223 for Mule deer

16 October 2009, 21:29

Doc224/375

Persons using a .223 or " ANY " cartridge under .243 for shooting mule deer ( FYI I consider a 6mm Bottom of the heap for Mule deer , as 44 years of Hunting experiences have proven it too ME !.)

Also FYI I don't hunt with a camera never have never will !. I've taken pictures of others hunting and visa versa .

My pack W/ water food knife binoculars block tackle first aid matches flashlight jacket is about all I'm willing to carry besides my Rifle & Pistol .

I don't hunt in some flat farm field 4 blocks from the house and ATV'S stay at camp , until needed and then 85% of the time are near worthless getting too the carcass . Yes I hunt in Mule Country !!!.

19 October 2009, 06:26

merlinron

.223 for any deer.... this is ridiculous.... hey, can i use one on elk?

19 October 2009, 07:51

rolltop

quote:
Originally posted by merlinron:
.223 for any deer.... this is ridiculous.... hey, can i use one on elk?

I'll bet some here have killed thousands of elk with a .223

19 October 2009, 12:16

seafire2

quote:
Originally posted by Hot Core:
Well well well, your above "quote" does not contain anything about 200# Deer nor 3300fps. So, you just proved yourself to be the same as "my hero" teanScum - a Lying sack of obummer.

All the Kills I made with the various weight Bullets in the 243Wins showed me the LARGER Diameter Calibers Killed cleaner and with more authority. I realize you don't have a clue as to what I'm talking about. That is because you are simply a Lying blowhard with Zero first-hand Experience.

Jeesh...next thing you know, HOTCore will be calling you even dirtier names.... Like calling you a Democrat!

19 October 2009, 13:17

Hamish

Gidday Guys,

Some people talk about it and others just shutup and do it.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

19 October 2009, 17:52

Jimmy P Coaltrain

Someone start this one I cannot stop laughing long enough to do it...Should you use the .223 70 grain TSX for Grizzly Bear or is the 62 grain enough.......

19 October 2009, 19:33

gunmaker

My first deer (mulie) weighed around 500# on the hoof. If this was the average weight for these critters, I probably wouldn't grab my 204 or 223 as a first choice. At the time I was using a borrowed 300WinMag and hunting in Colorado. The 300 was plenty of gun for a backstrap shot at 30 yards. Needless to say, he didn't run off.

20 October 2009, 04:49

bartsche

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gunmaker:
My first deer (mulie) weighed around 500# on the hoof. QUOTE]
bsflag

Well there you have it. Now look to the record books. We have a troll!!!

roger

20 October 2009, 04:51

MickinColo

quote:
Originally posted by gunmaker:
My first deer (mulie) weighed around 500# on the hoof. If this was the average weight for these critters, I probably wouldn't grab my 204 or 223 as a first choice. At the time I was using a borrowed 300WinMag and hunting in Colorado. The 300 was plenty of gun for a backstrap shot at 30 yards. Needless to say, he didn't run off.

Man! that was one monster Mulie.

20 October 2009, 05:10

seafire2

quote:
Originally posted by Hamish:
Gidday Guys,

Some people talk about it and others just shutup and do it.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

and some don't do it and never shut up about it..

by the way Hamish...good to see you popping in...

missed ya around the old forums here...

20 October 2009, 07:33

gunmaker

quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
Now look to the record books. We have a troll!!! roger

I really don't care if you believe me or not. I'm not talking field dressed weight here. We had 3 guys with a combined weight of over 580# on a hay bale pulley and I (190#) was climbing up the rope. We could barely lift the deer off the ground. After we got it off the ground another guy tied it to the grill guard of my Toyota truck. This is the only way I have to judge the weight, so take it for what it's worth. The land owner instructed me that he would gut it hanging upside down. He had hunted there his whole life and had never seen a larger bodied deer. It's too bad the rack didn't match the body size. A friend dug the teeth out to try and age the deer and guessed around 7 1/2-8 1/2 years. I've seen a pic of a whitetail in Iowa on a scale that weighed 440# field dressed. That pic looked to be 75+ years old. Pretty fat claim Roger to say I'm trolling with this. Look up some record weights and get back to the discussion with them. The book I saw the big whitetail in had records of much larger deer than I'm estimating I shot.

update:
just a quick google found this:
supposedly a whitetail taken by Carl. J Lenander from Minnesota. With a weight of 402 lbs. field dressed and an estimated live weight of 511 lbs! Just goes to show how big MN Bucks are...

However, in 1938, Hunter weighed a huge mule deer buck taken by Laurence Rowe near Ellens Park, Colorado, at a hog- dressed weight of 410 pounds with an estimated live weight 522.75#

If I was hunting deer this size on a regular basis, It wouldn't be with a 223.

20 October 2009, 08:16

DannoBoone

There's certainly a LOT of talk about under-powered
cartridges for deer, but hardly ever any about
using too much rifle. A 300 Win Mag on a deer is
like using a .50 BMG on an elk. "Overkill"
anyone? My Dad, brother, and I shot dozens (they
beat me out on number count, cuz I moved to Iowa)
of mulies with the .22-250, most of which were
one shot, down within 50yds. The more powerful
.22-250 gets poo-pooed in many forums just as the
.223 is getting here. None of us ever lost a
single deer by shooting with our "underpowered"
.224 Hornady 55gr SP's. It just galls my balls
when anyone claims that enough power is needed
to get through several inches of flesh. THAT
is slob-hunting.

I passed a shot on a deer this afternoon
because I could not get a good shot through
the boiler room.......others who shoot through
several inches of flesh COULD do the same. Here
in Iowa, I'm limited to a ML because I refuse
to use a slug-gun. So I'm using 200gr bullets
in a smokeless .45 ML. Even though this thing
pushes bullets 2600-2800fps, there are those
in some ML crowds saying THIS is underpowered!
I should be using 300gr bullets!!

There is a cannon mentality out there!

20 October 2009, 08:50

gunmaker

Danno
I'd have to agree with the over gun statement. I borrowed the 300win because I couldn't shoot my 22-250 in Colorado and I didn't have another rifle. While there I did see someone shoot a Mulie in the neck with a 22mag @ around 60yards a split second after the licensed hunter shot him in the boiler room with a 270. While helping skin it out we found the 22Mag hollow point bullet just underneath the skin and it didn't even penetrate through the fat to the neck muscle. The HP didn't expand at all either. While I can't claim those who say the 22RF kills deer are full of it, I'd guess more deer run off than fall over.

21 October 2009, 06:25

bartsche

quote:
Originally posted by gunmaker:
quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
Now look to the record books. We have a troll!!! roger

I really don't care if you believe me or not. I'm not talking field dressed weight here. We had 3 guys with a combined weight of over 580# on a hay bale pulley and I (190#) was climbing up the rope. We could barely lift the deer off the ground. After we got it off the ground another guy tied it to the grill guard of my Toyota truck. This is the only way I have to judge the weight, so take it for what it's worth. The land owner instructed me that he would gut it hanging upside down. He had hunted there his whole life and had never seen a larger bodied deer. It's too bad the rack didn't match the body size. A friend dug the teeth out to try and age the deer and guessed around 7 1/2-8 1/2 years. I've seen a pic of a whitetail in Iowa on a scale that weighed 440# field dressed. That pic looked to be 75+ years old. Pretty fat claim Roger to say I'm trolling with this. Look up some record weights and get back to the discussion with them. The book I saw the big whitetail in had records of much larger deer than I'm estimating I shot.

update:
just a quick google found this:
supposedly a whitetail taken by Carl. J Lenander from Minnesota. With a weight of 402 lbs. field dressed and an estimated live weight of 511 lbs! Just goes to show how big MN Bucks are...

However, in 1938, Hunter weighed a huge mule deer buck taken by Laurence Rowe near Ellens Park, Colorado, at a hog- dressed weight of 410 pounds with an estimated live weight 522.75#

If I was hunting deer this size on a regular basis, It wouldn't be with a 223.

I'll even grant you that these two case are coorrect. They are , however, a true rareity, and it is sad you do not have substantiated information on your deer. I lived in Colorado and killed big deer when they were aboundant. I never ,however, estimated any that I or anyone with me killed that would tip the scales at 500 pounds. Not only are these rare but I nor anyone I know has ever seen or heard of one.
While living in this country I did carry a 22 caliber rifle and as earlier pointed out it was not the best rifle to chose for mule deer size game and that was the statement I was agreeing to. Mule deer ? .223 ? Shine it on*** not the best choice.

roger

21 October 2009, 16:25

perry

quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
quote:
Originally posted by stillbeeman:
Anybody that tries to draw a parallel between arkansawing a deer from a helicopter with a AR15 in .223 and sports hunting with the same cartridge is really reaching. ***

Killing is killing. It doesn't matter if you're sitting in a helicoter or wearing orange. They knew what it would take to kill these animals and they used it.

Totally regretable belief.Try hitting a 9" stationery paper plate at 100 yds. while someone is pulling you in a wagon; none less a helicopter.
Does any one think the shot from the helicopter would be made only at deer standing still?
Again, the idea that shooting mule deer from a helicopter qualifies the .223 as a mule deer hunting rifle has no validity. Poor example.
Now if you get your rocks off contradicting, critisizing, argueing and name calling I guess you came to the right couple of threads. roger

Not to fuel the fire here but as one who HAS shot and killed HUNDREDS of animals from a helo it is very attainable to achieve accurate shooting with very precise kills. Bartsche you are 180* wrong on your assumption.

Perry

22 October 2009, 06:00

bartsche

quote:
Originally posted by perry:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TC1:
[QUOTE

Not to fuel the fire here but as one who HAS shot and killed HUNDREDS of animals from a helo it is very attainable to achieve accurate shooting with very precise kills. Bartsche you are 180* wrong on your assumption.

Perry

You did fuel the fire because I really do have a problem with that. In younger days I hunted with a bunch of cow boys that couldn't hit squat leaning against a tree. Substitute the helo for the tree and your saying a well placed shot can be made. Me thinks that's a little bit of a strech.

roger

22 October 2009, 06:56

gunmaker

I think the use of a smaller caliber can make a better hunter. Working within it's limitations means not taking 600 yard shots. Kind of like throwing sharp sticks at deer. Would you take a 100 yrd shot with a bow & arrow? Those who are consistently successful with a 223 aren't hunting in the "if it's brown it's down" mindset. Thinking that some magic caliber will make the sloppy larger caliber shooters somehow better hunters is just as brilliant as thinking nobama deserves a Nobel prize for good intentions.

22 October 2009, 07:36

TC1

Roger, why would you assume because the people you assosiate with can't shoot nobody else can?

Terry

22 October 2009, 07:44

perry

quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
quote:
Originally posted by perry:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TC1:
[QUOTE

Not to fuel the fire here but as one who HAS shot and killed HUNDREDS of animals from a helo it is very attainable to achieve accurate shooting with very precise kills. Bartsche you are 180* wrong on your assumption.

Perry

You did fuel the fire because I really do have a problem with that. In younger days I hunted with a bunch of cow boys that couldn't hit squat leaning against a tree. Substitute the helo for the tree and your saying a well placed shot can be made. Me thinks that's a little bit of a strech. roger

So to clarify...Are you saying a well placed shot can not be made from a helo?

Perry

22 October 2009, 09:44

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
quote:
Originally posted by stillbeeman:
Anybody that tries to draw a parallel between arkansawing a deer from a helicopter with a AR15 in .223 and sports hunting with the same cartridge is really reaching. ***

Killing is killing. It doesn't matter if you're sitting in a helicoter or wearing orange. They knew what it would take to kill these animals and they used it.

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
Roger, why would you assume because the people you assosiate with can't shoot nobody else can?

Terry

Terry, why do you assume anything, particularly that you have anything to contribute to the conversation? Do you now have an opinion about shooting from a helo? Have you ever done it? Have you ever shot a mule deer?

KB

22 October 2009, 12:47

TC1

I didn't assume anything KB, I asked Roger a question so there would be no need to assume on my part.

Just a little tip for ya KB. Reading comprehension is fundamental to participate in these forums. Without it you will continue to look like an idiot. I would prefer not to banter with you on every thread. It's like poking a retard with stick and I get no pleasure out of it.

I see you couldn't leave me on ignore more than 24 hours. I do understand though. I have a magnetic personality and deep down you know I'm right even if you can't quite bring yourself to admit it

. You got your feelings hurt and we all know you can't control yourself. We understand. Now try real hard to get over yourself. We already have.

Terry

22 October 2009, 13:24

Hamish

Gidday Guys,

As I posted on the 1000 deer thread, this has been done so much here that it isn.t considered anything special.

John I have been lurking but we have been fighting a few big issues here in NZ with regard to heli-hunting 1080 and access to public hunting areas so have had my hands full. It is good to see things havn't changed too much and people are still passionate about shootin, hunting and their vission of how they would like things to be.

Without passion our sport will not survive so its good to see you still get fired up Hotcore, even though you are wrong mate

Just keep the bigger share of the invective and bile for those who would put an end to our sport.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

22 October 2009, 16:58

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by Hamish:
Gidday Guys,

Just keep the bigger share of the invective and bile for those who would put an end to our sport.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
I didn't assume anything KB, I asked Roger a question so there would be no need to assume on my part.

Just a little tip for ya KB. Reading comprehension is fundamental to participate in these forums. Without it you will continue to look like an idiot. I would prefer not to banter with you on every thread. It's like poking a retard with stick and I get no pleasure out of it.

I see you couldn't leave me on ignore more than 24 hours. I do understand though. I have a magnetic personality and deep down you know I'm right even if you can't quite bring yourself to admit it . You got your feelings hurt and we all know you can't control yourself. We understand. Now try real hard to get over yourself. We already have.
Terry

Seems as though Mr. Hamish has some good advice.

Terry, in addition to the simple questions I asked in my previous post, now I'm wondering who you are referring to by using "we" in your inflamed response. Maybe gunmaker, and a mouse in your pocket?

I'm still curious about the answers so we know your qualifications to post an opinion on this subject. At this point it looks like your are merely trolling again. If you don't like bantering with me, then don't.

KB

22 October 2009, 18:05

TC1

What opinions have I given other than the .223 kills deer and you're an idiot? I believe I'm on solid ground with both statments.

The obvious escapes you but that's nothing new.

Terry

22 October 2009, 20:52

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:

Killing is killing. It doesn't matter if you're sitting in a helicoter or wearing orange. They knew what it would take to kill these animals and they used it.

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
Roger, why would you assume because the people you assosiate with can't shoot nobody else can?

Terry

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
What opinions have I given other than the .223 kills deer and you're an idiot? I believe I'm on solid ground with both statments.

The obvious escapes you but that's nothing new.

Terry

Opinions stated by TC1:
1. Killing is killing
2. doesn't matter if sitting in a helicoter
3. or wearing orange
4. they knew
5. Roger's associates can't shoot
6. That roger assumed
7. KB is an idiot
8. You believe you are on solid ground
9. The obvious escapes me
10. that's nothing new

22 October 2009, 21:45

bartsche

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
Roger, why would you assume because the people you assosiate with can't shoot nobody else can?
Terry

Terry , do you assume that the people I have shot with are the only ones that can't shoot? I don't think you missed the point I think you chose to do a little refocusing. ( Spin Doctoring again ). You really are good at this type thing.

roger

22 October 2009, 22:58

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:
quote:
Originally posted by perry:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TC1:
[QUOTE

Not to fuel the fire here but as one who HAS shot and killed HUNDREDS of animals from a helo it is very attainable to achieve accurate shooting with very precise kills. Bartsche you are 180* wrong on your assumption.

Perry

You did fuel the fire because I really do have a problem with that. In younger days I hunted with a bunch of cow boys that couldn't hit squat leaning against a tree. Substitute the helo for the tree and your saying a well placed shot can be made. Me thinks that's a little bit of a strech. roger

No spin or opinion here Roger. I'm not assuming anything other than you wrote that for a reason. That's why I asked the question. The people in Canada have done it out of a helo and yes I would tend to believe they were confident enough in thier abilities to do the job at hand. Perry say,'s he's done it and Hamish say's it's done in NZ enough not to question it's effectiveness.

KB, your last post only makes my point.

Terry

22 October 2009, 23:36

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:

KB, your last post only makes my point

Terry

Which point is that? Your opinions, or some of the few facts you mixed in, or some of the opinions you misstated as fact? Or is it your lack of experience on the topic that is the point?

KB

22 October 2009, 23:42

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by Kabluewy:
quote:
Originally posted by TC1:

KB, your last post only makes my point

Terry

Which point is that? Your opinions, or some of the few facts you mixed in, or some of the opinions you misstated as fact? Or is it your lack of experience on the topic that is the point?

KB

No, the point that arguing with you is like poking a retard with a stick.

Terry

23 October 2009, 01:39

trouthunterdj

I am going to get back to the post.

The 223 is perfectly viable round for mule deer and antelope. I have used it out "west" 3 times. And have seen several more shot. We have yet to see one "run off".

My cousin works for Alaska Game and Fish and said that the 223 and 222 were highly valued by the Natives for both Caribou and seals. Both rounds are cheap to shoot don't destroy alot of meat and are accurate.

Just my thoughts,

ddj

23 October 2009, 01:46

Kabluewy

Good post Trout hunter,

I have several friends who successfully use the 223 for sitka deer, etc, and when I lived up North, I noticed that the 223 was perhaps the most favored round by natives, just as your cousin described.

KB

23 October 2009, 01:52

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
quote:
Originally posted by Kabluewy:
quote:
Originally posted by TC1:

KB, your last post only makes my point

Terry

Which point is that? Your opinions, or some of the few facts you mixed in, or some of the opinions you misstated as fact? Or is it your lack of experience on the topic that is the point?

KB

No, the point that arguing with you is like poking a retard with a stick.

Terry

In addition to the above mentioned questions regarding your opinions, and the basis for them, now I'm wondering what experience you have with retards, and also what experience do you have in poking sticks at them, in order to form such an opinion? Do you do that on a regular basis? Maybe you show up at special olympic events either as a participant - pretending perhaps, just to poke sticks at the other contestants, or trip them? If so, please tell us about it.

23 October 2009, 04:49

bartsche

[QUOTE]Originally posted by trouthunterdj:
I am going to get back to the post.

The 223 is """perfectly""" viable round for mule deer and antelope. bsflag

My cousin works for Alaska Game and Fish and said that the 223 and 222 were highly valued by the Natives for both Caribou and seals.

Those natives also use the 30-30 for polar bear. OK

roger Not the """best choice for either and that is the point.

roger

23 October 2009, 05:07

MickinColo

It’s my understanding that before the 222 and 223, the 22 Hornet was their "choice of caliber" (not necessarily their choice but the choice of the government).

23 October 2009, 05:26

Kabluewy

quote:
Originally posted by bartsche:

Those natives also use the 30-30 for polar bear. OK roger
roger

They also use/used the 223 for bear, and probably the hornet too.

The local gunshop owner was telling me that he sells a lot of the rimfire .17 rifles to natives because some want to use it on caribou, and wolves, etc. I think such use is for shooting bou in the river, right beside the boat, and wolves after they run them down with snow machines.

KB
KB