beaver?

kirbymagnum · November 25, 2005, 09:40 PM

has anyone shot a beaver with a 17 hmr? What range and how did it go

I have a little beaver problam my 22lr kills them after a bit of flopping how would the 17 hmr fmj work with a heart and lung shot i know a head shot would kill it would anyone recomend the v-max or would the fmj be more suitable.

stevelyn · November 26, 2005, 12:41 AM

Having trapped and hunted beavers, and having experience with the .17 HMR, I'm inclined to recommend not using the .17 on them. Beavers are usually wet when they're shot and for some reason wet hide tends to restrict penetration. This can only be exacerted by the frangible nature of the bullets loaded in .17 cartridges. There is also a substantial layer of fat and muscle to plow through before reaching the vitals.
However, I'm basing this on bullet construction not caliber or velocities. If the manufacturers offer a stronger bullet, using it on a beaver wouldn't be a problem.

kirbymagnum · November 26, 2005, 12:59 AM

They make a 20grain fmj.

I like the .222 do they still make them and what is a good brand of gun?

kirbymagnum · November 26, 2005, 01:02 AM

would a .222 go through a 80 pound beaver if you shot it in the side?

stevelyn · November 26, 2005, 07:54 AM

Mouse on 'Burst'?

A FMJ in the .17 would probably work.......... .22 shorts seem to work well (head and eyeball shots). A .222 would definitely do the job from any angle.
I haven't seen a .222 for a long time. You'll probably need to check out some gunshops and maybe find out who's making them nowadays.

kirbymagnum · November 26, 2005, 12:50 PM

tikka t3 makes them.

Foxman · November 27, 2005, 09:32 AM

I have a Tikka 222. great rifle, very accurate and would kill them no problem. I use Nosler Bt 50 gr with 22.5 grs Hodgdon H322, gives just on 3000fps and one shot kills even on small deer , foxes no problem.

Foxman · November 27, 2005, 10:12 AM

This is it with Burris 3-12 x50 scope

Foxman · November 27, 2005, 10:47 AM

And the blanket belongs to this guy, best hunting buddy. He can find game or varmints and will tackle anything.

kirbymagnum · November 27, 2005, 03:41 PM

thats a nice gun now you made me really want a .222
How much does a box of bullets cost for it in canadian money?
How loud is the .222 is it as loud as a 410 how hard does it kick?
Is it flat shooting?
What do you think it would be best to zero a .222 at if i was going to shoot from 80yrds to 200yrds? How far is this gun good out to?

Foxman · November 27, 2005, 04:11 PM

It is about much the same as an unsilenced 22 rf magnum for noise, there is virtually no recoil (like shooting an air rifle), I would zero 3/4" high at 100 yds that gives a 3" point blank range to 200 yds and it will kill something like a beaver up to 200yds. I personally reload as it works out less than half price per round, Cabelas price for Remington ammo is $12.99 US ( 64 c per 1 ) but you can buy it cheaper than that if you look around. I still prefer the reload route which works out at less than .20c per round.

P.s Midway have some for $9.79 US (PMC 50grn sp)

22-rimfire · November 27, 2005, 04:41 PM

The 222 is a great round that has probably seen its day come and go. It used to be THE varmint caliber out to about 200 yards when the 218 Bee, 22 Hornet, and 220 Swift were popular. When the 22-250 was introduced, its popularity diminished considerably. If I was interested in buying a 222 sized gun now, I would just buy a 223 as you have more choices on loadings and more bullets for handloading. Neither the 223 or 222 have much recoil but they are noisy.

I was wonderlng why you want to shoot beavers? Causing a problem or are you looking to just finish them off when trapping? If trapping, I would just use a 22LR with solids to the head.

kirbymagnum · November 27, 2005, 06:13 PM

causing problams

22-rimfire · November 28, 2005, 05:11 AM

If the beaver issue is a pest or damage issue, I would use what I have on hand. If nothing suitable on hand, I would look at maximum flexibility in terms of purchase of a new rifle. That all being said, the 223 gives you a fair amount of flexibility for varmints at any range to about 200 or perhaps 250 yards. The 243/6mm would also be a good choice as it would bring you up to the deer hunting size of caliber and still be a very respectable varmint caliber out to maybe 400 yards. Still no recoil in most rifles up to this caliber. You can keep going larger in caliber to increase flexibility, but the recoil increases as does the practicality and damage to the animal (fur) would be much more substantial. For occasional use, where noise is not an issue, I would use whatever I have and not worry about it.

Ian2005 · November 28, 2005, 12:41 PM

Actually I was recently out at the range with a borrowed .222. The ammo price is roughly $12-$14 for a box of 20, however maybe my Remington 222 needed oiling or something but I was not able to use the internal magazine with any success- the d@mn thing jammed constantly so I had to insert 1 bullet at time. Zzzzz. It's an older round for an older rifle. Just go pickup something new in .223 - close enough, better variety of manufactureres, and cheaper ammo.

IMHO anyway.

kirbymagnum · November 28, 2005, 02:11 PM

How much louder is the 223 over the 222?

Foxman · November 28, 2005, 03:58 PM

The 222 is a long way from dying out it is still made by most of the major rifle makers and is a little more accurate than the 223, it is less noisy too. I have 17rem, 222, 223,and 22-250 in 22 centrefires and use the 223 least, it is noisier and uses more powder to achieve little more than the 222 and the 22-250 does everything better for a little more powder. The 223s popularity is due to the military use in Nato giving surplus cheap FMJ ammo and of course cases too and it is a good round if you only want one 22, but if I want to reach out more than the 222 I use the 22-250 which shoots a heavier bullet faster than the 223 and so bucks the wind better and kills effectively at longer distances. The 222 is only about 150fps slower than the 223 with the same bullet weight but is nicer to shoot. IMO

kirbymagnum · November 28, 2005, 07:57 PM

For what i do i would rather have the .222. How much longer do you think the .222 will last?

Dave Haven · November 28, 2005, 10:41 PM

Quote:

The 222 is a great round that has probably seen its day come and go. It used to be THE varmint caliber out to about 200 yards when the 218 Bee, 22 Hornet, and 220 Swift were popular. When the 22-250 was introduced, its popularity diminished considerably.

Not quite.
The .22-.250 was around before the .222. It just wasn't a standard caliber. It was adopted by Remington in 1963. The .22-.250 and the .219 Donaldson Wasp were very popular in benchrest competition until the .222 came onto the scene.
The .222 is still popular with the benchrest crowd. In fact, it still holds the record at 100 yards. (.009" center-to-center, set by Gale McMillan in 1973.)
Barrel life on the .222 is excellent. My Dad has fired over 3800 rounds through his .222 with no loss of accuracy.

shureshot0471 · November 28, 2005, 10:51 PM

Go with the .204 ruger great one to do that no matter where you hit them if you must get really nasty pick up your standard .300 win mag lol I have found that the .204 does a great job plus it is a fun gun to shoot

Foxman · November 29, 2005, 03:57 AM

The triple deuce (222) is going to be around for may years to come, its too good to slip away and has become very popular in europe this last few years as well.

FirstFreedom · November 29, 2005, 08:06 AM

Beavers can get up to 60 lbs or so, almost twice the weight of coyotes. I'd think you would probably want to use a .22 hornet or .223, though a .22 mag should work if placed in the vitals, and probably work better than a .17hmr. For head shots, .22lr will work. I hear they're good eatin - I intend to find out for sure next time I kill one.

jeff_troop · November 29, 2005, 08:16 AM

beavers where i live can reach 90 pounds. they all die with a .22lr to the body. there is nothing tough about a beaver (again, where i live). i have also killed them with a 17hmr from a taurus 12" barrel. you don't need head shots in my experience. just hit them in the guts and they will thrash and throw a fit, then die. i gather them up in the morning when they float to the surface.

Ian2005 · November 29, 2005, 09:12 AM

Yes that was the main point in my argument against the .222 was because of ammo; I usually see only Remington's brand on the shelf. If you look at other caliber's -aka .223, .22, etc., you see multiple brands and yes the availablity of cheap ammo by the case alone is a very persuasive argument if you just like to plink and take a shot here or there at something that can run from you.

Also when I was on the range I did notice how wind affected this bullet. It was very difficult trying to zero in my scope when it was blowing the bullet around. If you like the .222, great, good for you. I don't. There's no need to start a flame war as everyone has their own opinion as per the best rifle/scope/round in every single posting on every single thread of this entire website.:barf:

hivel37 · November 30, 2005, 01:23 PM

Ian, I agree. If you're not a handloader don't pick the .222 as .223 stuff is cheap and can be bought everywhere.

But if you do handload, .222 cases are readily formed from the .223 case if needed. So you don't need to worry about "how long it will last".

Either one will sure handle a beaver.

November 25, 2005, 09:40 PM	#1
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	beaver? has anyone shot a beaver with a 17 hmr? What range and how did it go I have a little beaver problam my 22lr kills them after a bit of flopping how would the 17 hmr fmj work with a heart and lung shot i know a head shot would kill it would anyone recomend the v-max or would the fmj be more suitable.

November 26, 2005, 12:41 AM	#2
stevelyn Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2004 Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell Posts: 2,655	Having trapped and hunted beavers, and having experience with the .17 HMR, I'm inclined to recommend not using the .17 on them. Beavers are usually wet when they're shot and for some reason wet hide tends to restrict penetration. This can only be exacerted by the frangible nature of the bullets loaded in .17 cartridges. There is also a substantial layer of fat and muscle to plow through before reaching the vitals. However, I'm basing this on bullet construction not caliber or velocities. If the manufacturers offer a stronger bullet, using it on a beaver wouldn't be a problem. __________________ Stop Allowing Our Schools To Be Soft Targets! http://fastersaveslives.org/ East Moose. Wear Wolf.

November 26, 2005, 07:54 AM	#5
stevelyn Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2004 Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell Posts: 2,655	Mouse on 'Burst'? A FMJ in the .17 would probably work.......... .22 shorts seem to work well (head and eyeball shots). A .222 would definitely do the job from any angle. I haven't seen a .222 for a long time. You'll probably need to check out some gunshops and maybe find out who's making them nowadays. __________________ Stop Allowing Our Schools To Be Soft Targets! http://fastersaveslives.org/ East Moose. Wear Wolf.

November 27, 2005, 09:32 AM	#7
Foxman Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2005 Posts: 466	I have a Tikka 222. great rifle, very accurate and would kill them no problem. I use Nosler Bt 50 gr with 22.5 grs Hodgdon H322, gives just on 3000fps and one shot kills even on small deer , foxes no problem. __________________ Better the man suspected of being a fool keep his mouth shut, than to open it and remove all doubt.

November 27, 2005, 04:11 PM	#11
Foxman Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2005 Posts: 466	It is about much the same as an unsilenced 22 rf magnum for noise, there is virtually no recoil (like shooting an air rifle), I would zero 3/4" high at 100 yds that gives a 3" point blank range to 200 yds and it will kill something like a beaver up to 200yds. I personally reload as it works out less than half price per round, Cabelas price for Remington ammo is $12.99 US ( 64 c per 1 ) but you can buy it cheaper than that if you look around. I still prefer the reload route which works out at less than .20c per round. P.s Midway have some for $9.79 US (PMC 50grn sp) __________________ Better the man suspected of being a fool keep his mouth shut, than to open it and remove all doubt.

November 26, 2005, 12:59 AM	#3
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	They make a 20grain fmj. I like the .222 do they still make them and what is a good brand of gun?

November 26, 2005, 01:02 AM	#4
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	would a .222 go through a 80 pound beaver if you shot it in the side?

November 26, 2005, 12:50 PM	#6
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	tikka t3 makes them.

November 27, 2005, 03:41 PM	#10
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	thats a nice gun now you made me really want a .222 How much does a box of bullets cost for it in canadian money? How loud is the .222 is it as loud as a 410 how hard does it kick? Is it flat shooting? What do you think it would be best to zero a .222 at if i was going to shoot from 80yrds to 200yrds? How far is this gun good out to?

November 27, 2005, 04:41 PM	#12
22-rimfire Senior Member Join Date: February 19, 2005 Location: Tennessee Posts: 5,323	The 222 is a great round that has probably seen its day come and go. It used to be THE varmint caliber out to about 200 yards when the 218 Bee, 22 Hornet, and 220 Swift were popular. When the 22-250 was introduced, its popularity diminished considerably. If I was interested in buying a 222 sized gun now, I would just buy a 223 as you have more choices on loadings and more bullets for handloading. Neither the 223 or 222 have much recoil but they are noisy. I was wonderlng why you want to shoot beavers? Causing a problem or are you looking to just finish them off when trapping? If trapping, I would just use a 22LR with solids to the head.

November 27, 2005, 06:13 PM	#13
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	causing problams

November 28, 2005, 05:11 AM	#14
22-rimfire Senior Member Join Date: February 19, 2005 Location: Tennessee Posts: 5,323	If the beaver issue is a pest or damage issue, I would use what I have on hand. If nothing suitable on hand, I would look at maximum flexibility in terms of purchase of a new rifle. That all being said, the 223 gives you a fair amount of flexibility for varmints at any range to about 200 or perhaps 250 yards. The 243/6mm would also be a good choice as it would bring you up to the deer hunting size of caliber and still be a very respectable varmint caliber out to maybe 400 yards. Still no recoil in most rifles up to this caliber. You can keep going larger in caliber to increase flexibility, but the recoil increases as does the practicality and damage to the animal (fur) would be much more substantial. For occasional use, where noise is not an issue, I would use whatever I have and not worry about it.

November 28, 2005, 12:41 PM	#15
Ian2005 Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 355	.222 Actually I was recently out at the range with a borrowed .222. The ammo price is roughly $12-$14 for a box of 20, however maybe my Remington 222 needed oiling or something but I was not able to use the internal magazine with any success- the d@mn thing jammed constantly so I had to insert 1 bullet at time. Zzzzz. It's an older round for an older rifle. Just go pickup something new in .223 - close enough, better variety of manufactureres, and cheaper ammo. IMHO anyway.

November 28, 2005, 02:11 PM	#16
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	How much louder is the 223 over the 222?

November 28, 2005, 03:58 PM	#17
Foxman Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2005 Posts: 466	The 222 is a long way from dying out it is still made by most of the major rifle makers and is a little more accurate than the 223, it is less noisy too. I have 17rem, 222, 223,and 22-250 in 22 centrefires and use the 223 least, it is noisier and uses more powder to achieve little more than the 222 and the 22-250 does everything better for a little more powder. The 223s popularity is due to the military use in Nato giving surplus cheap FMJ ammo and of course cases too and it is a good round if you only want one 22, but if I want to reach out more than the 222 I use the 22-250 which shoots a heavier bullet faster than the 223 and so bucks the wind better and kills effectively at longer distances. The 222 is only about 150fps slower than the 223 with the same bullet weight but is nicer to shoot. IMO __________________ Better the man suspected of being a fool keep his mouth shut, than to open it and remove all doubt. Last edited by Foxman; November 29, 2005 at 03:55 AM.

November 28, 2005, 07:57 PM	#18
kirbymagnum Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: Alberta Posts: 410	For what i do i would rather have the .222. How much longer do you think the .222 will last?

November 28, 2005, 10:51 PM	#20
shureshot0471 Senior Member Join Date: October 1, 2005 Location: In the sticks of East Texas Posts: 185	Go with the .204 ruger great one to do that no matter where you hit them if you must get really nasty pick up your standard .300 win mag lol I have found that the .204 does a great job plus it is a fun gun to shoot

November 29, 2005, 03:57 AM	#21
Foxman Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2005 Posts: 466	The triple deuce (222) is going to be around for may years to come, its too good to slip away and has become very popular in europe this last few years as well. __________________ Better the man suspected of being a fool keep his mouth shut, than to open it and remove all doubt.

November 29, 2005, 08:06 AM	#22
FirstFreedom Junior member Join Date: May 31, 2004 Location: The Toll Road State, U.S.A. Posts: 12,451	Beavers can get up to 60 lbs or so, almost twice the weight of coyotes. I'd think you would probably want to use a .22 hornet or .223, though a .22 mag should work if placed in the vitals, and probably work better than a .17hmr. For head shots, .22lr will work. I hear they're good eatin - I intend to find out for sure next time I kill one.

November 29, 2005, 08:16 AM	#23
jeff_troop Senior Member Join Date: July 24, 2005 Location: NRA Patron member from MS Posts: 459	beavers where i live can reach 90 pounds. they all die with a .22lr to the body. there is nothing tough about a beaver (again, where i live). i have also killed them with a 17hmr from a taurus 12" barrel. you don't need head shots in my experience. just hit them in the guts and they will thrash and throw a fit, then die. i gather them up in the morning when they float to the surface.

November 29, 2005, 09:12 AM	#24
Ian2005 Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 355	222 Again Yes that was the main point in my argument against the .222 was because of ammo; I usually see only Remington's brand on the shelf. If you look at other caliber's -aka .223, .22, etc., you see multiple brands and yes the availablity of cheap ammo by the case alone is a very persuasive argument if you just like to plink and take a shot here or there at something that can run from you. Also when I was on the range I did notice how wind affected this bullet. It was very difficult trying to zero in my scope when it was blowing the bullet around. If you like the .222, great, good for you. I don't. There's no need to start a flame war as everyone has their own opinion as per the best rifle/scope/round in every single posting on every single thread of this entire website.:barf:

November 30, 2005, 01:23 PM	#25
hivel37 Senior Member Join Date: August 24, 2004 Location: Hill Country Posts: 522	Ian, I agree. If you're not a handloader don't pick the .222 as .223 stuff is cheap and can be bought everywhere. But if you do handload, .222 cases are readily formed from the .223 case if needed. So you don't need to worry about "how long it will last". Either one will sure handle a beaver.