 |  | | | |  | |  |  | Survival airgun, but .177 |  | |  |  | |
 Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:29 pm |
 |
|
| tundrawolf |
| Member |
|
|
| Joined: 03 Jun 2009 |
| Posts: 20 |
|
|
|
|
I know, it's been discussed before.
(What happened to the "Search titles only" option in the search page?)
Anyway... I was originally going to ask if the difference between .177 and .22 was actually really significant, but...
I am going to invest in a Diana RWS 34 combo rifle. The price is right and from what I have read of the reviews, it is a GREAT gun. Unless it is glass fragile I am dead set on it.
I have a somewhat unique perspective here, I think.
I live in the boondock hills of the High Desert of California. You could take a 5 mile radius and count maybe 20 homes in 3 directions, because my back is to the hills.
From a survival perspective, in the event of a lack of electricity for an extended time, let's say all I have is this .177 cal rifle.
Where I live jack rabbits are not only plentiful, they are a problem. I realize a .22 would be better, but don't people kill rabbits with .177 cal rifles?
In other words, it's not "impossible" with a .177 cal rifle, and "possible" with a .22 cal, right?
What about snakes? We have rattlesnakes (I have a shotgun, but let's say I only have the airgun) and these things called Mojave Greens, which are a cross between a rattlesnake and some other very venomous snake.
Will a .177 cal kill a snake, or will it take several shots?
I like the fact that .177 cal ammo is cheaper, and I like even more that it is much more plentiful. Maybe I am coming from the 9mm box of 50 for $10 and the .45 box of 50 for $20 and shouldn't worry about ammo availability, but let's just say I am anyway.
I have heard that with a rimfire .22 with the right shot placement you could take a coyote and even a small deer (Dunno about that...).
Somehow I just don't see a .22 cal air rifle taking a coyote or deer. I could be wrong, though.
Another concern is the tremendously dusty environment. Air filters for vehicles are a constant casualty here. Will the dust hurt the barrel, or the crown, or the action? Will maintenance be a constant thing?
What about noise. I would want to be as quiet as possible. I had a Gammo combo that was VERY quiet. It was a wal-mart gun. Are Dianas "loud" per se compared to Gammo rifles? The Gammo made a "DUNK" sound. Certainly quieter than my Ruger MKII pistol, I should think... Hopefully quieter than a .22 rimfire rifle?
What about resistance to shock? The terrain here is extremely rocky, harsh, steep, and treacherous. If I fall, or drop the rifle, how much am I going to regret it?
I am going to have both this air rifle and a .22 rimfire rifle and a .22 rimfire pistol.
I would hope to use the rifle as my general, go-to rifle, as it is hopefully not as noisy, it does not scare animals, and it is dirt cheap to shoot.
I did search for this, and it came back with a lot of results. I just wanted to search for .177 vs .22, but I have other concerns here as well.
Thanks for reading my thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |  |  | | | |  |  |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 4:19 am |
|
|
| broommaster2000 |
| Moderator |
 |
|
| Joined: 10 Mar 2007 |
| Posts: 5714 |
| Location: City of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
Oh dear, big read.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
(What happened to the "Search titles only" option in the search page?)
|
I have yet to find a forum where "Search" actually works.  Allthough this one isn't as bad as the one on the dutch forum where I roam.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
I am going to invest in a Diana RWS 34 combo rifle. The price is right and from what I have read of the reviews, it is a GREAT gun. Unless it is glass fragile I am dead set on it.
|
I wouldn't worry to much about that. Diana is a brand that builds reasonably good guns.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
Where I live jack rabbits are not only plentiful, they are a problem. I realize a .22 would be better, but don't people kill rabbits with .177 cal rifles?
|
They do. Should they? We recommend .22, but some .177 pellets can also deliver the punch. Depends a bit on your rifle though.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
In other words, it's not "impossible" with a .177 cal rifle, and "possible" with a .22 cal, right?
|
At least that's a certainty.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
What about snakes? We have rattlesnakes (I have a shotgun, but let's say I only have the airgun) and these things called Mojave Greens, which are a cross between a rattlesnake and some other very venomous snake.
Will a .177 cal kill a snake, or will it take several shots?
|
I recon it will, but only based on what I've read.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
I have heard that with a rimfire .22 with the right shot placement you could take a coyote and even a small deer (Dunno about that...).
|
Personally I have my doubts it's the best way to do it.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
Somehow I just don't see a .22 cal air rifle taking a coyote or deer. I could be wrong, though.
|
It probably can be done, but you'd need at least the same amount of power of a rimfire, and enough bore to do it. It's easyer and maybe cheaper, not to forget recommendable, to use a bit of a bigger caliber airgun for that purpose. Allthough I recon a powder burned with some power might be a bit more affordable.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
Another concern is the tremendously dusty environment. Air filters for vehicles are a constant casualty here. Will the dust hurt the barrel, or the crown, or the action? Will maintenance be a constant thing?
|
Hm, I can't say for sure, but if it's the kind of dust that kills cars, I can see how it will probably increase wear and tear on your airgun, especially when it's a break barrel. Taking one apart can become a pain in the a$$ over time, not even mentioning the fact that taking a rifle apart also increases aforementioned wear and tear.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
What about noise. I would want to be as quiet as possible. I had a Gammo combo that was VERY quiet. It was a wal-mart gun. Are Dianas "loud" per se compared to Gammo rifles? The Gammo made a "DUNK" sound. Certainly quieter than my Ruger MKII pistol, I should think... Hopefully quieter than a .22 rimfire rifle?
|
I recently have found trouble defining "quiet". A friend of mine who hunts wild hogs tells me that cocking a rifle is enough to scare it off, and that's from 400 yards. So in a way, quiet can also be something you wish from the mechanics.
I assume you mean the sound of the action of shooting though, and that depends on the pellets, and on the sound of impact. Is your area one that dampens the sound a bit? My Diana does about 15 Fpe in .177, about the same as a Diana 34. I don't think it's that loud. It's had a bit of a major tune though.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
What about resistance to shock? The terrain here is extremely rocky, harsh, steep, and treacherous. If I fall, or drop the rifle, how much am I going to regret it?
|
I would, and I'm the kind of guy that doesn't bother about a few scratches.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
I would hope to use the rifle as my general, go-to rifle, as it is hopefully not as noisy, it does not scare animals, and it is dirt cheap to shoot.
|
You want the best of all worlds. You often have to make some concessions, I'm afraid.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
I did search for this, and it came back with a lot of results. I just wanted to search for .177 vs .22, but I have other concerns here as well.
|
I'd say we need more reactions from other forum members.
| tundrawolf wrote: |
Thanks for reading my thread.
|
No problem, that's what we're here for. I hope this contributed something to your search, in stead of making it harder.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:53 am |
|
|
| donwalk |
| Veteran Member |
|
|
| Joined: 09 Jun 2009 |
| Posts: 247 |
| Location: republik of kaliphornia |
|
|
|
i live in the high desert of so cal, too.
yes, the .177 is enough to take the mojave green...and the white/black tail JR's; i've done it. but...a good solid middle of the head shot is a must. (for the rattler) and, you will probably need more than one shot to do it...rattlers are not ones to, normally, remain still. the boiler room/head shot is good on the JR.
IMO...if you're looking for the 'survival' arm in a .177 airgun, get the higher powered rifle...such as the beeman RX or R9, RWS 48 or one of it's chinese counter parts and learn to use the open/iron sights. for "survival" a scope has too many 'pitfalls' that can neutralize it and is additional weight, on an already heavy rifle (in the case of the RWS 52) i'd opt to carry more ammo or water over the extra weight of a scope.
desert dwelling creatures like we have here are highly adept at survival...after all...that's what they do...survive. you gotta outwit them if you're gonna be the successful hunter/survivor. |
|
_________________
never squat while wearing spurs...will rogers |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 12:17 pm |
|
|
| tundrawolf |
| Member |
|
|
| Joined: 03 Jun 2009 |
| Posts: 20 |
|
|
|
|
Excellent information! Thank you both!
The problem with the RWS 40 series or 50 series is that they are a bit beyond what I am able to afford right now.
If I purchase the gun, what about a hop up kit later?
I know I am expecting a lot from this gun. Using the iron sights is a must, you are right.
Am I able to use the iron sights with the scope attached, in combo form? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 12:48 pm |
|
|
| Alucard |
| Member |
|
|
| Joined: 30 Jul 2009 |
| Posts: 64 |
|
|
|
|
| tundrawolf wrote: |
Excellent information! Thank you both!
The problem with the RWS 40 series or 50 series is that they are a bit beyond what I am able to afford right now.
If I purchase the gun, what about a hop up kit later?
I know I am expecting a lot from this gun. Using the iron sights is a must, you are right.
Am I able to use the iron sights with the scope attached, in combo form? |
You would need High Rise see through Scope Rings, Like these http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250375927473
I use something similar on my Little Airmaster. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 4:44 pm |
|
|
| broommaster2000 |
| Moderator |
|
|
| Joined: 10 Mar 2007 |
| Posts: 5714 |
| Location: City of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
Why not try for a red dot? Quick aim, might be usefull.
A magnum in .177 is the least recommendable. I'd go for something mid ranged then.
Diana 34's can be tough to shoot. The Beeman R9 is much less hold sensitive. I guess the price is the downer on that one though. On either side of the pond. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:49 am |
|
|
| donwalk |
| Veteran Member |
|
|
| Joined: 09 Jun 2009 |
| Posts: 247 |
| Location: republik of kaliphornia |
|
|
|
the red dot is an excellent idea...i never thought of that.
will they withstand the recoils of springers? if they will, that's the best, and most logical, suggestion... |
|
_________________
never squat while wearing spurs...will rogers |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:30 pm |
|
|
| Alucard |
| Member |
|
|
| Joined: 30 Jul 2009 |
| Posts: 64 |
|
|
|
|
| donwalk wrote: |
the red dot is an excellent idea...i never thought of that.
will they withstand the recoils of springers? if they will, that's the best, and most logical, suggestion... |
Well, Im sure with some lathe fu you could get the job done. You just need to be able to clip? It into the scope stop. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:46 pm |
|
|
| fritz |
| Silver Status Member |
 |
|
| Joined: 25 Nov 2008 |
| Posts: 2442 |
| Location: New Jersey- outside of Philadelphia |
|
|
|
I can shoot my 34 from just about any position and it will hit- hard. It is .177.
But for your purposes I suggest the .22 version. I would get a weaver rail for it, Leapers sells them. Get quick release bolts for the scope mounts, and leave the iron sights on. Sight everything in with the same pellet, and make sure you ONLY keep that pellet at hand (I have went hunting with the wrong pellet before...).
I have a theory that a larger bullet/pellet can be more deadly- even if the penetration depth is the same. Because of the larger face it will dump more energy easier, the wound channel will be larger, and because of the extra time spent inside the cavity it will cause more deformation of body parts. It's just my theory, so it may be wrong. IIRC there is a name-brand for that theory but I heard about it after thinking it up on my own. |
|
_________________
"I never set out to be wierd, it was always everyone else who called me it" -Frank Zappa
Speed is impressive, accuracy is deadly.
It's not that I'm not a people person, it's just that I'm not a stupid people person. |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:06 am |
|
|
| broommaster2000 |
| Moderator |
|
|
| Joined: 10 Mar 2007 |
| Posts: 5714 |
| Location: City of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
| fritz wrote: |
| I would get a weaver rail for it, Leapers sells them. |
Wouldn't do that. You can better spend your money on a good one piece mount, or good two piece mounts. But for a 15 Fpe rifle, you're not likely to break your scope unless it's really bad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:47 am |
|
|
| fritz |
| Silver Status Member |
|
|
| Joined: 25 Nov 2008 |
| Posts: 2442 |
| Location: New Jersey- outside of Philadelphia |
|
|
|
I chose to suggest a weaver rail because the quick release mounts are readily available, not so with 11mm dovetail.
What good is your gun if you have a broken scope and no way to get it off? It can be impossible to get those bolts loose with your fingers alone. I would never solely rely upon optics for sighting, too many things that can go wrong. |
|
_________________
"I never set out to be wierd, it was always everyone else who called me it" -Frank Zappa
Speed is impressive, accuracy is deadly.
It's not that I'm not a people person, it's just that I'm not a stupid people person. |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:02 am |
|
|
| broommaster2000 |
| Moderator |
|
|
| Joined: 10 Mar 2007 |
| Posts: 5714 |
| Location: City of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
| fritz wrote: |
I chose to suggest a weaver rail because the quick release mounts are readily available, not so with 11mm dovetail.
What good is your gun if you have a broken scope and no way to get it off? It can be impossible to get those bolts loose with your fingers alone. I would never solely rely upon optics for sighting, too many things that can go wrong. |
The whole idea you don't have to reset your scope with a weaver mount is very questionable. Or are we still talking about Red Dots?
Does a Diana 34 break scopes? If the scopes suck, my answer would be yes. Another + about red dots is that they're small and light. Which means less weight to throw around, which means you won't have it break down that fast. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:48 am |
|
|
| fritz |
| Silver Status Member |
|
|
| Joined: 25 Nov 2008 |
| Posts: 2442 |
| Location: New Jersey- outside of Philadelphia |
|
|
|
I'm talking about if the scope gets broken- period. If the scope, reddot, or other optical sighting device broke and you could not use the iron sights through it (and we know you can't!)... then it would render the gun useless. That is where the quick releases come in.
On a side note to Broom... I am still under the impression that by removing a scope and putting it back on- even with weaver rails will lose it's zero. Even if by just a couple clicks. |
|
_________________
"I never set out to be wierd, it was always everyone else who called me it" -Frank Zappa
Speed is impressive, accuracy is deadly.
It's not that I'm not a people person, it's just that I'm not a stupid people person. |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 7:58 am |
|
|
| broommaster2000 |
| Moderator |
|
|
| Joined: 10 Mar 2007 |
| Posts: 5714 |
| Location: City of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
| fritz wrote: |
I'm talking about if the scope gets broken- period. If the scope, reddot, or other optical sighting device broke and you could not use the iron sights through it (and we know you can't!)... then it would render the gun useless. That is where the quick releases come in.
|
Right, I misread a bit. My apologies! Yes, I agree that you might want to have back up sights ready when you go hunting. Allthough if my scope breaks down "in the field" I'm pretty sure I'm to frustrated to continue with that rifle.
There are also high scope rings with which you can use the open sights along with your scope. It doesn't work bad at all, and in that case you can use the scope for long range, and the open sights for short range.
Oh, and .22 in any spring powered rifle above 15 Fpe in my opinion, unless it's a PCP. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:29 am |
|
|
| fritz |
| Silver Status Member |
|
|
| Joined: 25 Nov 2008 |
| Posts: 2442 |
| Location: New Jersey- outside of Philadelphia |
|
|
|
I wasn't sure how well the see-thru rings would work... they seem to offer a very small field of view.
If we where in a "survival" situation, the sh!t would have already hit the fan. Leaving your gun behind would be a very dumb move. |
|
_________________
"I never set out to be wierd, it was always everyone else who called me it" -Frank Zappa
Speed is impressive, accuracy is deadly.
It's not that I'm not a people person, it's just that I'm not a stupid people person. |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
Note: If you are seeing "Please enter your username and password to log in." Your browser cookies have been reset
or you need to register to access the topic in question. Use the 'Register' button near the top left of this page.
|
