Coyote calibre for Youth

I just took a friends 13yr old son out to the range last weekend. Never shot a gun ever. After shooting about 300 22lr he was looking for something with a little more poop so I pulled out my CZ527 223. I shot it first to show him there was little recoil. After that he pounded off all the ammo I had carried with me that day and never batted an eye. Maybe seeing me shoot it first and laughing off the recoil was a good thing. No flinch at all. There is a difference between the 223 and 22-250. Why does the muzzle move so much and look at the size of the cartridge? Real or perceived doesnt matter if you think it kicks. I shoot a 223 cuz I can watch the effects thru the scope when I shoot. No can do with a 22-250. Shot both and keep the 223. MY $0.02
 
I don't think most people understand how recoil works and instantly think that bigger hole or longer cartridge equals more recoil. It ain't so. Calculating recoil is a simple matter with bullet weight, charge weight, speed and rifle weight all playing a factor. To say that you've shot both calibres and one has noticeably more recoil might be so in the two rifles you shot but put the .223 in a 5 pound rifle and the .22-250 in a 10 pound rifle and now there is more recoil from the .223. There is far more to actual recoil and felt recoil than comparing a couple rifles that you've shot. Get the proper pull length in a decent weight rifle and recoil becomes much less of an issue. Shoot a rifle that has a pull 1.5-2" too long and you'll develop a flinch regardless of calibre size. Worst thing you can do is put a shooter behind a rifle with too long of a pull. Sadly hand-me-downs ruin more new shooters than they help....recoil ain't the issue here....fit is!
 
Sheephunter, I am not saying the ACTUAL recoil is there but with the barrel jumping the way they tend to with the 22-250 and the very loud report the new shooter may FEEL like there is more recoil. I had the same impression as I was a new shooter at the time.Quite intimidating and the report is quite loud. Once we become more familiar with 30cals and such then it takes its place as a mild rifle for sure. We are not talking about seasoned shooters. Watch the results yourself at the range. There is an obvious difference to see these cals shot so the point is that whether it is real or not it still scares the crap out of him and that is the problem. No amount of explaining the physics to the kid is likely to change that. I shoot 30-06 and down so a 22cal thumper is a resting gun after that. I know what you are saying but the kid doesnt.
 
Come on bogie...we're not talking 30 cals here......we're talking three calibres 223, 22-250 and 243....all pretty close in report decibles, especially with proper ear protection on and all within a pound of recoil. It's got to do with fit and proper instruction. Again....your barrel jump has more to do with fit and rifle weight...not a few ounces of recoil. I just hate seeing new shooters ruined by ill-fitting rifles......a couple ounces of recoil difference isn't the solution!
 
Last edited:
buffdog said:
.
Your best bet is probably the .223. Since he is affected by the .22-250, the .223 with it's much less recoil would be better.

Advantages are:

Lower Recoil
Ammunition readily available
.22 Calibre components are easily obtainable if you intend reloading
Accurate out to 300 yards
Effective on a coyote
Heavier bullets can be used in windy conditions
less muzzle rise when fired
less noise

Recoil has two components..felt and perceived. The felt recoil is the actual force, and the perceived recoil is from things like muzzle rise, twisting of the rifle due to torque, and noise. Also rifle stock design has is a factor. If a rifle has a sharp drop in the buttstock or a narrow comb, recoil feels more. Weight is another factor.

While light weight rifles are available, (such as the Remington Model 7), it might be better going to a slightly heavier rifle. The Stevens 200 is available in .223 and is inexpensive compared to other makes and brands.

A good 3-9 x 40 scope on top will be about right.

I have been hunting for over 50 years, and could use almost any calibre I want to. I use the .223 here in South Western Manitoba, and do not feel I need anything larger.
.
Click to expand...

what he said;)
 
I have a 22-250 that I just shoot the 45 grain Wallyworld white box ammo. I've only had the gun out once since I bought it a few weeks ago but there is pretty much no recoil. That being said, at the same range session another CGN member I went with was shooting his new-to-him 243, still not much for recoil but more than my 22-250.

Another friend of mine who is a CGN member as well takes his 2 sons out (8 and 14) and they both have no trouble shooting the 204.
 
Pudelpointer said:
I have to dissagree with you Dogleg. i took a young fellow out to the range Wednesday and let him shoot my 22-250 with moderately hot loads of 55gr BT's. This was out of a 10+lb ruger #1 varmint. He is 11 y/o and not small for his age, but he did mention the recoil and I saw him touching his shoulder.

For a young shooter, I think a lot of the recoil is just a new experience and most learn to deal with it. At 12 y/o I would shoot my grandfathers 50 cal. muzzleloader all day long until I was too tired to hold it on target. At 14 I was shooting my uncles 8mm Rem Mag with little problems. Did I mention that I was a scrawny little kid for my age? I couldn't have weighed more than 90 lbs at 12.

I think the 22 Hornet (K-Hornet) would be a fantastic rifle for a youngster to whack yotes with. The muzzle blast and recoil are only marginally greater than a .22LR.

Good luck,

Ian
Click to expand...

The problem that the 11 year old youngster had was probably the result of apparent recoil, something that the recoil calculation doesn't reflect. He shot an adult size rifle, much too long for him. Yet a young kid could shoot 200 gr cast bullets from my wife's 6.5 pound .30/06 and with it's 12.5" LOP and Decelerator recoil pad, recieve 10 ft/lbs of recoil, or nearly double the recoil of what would of been the case with a hot .22-250 in a 10 pound rifle, without discomfort. For a kid to have a chance, the rifle has to fit him; and a top grade recoil pad wouldn't do any harm either.

IMHO, a kid's first rifle should be one that grows with him into adulthood. The chambering doesn't really matter provided you can handload suitable ammo for him or her to learn with. If a .22-250 or a .243 is what you determine is suitable, then there is no reason it can't be made to work, same if it's a .270 or a .30/06. The key is that neither the bark nor the bite can be too sharp. No one will shoot well if they expect it to hurt.

On a related track, is the weight and OAL of the rifle. If the kid will be shooting from field positions the rifle can neither be too long or too heavy for him. If the barrel is reduced much below 20" muzzle blast becomes a problem, but much longer than 22" and he might not be strong enough to hold it. An 8 pound rifle is fine for an adult to pack around, but that's alot for a kid. Six pounds is probably about right.

Another consideration is the trigger pull. Too heavy a let off and the kid won't be able to shoot well, but too light a trigger and he'll fire before he's ready.
 
Last edited:
coyote cal

Give him a nice Rem mod 7 or a cheap Savage 243 win.
And he will be a very hapy boy.
I have 2 boys and 3 mod 7's 308,708,and 243.
My boys are 13 , and 11 years old and love all 3.
 
My 14 year old started shooting my .223 when he was 10, he loved it and never had a problem. I had him shooting apples tied to strings at 100 yards using 50gn Vmax's. He loved to see then expload.

My .223 is a Rem700P, it is heavy and he shoots it prone off a bipod. The wt of the rifle ensures that there is essentially no recoil. And of course dad loves it as well. With 77gn SMK I have engaged targets at 600 yards with no problem. I would not be shooting coyotes at that distance but the rifle has not problem reaching out.
 
sheephunter said:
I don't think most people understand how recoil works and instantly think that bigger hole or longer cartridge equals more recoil. It ain't so. Calculating recoil is a simple matter with bullet weight, charge weight, speed and rifle weight all playing a factor. To say that you've shot both calibres and one has noticeably more recoil might be so in the two rifles you shot but put the .223 in a 5 pound rifle and the .22-250 in a 10 pound rifle and now there is more recoil from the .223. There is far more to actual recoil and felt recoil than comparing a couple rifles that you've shot. Get the proper pull length in a decent weight rifle and recoil becomes much less of an issue. Shoot a rifle that has a pull 1.5-2" too long and you'll develop a flinch regardless of calibre size. Worst thing you can do is put a shooter behind a rifle with too long of a pull. Sadly hand-me-downs ruin more new shooters than they help....recoil ain't the issue here....fit is!
Click to expand...

Your aguement may come from a book but experience tells the rest of us that the .223 has less recoil that the .243. Even in a properly fit rifle.
 
Yasee what todbartell is giving up makes more sense to me. Cmon man lookit the friggin case-it holds WAYYYYY more powder than the 223 case. Aside from that it also follows that this makes sense as all my friends that shoot 22-250 are unable to watch the action in the scope once the shot is made as the scope is still up in the air whereas I can watch killshots in my scope with the 223 so how would you explain that?Aside from that Todd is usually pretty much on the money from what I have seen. As for powder load my Speer manual indicates a 24gr load of 748 for the 223 and 38gr max for the same weight bullet for the 22-250 so there should be more than a 1lb diff. All things being equal the 4lb to 7lb would make sense. Of course fit and weight are important and of course it has nothing to do with 30cals(read the entry again-I think you missed something). Thanks for the clarification Tod. Might just have to get me one of these 22-250 to play with...:)
 
Ive shot plenty of 223, not much 22-250, and plenty of 243 (with 55 grainers). To say there is only 1 ft lb more recoil energy with the 243 is friggin' hilarious to believe. I should be a gun writer :onCrack:
 
casterpollox said:
Your aguement may come from a book but experience tells the rest of us that the .223 has less recoil that the .243. Even in a properly fit rifle.
Click to expand...

Now that is funny..........:dancingbanana::runaway:

No good learnin' ever came from a book that's fer darned sure.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom