quote:

What a bummer to be on a hunt of a lifetime with a prarie dog gun, seeing a buck of a lifetime, and wounding it or not being able to take it because you didn't bring your deer rifle.

tell that to those wacky folks hunting with a bow, patched round ball or a pistol cal levergun. To me the difference between deer and a trophy of a lifetime is how full my freezer is. You buy trophies at the trophy shop, you get meat by going out into the woods and killing something.

and just for the record the deer pictured on page 1 hasn't sprang back to life and escaped the freezer.

I utterly reject your logic that carrying bigger cal will let you get by with more of a gutshot. While I do agree that effective range increases there isn't a shot I'd take inside my .223's range that I wouldn't take with my .223 that I would take with my 30-06. If the shot is good you take it if it's not you don't, IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

If you're one of those slovenly hunters who absolutely must shoot at any hair you see (even hair round the asshole) than NO a .22 centerfire is not for you, nor is anything smaller than .338 either for that matter. But if you view making a good shot as another part of the hunting experience than you'll find you're not handicapped at all with a .224 cal

What is your reason for using a .223 for big game?

Don't you own or have access to borrow something in .243 on up?

Or are the deer you're hunting there in Arkansas the size of coyotes?

quote:

tell that to those wacky folks hunting with a bow, patched round ball or a pistol cal levergun. To me the difference between deer and a trophy of a lifetime is how full my freezer is

I hunt with a bow too. I've wounded animals and it's no fun, but unfortunately it's part of bowhunting. If you are on a rifle hunt you can minimize this by choosing an appropriate caliber/bullet as shown by all of the links I have posted. It's legal to use a .223 but why would you choose it over other appropriate calibers?

quote:

I utterly reject your logic that carrying bigger cal will let you get by with more of a gutshot

Don't put words into my mouth. I never said this.

I will remind you though that Roy Weatherby purposly gutshot animals to demonstrate the lethality of his line of calibers. I don't agree in any way with what he did, but it killed African game. The point is that if you make a bad shot with an appropriate caliber/bullet, you'll have a better chance of filling your tag than if you do it with your prarie dog gun.

quote:

If you're one of those slovenly hunters who absolutely must shoot at any hair you see (even hair round the asshole) than NO a .22 centerfire is not for you, nor is anything smaller than .338 either for that matter

Of course not. Does choosing the .22 centerfire make you feel like more of a man or what? Some would consider a "hunter" who chose this caliber for big game to be the definition of a "Slob Hunter".

quote:

But if you view making a good shot as another part of the hunting experience than you'll find you're not handicapped at all with a .224 cal

As long as you're shooting off a bench with sand bags at the cranial vault of big game within 100 yards that's not moving......you're right

quote:

What is your reason for using a .223 for big game?

Because of the very light and handy rifles so chambered. The above pictured retro AR makes a marlin levergun feel like an unwieldy club by comparison. Would I carry a .223 rem 700 huntin...no way...would I carry a 6.5lb retro or m4gery in the deer woods hell yes

Don't you own or have access to borrow something in .243 on up?

Sure I do, 30-06, 7.65x53mm 30HRT,30-30, 7.62x39, 357mag and a 45win mag in the works

Or are the deer you're hunting there in Arkansas the size of coyotes?
They aren't that small but they aren't exactly large either. A 200lb deer would be very very large. Deer are not hard to kill, if pick an appropriate bullet and put it in the right place the only thing you need to worry about is where to put your knife

What firsthand experience do YOU have with using 22 center fires on deer? after all this is all the OP is interested in.

quote:

It's legal to use a .223 but why would you choose it over other appropriate calibers?

Is a 260 more apropriate than 243? if so how bout a 30-06 vs 260, what about 375H&H

See where I'm going with this. You can quote some nameless internet knowitall's till your blue in the face. But the fact of the matter is that with proper bullets dead deer on the ground say .223 IS appropriate. Your local is a large factor here, lots of northern folks don't quite comprehend how much smaller southern deer are. If you're OK with hunting whitetail in Minnesota with a 243 you can in no way (and be intellectually honest) condemn someone in Missippi using a .223

From the logic, accomplishments and outright bravado we have heard on the topic, it would appear that all other cartridges are unnecessary...the 223 will do it all..all we have to do is practice.

Good to know...

quote:

Originally posted by JonP:
From the logic, accomplishments and outright bravado we have heard on the topic, it would appear that all other cartridges are unnecessary...the .223 just about any cartridge will do it all..all we have to do is practice.

Good to know...

you do practice don't ya?

quote:

What firsthand experience do YOU have with using 22 center fires on deer? after all this is all the OP is interested in.

Absolutely none, and I plan on keeping it that way unless I'm lost in the wilderness with nothing but a .223 and I need to eat. I've seen coyotes that have run off never to be recovered shot with a .22-250 and the deer we hunt are a lot bigger and stronger than them.

quote:

Because of the very light and handy rifles so chambered. The above pictured retro AR makes a marlin levergun feel like an unwieldy club by comparison.

Rediculous! There are many light and handy rifles chambered in suitable calibers. The Browning A-Bolt TI comes to mind available in calibers up to .325 WSM weighing it at around 5.5 pounds!

If you can't handle a 7 or 8 pound rifle cuz it's chambered in a big bad caliber, you probably should start exercising!

quote:

Deer are not hard to kill, if pick an appropriate bullet and put it in the right place

I couldn't agree with you more, but what is appropriate seems to be where we disagree...

quote:

Rediculous! There are many light and handy rifles chambered in suitable calibers. The Browning A-Bolt TI comes to mind available in calibers up to .325 WSM weighing it at around 5.5 pounds!

If you can't handle a 7 or 8 pound rifle cuz it's chambered in a big bad caliber, you probably should start exercising!

and yet with a 22 or 24" bbl no sights, a $2000 price tag and the inability for rapid followups such a rifle would be just as out of place crawling through birars and creek bottoms of the arkansas ozarks making 30yd or less shots on whitetail as a marlin 1894 would be antelope hunting in in the wide open spaces of new mexico. There's more to making a quick handy rifle than just the weight!

I mean really?!?! a borderline full on custom titanium mountian rifle for stalking in the southeast.

I gotta ask where are YOU located?

quote:

If you can't handle a 7 or 8 pound rifle cuz it's chambered in a big bad caliber, you probably should start exercising!

My 30-06 is one of the infamous boat paddle stocked Ruger all weathers that doesn't weigh much more than my AR15, I love it dearly but it's not the quickest pointing or easiest thing to navigate through the underbrush even though it is quite light.

You guys seem to not have an aversion to making wild and completely incorrect assumptions about folks.

quote:

I couldn't agree with you more, but what is appropriate seems to be where we disagree...

Depending on where your are, how you hunt, what your skill level is and how patient you are this answer varies. WHY CANT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

So if an AR chambered in .223 Rem passes for a deer rifle in your book, a .410 with skeet 9's must be a great choice for Canadian geese, and your 30-06 is what you'll take to Africa for your Cape Buffalo hunt.


Be sure to post your entire name, location and such so when the next "Darwin Awards" comes out we'll be ready.

Any ballistician, writer for a respected publication, or prominent individual in the shooting industry who would champion the .223 as "a good choice for a big game rifle" would be fired and become the laughing stock of the industry

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Any ballistician, writer for a respected publication, or prominent individual in the shooting industry who would champion the .223 as "a good choice for a big game rifle" would be fired and become the laughing stock of the industry

Really????? I'll bet someone with a college degree worked on developing .233 bullets and loads such as

the barnes tsx
win PowerPoint
nosler partition
Speer tbbc
Sierra gamekings

Shall I go on? You're problem I's you're so closed minded you still think bullet technology is still stuck in the 1980,s and you think all hunting takes place in terrain in which you live (out west? You still won't answer)

don't you think it's rather hypocritical for you to brag on using a 243 on yotes at 1000yds and yet deride me for using a .223 on Bambi 30yds out????

At this point you have NO experiance it add to this subject and yet that's not stopping you from running spouting off your mal informed opinions as though they're fact.

Give us the name of one prominant individual who makes his living in the shooting, hunting, or outdoor trades industry who recommends the .223 Remington as the best choice for a big game cartridge.

I've supplied plenty of information that can easily be found to the contrary. I was taught that when you make claims in writing such as a simple paper for your high school English class, you better be able to support them with references

Nick Harvey an aussie gunwriter never had a problem with stories of shooting pigs, roos feral goats ect with .222,223's and the like.

The .223 has a Taylor index of 4.9 at 100 yards.

To humanely kill an antelope or mule deer, a rifle that has a Taylor index of a minimum of 6 is needed.

To humanely kill whitetails, the chart recommends a rifle/load with an index of 17.


I don't think it's a problem to use the .223 on the varmints you have listed...

After more searching on the net, I still have not found anybody, any site or organization that thinks the .223 is the best choice for deer or any other animals we here in NA consider big game.

I live in New Mexico, but that has no bearing. According to everything I've read duing my searches, it doesn't matter where the big game animals are. No one recommends .22 calibers as the best choice to humanely kill them.

Please feel free to post some links that prove them wrong. Especially ones that deal with physics and terminal ballistics. I've searched plenty and they all plainly show that larger caliber/bullet combinations are the way to go.

You still haven't answered my question about your goose gun. Skeet choked .410 shooting 9's just to say it can be done like the .223 for deer? With the proper shot, I'm sure it can work, but it's not the best choice

I already linked to ammo manufactures suggested game uses for several loadings. Yet you omit to notice that.... Hmmmmmm? I'll find more when I get off this iPhone and in front of a real computer

You keep rambling about some Taylor guy as if he invented hunting or some shit. Folks were killing shit with cartridges that don't meet his index of what he deems worthy a 100 before he was born.


Name one instance where myself or anyone else has claimed that .223 is "THE BEST CHOICE"

and while your at it answere the fucking question about the terrain YOU have experiance hunting!

All I've said is that .223 is a legetimate choice if you're the type of hunter who has some dicipline and hunts certian parts of the country. Nowhere have I said best. I have experiance in this subject, YOU have some shit you found using google

It's funny that your replies have degraded to the point where you have to use foul language and still can't prove your point.

The Taylor Index is just something I found on the net I thought you and everybody else who uses an unsuitable cartridge for big game might want to see.

You obviously believe the .223 is the best choice because you have chosen it over your '06.

Once you've learned to spell and compose arguments with structured sentences that can pass high school English we can continue this discussion. Until then, I'm done with you.

P.S.

By the way, from everything I've seen from you, I'd have to say you're an OBama voter.

A Daisy BB gun will work too...just gotta get close enough to club them to death

Another good source is Ed Matunas' Optimal Game Weight system found on Chuck Hawk's website as well as in the Lyman manual 47th edition.

The OGW for the .223 with a 55 grainer at 100 yards is 31 pounds. The OGW for the .243 Winchester with the 100 grainer is 294 pounds.

These are calculated with variables such as bullet weight, velocity, and bullet construction.

quote:

The OGW for the .223 with a 55 grainer at 100 yards is 31 pounds. The OGW for the .243 Winchester with the 100 grainer is 294 pounds.

suffice to say your calculations do not agree with mine using a 3000fps 69grn bullet as the input. Me thinks you're skewing your numbers.

100yds and 150 lbs that's called deer hunting in the south right there

quote:

Any ballistician, writer for a respected publication, or prominent individual in the shooting industry who would champion the .223 as "a good choice for a big game rifle" would be fired and become the laughing stock of the industry

you want examples of gun media potentates saying that .22's can be effective on deer

quote:

The good news is that there are several excellent .22-caliber bullets intended for use on larger game. They hold together, penetrate, and greatly expand the range of shots you can safely take.

(redacted for space)

Because of this, in my mind the .22 centerfires are really not suited for the larger deer, nor for trophy buck hunting anywhere. Rather, they are their best when venison is the main goal, and with absolute priority given to shot placement and presentation. Used in this fashion, the .22 centerfires will take down deer like lightning striking.

Craig Boddington

That second paragraphs sounds a lot like what I've been saying this entire time.

quote:

“The author has made the statement from time to time that the .220 Swift is the greatest one-shot killer on deer and similar game ever produced. Many letters have been received to the effect that such a statement is proof that anyone making such a statement just proves his ignorance, that he just doesn’t know what he is talking about. His opinion remains the same, which is that if 100 head of deer, for example, were to be shot with the .220 Swift (with good bullets) under average conditions and an equal number killed with a .30/06 under average conditions, that the .220 Swift would produce the most clean kills.”

P.O. Ackley ever hear of this guy?????

while I don't agree with the broad extent of his statement it does leave no doubt PO Ackley considered .22 centerfires adequate. Yes this is speaking of 220 swift, but bear in mind that the only difference between it and .223 is the 220 will just do the same things farther away.

And of course don't forget or brave boys in tan are using 5.56/.223 to hunt the most dangerous game on the planet and have been doing so for the past half century.

quote:

By the way, from everything I've seen from you, I'd have to say you're an OBama voter.

Are you serious?? where in the earth did that come from?


From what I've read of your self righteous high horse rambling opinions passed off as facts I peg you a a Ron Paul voter

and FYI I wrote in Chuck Norris because Ron Paul is an nut, McCain is a principal-less panderer and OBH is a communist.

quote:

The .223 has a Taylor index of 4.9 at 100 yards.

To humanely kill an antelope or mule deer, a rifle that has a Taylor index of a minimum of 6 is needed.

To humanely kill whitetails, the chart recommends a rifle/load with an index of 17.

You might try telling that to the 20+ of them that I've killed with 1 shot each using a .223 and none wounded or lost. You might want to go back and revisit what the "Taylor Index" is really about. You will find it has little to do with killing deer.

Larry Gibson

quote:

By the way, from everything I've seen from you, I'd have to say you're an OBama voter.

Now there's something to argue about!

Good try krochus.

You posted some quotes on ".22 cals", and didn't fulfill the requirement of "naming a prominant individual in the industry who recommends the .223 Remington as a good choice for a deer rifle".

In fact, you purposely left out Boddington's words where he tells us why it isn't a good choice in your grasping for any shred to use to back up your statement.…very similar to the way a Liberal (Obama voter) jutifies their wacky ideas… reacting from emotion and feelings, twisting existing writings so they seemingly reinforce their assertions.

I did no calculations for the OGW I quoted. If you would take the time to go to Chuck Hawk's page, you'll see it there. But then why would you? Take a chance on finding out you might be wrong? Never!

By the way, the OGW from the table for the .220 Swift with a 50 gr. bullet @ 4110 fps at 100 yards is 49 pounds.

Correction. 59 pounds

Having killed more than a few deer in my lifetime, some with the 222,223 and the 22-250 I'll have to say it just isn't that tough to kill deer and feral hogs with good hits using 22 centerfires. These rifles with good hits are just as certain to take game as this type of thread is to gather blather from the clueless.

I have started deer hunting with a 9.3x62 and love it, and I, now, believe that hunting with anything less than a .366 caliber is unethical.

Almost the same content of this thread happened when someone in biggame asked about the 243 on deer. The real hang-up is saying "BEST" choice, that's where things heat up it seems. I like to try to many differant rifles and calibers to get caught up in a best. The best one is the one in my hands when I see a deer!

It's not the phrasing of "the best" choice at all.

I've posted many links based on physics that clearly show the .223 Rem to be inadequate for medium sized game which is what the thread is about.

If you own a .30-06 and a .223 and deliberately choose the .223 to shoot deer like krochus does, you are showing that you have absolutely no understanding of terminal ballistics and have no respect or regard for the game you hunt.

Absolutely ignorant and inexcusable!!!

I guess I'm in the ignorant and inexusable group. I have both a 30-06 and a .222. I hunt some terrain for whitetails where a long shot is 50 yds. In my ignorance, I head shoot does within that range with the .222. The does (being ignorant of the Taylor index) die instantly.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Another good source is Ed Matunas' Optimal Game Weight system found on Chuck Hawk's website as well as in the Lyman manual 47th edition.

The OGW for the .223 with a 55 grainer at 100 yards is 31 pounds. The OGW for the .243 Winchester with the 100 grainer is 294 pounds.

These are calculated with variables such as bullet weight, velocity, and bullet construction.

How much did a Viet Cong weigh?

Read P.O. Ackley's books on his use and testing for the U.S. Government on the use of small caliber high velocity rounds. He was a real advocate of the .17 Mach IV on use of deer size animals. He wrote all of his stuff before the introduction of many of the premium bullet designs that we have today.

Just facts, not opinions like some of the Hammer Boy stories here that are extracted from a lack of experience that are then extrapolated out to meaningless fantasy.

Oh by the way I've killed over a thousand deer with my .223, didn't clean a one due to lack of anatomy knowledge and did finish off a whitetail doe that some imbecile shot using a .375 Mag with my trusty 80# sledge.

Actually I've done none of the above but don't need to in order to have an opinion when the OP asked for experience. In some posts here

OPINION = FACTS

It is kind of funny that instead of "is the 243 big enough for deer" threads we are now beating up the 223.

quote:

How much did a Viet Cong weigh?

Viet Cong aren't deer. Deer hide makes decent gloves. I expect you'd not be happy with Viet Cong hide gloves -- for the same reasons as bullet penetration.

Im not in the ignorant and inexcusable group---I'm in the doubly ignorant group. My nephew came over to hunt and brought his son. His son is a small built 11 year old and I was to let him use one of my rifles and make the selection for him. Did I select my .223? Heavens no. I'd be ignorant. I selected even smaller and went with .222--doubly ignorant. Now why did I do that? Well my .223 is a model 70 and my .222 is a Remington 600. I figured the smaller 600 would match up with the boys size. I also wanted to avoid what Larry Gibson accurately described--close eyes and jerk and miss or make bad hit. (Of course bad hits don't matter with non ignorant selected guns). About 10 years earlier I had made that same ignorant selection for my grandson and he took a doe with it. Surely during the 10 years the deer had become better educated, possibly read some of the posts here, and knew the .222 would not work. We were rushed for time the first day and the boy missed a deer. He had experience shooting, but had never shot that .222. The second day we had more time and took my Work Mate folding table and used it as a bench and let the boy shoot several rounds. That afternoon he shot a forked horn one side and the antler broken for a spike the other side. Not a trophy you might say? Try telling that boy that--this thing shatters all Boone & Crockett's in his eyes. Was the .222 the best choice in my safe? Of course not. Was it the best choice for this boy? He has a trophy. So his dad decided he wanted me to order the boy a CZ in .222. The .222 was not available---but .223 was, so we ordered that. Couple weeks later they came back and we took the rifle out and again used the Work Mate and the boy sighted the rifle in and got comfortable shooting it. That afternoon he got a forked horn buck. He hit it a little far forward--through both shoulders. I would never have guessed the result he got. He hit no vitals, but the deer dropped dead right there. Now I have explained my ignorance and I really have an ignorant question.. You mentioned going bow hunting---don't you have a .223? ( This is no way a knock on bow hunting. But if a person thinks a .223 is undergunned and might miss the buck of a lifetime because it's out of range for a .223---what in the world are they thinking using a bow??)
I do have a question for Krochus. We were told that there is no info anywhere on internet where .22's are recommended. You posted a link that shows what looks like a whitetail buck head as being intended game for a bullet. We know this can't be a deer--.22 wont work--so I figure it is an antlered squirrel. Do you have those in your neck of the woods--Ive never seen em?

Oh boy. A sincere "sorry" goes out to all of you who do use the .223 Remington by choice (even though you probably have a larger caliber rifle in the safe) for deer.

You know how there are misunderstandings based on semantics. I think that's what has happened here and I'm truly sorry.


After doing some more diligent research on the 'net on the subject of terminal ballistics and deer or "medium sized game", I've realized why so many disagree on this hotley contested subject.



This is the type of deer I was saying was unethical to hunt with the .223 Remington:






What I didn't realize was that these are the deer you guys shoot with the .223:







And this is alright with me! Boy am I glad we have this cleared up!

That’s funny!

After more research, I've found something that I feel compelled to report, as not to would be neglectful to the subject matter.

I scanned through the Nosler Reloading Guide #6 to the data for .223 Remington. They always have a blurb written by a gun writer at the beginning of the data to pump up the cartridge that follows. The blurb is written by Richard Mann who is touted as a "freelance writer from West Virginia".

He states that his favorite hunting bullet is the 60 grain, .22 caliber Nosler Partition. He writes that he has done extensive bullet expansion and penetration tests with this bullet and the .223 Remington at 100 yard impact velocities and they are on par with any 30-30 Winchester load even if bone is struck.

In caveat, I would stress that this is a Nosler publication and that the writer is pumping up the Nosler product. He is also from West Virginia where the deer resemble the Jackalope in my last post.

To his credit, he states that the forte of the .223 Remington is as a varmint cartridge. He also says that his hunting experience with the round was during a time when disposable income was hard to find and the rifle was all he had.

I don't doubt that with today's premium bullets that big game can be killed (as I've posted before in this thread) with the .223, but it is not the most responsible choice by any means.

quote:

Originally posted by 0X0:

quote:

How much did a Viet Cong weigh?

Viet Cong aren't deer. Deer hide makes decent gloves. I expect you'd not be happy with Viet Cong hide gloves -- for the same reasons as bullet penetration.

?????????????????????

Makes sense to me.

I think if you asked anybody in combat if they were happy with the .223 or would they want a 30 cal, they'd go with the 30.

I know I would rather be shooting the enemy with something that dismembered as opposed to something that made me track them.

[QUOTE]I do have a question for Krochus. We were told that there is no info anywhere on internet where .22's are recommended. You posted a link that shows what looks like a whitetail buck head as being intended game for a bullet. We know this can't be a deer--.22 wont work--so I figure it is an antlered squirrel. Do you have those in your neck of the woods--Ive never seen em? [/QUOTE


Hey carpetman!

Is that really the way you decide which ammo is suitable for the animal you're after?

"duh, dere's a pretty picture of a deer on da box. Must be good to shoots a deers wif"

For God's sake man, if that constitutes difinitive information on the 'net recommending the .223 Remington for deer, why did Ed Matunas and guys like Taylor go to all that trouble "ciphering?"!!!!!

There's no way you're that clueless without trying to be intentionally. The pictures on the boxes of winchesters ammo are indeed representations of what the loading is suitable for as part of win's cxp index
http://www.chuckhawks.com/cxp.htm

I believe I'll refrence the engenneers abs ballisticians employed by ammunition manufacturers before some "index" written by...........who exactly is this Taylor and what does he do and what's his field of expertice??????


Either way if his chart is half as good as you make it out to be you should be able to take it out to the woods and kill a deer just bt showing it to em. Oh wait I forgot néw mexico y'all don't know what trees are so y'all have to hunt with an ergsplittenloutenboomer cause all the animals in the state can watch you leave your house in the morning

head east some time and hunt some cover more dense than pine trees you can drive a jeep inbetween. I think you might be reevaluating that suggestion for a 325wsm titanium rifle as a brush gun

quote:

who exactly is this Taylor and what does he do and what's his field of expertice?

FYI

"Noted big game hunter and writer John Taylor thought that the kinetic energy equation gave too much credit to the new high velocity cartridges. Taylor, who spent a good many years in Mozambique, did a great deal of shooting and some commercial ivory hunting. He wrote a book entitled African rifles and Cartridges in which he pushed the British big-bore viewpoint. He thought these new cartridges, which fired a lightweight bullet at high velocity, gave too much importance to bullet velocity. Looking at the kinetic energy equation it can be seen that a small increase in velocity means a large increase in the kinetic energy because this energy increases as the square of the velocity. He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.

In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine, Taylor gave several examples of how the heavier bullet knocked big game animals cold while the lighter faster bullet, in many cases, only dazed the animal for a few seconds. Taylor's energy equation is listed below:

TI = bw/7000*v*DI (2)

Where:
TI = Taylor Index
bw = Bullet weight, grs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
DI = Bullet diameter, inches

Taylor's equation includes the bullet diameter, velocity and bullet weight. Since the velocity term is not squared it has less impact on TI energy as compared to the kinetic energy equation."

I only copied part of the page you can click on the link below and read the whole page for yourself.

http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/July02.htm