The 22-250 for bear??

hunter33 · October 11, 2007, 06:24 PM

Should the 22-250 be used for bear?

spacemanspiff · October 11, 2007, 06:40 PM

Depends on the bear. Koala bear, yeah. Brown bear, maybe not. Teddy bear, yeah, Polar bear, me thinks no.

hunter33 · October 11, 2007, 06:43 PM

black bears would be the hunt.

davlandrum · October 11, 2007, 06:52 PM

Wouldn't be my first (or second, or third) choice. Heavy hide + big heavy bone....

Before I get flamed, yes it COULD be done (perfect shot, etc), but not what I would take if looking for a bear.

hunter33 · October 11, 2007, 07:01 PM

Well i dont think it should be used because my cousin shot a bear about a week ago right in front of the shoulder from about 50 yards away with a 270 180gr and he said it went so far he looked for about 7 hours till it got dark and couldnt find it.But yet the 22-250 is legal for bear?

tyrajam · October 11, 2007, 07:19 PM

The only way I would try it is either a close range headshot, or shooting a bear with hounds. That way you can wait overnight for it to die, and put the dogs back on the trail to track it down.
That said, how many bears and moose have been taken with a 22 rimfire, especially by natives in canada and alaska? Many. About 40 years ago my dads hunting buddy snuck a 22LR bullet behind a black bears ear and dropped it in its tracks. Not legal, but he was after meat, and he got a lot of venison with that 22.

Hey hunter33, where do you find 180gr bullets for the 270???????????

Art Eatman · October 11, 2007, 07:50 PM

One story from a cousin who may or who may not have hit where he thought he did does not offer anything meaningful about one's choice of firearm.

No centerfire .22 is truly suitable for larger game animals. I'm not saying you can't make a kill. I will say that the odds of a clean and ethical kill are reduced as compared to cartridges using heavier bullets of larger diameter.

hunter33 · October 11, 2007, 07:57 PM

oops haha im not sure. it was 150 gr i think if i remember right

Wildalaska · October 11, 2007, 08:06 PM

Alaska natives use that caliber for subsistence bear hunting.

I saw Spiff use a Garand for subsistence McDonalds hunting. Put that burger down with one shot.

WildrightspiffAlaska ™

Erik · October 11, 2007, 08:27 PM

"Should the 22-250 be used for bear?"

No, assuming it is even legal to begin with.

First Shirt · October 11, 2007, 08:35 PM

No! Unless the bear is eating your wife/children/dog, and there is nothing else available. I've seen people try to use the 22/250 on smallish (100-200 lbs) wild hogs, and even with perfect shot placement, the results were less than stellar. I'm pretty sure that even black bears need more medicine than a centerfire .22 will provide.

JMHO,YMMV, FWIW, other caveats as required.

JWB

Go Kiwi · October 12, 2007, 03:12 AM

Heck - we use .22lr on Kiwi Bears here all the time so .22 250 will be sweet as

Ifishsum · October 12, 2007, 03:47 AM

I'm wholeheartedly in the "NO" camp. Bears are very tough animals and will run a long ways, you need a good blood trail to follow or broken bones to slow them down. The .22-250 isn't going to be good for either.

Art Eatman · October 12, 2007, 09:24 AM

Wild, a lot of folks do a lot of things. The amount of success depends on the amount of skill and the knowledge brought to the effort.

Look: The last mulie I killed was rudely awakened by me from his noonday nap. I was no more than thirty yards from him. I had what seemed to me to be "all day" to judge whether or not to kill him. I could as easily have center-punched him between the eyes with a .22 rimfire as ruining his neck with my '06. But I've been hunting and shooting for over 65 years. I'm supposed to be able to do the sneaky-snake thing, and hit exactly where I intend to.

hunter 33, by the very nature of his question, seems to be one who is starting out, still on the upside of the learning curve. I'd bet that he still has to learn to deal with all the bits and pieces of that learning, to develop the knowledge and skill that is needed for success at that proverbial clean and ethical kill. I figure he can stay with it, work at it, and do just fine.

This is no reflection upon him, of course. We all go through it. I did, for sure. So did you, Wild, just as you went up a learning curve in gunsmithing. We all gotta start somewhere...

Just as folks don't move from trundling around town in their little Honda to driving a Formula 1 car, folks shouldn't start off in hunting with cartridges that demand an expert's higher level of skill.

My 2¢, anyhow.

Art

leadslinger07 · October 12, 2007, 11:43 AM

Dont think 22-250 is legal for bear but if your felling confidnet you can always try shooting one with the 22-250. If I were hunting black bear I would carry nothing less than a 375 Holand and Holand magnum. My personal choice would be a CZ rifle chambered for 458 Winchester magnum.

davlandrum · October 12, 2007, 12:05 PM

In Oregon, where both Hunter33 and I (and it looks like a lot of other posters) live, it is perfectly legal.

Why? I have no earthly idea. My guess is it is a hold-over from the good old days when we could bait bears and run both cats and bears with dogs.

Since we can't do that anymore, something like 90% (or more) of both bears and cougars taken are taken while someone is deer/elk hunting.

Wildalaska · October 12, 2007, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Wild, a lot of folks do a lot of things. The amount of success depends on the amount of skill and the knowledge brought to the effort.

Art by now means do I imply that anyone other than the most skilled hunter should take on a bear with a 22-250.

These native guys living out there have skills and a...hmmm...disregard for safety that most folks dont have.

Wildifitisa17itstoobigAlaska™

castnblast · October 12, 2007, 12:57 PM

As big a fan I am of the 22-250, I would only use it for bear if it was a self defense shot. And if I were in bear country, I'd probably have something a little better for that purpose on my hip. I would not hunt them on purpose with this round. Yeah, you get enough holes in one, it'l do the trick. 1 good shot to the noodle will probably take one, but I'd advise against it. I've cut Steel T-Post in half w/ a 22-250, so It should bust the skull of a black bea, but again, I'm definitely in the no camp on this one too. I don't know what it would do to a brown...probably piss it off... but it may get it away from you...

Art Eatman · October 13, 2007, 10:00 AM

Drifting a bunch: I've read that Savage brought out the 99 in order to use the .22 Savage HiPower. That's a whole bunch of years ago, long before the varmint hunters got into "wildcats".

Phil Sharpe lists a load for the HiPower that pushes a 40-grain bullet out at Swift speed. Not exactly shabby performance.

Anyhow, some guy in India had one, and killed a tiger. Allegedly only one shot was required for the kill.

But I don't recommend it...

, Art

bswiv · October 13, 2007, 01:02 PM

Ethics.....................remember that word...........if we hunters ( And fishermen. ) abandon them totally we will be giving over to the PETA types another weapon, a weapon for which we will have no defence.

It is not ethical to do what you propose...............discussing such for entertaiment is one thing but to actually do so, and to do so under the guise of being a "sportsman".............not acceptable.

Scorch · October 13, 2007, 01:42 PM

Quote:

In Oregon, where both Hunter33 and I (and it looks like a lot of other posters) live, it is perfectly legal.

Yes, it is legal, but not very wise if you want to anchor the bear. Black bears I have seen average about 250 lbs, but I have also seen one that went 680 lbs IIRC. They are not terrifically hard to kill with a well-placed shot to the head. But that generally only works for baited and treed bears. As davlandrum said, it's no longer leagal to do either. I would recommend something a little bigger.

Dirty_Harry · October 13, 2007, 04:49 PM

Quote:

If I were hunting black bear I would carry nothing less than a 375 Holand and Holand magnum.

The bears must be as big as tanks around you

.

IMHO the .22-250 has no place in the bear world. Even if you are an experienced hunter, always use enough gun and go for the clean kill. The centerfires of the 6mm class and up should be jst fine for black bear.

taylorce1 · October 13, 2007, 09:18 PM

While I've only hunted black bear once I would never use a .22-250 legal or not for bear. Sure you can kill them with it but if you make a less than perfect shot do you want to be tracking a wounded animal it. While black bears are not very scary (at least not to me) they do move very fast and have big claws and teeth. The idea of tracking a wounded animal that can move fast and put a hurtin on you with those claws and teeth is very scary to me to say the least. I think when hunting any bear you want to put them down hard and fast so the heavier the bullet the better.

hunter33 you have that .30-40 Krag, find some 220 grain round nose cartridges and go shoot a bear with that. I'm sure you will have better results with that than you will any .22-250. If you decide to hunt a bear let us know how it turns out.

BTW this is what I mean about claws!

rgates · October 13, 2007, 09:38 PM

I love shooting 22-250 and as impressed as I am with it and having seen what it can do I still don't think I would attempt to use it on anything that big. I'd want something with relatively painfull recoil before I could trust hunting something that big and possibly that mean.

MeekAndMild · October 13, 2007, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Should the 22-250 be used for bear?

No. The 22-250 should be used for prairie dogs.

October 11, 2007, 06:24 PM	#1
hunter33 Senior Member Join Date: September 19, 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 289	The 22-250 for bear?? Should the 22-250 be used for bear?

October 11, 2007, 06:40 PM	#2
spacemanspiff Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2002 Location: alaska Posts: 3,498	Depends on the bear. Koala bear, yeah. Brown bear, maybe not. Teddy bear, yeah, Polar bear, me thinks no. __________________ "Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard

October 11, 2007, 06:52 PM	#4
davlandrum Senior Member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: Lane County Oregon Posts: 2,547	Wouldn't be my first (or second, or third) choice. Heavy hide + big heavy bone.... Before I get flamed, yes it COULD be done (perfect shot, etc), but not what I would take if looking for a bear. __________________ U.S Army, Retired Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do. -Potter Stewart

October 11, 2007, 08:27 PM	#10
Erik Senior Member Join Date: December 24, 1999 Location: America Posts: 3,479	"Should the 22-250 be used for bear?" No, assuming it is even legal to begin with. __________________ Meriam Webster's: Main Entry: ci·vil·ian Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\, Function: noun, Date: 14th century, 1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law, 2 a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force b: outsider 1, — civilian adjective

October 12, 2007, 12:05 PM	#16
davlandrum Senior Member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: Lane County Oregon Posts: 2,547	In Oregon, where both Hunter33 and I (and it looks like a lot of other posters) live, it is perfectly legal. Why? I have no earthly idea. My guess is it is a hold-over from the good old days when we could bait bears and run both cats and bears with dogs. Since we can't do that anymore, something like 90% (or more) of both bears and cougars taken are taken while someone is deer/elk hunting. __________________ U.S Army, Retired Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do. -Potter Stewart

October 11, 2007, 06:43 PM	#3
hunter33 Senior Member Join Date: September 19, 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 289	black bears would be the hunt.

October 11, 2007, 07:01 PM	#5
hunter33 Senior Member Join Date: September 19, 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 289	Well i dont think it should be used because my cousin shot a bear about a week ago right in front of the shoulder from about 50 yards away with a 270 180gr and he said it went so far he looked for about 7 hours till it got dark and couldnt find it.But yet the 22-250 is legal for bear?

October 11, 2007, 07:19 PM	#6
tyrajam Senior Member Join Date: July 24, 2007 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 467	The only way I would try it is either a close range headshot, or shooting a bear with hounds. That way you can wait overnight for it to die, and put the dogs back on the trail to track it down. That said, how many bears and moose have been taken with a 22 rimfire, especially by natives in canada and alaska? Many. About 40 years ago my dads hunting buddy snuck a 22LR bullet behind a black bears ear and dropped it in its tracks. Not legal, but he was after meat, and he got a lot of venison with that 22. Hey hunter33, where do you find 180gr bullets for the 270???????????

October 11, 2007, 07:50 PM	#7
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	One story from a cousin who may or who may not have hit where he thought he did does not offer anything meaningful about one's choice of firearm. No centerfire .22 is truly suitable for larger game animals. I'm not saying you can't make a kill. I will say that the odds of a clean and ethical kill are reduced as compared to cartridges using heavier bullets of larger diameter.

October 11, 2007, 07:57 PM	#8
hunter33 Senior Member Join Date: September 19, 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 289	oops haha im not sure. it was 150 gr i think if i remember right

October 11, 2007, 08:06 PM	#9
Wildalaska Junior member Join Date: November 25, 2002 Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 14,172	Alaska natives use that caliber for subsistence bear hunting. I saw Spiff use a Garand for subsistence McDonalds hunting. Put that burger down with one shot. WildrightspiffAlaska ™

October 11, 2007, 08:35 PM	#11
First Shirt Member Join Date: August 22, 2007 Posts: 15	No! Unless the bear is eating your wife/children/dog, and there is nothing else available. I've seen people try to use the 22/250 on smallish (100-200 lbs) wild hogs, and even with perfect shot placement, the results were less than stellar. I'm pretty sure that even black bears need more medicine than a centerfire .22 will provide. JMHO,YMMV, FWIW, other caveats as required. JWB

October 12, 2007, 03:12 AM	#12
Go Kiwi Member Join Date: October 11, 2007 Posts: 40	Heck - we use .22lr on Kiwi Bears here all the time so .22 250 will be sweet as

October 12, 2007, 03:47 AM	#13
Ifishsum Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2005 Location: Oregon Posts: 1,033	I'm wholeheartedly in the "NO" camp. Bears are very tough animals and will run a long ways, you need a good blood trail to follow or broken bones to slow them down. The .22-250 isn't going to be good for either.

October 12, 2007, 09:24 AM	#14
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Wild, a lot of folks do a lot of things. The amount of success depends on the amount of skill and the knowledge brought to the effort. Look: The last mulie I killed was rudely awakened by me from his noonday nap. I was no more than thirty yards from him. I had what seemed to me to be "all day" to judge whether or not to kill him. I could as easily have center-punched him between the eyes with a .22 rimfire as ruining his neck with my '06. But I've been hunting and shooting for over 65 years. I'm supposed to be able to do the sneaky-snake thing, and hit exactly where I intend to. hunter 33, by the very nature of his question, seems to be one who is starting out, still on the upside of the learning curve. I'd bet that he still has to learn to deal with all the bits and pieces of that learning, to develop the knowledge and skill that is needed for success at that proverbial clean and ethical kill. I figure he can stay with it, work at it, and do just fine. This is no reflection upon him, of course. We all go through it. I did, for sure. So did you, Wild, just as you went up a learning curve in gunsmithing. We all gotta start somewhere... Just as folks don't move from trundling around town in their little Honda to driving a Formula 1 car, folks shouldn't start off in hunting with cartridges that demand an expert's higher level of skill. My 2¢, anyhow. Art

October 12, 2007, 11:43 AM	#15
leadslinger07 Member Join Date: June 3, 2007 Location: Columbia City IN Posts: 18	Dont think 22-250 is legal for bear but if your felling confidnet you can always try shooting one with the 22-250. If I were hunting black bear I would carry nothing less than a 375 Holand and Holand magnum. My personal choice would be a CZ rifle chambered for 458 Winchester magnum.

October 12, 2007, 12:57 PM	#18
castnblast Senior Member Join Date: July 2, 2006 Location: Corpus Christi TX Posts: 1,148	As big a fan I am of the 22-250, I would only use it for bear if it was a self defense shot. And if I were in bear country, I'd probably have something a little better for that purpose on my hip. I would not hunt them on purpose with this round. Yeah, you get enough holes in one, it'l do the trick. 1 good shot to the noodle will probably take one, but I'd advise against it. I've cut Steel T-Post in half w/ a 22-250, so It should bust the skull of a black bea, but again, I'm definitely in the no camp on this one too. I don't know what it would do to a brown...probably piss it off... but it may get it away from you... __________________ VEGETARIAN...old indian word for bad hunter

October 13, 2007, 10:00 AM	#19
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Drifting a bunch: I've read that Savage brought out the 99 in order to use the .22 Savage HiPower. That's a whole bunch of years ago, long before the varmint hunters got into "wildcats". Phil Sharpe lists a load for the HiPower that pushes a 40-grain bullet out at Swift speed. Not exactly shabby performance. Anyhow, some guy in India had one, and killed a tiger. Allegedly only one shot was required for the kill. But I don't recommend it... , Art

October 13, 2007, 01:02 PM	#20
bswiv Senior Member Join Date: June 4, 2006 Location: NE FL....... Posts: 1,081	Ethics.....................remember that word...........if we hunters ( And fishermen. ) abandon them totally we will be giving over to the PETA types another weapon, a weapon for which we will have no defence. It is not ethical to do what you propose...............discussing such for entertaiment is one thing but to actually do so, and to do so under the guise of being a "sportsman".............not acceptable.

October 13, 2007, 09:38 PM	#24
rgates Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 2006 Location: Southern Indiana Posts: 473	I love shooting 22-250 and as impressed as I am with it and having seen what it can do I still don't think I would attempt to use it on anything that big. I'd want something with relatively painfull recoil before I could trust hunting something that big and possibly that mean.