already have a Savage .22 lr and a Savage .270...need something in between for some yotes and bobcats...please advise. thanks. And yes...even my new (.223/.22-250) rifle will be a Savage. LOVE THE ACCU-TRIGGER AND LIGHT HAIR TRIGGER!
2007-12-17 08:59:59 · 14 answers · asked by COACH 2 in Sports ➔ Outdoor Recreation ➔ Hunting
as an FYI: will/should not be shooting out past 200-250 yds.
2007-12-17 09:02:53 · update #1
also own:
GLOCK 22 .40 CAL
20 GA. REMINGTON WINGMASTER
12 GA. BENELLI M1 REALTREE CAMO
2007-12-17 15:50:32 · update #2
Why not use the 270 you already have? It's not like you need to worry about spoiling any meat if you are shooting varmints......
2007-12-17 09:08:10 · answer #1 · answered by JD 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
As far as coyotes and foxes go, your best bet is a .223...the M4 and the M16 are the current standard issue rifles of the US military, and they fire a 5.56x45...which is basically a slightly beefed up version of the .223. So if the troops in Afghanistan are taking down hajis with the 5.56, Im sure the .223 will take down a fox or coyote no problem. It's also a very accurate round as well...and you can carry MUCH more than a 270 or a 243. But for a deer? That's another story...for them I'd use a 30-06.
2016-04-10 04:45:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even though they contradict each other I agree with the first two answers. It is nice when you can't go wrong.
If I had to choose I would go with the 223. Long barrel life and cheaper shooting. You can shoot all day and never get tired.
But then... I really like the 270. I really do not understand why they don't make a sendero or a varminter with it.
nope I changed my mind go with the 270.... maybe.
A 223 will destroy yotes past 300 yards. I am talking with full metal jackets it will put them down. Go with v-max and you will turn their guts to soup. The advantage of the 22-250 inside of 300 yards is less adjusting your aiming and heavier bullets. before you go with the 22-250 check out balistic charts on bullet drop. It is not that big of a difference to me but I see why someone would care.
2007-12-17 11:03:39 · answer #3 · answered by uncle frosty 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you arent going to shoot over 200-250 yards your .270 will be fine. The only reason is ee in getting a smaller caibler is to shoot farhter, but you arent going to so whats the point? If you are dead set on getting a new gun, the 22-250 is better. They do shoot farther, and they shoot faster. The 22-250 bullets are more expensive, way more expensive. And they can go through barrels fast since the bullet moves really fast. Ive given you the good and bad points, and ill let you decide. If i were you, id stick with the .270 and save a few hunderd dollars, because it will do fine since you already own it and know how it shoots.
2007-12-17 10:51:53 · answer #4 · answered by Aaron 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would go with not another rifle but another barrel for that savage you already have. You can get barrels and they are easy to remove and install. The base of the 22-250 and 270 are both .473" So you would not even need to change the bolt head.
That would save you some money and you could put a sure stock on it too.
As far as caliber choice. I love the 223 but if I were going to have a predator only rifle it would be nothing less than a 22-250. maybe even a 220 Swift for me.
2007-12-17 09:14:17 · answer #5 · answered by cpttango30 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
You;ll get better range and accuracy from the 22-250, but ammo is cheaper for the .223. The .223 also carrys a wider variety of ammo selections, but the 22-250 can still get the job done nicely, I can see why you have a decision to make here, I really can't offer any help either. Both calibers are damn near perfect for your intentions.
2007-12-17 09:06:22 · answer #6 · answered by boker_magnum 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I prefer the 22-250 Remington bull barreled equipped with a Redfield 20 X Target Scope Model 3200.* The longest shot yet with it was at 375 yards at a groundhog that was standing up.* I always aim for the head and I hit it in the nose.* I always aim for the head, because I harvest them to be eaten by people in Bars & Clubs, which put on dinners.* I dress each and everyone & cut them up, all they have to do is cook them.* It is more of a challenge to aim always for the head, and I very rarely if ever miss. I have never hit one in the body.* The most I have harvested in one (1)* year was one-hundred and thirty (130)*. You don't spoil any meat that way.* One shot one kill.*
2007-12-17 11:06:54 · answer #7 · answered by dca2003311@yahoo.com 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would go for the .22-250 with a zoom scope with a max of 18-20x. If the extra cost of the ammo is a concern, consider handloading.
Of course, you can call them in close and use a shotgun.
2007-12-17 21:44:38 · answer #8 · answered by Gerald G 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not just develop an accuracy load for your .270 using a 100 or 110 grain varmint bullet?
Then use the money you saved from not having to buy a new rifle and new reloading dies and buy a new scope for your old rifle, or a new handgun.
Doc
2007-12-17 14:30:17 · answer #9 · answered by Doc Hudson 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like my Savage 204, it fires 4225 pfs and only drops 29" in 500 yds with 32 gr hornaday ammo.
2007-12-17 10:42:31 · answer #10 · answered by silverbullet217 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hi there
like JD said ,get some 100 gr. for your 270 she would be as fast and flat as either of your new choices, and you all ready know the gun, just the kick is gona be stronger.of course if you have that urge to buy a new gun.... take the 22-250, good hunting
2007-12-17 09:21:28 · answer #11 · answered by burnie_1_2000 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋