.223. 1in12 v 1in8 for fox out to 300m

[Neddle]

It looked like you thought Tikkas weren't available in 1:8. Funny, I thought, because I have two. Missed commas can make a big difference.

I had 1,son still has! Moved over to 204 for foxes never looked back

 

[cammy567]

I replaced my old 223 howa with a 1-12 twist, it shot well with most factory ammo up to 62g lead. 55 g copper was poor. I replaced it with the same model with a 1-8 twist. So far I have been disappointed, the only round that had a reasonable group was 75g. Not tried reloading yet but I have fired about 150 rounds.

 

[Foxyboy43]

Indeed. More than enough energy if you can put it in the right place. But 300m is quite a way for a light bullet on a small target like a fox IMO- i would be worried about wounding it myself.

Absolutely correct - last thing any shooter would want but with practice (as in my case and at longer ranges) it can be done to effect. Perhaps a .243 would be a better idea….
That said and obviously out of well founded modesty I hesitate to post this yet again but……

 

[willowbank]

Hi.
i've got the option of two .223 rifles. A Wide Veil 22" 1in 12 barrel, or a Tikka Lite 20" 1in8 barrel.
I'm only interested using it on Fox and vermin but would really like to use it out to 300m due to the nature of the land on my permissions.
What do owners of .223's think is preferable?

Good luck with ‘fox @300m’ with a .223 ...... just saying lol.

WB

 

[Will the chippy]

I replaced my old 223 howa with a 1-12 twist, it shot well with most factory ammo up to 62g lead. 55 g copper was poor. I replaced it with the same model with a 1-8 twist. So far I have been disappointed, the only round that had a reasonable group was 75g. Not tried reloading yet but I have fired about 150 rounds.

I've just bought one the same as you. It's not as easy to find a load for as my tikka 22250 but I reload for it and I've found a good load using 55g sierra blitzking doing a 17mm group atb100m.
50grain ttsx were terrible.

 

[Polar Lynx]

A standard modern rifle will produce about 1 MOA. 1 MOA at 300 m is 10 cm x 10 cm. That is also a fox's chest dimension. To attain that square at 300 m is not easy or almost impossible now that wind and drop are other factors apart from spread.
Have once shot a fox with a 223 at some 270 m but occasion came about as sort of a mistake. The fox sat on a open field and with full height of body towards. Aimed at fox's head and bullet struck in the heart section. It was a clear winter evening with some snow on ground and no wind and fox felt, if not close, at least possible. Fox dropped and I went looking with my spaniel. Was certain fox would be in the 200 m area but with dog's help it was found at 270 m. Had not a range device with me at that time. Lucky shot ..

 

[shootnfish]

who told you that Shootnfish? i use a tikka t3x lite 20" barrel 1-12 twist with 53g vmax to great effect 1/2 moa with factory rounds and even better with home loads ive shot foxes out over 220yds with them in

who told you that Shootnfish? i use a tikka t3x lite 20" barrel 1-12 twist with 53g vmax to great effect 1/2 moa with factory rounds and even better with home loads ive shot foxes out over 220yds with them in it so not that shabby

No one. Purely personal experience. I accept it may not be that for everyone. I've read mixed reports. Just out of intrest are you handholding or shooting factory

 

[25 Sharps]

Hi.
i've got the option of two .223 rifles. A Wide Veil 22" 1in 12 barrel, or a Tikka Lite 20" 1in8 barrel.
I'm only interested using it on Fox and vermin but would really like to use it out to 300m due to the nature of the land on my permissions.
What do owners of .223's think is preferable?

My .223 AI is a 1:14 and I shoot foxes out to that and a little further with zero issues.

 

[25 Sharps]

A standard modern rifle will produce about 1 MOA. 1 MOA at 300 m is 10 cm x 10 cm. That is also a fox's chest dimension. To attain that square at 300 m is not easy or almost impossible now that wind and drop are other factors apart from spread.
Have once shot a fox with a 223 at some 270 m but occasion came about as sort of a mistake. The fox sat on an open field and with full height of body towards. Aimed at fox's head and bullet struck in the heart section. It was a clear winter evening with some snow on ground and no wind and fox felt, if not close, at least possible. Fox dropped and I went looking with my spaniel. Was certain fox would be in the 200 m area but with dog's help it was found at 270 m. Had not a range device with me at that time. Lucky shot ..

You’ve got some bloody small foxes if their chests are only 10 cm deep!

 

[25 Sharps]

Good luck with ‘fox @300m’ with a .223 ...... just saying lol.

WB

Decent shot and rifle with good conditions and it’s no issue at all!

 

[Foxyboy43]

Good luck with ‘fox @300m’ with a .223 ...... just saying lol.

WB

See post above.

 

[Foxyboy43]

A standard modern rifle will produce about 1 MOA. 1 MOA at 300 m is 10 cm x 10 cm. That is also a fox's chest dimension. To attain that square at 300 m is not easy or almost impossible now that wind and drop are other factors apart from spread.
Have once shot a fox with a 223 at some 270 m but occasion came about as sort of a mistake. The fox sat on a open field and with full height of body towards. Aimed at fox's head and bullet struck in the heart section. It was a clear winter evening with some snow on ground and no wind and fox felt, if not close, at least possible. Fox dropped and I went looking with my spaniel. Was certain fox would be in the 200 m area but with dog's help it was found at 270 m. Had not a range device with me at that time. Lucky shot ..

Sorry but I disagree. 300 or more is all about reading the prevailing conditions and this applies with any chambering - to lesser or greater extents.
The kill area of a fox hit with a .222 or .223 is probably closer to 6 x 6 inches which if you do a lot of long distance shooting is eminently doable. You might be surprised how frequently you will hit a smaller plate at 300 and beyond - if you do your bit.
Of course and with any live quarry if you do not have the confidence or experience to take the shot then either get closer or just leave it….

 

[Foxyboy43]

Bugger it - I’m posting it yet again! No laser range finder, no ballistic calculator, no bullet data and not the first at that distance just plain and simple knowing my rifle and ammunition and a FB brain calculated holdover.
Pinged this later at 315 yds - from memory. Of course it was the sainted triple deuce…

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Absolutely correct - last thing any shooter would want but with practice (as in my case and at longer ranges) it can be done to effect. Perhaps a .243 would be a better idea….
That said and obviously out of well founded modesty I hesitate to post this yet again but……

Built in range finder def helps

If you took one 360 yard shot on a different fox 10 nights in a row- how many would drop on the spot ?

I think if I tried it I would have less than a 10/10 kill sucess- so I dont do it

 

[hendrix's rifle]

Good luck with ‘fox @300m’ with a .223 ...... just saying lol.

WB

Tell you what, stand at 500 and let someone shoot at you with a 223. Somehow i doubt you will because you know what the answer would be Absolutely more than capable. Id use the 223 on all my deer if it were legal. Low recoil, pin point accurate and with the likes of the 53g vmax, surprisingly high BC bullet.

 

[Laurie]

Tell you what, stand at 500 and let someone shoot at you with a 223. Somehow i doubt you will because you know what the answer would be

Strensall MoD Ranges outside of York were closed for the best part of a year, some 20 or so years ago due to a small number of locals who insisted on walking dogs in the danger area. One such, a self-appointed spokesman, told the York Press newspaper that what he was doing for perfectly safe as he walked two or three hundred yards behind the butts and everybody knows that the little bullets the Army fires today can't harm you at such long ranges! Since nearly all military training is at 100/200 yards these days, your 500 yards was spot on for this character.

(Landmark had to fence the entire range complex in the end, hence the long closure.)

 

[welshwarrior]

Seen 223 shooting 1000 yrds TR (iron sighted) and winning against the 308 boys so if you can do the shooting bit a good bullet in an accurate rifle will easily hit foxes at 300 yrds.

Personally I’d go 1:8 I’ve a 1:8 222 and it shoots 60-70 grain bullets very well.

 

[tackb]

Strensall MoD Ranges outside of York were closed for the best part of a year, some 20 or so years ago due to a small number of locals who insisted on walking dogs in the danger area. One such, a self-appointed spokesman, told the York Press newspaper that what he was doing for perfectly safe as he walked two or three hundred yards behind the butts and everybody knows that the little bullets the Army fires today can't harm you at such long ranges! Since nearly all military training is at 100/200 yards these days, your 500 yards was spot on for this character.

(Landmark had to fence the entire range complex in the end, hence the long closure.)

wouldn't big signs be cheaper than a fence , and then let darwin sort it out ?

 

[Laurie]

wouldn't big signs be cheaper than a fence , and then let darwin sort it out ?

Boundary signs were what the MoD relied on for years. (Many decades I'd think as the present ranges date from Victoria's reign.) Modern safety management doesn't allow Darwinian solutions unfortunately, and an independent safety inspection was taking place when shooting had to be shut down thanks to a trespasser. The infuriating thing was that the ranges adjoin an area of Strensall Common that is used as a training area and public access and car parking are allowed on it under 'good neighbourship' arrangements. The ranges themselves were open to walkers whenever shooting was shut down and the red butts flags removed, and guaranteed after 16.30 daily. (A collection of up to a dozen locals would build up at weekends in the car park and pass the no entry signs at precisely 16.30 into the ranges even if the wardens had yet to remove the flags!)

It was a tiny number of (all male) locals who insisted on their 'rights'. Since the fence was installed, the enclosed area has been barred to non-users 24/7 365 days a year including days that see the ranges closed such as Christmas day - no exemptions given. The village parish council was furious - not with the Army and Landmark, but the stubborn, selfish few who brought about complete closure,

 

[tackb]

Boundary signs were what the MoD relied on for years. (Many decades I'd think as the present ranges date from Victoria's reign.) Modern safety management doesn't allow Darwinian solutions unfortunately, and an independent safety inspection was taking place when shooting had to be shut down thanks to a trespasser. The infuriating thing was that the ranges adjoin an area of Strensall Common that is used as a training area and public access and car parking are allowed on it under 'good neighbourship' arrangements. The ranges themselves were open to walkers whenever shooting was shut down and the red butts flags removed, and guaranteed after 16.30 daily. (A collection of up to a dozen locals would build up at weekends in the car park and pass the no entry signs at precisely 16.30 into the ranges even if the wardens had yet to remove the flags!)

It was a tiny number of (all male) locals who insisted on their 'rights'. Since the fence was installed, the enclosed area has been barred to non-users 24/7 365 days a year including days that see the ranges closed such as Christmas day - no exemptions given. The village parish council was furious - not with the Army and Landmark, but the stubborn, selfish few who brought about complete closure,

shame,,,,