just use forty as a respectable figure.

That said, if you had an air rifle with enough velocity at the muzzle and if that air rifle liked a certain hollow point pellet, it could then be possible to open up a larger wound channel than .177 on impact. It could also be said that with the frontal expansion of the pellet on impact, there would be less likelihood of the faster .177 pellet exiting due to its condition of trying to turn itself inside out on impact.

Also, I don't recall ever having seen a .177 hollow point pellet expanding to the diameter of .25 in the flesh of an animal. I can say that the wound channel on inside thirty yard shots, using a hollow point pellet, has been fairly close to .22 caliber diameter though.

So the possibility exists that having the aforementioned conditions being met, a very good shooter ought to be able to use a .177 hollow point pellet in lieu of a .22 with somewhat equal effect. My R11 with Crow Mags has decapitated sparrows. Quick death but very wierd to witness through the scope. The head popping off thing is a little disconcerting. Effective, but not pretty and you could say the wound channel criteria discussed earlier became a moot point. If I remember that was at about thirty two-ish yards.

I'm trying to imagine just what a Crow Mag or Super Hollow Point would accomplish out of the 350 or 48.

Harv

I could post a pic of a squirrel I shot with the 350 using a Crow Magnum that went straight through, but I won't because some people lose their lunch when they see a little blood

I have recovered .22 Crow Magnums out of phone books that were shot from my 350, and most were 0.33" to 0.37" diameter so it's like being shot with a .38? less the energy?


Diana 350 Mag .22
Hammerli 850 .22
A few Crosman CO2 & Pump .177

I spent some time a few weeks ago testing expansion with plumber's putty.

Tested various common crossman ammo (what I had that day). My Model 34 shoots both the domed and the hp's equally well, producing 1" groups at 40yds. The hp's are maybe slightly worse, but certainly in the game for hunting. Points sometimes group, sometimes not for me, I reserve them for plinking.

.177 Crossman domed, point and HP were tested in my 10 yd range with my Model 34. Its achieving about 900fps on all 3.

I didn't carefully measure any wound channels, just depth and the final pellet diameters

Crossman points penetrated best, about 3.5" deep. Retrieved examples were 4.9mm diameter. Negligable expansion.

Domes were almost as effective, about 3.1" deep. 5mm final diameter.

The HP's were phenominal. Penetration was about 2.75". The wound channel was far wider than the others. The retrieved pellet was 6.8-7mm diameter, and about 2.5 mm thick. That's expansion to .275"

I use the hp's exclusively when hunting now. Shooting squirrel with points was like hitting them with a frickin' laser (when they hit), the squirrels only were anchored with headshots, body shots taking a few seconds to stop'em. When hit with the hp's, it would still be thru-and-thru, but it took a sizeable chunk out the back side with it. With hare (headshots only), about 50% of hp's exited, the rest just came to rest under the skin, far side. At 20-30 yds, they were well deformed, often fragmented from the bones.

I shot a crow in the neck at about 40yds (line of flight). Exit wound was almost 1cm. Snow was red for a foot around, crow didn't survive the 30' to the ground.

I like .177 for hunting! Alot of rifles have great results when fed CP HP's, they're probably the easiest of the common HP pellets to shoot.

J

You shot .177 Crosman pellets 3-3.5" deep into plumber's putty with a 34? We are talking about the same duct seal we all use? Electrician's putty? I think it will take a lot higher velocity that 900fps to penetrate 3.5" of duct seal!

Do they make different kinds of putty? Maybe I got a real tough one?

Diana 350 Mag .22
Hammerli 850 .22
A few Crosman CO2 & Pump .177

Hey Harry, must be differant density duct seals. The stuff I got is TOUGH! I just checked my latest trap & no pell is deeper than "about" 1 inch. (inc. some shot well over 1000 fps.. 550 fps. they are lucky to sink flush.(I have not measured pen. but after reading Tom Gaylords post on hollow points I did shoot some to check for expansion,Wow! they really do expand great shot into somthing as dense as "elec.putty". Not shure if they would as much on flesh. CPHP,&Crow mags. are 2 of my favorites for my guns that "like" them. Duct seal I have I swear I think could stop a 22 LR. w/ 3"? Not shure of your season there Harry,, here in S.C. I have only "3 shopping days" left for crows! DARN!! Tim.

The electrical putty I use is very tough. Although I have about 2.5" packed in the metal junction box, the 350 only shoots the fastest best penetrating pellets I have about maybe 1". Yeah Crow Magnums expand very well to almost 9mm. CPHP's too but not as much. The Crows are #1 when it comes to expansion. They are also larger (18.2) and tall so there 's a lot of lead there to expand.

Yep, only 4 days to go until hunting season is over - end of February.. Sucks. Good thing racing starts in the middle of March because I need another hobby to take my mind of shooting critters

Diana 350 Mag .22
Hammerli 850 .22
A few Crosman CO2 & Pump .177

I think Harry and I might be misunderstanding you maybe? It sounds like you're saying you got three inches of penetration at forty yards? Maybe we are using different medium than you?

Please explain what we're missing.

Thanks,
Harv

Yeah, that would do it lol. .22 hollow point wop!

Harv

Hey Harve, just want to make shure Im reading right. I was refering to Jasons comment on pen. tests. I dont have any pell. gun that will pen. more than about an inch into "putty'. I think Jason has some putty that is considerably less dense than what we have. I did not say "Jason" in my post & feel like maybee you got me wrong. Maybe Jason is using balistic gell?? That would explain 3" of pen. w/ 900 fps pells.?? & Jason,Please take no offense, you obviously took the time to measure & post your results. What kind of medium are you using? If you are using duct seal,elec.putty,, you obviously got a wattered down, bad batch,kinda like bad die # from Cros. (Lord I apoligise)! Tim. (kidden guys)!

Good point, Tim. I don't remember the exact wording of the post so correct me if I'm wrong here. As I understand it, and what you're saying makes a lot of sense, that its either as you say, or he's referring to shooting the one inch groups seperately from shooting into the medium ie putty or gel. I would think if its putty a shooter would have to have the muzzle right on top of the putty to get that kind of drilling. But the gel? I think what you're saying sounds more plausible. I think you're right Tim.

Good call on that one. Good thread too.

Harv

Hey all,

Plumbers putty, not Duct Seal is what I used (it was handy). It's used for sealing around the plug fittings in your kitchen sink, and running a bead under the sink to seal it to the countertop. It was handy. Shot at 10m.

Penetration numbers won't add up between different mediums, but what is important is the relative penetrations and expansions, that should be similar between materials. The hp's penetrated 30% less but expanded 40% more, and such.

Ah, the fun of the basement ballistics lab.

Tim, you'd have to TRY real HARD to offend me! We're all friends here!

J

No Harve, Mike isn't back insofar as posting on boards is concerned. He and I just never have quit corresponding.
Like many others he just got exhausted by contending with the instant experts the sport seems to attract.
I informed him of the previous thread in which I mentioned him and he has reviewed it. As always he takes exception to being labelled as an 'expert'. I have compromised only so far as changing his title from 'expert' to 'authority'. He also noted that he and I didn't really argue concerning the conlusions reached in the other thread. Frankly I intimated minor disagreements only in order to give him leeway to expand on my own oft limited understanding should he care to join the discussion.
As you also know his research into terminal ballistics and the effects of airgun projectiles on both game and test media is second to none. So when he chooses to share his conclusions I pay rapt attention. Even though he spurns the expert label I know of no one who has researched his area of interest in such depth. So when I see others make definitive statements on the subject I always find myself comparing them to what Mike has chosen to share over the years. In every instance in which I have had reservations concerning any of his conclusions or statements further experience on my own part has proven his understanding superior to my own.
I hope that someday he will choose to rejoin the online airgunning community to share his knowledge with newcomers to the sport, but in the meantime I respect his right to privacy and only occasionally cite him as an authority. I don't think I have yet exceeded his level of tolerance in that respect. In fact, knowing Mike as I do, I'm sure he'd let me know in no uncertain terms should I do so. Tom

as examples Tom February 24 2008, 11:01 AM

would you like to be hit by a golf ball at 100 MPH or a baseball at the same speed or

slapped by a 4 ft tall woman than a 6-6 tall one and then

hit over the head with a 2 x 4 or a 4 x 4

inconsequential? Nope

the stoping power of the .45 cal automatic is not the same as the M-16 in 5.56 mm. back when my Dad was in the military he talked about the Philippines and the insurgency over there the .45 was and is a man stopper, the Springfield and Garand are the same but not the M-16 even in automatic

Channel wound is a factor but so are exit wounds' the difference is the efect of the projectile traveling through flesh. With the higher cal. you produce more tear of tissue and flesh also bone fragmentation with lower cal. you get deflection inside your target there is no straight line between initial entry and exit wounds

bottom line FOR me is that the .177 has the speed but not the knock down power of the .20 and the .22, kinetic energy is not the same

if you want to plink or shoot birds, small game then use the .177 but for possum and medium game then the .22, it will stop him even with a neck shot

warren

PS: just my opinion, like my Daddy said .177 for feathers and .22 for hide

warren

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Quote Warren : " the stoping power of the .45 cal automatic is not the same as the M-16 in 5.56 mm. back when my Dad was in the military he talked about the Philippines and the insurgency over there the .45 was and is a man stopper, the Springfield and Garand are the same but not the M-16 even in automatic"


So you're sayin that you wouldn't have a worry about being downrange from a true rifleman with an AR15 /M16? 
 If so,  I'll give you the Cajones Award.

Rick:

It is all about KINETIC energy

and yes, at 10 feet the 45 is the caliber but at 250 METERS, I would hide behind a concrete wall with the M-16

I was talking about stoping power not "accuracy"

and Rick it is "Cojones"

warren



and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Hey Jason,Thanks for comin back on this one! Plumbers putty, Yeah I know what it is firt hand! I will say this explains any of last nights contreversy, Plumbers putty is not nearly as dense as "duct seal" (electricians putty). As you said results should be same (hp expansion),,I think plumbers putty would represent flesh better than SUPER dense "duct seal". (my opinion). Its readily available & a whole lot more conveinient than ballistic medium. Thanks for info,I will try it for tests. For a trap. you should try duct seal, elec. at Home Dep. or Lowes,1 lb. blocks are about $2. Get 5 or 6 of them for a small stop. If your airgun penitrates any deeper than 1",,let me know,,Ill buy your gun!! LOL.! Tim.

I have a basement range, and a very basic trap. Luckily, my house has a unique design feature that helps make better traps (like duct seal ones) less necessary. I shoot the length of my basement (which allows 10m from muzzle to target, with room for the shooter behind him). The target is placed in a former water cistern, which has had a door cut into it's 14" thick concrete walls. This cistern is a room about 20'x7'x6'6", with 14" walls all around (2 layers 1/2" bar @ 12" O/C) and a 4" concrete ceiling (1 layer 1/2" bar @ 6" o/c), so it in itself makes a great pellet trap. I just use a stuffed cardboard box backed up with a couple layers of 2x8 pressure treat to prevent ricochets. Just keep stapling targets one on top of the last, and the box has now held about 5000 shots, mostly from my old 500fps crossman, but now about 1000 from my model 34.

One day I'll upgrade the target setup, but it won't be soon.

Been pondering a box full of cotton rags you can get from the hardware store. Should absorb a few!

Gun won't ever be for sale. (cold dead hands, all that!)

J

*my* mis spelling .

So at 10 feet you stand and take the bullet but at 250 meters you'll hide behind a block wall ?

Yup you get the Balls Award . 

neither way would I stand in any of those situations

the damage of a 45 @ 10 feet is WAY more that the one from @ 5.56mm. M16 at 10 or 100 feet

no awards for me, thank you

we are talking about kinetic energy and the .177 is not the same as the .22 cal. for small game and bird'st he .177 is fine, maybe on some occasions it will do the job on other creatures but you do not get that lattitude with the .22. you cannot go up with the .177 vs the .22 but your game selection can go up with the .22

just a matter of preference by the shooter on .177 or .22. I have both calibers and know the limitations of each

warren

and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"

Warren ( and other Diana fans ), it's quite simple and all a matter of speed and weight. When calculating with: .......m/sec. X .......grams = ...... Joule you can do some simple exercises to find out the difference between .177 and .22 and see some very interesting results. It's also a matter of shooting all the different types hundreds and hundreds of pellets. A very interesting peelet in .177 for hunting is the Haendler / Natermann hunting pellet Silver Point what is in hands ( or in the barrel ! ) from the marksman an very good to use universal hunting pellet. It penetrates ubelievable and has a superb stopping power, if you have the chance try it, best regards from Johannis.

I've used the standard FPE formula and Taylor's Knock Out (TKO) formula to compare the military .45 ACP, Nato .223, and typical .177 and .22 pellets. (Taylor was an African big game hunter who estimated the effectiveness of cartridges by bore size. In the case of his TKO, the Knock Out referred to was the minimum level required to stun an African elephant. He had plenty of field experience to back his theory up.)

.45 ACP, 230 grains at 850 fps vs .223, 62 grains at 3100 fps:

The .45 has an FPE of only 369 FPE, compared to the .223 at 1323. The TKO for the .45 is 12.6 while the .223 is only 6.15. In other words, the big, slow moving .45 slug has twice the knock out power. Makes a lot of sense in that a heavy projectile with a large frontal area will delivery more kinetic energy into the target than a small, higher velocity projectile tending to over-penetrate. (Especially so with full metal jacketed ammo. Read in the book Black Hawk Down the account of a militia man being drilled several times with .223 armor piercing ammo to practically no effect.)

Carried over to the air gun pellets you get these results:

.177 7.9 grain at 1,000 fps generates 17.5 FPE and a TKO of .200.
.22 14.3 grain at 700 fps yields only 15.6 FPE but a TKO of .315 or 158% over the small pellet.



What, me worry???

Red Feather! This is what I 've been trying to tell people but I always said the .22 pellet delivers more shock to the animal than .177. Now we have a word for "shock": TKO. Over 1.5 times more TKO than .177 with less FPE, hey? Very interesting. This explains why the squirrel ran and jumped to another tree, and 1 crow just flew after being hit in the body from my friend's RX2 .177. Everything I 've hit with my .22 gets knocked off the tree, no exceptions.

What is the formula for TKO? I assume the projectile's mass plays a big role in calculating TKO.

Of course this is all assuming vitals shots. If the .177 pellet hits brain matter or head, it's usually over very quickly.

Diana 350 Mag .22
Hammerli 850 .22
A few Crosman CO2 & Pump .177

a properly placed shot is what you need . If you need knockdown power ...use one of Taylors african big game rifles . Debate all you want about Mad Air Powah! dead is dead . if you place your shot well ...game over .If you can't place your shot ...practice , know your gun and pellet trajectory ,practice some more until you are proficient . Confidence in knowing your going to hit the mark time after time .

Best of luck to y'all ...I'm in the hall ...shooting .

Weight times velocity in fps times diameter divided by a constant of 7000.

Yes, I agree that shot placement plays a paramount role in cleanly harvesting game. Would that we all could hit exactly what we aim at 100% of the time. I know I can't. What Taylor's TKO points out is that large slugs can do much more damage in the real world than a single test such as FPE (and don't we ALL see that bandied about on every airgun forum) would suggest.

Old Doc Sam Fadala once queried something along this line: A .22-250 puts out a lot more energy on paper than the lowly .45-70. When faced with a charging bear, which would you rather have?

Choice of caliber has always been personal. The only time I disagree is when it is obviously too small or too large to humanely take game. That an animal will eventually die is not proof of effectiveness. I bow to Jack O'Connor's admonition to "use enough gun" and add to it "that you can shoot well".

Really, there's not a whole lot of difference between the .177 and .22 in airgun pellet form. Most times the animal can't tell the difference.

What, me worry???

Finally some brevity. Thanks for that last sentence Redfeather.

This subject has been sufficiently parsed now that all of us who have an interest have read or written our thoughts. As far as I'm concerned I'm satisfied with the thread and reading other people's views.

I am glad however to see that there are a few here who are looking at this from the perspective of the next question I want to ask. It sort of led up to this one. I wanted to see a few people touch on it before raising this next question.

Harv