prarie dogs with .22 lr ?

I usually shoot my 17 HMR out to about 200 then take out the 204. The one thing I do like better about the 223 is it is an AR so follow up shot are a lot quicker.

Some 204 carnage, all closer to 200 than 100 yards.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7758.jpg

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7757.jpg

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7756.jpg

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7749.jpg

Flattened this one out like a bear rug.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7750.jpg

My boys shooting their 17 HMRs

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/IMG_7755.jpg

I didn't want another flood of PM's telling me they're not in season, despite my disclaimer...

[Coffee]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

Put that rabbit head picture back up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckaroobonsai

I didn't want another flood of PM's telling me they're not in season, despite my disclaimer...

[Coffee]

---

Should we post the gummy bears? [LOL]

Actually, the 50 bmg will not blow them up more than any of the many smaller calibers when using bullets designed for rapid expansion/fragmentation for the simple reason that the bullet from the 50 bmg is unable to transfer it's energy into such a small/soft target. I know, because I've done it. But to say that a .223 hits harder than a 22-250 when both are using bullets designed for rapid expansion/fragmentation is silly since the 22-250 is carrying more speed hence it is simply carrying more energy. One tends to believe that the larger calibers will blow them up even more so, BUT once you get over a 6mm/.243 caliber, there are no longer bullets designed for rapid expansion/fragmentation. Instead the larger caliber bullets are designed for deep penetration and controlled expansion, and when they hit a small soft target they simply don't expend their energy quickly enough to compare to the bullets that are designed for the job. I had the pleasure to shoot with a guy that owned and operated a gun shop. When he came he brought an arsenal with him including about everything from the .17h2 to the 50 bmg with other calibers such as 6mmppc and 338 edge. The 6mmppc was probably the one caliber that was most impressive of them all, as far as given aerials. But in the end, the 50 bmg did deliver one aerial that was above and beyond all I've ever witnessed, but it wasn't because of the hit on the target, but instead the shot hit low into the mound and launched the prairie dog all of 15', some thought it was higher than that. Killed it dead without even breaking the skin on it. Over time, I've learned that shooting high volume is much more fun with the tiny .17 calibers, especially with them suppressed. Flat shooting, low recoil, quiet, and not burning up my powder supply. After a day of firing a few hundreds rounds, I'm ready for more.

Huh? I never said the 223 hits harder than the 22-250. I'm saying the 223 blows em up just fine at 100 yards that you don't need to go any bigger unless you really wanted to. No arms, no legs, no head. You know, blown up.

I say use whatever the hell makes you happy and gets the job done. Then there is no right or wrong answer. That being said, I'm done hijacking this poor guys thread.
[Beer]