|
Author
|
Topic: Taking of multiple coyotes?
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 09:00 AM
I have a theory that I go by, in .224; suitable coyote bullets begin at 55 grain. Less weight, 50-52-53, are usually intended for squirrels or targets.
This splash phenomena is something that is expected with seventeen caliber bullets and rifles. It is not something we should be seeing with proper .224" bullets. The quest for speed needs to be rethunk if the application involves bullets selected solely on weight with the intention of driving them faster than the speed of light....without regard for bullet construction.
I admit to having killed a number of coyotes and bobcat with 52 gr. Speer HPs, but generally, this was at night with the animal facing me; at 220 Swift velocities.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted April 11, 2007 09:02 AM
Could not agree with you more Leonard!
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wiley E
Knows what it's all about
Member # 108
|
posted April 11, 2007 09:03 AM
I haven't had much problems with the 52 gr. A-MAX but maybe I haven't hit a coyote in the shoulder yet.
I really liked the later model, heavier jacketed Nosler 55gr. ballistic tips.
My all time favorite for performance on coyotes was the Nosler 55 gr. softpoint boattail "spitzers" but the ballistic tips are more accurate and the tips don't deform while ejecting them in and out of the chamber.
~SH~
Posts: 853 | From: Kadoka, S.D | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 11, 2007 09:37 AM
Randy,
That makes alot of sense about the soft points.I have used the sierra softpoints(#1365)and they work good for coyotes.
Leonard,
you stating my using the .204 and Randy and the soft points,I might have a solution to my problem.lol
I just ran some numbers comparing the 55 grain sierra soft points in my .22-250 and the 45 grain Hornady soft points for my .204.This is what I come up with.
The .22-250
Drop= 1.0" high @ 100 yrds,zero @ 200 yrds,-5.5 @ 300 yrds,-17.0 @ 400 yrds
Windage(10 mph)= 1.0" @ 100 yrds,4.1 @ 200 yrds,9.9 @ 300 yrds,18.7 @ 400 yrds
Velocity= 3610 fps muzzle,3171 fps 100 yrds,2777 fps 200 yrds,2416 fps 300 yrds,2084 fps 400 yrds
Energy= 1587 lbs muzzle,1227 lbs 100 yrds,942 lbs 200 yrds,713 lbs 300 yrds,530 lbs 400 yrds
The .204
Drop= 1.0" high @ 100 yrds,zero @ 200 yrds,-5.5 @ 300 yrds,-17.1 @ 400 yrds
Windage(10 mph)= 1.0" @ 100 yrds,4.2 @ 200 yrds,10.0 @ 300 yrds,19.1 @ 400 yrds
Velocity= 3625 fps muzzle,3180 fps @ 100 yrds,2779 fps @ 200 yrds,2411 fps @ 300 yrds,2072 fps @ 400 yrds
Energy= 1313 lbs muzzle,1010 lbs @ 100 yrds,771 lbs @ 200 yrds,580 lbs @ 300 yrds,429 lbs @ 400 yrds
They are pretty comparable(B.C on the .22-250 bullet is .250 with a sectional density of .157,and the .204 bullet has a B.C of .245 with a sectional density of .155) ,so maybe I will just stick with the .204 and shoot the 35 bergers for fur and those times I need alittle more smack I can shoot the 45 grain soft points.Now if they would just shoot in the same place on paper I wouldn't have to sight it in for each load.That would be the perfect setup.LOL Good Hunting Chad
[ April 11, 2007, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: UTcaller ]
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 09:57 AM
Yeah, if foot pounds of energy mean nothing at extended (unknown) range?
[ April 11, 2007, 09:58 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted April 11, 2007 10:30 AM
Scott, both Brent and I have seen the same results repeated times, we have seen it as close as 50-100 yards with the vitals intact or just slightly damaged. An obvious pattern we both noticed. I have one on video.
Ut-the windage correction of the two really suprised me, virtually the same, do they seperate further with higher mph? I had heard they did. 10 mph here is a calm day.
Leonard-I truly need that downrange energy also, I shoot an AR in the contests we enter and notice the lack of that immediately in the 200 plus coyotes.Can't expect it to do something it's not made for!The AR works great on the close hard chargers etc.Just not a long range thumper.
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wiley E
Knows what it's all about
Member # 108
|
posted April 11, 2007 11:02 AM
Randy: "Scott, both Brent and I have seen the same results repeated times, we have seen it as close as 50-100 yards with the vitals intact or just slightly damaged. An obvious pattern we both noticed. I have one on video."
I don't doubt you, I'm just saying I haven't seen it yet.
~SH~
Posts: 853 | From: Kadoka, S.D | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 11, 2007 12:09 PM
Randy,
I put in the numbers for the same bullets with a 25 mph wind.
.204
2.5 @ 100 yrds,10.5 @ 200 yrds,25.1 @ 300 yrds,47.7 @ 400 yrds
.22-250
2.4 @ 100 yrds,10.3 @ 200 yrds,24.7 @ 300 yrds,46.9 @ 400 yrds
still seems close.
As far as energy goes even at 500 yrds they are fairly close.The .22-250 has 386 lbs to the .204's 310 lbs only 76 foot lbs difference.or about 20% more foot pounds of energy at 500 yrds
Randy you better do like Cal Taylor and get you a .204 barrel for your AR. Good Hunting Chad
[ April 11, 2007, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: UTcaller ]
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
scruffy
Knows what it's all about
Member # 725
|
posted April 11, 2007 12:48 PM
How does a 45gr in a 223 compare to the 45gr in a 204? I know the 204 has a little more case capacity, and a higher bc, so I know it's better, but how much better, ballistically?
And maybe no one makes a good 45 grain sp in .224 to make the question even valid?
later,
scruffy
[ April 11, 2007, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: scruffy ]
--------------------
Git R Done
Posts: 361 | From: south central Iowa | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 11, 2007 01:20 PM
.223 Remington
45 grain Sierra B.C .210
Drop= 1.3" high @ 100,zero @ 200,-7.0 @ 300,-22.1 @ 400
Windage(10mph)= 1.3 @ 100,5.4 @ 200,13.1 @ 300,25.6 @ 400
Velocity= 3417 muzzle,2928 @ 100,2486 @ 200,2087 @ 300,1728 @ 400
Energy= 1166 muzzle,855 @ 100,617 @ 200,435 @ 300,298 @ 400
55 gr .250 B.C
Drop= 1.4 high @ 100,zero 200,-7.1 @ 300,-21.1 @ 400
Windage= 1.1 @ 100,4.7 @ 200,11.3 @ 300,21.1 @ 400
Velocity= 3250 muzzle,2853 @ 100,2486 @ 200,2148 @ 300,1838 @ 400
Energy= 1292 muzzle,994 @ 100,755 @ 200,563 @ 300 412 @ 400
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
scruffy
Knows what it's all about
Member # 725
|
posted April 11, 2007 01:32 PM
That's very interesting, the 223 55 beat out the 45 in every long range catagory, long range trajectory, velocity, punch, wind, etc.
and the 55gr 223 compared to the 45gr 204, at 400 yards, shows the .204 has a 4" trajectory advantage, 2" wind advantage, and 17ft/lbs advantage.
With all the comparisons of the 204 to the 22-250 I guess I thought it wouldn't be a contest between the 204 and 223, but the numbers are closer than I thought.
Thanks for looking them up/generating them/etc.
later,
scruffy
--------------------
Git R Done
Posts: 361 | From: south central Iowa | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted April 11, 2007 03:14 PM
Ut-your right you make a very good case for the 204 I am surprised! Thanks for all the info.
I will be thinking a little more about this and have been thinking about a new AR, I had been leaning toward the 243 but this makes me think.
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 04:38 PM
Apples to oranges, Randy.
We should try to makea fair comparison, same ballistic coefficient, same sectional density, same ogive and point configuration, same base, flat/boat tail.....same standard bullet model.
You can not get away comparing a heavy 204 to a lighter 224 at lower relative velocities.
I think to be fair, we should compare hunting bullets, rather than VLD types. Not that this is what Chad is using; but it really doesn't make sense to look at these drop charts and claim the a twenty caliber bullet is equal to a comparable twenty-two caliber bullet.
Even if you select a heavier .204 and a lighter for caliber .224 bullet, the trajectory will favor the longer and heavier bullet design. Enough to make you think that the laws of physics have been repealed.
One thing for sure, every time we think we have ballistics figured out, somebody, somewhere offers some numbers that tend to counter what we hold near and dear.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted April 11, 2007 05:03 PM
Leonard , these type of things are exactly why I have waited and waited longer as the years add up to make decisions on outdoor gear. New stuff comes out so fast and furious, then disappears as quickly as it came.
I like the AR in 223, cheap to shoot does the job on 200yard and in coyotes,I like the quick followup and the advantage on multiples, I'm not asking it to be deadly out to 400 like I do with my 250 and any attempt at making it something it is not results in a game of give and take.
I am leaning toward a 243 to be a deer, antelope, coyote, cross functioning tool!!Maybe in the AR format maybe not.still deciding.
You are correct: apples to oranges
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted April 11, 2007 05:14 PM
Randy R,
I think the .243 would be your best bet. Take a look at this bullet from Speer. http://www.speer-bullets.com/ballistics/bullet_detail.aspx?id=18
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 05:31 PM
Oh yeah, forgot that part. I would favor the 243, if you are looking at a chambering in an AR specifically for coyotes at further distances. Slower velocity, bit more midrange trajectory, but you cannot beat that BC and it smacks a coyote very hard, no "surface splashes" with a 243.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted April 11, 2007 07:08 PM
Yeah, the .243 will be a thumper for ya. Stay away from those 6mm remmies though, Ive witnessed some gawd awful "splashes" with that particular cartridge:)
Posts: 1629 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted April 11, 2007 07:19 PM
Az-Hunter,
I believe you are a much better rifleman than I, but please take another glance at the reloading manuals. I think you will notice that the 6mm Remington is very close to same velcity as a .243 when shooting same bullet. As you know, the bullet construction is very important for Randy's intended use. The particular 85 grain Speer that I recommended is designed for big Game hunting. Surface blowup on coyotes or deer should be a rare thing with that bullet. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Az-Hunter
Hi, I'm Vic WELCOME TO THE U.S. Free baloney sandwiches here
Member # 17
|
posted April 11, 2007 07:23 PM
I know all that Rich....my response was a private jab at one of our members onboard, Bosinski will knwo what IM talking about:)
Posts: 1629 | From: 5 miles west of Tim | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 11, 2007 07:25 PM
Leonard:We should try to makea fair comparison, same ballistic coefficient, same sectional density, same ogive and point configuration, same base, flat/boat tail.....same standard bullet model.
Leonard,
I thought that's exactly what I did.
.22-250 rem. 55 grain sierra sbt(1365)
B.C = .250
sectional density = .157
55 grain soft point
3610 fps muzzle
.204 Ruger 45 grain flatbase sp
B.C= .245
sectional density=.155
45 grain softpoint
3625 fps muzzle
That looks pretty apples to apples to me.
That's about as close as you can get when comparing the two.FWIW
Good Hunting Chad
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 08:12 PM
Yes you did, Chad. I wasn't questioning your data, just making general comment about all the focus on light bullets versus heavy bullets and their purpose, etc. Some people think speed is God without regard for bullet design or the application. Two posts had me thinking about that, what Scrffy said about 223's and 204s and then what Randy said about his considerations, 204 versus 243. I was attempting to make a point that there is more to the question than cartridges and random bullet selection. As I also pointed out previously, the ft/lbs is where we see the difference and sometimes that makes a difference between a bullet opening up or a pass through. What do your numbers show for those two examples, at 500 yards?
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 11, 2007 08:22 PM
Leonard:What do your numbers show for those two examples, at 500 yards?
Comparing the two bullets and calibers from above.
.22-250 has 386 ft lbs of energy at 500 yrds.
.204 has 310 ft lbs of energy at 500 yards.
Good Hunting Chad
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 11, 2007 10:27 PM
That's what I thought and it does not make much sense, to me?
Apparently that 204 has some real magic?
22-250 @muzzle = 1587 ft/lbs
204 @muzzle = 1313 ft/lbs
-------------------------------------------------
274 ft/lbs difference
22-250 @100yds =1227 ft/lbs
204 @100yds=1010 ft/lbs
-------------------------------------------
207 ft/lbs difference
22-250 @200yds = 942 ft/lbs
204 @200yds = 771 ft/lbs
--------------------------------------------
171 ft/lbs difference
22-250 @300yds = 713 ft/lbs
204 @300yds = 580 ft/lbs
------------------------------------------
133 ft/lbs difference
22-250 @400yds = 530 ft/lbs
204 @400yds = 429 ft/lbs
--------------------------------------------
101 ft/lbs difference
22-250 @500yds = 386 ft/lbs
204 @500yds = 310 ft/lbs
--------------------------------------------
76 ft/lbs difference
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31466 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted April 12, 2007 07:16 AM
Leonard:That's what I thought and it does not make much sense, to me?
Apparently that 204 has some real magic?
That's what I've been trying to tell ya.lol ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
And it only gets closer when you get to Sly's sniper ranges of 600-700 yards.
.22-250
600 yards= 278.3
.204
600 yards= 221
difference of 57 ft lbs
.22-250
700 yards= 201.3
.204
700 yards= 159.1
difference of 42 ft lbs
Good Hunting Chad
[ April 12, 2007, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: UTcaller ]
Posts: 1613 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TOM64
Knows what it's all about
Member # 561
|
posted April 12, 2007 08:30 AM
My problem with the 204 is I can't seem to get the velocity everyone else is claiming. I've had 3 guns now, 2 Rem 700 w/24" barrel and now I have a T/C Contender w/23" barrel. The 2 Rem's were about 200 fps slower than what I expected and my contender seems the same. I loaded 28.2 grains of H4895 for a 35 grain Berger and chronographed 3687 fps instead of 3900 claimed by the book and several other sources on the net. I've tried about 5 different powders and bullets and they all come out about the same. So unless the velocity has been chronographed in the above figures, I wouldn't get too excited just yet.
The factory Hornady loads did get close to their claimed velocity out of the Remington but the bullets left alot to be desired.
[ April 12, 2007, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: TOM64 ]
Posts: 2283 | From: okieland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
