fox rifle

[kjd]

Seniority over what in this case?

[native hunter]

Where's the popcorn.!!!

[trevort]

I can see this heading downhill now

[Stalker]

My post has been misunderstood. When I said a lot has changed, I meant in general, not in relation to foxes or the 17Rem. A lot has changed in that fox pelts are not worth what they once were and new claibres are available not just .204. Every calibre has it's merit and some are better for certain things. I kill foxes, I haven't used a 17 Rem, the .204 kills foxes easily out to 350m. I recommended that calibre from experience. A lot has changed since the days of blokes with rifles shooting foxes for pelts and selling them.

[HiWall]

You are doing OK P, I forgot what I had for breakfast before I forgot to eat it!

[Rinso]

My post has been misunderstood. When I said a lot has changed, I meant in general, not in relation to foxes or the 17Rem. A lot has changed in that fox pelts are not worth what they once were and new claibres are available not just .204. Every calibre has it's merit and some are better for certain things. I kill foxes, I haven't used a 17 Rem, the .204 kills foxes easily out to 350m. I recommended that calibre from experience. A lot has changed since the days of blokes with rifles shooting foxes for pelts and selling them.

Mate,
I would say that no not a lot has changed really I spent a great many hours, far more than I would care to count in fact shooting and skinning foxs in the freezing cold here in Bathurst and Oberon areas. I remember my shooting buddy and I getting 20 - 30 a nite and they were bringing $40-45 which was good money considering a Tikka M55 deluxe in 17 Rem retailed for around $400 then.

Anyway back to the point the calibre of choice of any serious fox shooter was the 17 either 17 Rem or an M4 the idea of using a 222 was horrific. There was a reason for this and that was very simple, you could get a 17 pill to stay inside the fox, which meant you had a single pin hole in the the skin from bullet entry and that was all the damage you did.

Add to that the flat shooting and yes you can go to 300 plus with a 17Rem. It was also an emphatic killer, having a small 17 cal pill hit you at 3000+ FPS and explode inside your head or chest is apparently a really bad thing if your a fox.

Now I have said for a long time that the 204 is only a 17Rem on steriods and I stand by that, would it stay inside a fox like a 17 does? I cant say and dont care really. If I was to go fox shooting for cash I would grab a 17 everytime.

[ogre6br]

You are doing OK P, I forgot what I had for breakfast before I forgot to eat it!

now thats sad

I'm not that bad- but you just have to look in your gunsafe to feel good- you have some nice toys

TrevorT- you have seen what I'm like in the morning- not plesant is it- and i have only that and worse to look fwd to as the disease progreses

back on topic- is anyone even buying skins?? what are they paying per skin- for a full fur winter fox pegged out

Last I heard it was less than $15- but that was when you were getting $10 bounty for the tail as well so thats a fair few years back- I have only paddock Pizza'd foxes since they got rid of the bounty
I'm and the shittest skinner under the sun- I did more damage to the skin- skinning the bloody thing than I did shooting it

P

[GriMo]

I'm and the shittest skinner under the sun- I did more damage to the skin- skinning the bloody thing than I did shooting it

P

You can take the shit claim. ill take the slow claim. Takes me forever to skin a cat, but worth it in the end.

[Stalker]

My post has been misunderstood. When I said a lot has changed, I meant in general, not in relation to foxes or the 17Rem. A lot has changed in that fox pelts are not worth what they once were and new claibres are available not just .204. Every calibre has it's merit and some are better for certain things. I kill foxes, I haven't used a 17 Rem, the .204 kills foxes easily out to 350m. I recommended that calibre from experience. A lot has changed since the days of blokes with rifles shooting foxes for pelts and selling them.

Mate,
I would say that no not a lot has changed really I spent a great many hours, far more than I would care to count in fact shooting and skinning foxs in the freezing cold here in Bathurst and Oberon areas. I remember my shooting buddy and I getting 20 - 30 a nite and they were bringing $40-45 which was good money considering a Tikka M55 deluxe in 17 Rem retailed for around $400 then.

Anyway back to the point the calibre of choice of any serious fox shooter was the 17 either 17 Rem or an M4 the idea of using a 222 was horrific. There was a reason for this and that was very simple, you could get a 17 pill to stay inside the fox, which meant you had a single pin hole in the the skin from bullet entry and that was all the damage you did.

Add to that the flat shooting and yes you can go to 300 plus with a 17Rem. It was also an emphatic killer, having a small 17 cal pill hit you at 3000+ FPS and explode inside your head or chest is apparently a really bad thing if your a fox.

Now I have said for a long time that the 204 is only a 17Rem on steriods and I stand by that, would it stay inside a fox like a 17 does? I cant say and dont care really. If I was to go fox shooting for cash I would grab a 17 everytime.

Hey mate, when were you going out shooting foxes for skins and selling them for $40-$45???? What year?

[Rinso]

Hey mate, when were you going out shooting foxes for skins and selling them for $40-$45???? What year?

Back in the 80's mate as I recall the prices peaked around 1986-88

[frakka]

.......and we know the 243 can't be toppled from that (sic) Godlike position........

Amen

[Aussie steve]

I have shot foxes with a .17 ackley hornet, a .17 rem and a .204, and I'm dyin to get my hands on a sako .17 Mach IV shane has done for me. I can say that if you want to keep the pelts, a .17 with fragile 20 or 25 grain bullets is the best option. I wouldnt use the hornady 25 grain HP for serious skin work, as I've had a few exit on broadside shots leaving a hole as large as caused by .222 or .22-250, though they work really well on head shots and front on chest shots. I would perhaps try the 25 grain Berger as they are supposed to be softer or either weight Vmax, which have worked well for me with no exits esp the 20 grain. I'd seriously forget about ever shooting them for skins with a .204, as even the soft bullets like the Bergers leave massive holes.

I once shot a fox at close to 350 yards, I aimed at the eyes and the bullet hit a fraction below the bottom jaw. The bullet blew a fist sized hole out the back of the neck, tore the pelt to bits and made a general mess of things. The trouble is even a really soft 40 grain bullet will penetrate further and cause more damage than a 25 grain bullet, and a fox is not solid enough to pull up these larger bullets, and at closer rangers its worse. Under 100 meters I cant tell the difference between either a 32 grain at 4150, a 40 grain bullet at 3900 from the .204 or a 50 grainer at 3800 from a .22-250. I dont see the need to re-invent the wheel, what worked back in the 80's will work today, only we have better bullets and better powders to choose from.

Cheers

Steve

[270]

Pro shooters fox rifle of choice was the .17 Rem, plenty of grunt and little fur damage. Nothing has changed!!

Actually what has changed is that you cant get the remington projectiles anymore, in my experience they always stayed inside, but the hornadys would sometimes really blow the shit out of a pelt.
I dont touch the stinking things any more

[Stalker]

Hey mate, when were you going out shooting foxes for skins and selling them for $40-$45???? What year?

Back in the 80's mate as I recall the prices peaked around 1986-88

Well that just proves my point. A lot has changed since the late 80's hasn't it. Pelts aren't worth a buck, properties harder to gain access to, a lot more shooters around etc etc etc... This is what I meant HiWall and Grimo, you know by my " A lot has changed comment".

[kjd]

Hey mate, when were you going out shooting foxes for skins and selling them for $40-$45???? What year?

Back in the 80's mate as I recall the prices peaked around 1986-88

Well that just proves my point. A lot has changed since the late 80's hasn't it. Pelts aren't worth a buck, properties harder to gain access to, a lot more shooters around etc etc etc... This is what I meant HiWall and Grimo, you know by my " A lot has changed comment".

But what has that got to do with shooting foxes for pelts mate?