Fastest Airgun?

[Luke]

I used to have a Remington that would zip a pellet 1000 fps, but my buddy just got a Beeman that pushes 1200 fps.

I was wondering if there is any pellet guns going 1200+ fps?

[gitano]

Depends on the weight and composition of the projectile (pellet). Simply put, "Yes".
 
I've seen 1600 advertised for 17 caliber, ultra-light-weight pellets.
 
Paul

[Luke]

Depends on the weight and composition of the projectile (pellet). Simply put, "Yes".
 
I've seen 1600 advertised for 17 caliber, ultra-light-weight pellets.
 
Paul

wow, thats faster than my shotgun

[gitano]

wow, thats faster than my shotgun

Maybe... "All that glitters is not gold."
 
Paul

[Brithunter]

Hmmm I wonder why this speed thing is so important with air guns. Surely it's the power and accuracy which is much more important as it matters not how fast the pellets that misses the target is going, it's how the accurate pellet performs on and in the target which is important.

Here in the UK normal air rifles are limited to producing 12 ft lbs muzzle energy. After this power limit they become firearms are are licenced just the same as a normal firearm. There are companies which produce special mainly pre charged pneumatics which produce much more power and 45 ft ls has been seen but there are a few spring powered high power air rifles. The problem is that these high velocities and power levels is that special design pellets or bullets are required as normal types become seriously unstable with the result that accuracy is almost non existant.

Now there are those who think that 12 ft lbs is not enough to cleanly kill anything would be surprised. For many years the pest controllers and air gunners have been sucessfully taken Rabbits, Pigeons and Rats at ranges up to 45 yards with no problems. Of course this does require learning how to shoot and judge range something which I am out of practice with as I have not brought the airguns out for some time but at one time I was shooting about 500-700 pellets a week through my Feinwerkbau 127, this rifle I brought in 1979 or 1980 and still have it, it has had to have the seals and springs replaced over the years.

  Oh I am talking about normal air gun calibres here and not the exotics like the pre charge .45 cals which have appeared in the last few years that produce more like 70+ ft lbs energy. Normal calibres are of course .177", .20", .22" and .25". Thses calibres have been about since spring powered air guns came about around 100 years of so ago.

[txc45]

Edited by Rockinbbar. Reason: Inflammitory.

[greywolf]

here is about the same , only we don't go by ft lbs , it is fps anything under 500fps is not licensed , anything over is treated as a regular firearm , but anyways the speed thing , most pellet guns have a very short effective range , i have yet to see a pellet gun under 500fps to hit and kill a rabbit at 100 yards! whereas the new spring powered pellet guns can and do break 1200 feet per second and  CAN hit and kill a rabbit at close to 100 yards if not more (never tried it) and the new pba hunting pellets are way cool! needless to say i think is a difference same as  the diff between a "regular " pellet gun and a .22 rimfire , which one is far more effective, and you have just answered your own question :) take care :)

[greywolf]

oh , i must add , they are great when you are moose hunting , and not finding a moose, shooting grouse as you go , no loud bang , no scare  biggame off and still at least getting some "chickens"

[gitano]

Surely it's the power

[/COLOR][/SIZE]

Is the point of velocity. "Power" (force per unit time) is a function of velocity.

Paul

[scoper-uk]

Yes we covered this somewhere, where the integrity of the pellet diminished on its journey to the target,, some lead pancaked at just a few yards, with the massive pressure placed on the nose of the projectile, causing misshapen noses tending to veer the pellet anywhere but at the target , then we have the long sheng shung,,, i may have miss spelt this,, but its similar theyre long heavy .177 fac airgun pellets that seem barrel fussy, for extreme high powered airguns pushing 60-90 foot pound, with solid heads and longer bodies,,, but then power in an airgun dictates the amount of lead contact with the inside of the barrel ,, friction etc, renders a projectile incapable / unsuitable for the job,, as most flat headed pellets are more suited to low power target work,,, i choose .177 myself as i have the choice now to pick an heavyweight pellet for predators like fox, at a given range for a hefty kinetic hit, or a relative light pellet such as crosman premier lights, 7.9 which will bowl rabbits over at 90  yards plus,

[scoper-uk]

some airgun barrels tended to shred the lead pellets  on their way up the barrel, they wouldnt grip in the rifling so had a rasp affect on the lead,,, so specific barrels were made out of older BSA airguns as they had wider land in the rifled grooves, and the twist wasnt so tight,,so Weihrauk ( Beeman)made the barrels better,, to cope with the higher velocities their rifles were capable of, an 80 or long stroke 77/97 1n 177 could easily reach 1200 fps,,but were rarely accurate with the pellets  of that era / early 80,s     so now  1000 fps with cp heavies is good enough for small game to 100m,,,

[Paul Hoskins]

Scoper, I would like you to explain how the nose of a pellet can be deformed in flight when fired from a pellet rifle. The nose of lead bullets fired in a cartridge rifle at 3000 FPS doesn't deform in flight. How is it possible for a lead pellet to deform at 1200 or even 1600 FPS? ......Paul H

[firebird]

Issues here are velocity and pellet weight. Accuracy has also been mentioned. The higher velocity pellet guns are not often as accuarrate as lower velocity air guns but the difference isn't often an issue in hunting, more in match target shooting.  Air guns physics are the same as firearm physics when projectile wieght and velocity and energy on target are considered. Light wight pellets shoot at higher velocity than heavier pellets from the same gun . Lighter pellets also have much less energy on target and lose their smaller amount of energy much faster than heaver pellets as the range is extended. I used a .22 cal. pellet gun that shot at 800FPS. I took many pigeons out to 50 yards but rabbits was a headshot only proposition out 40 yards or so. Pellets just don't have the projectile weight necessary for penetration on rabbits past very cose ranges even with heavy pointed pellets. Pellets lose velocity and energy very quickly over distance. Only  at  short ranges of 20 Yds or so would I trust a .22 pellet gun to penetrate a small rabbit for a clean kill. Wounding is never an option with me. I would never consider a .177 for hunting rabbits or anything bigger unless it is at very close range and head shots only. At 50yds a 800fps  22 cal. pellet  will penetrae and kill much better than a .177 pellet with a muzzel velocity of 1000 FPS . In firearms a .17 cal remington will fire a 25 grain  bullet at over 4000 fps second but it is usless on anything much bigger than a coyote. Due to its tiny 25 grn bullet, it has minimal  energy compared to a Winchester .458 shooting 500 grn. bullets at 2000 fps. At half the speed of the .17 Rem, the .458 Win   500 grn bullet  will drop an Elephant or Rino.
Lighter pellets will shoot faster  but will create less energy on traget and will lose energy much faster over distance than a heavier pellet at lower velocity.

[JaDub]

I`d take a heavier pellet at a slower velocity every time when I`m droping squirrels out of a tree at 30 yards with my .22 Gamo.  Tree rats around here have pretty tough hides and complete shoulder pass throughs are the norm.  I do use Kodiak Extra Heavy pellets for both accuracy and penetration........ out to 30 yds. I`ve never shot further than that so I can`t vouch for longer shots. At 30 yards I can punch nickle sized groups with consistancy.

[firebird]

Knowing your limitations is essential to taking game cleanly with an air gun. I have never excepted wounding animals as a sport. Shooting a racoon with a pellet and waiting for it to die of infection doesn't sit well with me. If your going to shoot at bigger game with a pellet gun, make sure you have both the energy and shot placment for a clean kill. Squirrels are no problem for a good .22 cal pellet gun or a higher velocity .177 at closer ranges. I don't even consider shooting the many big Jack rabbits in my area with a pellet gun. Jacks are muscular as **** and I have seen close range #5 shot, shotgun pellets fail to penetrait through the muscle.  They are tough as nails. I use the pellet gun on barn rats, squrrels and occasionally sitting rabbits at very close range. In winter I used to put out leftover veggies near the barn to attract rabbits within airgun range at night.

[Paul Hoskins]

Firebird, Just out of curosity, how many coyotes or animals bigger than coyotes have you shot with a 17 Rem? .....Paul H

[firebird]

My hunting buddy used a .17 Rem for years. I used his gun to shoot wood chucks on several occasions. It demolishes wood chucks as far as I can shoot and shredds rabbits. He used it to shoot everything up to  deer but a couple of  deer he shot ran on several hundred yards after what would  have been good hits with a larger bullet.  The 25 grn bullets blew apart before any serious penitration leaving a large but shallow wound. The .17 Rem is a terrific  little varmint rifle and I have seen him drop Cyotes and foxes in thier tracks but it's little explosive 25 Grn bullet limits penitration on any big game as he proved with the deer. It has terrific velocity and is very accurate. I just would not use it for big game. I chose the 17 as an example of light bullet and high velocity verses heavy bullet at low velocity. They both have their uses but are not always interchangable.

[Paul Hoskins]

OK, firebird....I use small calibers almost exclusively & have no complaints whatsoever so far. With proper bullets, I know the 17 Rem. is very effective on deer out to around 200 yards or so. I expect the 204 Ruger to be even more effective with proper game bullets. I haven't killed a bear with either yet but have killed several using 22 calibers, the largest of which weighed 402 pounds field dressed. .....Paul H

[firebird]

Yes you can kill deer with a .17 but bullet placement is crutial and it is illegal in many places to use a .17 because of too many wounded deer. A lot of places have also banned .22 cal centerfires for deer for the same reason. A concientious hunter and good marksman can take almost any animal with a .22 rimfire magnum  but that isn't the majority of hunters. I have shot a deer with a .22 rimfire long rifle but it was a clean head shot on a standing deer at 15 yds. He dropped dead instantly. I would never try a body shot with a .22 rimfire on any deer at any range. The problem of getting tough bullets for the .17 is an issue . Most bullets for the .17 are frangible bullets designed to disintigrate on small animals. Penetration on a broadside shot or a head or neck shot is exceptable but a raking or quartering away shot may require more than 12 inches  inches of penetration and the little delicate .25 gn bullet will not stay together to retain enough weight for that. Many northern hunting guides will refuse to take a client with a .223 or .22 250 for deer. Here many deer are taken with .223 but heavier and tougher bullets up to  50 and  60 grn are available for the .22's . If a .35 grain, non frangible bullet were more commonly available for the .17 Rem, it's use for larger game would increase a lot. The only bullets I have seen in .17 cal made for larger game are custom made by small companies and stabilizing long 35 Gn bullets in .17 cal is an issue for some rifles. Small calibers for deer is an ongoing debate with many refusing to except anything less than a .243 for deer hunting and some that swear the fast . 22 centerfires with heavier and stronger bullets are  great for deer. Newer bullets made just for large game are availible in .22 centerfire but not to my knowledge are they normaly commercially made for .17 cal. Yes you can take deer cleanly with a .17 Rem if you a very careful and good marksman but few concientious hunters will agree with you. A shoulder shot at a 250 lb mule deer at  200yds is a lot for the liitte .17 to handle. Here are two links  on this subject. http://skinnymoose.com/smokenfeathers/2007/07/04/the-22-caliber-deer-bullets/
Here is another from a lover of the .17.
http://www.coyotegods.com/pagepart15.html

[gitano]

I don't think there's really much argument here.

Most of us agree that shot placement is one of the most important elements to ensure clean kills on big game. In order to assure good shot placement, one must have some marksmanship capabilities. Therefore it is incumbent on ALL hunters that they be good marksmen. Not all are.

The second factor necessary for consistently clean kills is discipline - knowing both the capabilities of the weapon and the shooter and staying within those capabilities. People have different levels of capabilities and different levels of discipline.

In spite of what the socialist "experts" say, cartridge, caliber, and bullet choices are VERY low on the list of items necessary for a clean kills by skilled, disciplined Hunters.

Every time one of these arguments arises, the two parties almost invariably retreat to diametrically opposed "corners" and continue to argue about two different subjects.

More often than not, the one arguing about limiting the use of a particular caliber or cartridge is actually NOT arguing about the "lethality" of that caliber or cartridge AT ALL. Instead, they are arguing about human "frailty". Whenever examples that contradict the banning of use of a particular caliber or cartridge are demonstrated, they always retreat to "Well not every hunter can do that." The proper response to that "argument" is "Duh". There's no argument there. However, personally, I refuse to be defined by or have my activities and actions constrained by the lowest human common denominator. Only socialists take that approach to life.

Sadly, we HAVE BECOME, (NOT are becoming), a socialist country. As socialism is a kind of communal cancer, it has "metastisized" to every element of our society including hunting. Now, along with all the other political correctness "out there", we are admonished to be politically correct in our hunting practices. Meaning, "Don't confuse me with facts, the "experts" say we shouldn't do this or that, so by golly, it's positively WRONG if we do." OR... Since some idiot is incapable of behaving responsibly, we need to make a LAW that says that NOBODY is ALLOWED to even THINK about doing that.

Both sides of this particular argument understand and appreciate that ALL firearms use for hunting has limitations. Nobody but a fool hunts free-ranging African elephants with a .22 caliber RF pistol. Duh.

Although I can't really conceive of how one could actually kill an African bull elephant with a .22 RF pistol, regardless of bullet placement, the truth is, ANY firearm in the hands of a skilled, disciplined Hunter can be used to take ANY game animal.

And everybody participating in this thread has demonstrated that they know that.

Finally, "we", (socially speaking), can't prevent wounded animals. It's impossible. More importantly, before the socialist argument is even voiced, let me say VEHEMENTLY that "NO! I do NOT believe we should do "everything possible" to reduce the possibility of wounding an animal." The logical conclusion to that "argument" is the only REAL way to prevent wounding animals is to COMPLETELY STOP SHOOTING AT THEM.

Paul

[firebird]

I agree with mosf what you have said. The ability to limit ones self to very accurate shot placement really is the defining capabilty of most caliber, bullet choices unless you use a cal obviously not capable as you suggested with the .22 and the elephant. Having said that I also aknowledge that  also limits the range and choices of shot placement. A Mule deer quartering away or running straight away from you is going to make a lot of penetration necessary that bigger calibers and heavy bulleta are capable of but  tiny caliber and light bullets are not capable of. A quartering away shot  can require 20 inches or more of penetration to reach the vitals of a big mule deer. The tiny little bullets under 30GRN simply cannot penetrate that far even at 4000 fps. I would very likely pass up a straight away shot but many hunters will not. Not every hunter is capable knowing or even acknowledging they have limitations. Not many are  willing  to pass up a shot(  maybe their only shot) at a good buck because it is slightly out of their capable range. Many do not except that they are at best mediocer marks men. Unfortunatly we do live in a society where we are forced to give up many things because of the short comings of others. If everyone were capable of perfect shot placement we could all just do head shots on everything up to Elk with a .22 magnum or Hornet. Both are capable of that in the hands of a patient hunter and good marksman. The ban on smaller calibers for hunting deer is valid because few hunters have the skills required or the dissapline  for consistant clean kills within the limitations of the tiny bore calibers. Wounding will always be a problem but it is much more of a problem when  cal and bullet wieght are at the very minimun of capability. A 350 Grn bullet at only 1300 fps second will shoot right through most deer from tail to chest  on a straight away shot and crush any bone in its path. A .17 rem with 25 grn bullets cannot even come close to doing that. One cal. is dinner served and the other is a wounded deer that may get away even if both are excellent shot placement.

[gitano]

One cal. is dinner served and the other is a wounded deer that may get away even if both are excellent shot placement.

OK. I guess since a 350-grain bullet is so much a "certainty" over a 25-grain bullet then a 500 grain bullet is even better. Since there are "stupid" shooters "out there", let's make it law that no one can shoot any animal with any bullet that weighs less than 500 grains and is at least .720" in diameter. One bullet, one caliber for everyone. Then "everything" will be alright and we won't have ANY more wounded animals.

Also, I guess I'm gonna hafta "return" all those deer and caribou I shot with my 17 Rem. Not one of which left their tracks.

Paul

[JaDub]

500 grain , .750"bullet.............
 
Oh my aching shoulder!! That would limit me to one shot per season.

[Paul Hoskins]

Well said Paul. I don't pull the trigger on much of anything that I'm not sure is going to be dead as a doornail. I have lost one deer that should have dropped in it's tracks. That was using the 22 Newton. To this day I can't cipher what happened. ....As for wounding the coon in question, I don't give a **** if it was wounded. It lived about 10 or 15 seconds. Didn't bother me one bit. I don't need any bleeding heart liberal telling me how cruel that was. Any varmint destroying my garden or chickens is gonna get shot any way I can do it.    ......Paul H