.22-250 For Wolves

[Curtsyneil]

I wouldnt think twice about shooting a22-250 at a wolf. Long range missle and hits hard, pin points accuracy.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Dubious

223 with hunting bullets does well for deer sized game and should be changed in the Alberta regs imo, it’s been proven effective over and over in other provinces and states regardless of peoples opinions against it on this forum. Knowing that 22-250 set up right will be fine to think otherwise is drastically underestimating the lethality of centre fire 22’s.

No

[Jerry D]

In Ontario many deer fall to the .223 Remington. There’s your basic cup and core bullets in the 65gr range and then there’s a selection off Barnes from about 50-70grs and there’s a proven 60gr partition as well.

There was an article a while back. The damage done by the 60gr partition in a .223 Remington is similar to the 170s in a .30-30.

If you get in the 6mm and .257s. There’s some heavier varmint bullets as well as the common big game bullets.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Dubious

223 with hunting bullets does well for deer sized game and should be changed in the Alberta regs imo, it’s been proven effective over and over in other provinces and states regardless of peoples opinions against it on this forum. Knowing that 22-250 set up right will be fine to think otherwise is drastically underestimating the lethality of centre fire 22’s.

It's all about shot placement right? So why not a rimfire .22? Biggest grizz in Alberta was killed with one. If I somehow decided to become a doe hunter, I can promise you one shot clean kills on all my meat doe with said rimfire. So why not? Where is that line?

Nosler partitions are now way north of $1 per bullet. Getting out of hand actually. But I still buy and use them. Yeah I could use a 30 cent chunk of inferior bullet, but I do my very best for a quick and efficient kill. I cheap out on beer (pilsner) instead.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by 270person

No

It's doable. Just need some extra rules. No shots past 100 yds. Standing shots only. Must be broadside in short grass. No uphills shots greater than 7 degrees. You can probably add a couple more I'm missing

[270person]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

It's doable. Just need some extra rules. No shots past 100 yds. Standing shots only. Must be broadside in short grass. No uphills shots greater than 7 degrees. You can probably add a couple more I'm missing

Long range snipers born from watching too many hunting programs are not allowed use of?

No deer with thick hair or moving can be targeted? Or, unless said deer has spots and milk on its lips it shall be considered off limits.

We all know a large number of users would attempt the same shots at the same distances they do with their larger center fires. Its human (clueless hunter) nature.

What the hell would the advantage be in shooting a .22 vs a 6mm? If its recoil the hunters worried about, 4 lbs vs 8-9 they should take up a new pasttime. Or wait til they get through puberty.

[Demonical]

So I hit the range today (-28C this morning ffs...), took my M700 .30-06 and my M700 Sendero .270Win.

Got both rifles sighted in.
The .270 Sendero has the 26" heavy barrel, great shooter.

I'm thinking that's going to be the rifle I take out.

HEAVY sumbitch though! It's somewhere around 13 lbs, with ammo, scope (obviously) etc...

[MooseRiverTrapper]

Are you going on a baited hunt?

[catnthehat]

[QUOTE=MountainTi;4468241]It's all about shot placement right? So why not a rimfire .22? Biggest grizz in Alberta was killed with one. If I somehow decided to become a doe hunter, I can promise you one shot clean kills on all my meat doe with said rimfire. So why not? Where is that line?
/QUOTE]
There is alo a VERY big difference in .22LR and a .223 in velocity and bullet construction just to name two things.
There is no difference BTW in killing a doe and killing a buck . Not sure why you made that comment unless you either think killing a doe is not hunting or you are just trolling
Using a .233 outside the usable parameters of it and the shooter no different than using a 300 magnum ( or any other cartridge) outside the parameters of the cartridge and shooter, but I think you know that .
Cat

[catnthehat]

BTW guys in case you forgot, Bella Twin shot that bear on the head at very close change and more than a few times I think.
She didn't set out to ho Grizzly hunting with a .22 , it was in her toboggan.
Cat

[Ken3134]

Originally Posted by Dubious

223 with hunting bullets does well for deer sized game and should be changed in the Alberta regs imo, it’s been proven effective over and over in other provinces and states regardless of peoples opinions against it on this forum. Knowing that 22-250 set up right will be fine to think otherwise is drastically underestimating the lethality of centre fire 22’s.

What would this accomplish? Is this for the benefit of the hunter or the animal? Would there be more wounded animals or less? Would this help bring a positive public opinion to the sport of hunting?

[Demonical]

Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper

Are you going on a baited hunt?

No, looking to cut fresh track following road systems/skidoo trails then call them.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Ken3134

What would this accomplish? Is this for the benefit of the hunter or the animal? Would there be more wounded animals or less? Would this help bring a positive public opinion to the sport of hunting?

I don't believe it would accomplish anything negative and doubt if there would be any more shooters useing improper bullets than there is now in bigger cartridges.
I also doubt very much that we would see a dramatic increase in wounded animals. Mainly because the gunwruters/ yutubers would now have another topic to beat to death!
As far as public perception goes, the anti crowd doesn't give a dam, they are always blowing everything out of proportion.
Cat

[WhiskeyJack]

Good question.

As a fur bearer or ADC private land there is no minimum calibre

As a big game tag min .243 seems to apply

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyJack

Good question.

As a fur bearer or ADC private land there is no minimum calibre

As a big game tag min .243 seems to apply

As per post #54, I asked and no there is no requirement
For caliber .
Cat

[270person]

[QUOTE=catnthehat;4468307]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

It's all about shot placement right? So why not a rimfire .22? Biggest grizz in Alberta was killed with one. If I somehow decided to become a doe hunter, I can promise you one shot clean kills on all my meat doe with said rimfire. So why not? Where is that line?
/QUOTE]
There is alo a VERY big difference in .22LR and a .223 in velocity and bullet construction just to name two things.
There is no difference BTW in killing a doe and killing a buck . Not sure why you made that comment unless you either think killing a doe is not hunting or you are just trolling
Using a .233 outside the usable parameters of it and the shooter no different than using a 300 magnum ( or any other cartridge) outside the parameters of the cartridge and shooter, but I think you know that .
Cat

Not sure how the conversation went from 22-250 ,to .223 but since we're there, the 22-250 is the far better option. Beats .223 in both velocity and downrange energy pushing the same bullet. I only looked at a couple but a 60gr NP in the 22-250 at 300 yds is outperforming the .223 by 250 fps and 150 ft/lb.

Either way 530 (223) and 630 ft/lb i(22-250) is a long ways off a .243 pushing a 95gr at 1125.

So I'll ask again. When a hunter can currently run a .243 for all species, what would be the advantage of allowing the 22's into play? Is it the -4lbs of recoil? Thats not enough to make a noodle armed, poodle walking dough boy notice.

I think things are just ducky as they are and until there's a good reason for change, and just so one can say they did it isn't one, we're are just fine as is.

[WhiskeyJack]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

As per post #54, I asked and no there is no requirement
For caliber .
Cat

Even when I agree with you, you argue about it

[Dubious]

I dont want to detail this thread, the proof is in the pudding look at all the states and provinces that allow 22 centre fire there more than enough rifle there for wolves You can wound animals with any caliber and if you shoot enough game eventually with any caliber something will go not according to plan.

270, with the current 23 cal restriction you can hunt big game with 9mm and other pistol calibers in carbines or leaver guns. If that isn’t enough reason to change the restriction I dont know what it’ll take.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by heretohunt

I think you meant under the .24 min caliber rule.

Yes I made an error, I meant to say there is no minimum requirement of .23
Cat

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyJack

Even when I agree with you, you argue about it

No In am not, they are not considered big game and as such there is no minimum caliber requirement .
Cat

[Ken3134]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't believe it would accomplish anything negative and doubt if there would be any more shooters useing improper bullets than there is now in bigger cartridges.
I also doubt very much that we would see a dramatic increase in wounded animals. Mainly because the gunwruters/ yutubers would now have another topic to beat to death!
As far as public perception goes, the anti crowd doesn't give a dam, they are always blowing everything out of proportion.
Cat

I don’t see any good coming from it, just opens the door for more poor decisions which is why there needs to be regulations. The only benefit I can see is for a hunter who doesn’t want to buy another rifle in a proper caliber for the game they are hunting. Or seeking attention to impress someone with how amazing a marksmen they are that they can bring down big game with a small caliber. Or likely even more important, they can take a picture and prove beyond a doubt that they were right! None of these reasons are worth making the change for. Regardless of the anti hunters, I know most would or should feel some responsibility to ethically kill the game animal (or at least that’s what I like to think).
Im not arguing that a .22 caliber cannot kill a big game animal, It obviously can. The point is the animal deserves better.

Ken

[cody j]

If you see a wolf and you have a 22-250, shoot him. If I was specifically targeting wolves I would probably go a little bigger but I would not hesitate to use the 22-250. It will kill

[Demonical]

Gonna take this: 1996 Remington M700 Sendero in .270Win. Heavy to carry (13 lbs) but accurate as heck.

[Dean2]

When I was young, and everyone still thought the earth was flat, we used 300 Win mags with 147 grain Boat Tail FMJs to shoot coyotes. Back then, calling coyotes wasn't a thing. You drove back roads or travelled on snow machines and shot them in the fields, often out to the half mile line. We didn't use the 300 mags because yotes were hard to kill, we used them because they push that 147 grain bullet at 34-3500 fps. Range estimation was mil-dots, long time before range finders were around.

It is the same reason I used a 7 Rem mag with 162 grain Hollow Point BT Match bullets with a .635 B.C. doing 3100 fps, when intentionally looking for wolves. Never though I needed that much killing power, but you could reach out and touch a wolf standing in the middle of a frozen lake or way down a power line. Back then, we didn't call wolves and didn't hunt them over bait. We would travel by snow machine, pick up fresh track, try to get in front of them and wait for them to show up. Close range over bait, no problem using a 223. The army doesn't seem to have any trouble killing stuff with them.

[Wolftrapper]

Originally Posted by Demonical

No, looking to cut fresh track following road systems/skidoo trails then call them.

Best of luck and enjoy yourself. No shortage of fresh snow right now.
That .270 will work great. Good choice!

[IronNoggin]

Lived in the Arctic for a considerable period of time.
killed literally several hundred wolves through that period.
Dumped them with most of the rifles I had, including 22 mag, 222, 5.56 NATO, 25-06, 270 and 300 Weatherby.
My partner ran consistently with his 22-250. It worked very well for that task, and many caribou as well.

You will be fine with the 22-250 if keeping shots within reason.

Cheers,
Nog

[roper1]

Not much love for the venerable 22-250. Certainly taken many a 'yote at short & long range, I've heard wolves are much tougher.

Our noted Cowmanbob has killed a whack of wolves, some with a 7MM. If the OP shoots the 22-250 well, go hunting!

[Steelhorse Cowboy]

A 22 250 thru the lungs is a dead dog.
Now where are you hunting is a question..Wolves come in different size packages so the previous post of using a 270 is quite good.
100 gr 270s will anchor any wolf better in normal hunting distances than a 22-250 could if dealing with the larger northern Grey compared to the Timber.
Just my thoughts

[cowmanbob]

Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper

I wouldn’t go out looking for wolves with a 22-250 if I had bigger options.

Best advice.

[reddeerhunter]

How many guys have shot a steel plate with a 22-250 at 100yds and then used a bigger caliber to compare dent sizes?

Results would blow your mind. 22-250 is a thumper. I was proven wrong, had to purchase whiskey as my 300win mag did not hold a candle to the dent of the 22-250.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk