quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I have no experience
I have an opinon about it

Thanks for your opinion
KB

concerning the topic
I have experience
I don't need an opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
concerning the topic
I have experience
I don't need an opinion.

Are you telling us that you have no opinions, despite this vast experience you claim? Are you one of those guys who have few opinions, because to you what you think/believe is fact. So, you can't distinguish opinion from fact?

You have little experience with me, and yet apparantly you have an opinion, or is it a fact to you? What little experience I have with you, combined with other life's experience with similar arshwholes, has clearly given me basis to form an opinion.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
MickinColo

Taylor's "Knock ot values" are for head shots on elephant. To applie them to heart lung shots on deer is an "apples/oranges" scenario. I have shot numerous deer in the head with a .223 and I can assure you they are more than "knocked out".

Larry Gibson

BTW; the largest mulie deer I've shot (mount is hanging on my living room wall and not quite as large as the one pictured but a very nice on anyway) was shot with a .223 using a 62 gr Winchester PP. The gutted and skinned carcass weighed just short of 200 lbs at the butchers(somewhat larger than the average Viet Cong - I've shot those also). It was not quite 220 yards away and was a one shot kill. The rifle was a Colt AR15.

Taylor's Index or "knock out values" are for "bang-flop" type reactions on game or the caliber/bullet combos that will most likely get that result.


As he states,

quote:

Of course we all know that a 22 Long Rifle can kill a deer just as dead as the 416 Rigby, but how close did you have to get to fire a clean shot and how long did you have to track the deer before it dropped? By using the TI values from Table 2.0, as a guide, the hunting experience should be more pleasant for the hunter and more humane for the game animal.

If I would have shot the big muley I've spoken about with a .223 and even the largest bullet available for it, it would have run all the way to Colorado before it died and I would have never found it. It ran 75 or more yards after a 25 yard shot with a 180 grain Accubond, quartering away from right to left, into the rib cage and out the right chest under the neck between the shoulders.


You .223 deer-shooting goobers don't seem to realize that this is the crux of the argument.

I think AzGuy summed it up in one word in his addition to the thread:

quote:

223 on medium game.....??? Why..??

And no, krochus, I didn't have my hat in my hand asking for any forgiveness from anyone on the other side here (AKA boneheads that don't have enough respect for the game they hunt to "use enough gun" to insure the quickest dispatch possible to the game animal), I was just explaining my interest in the topic was due to being cooped up in the house with a cold. I chose a side and played.

I could have chosen your side too and made a more valid argument than you could even though the preponderance of the evidence weighs on the other side. All you had to do was show a picture of the jackalope as an example of the deer you shoot and it would be understood.


The pure-as-the-driven-snow side and side of all-that-is-right-and-good! Ha!

As I said before..

quote:

Whether the 223 is adequate in well practiced hands is really not the question. A 7mm in well practiced hands is MORE adequate and carries more energy down range

Clearly, shooting 250lb game with a 223 (we've had the same discussions around 17 and 204 calibers)is all about the "sport" and less about the killing....sort of like a contest...

quote:

BTW; the largest mulie deer I've shot (mount is hanging on my living room wall and not quite as large as the one pictured but a very nice on anyway) was shot with a .223 using a 62 gr Winchester PP. The gutted and skinned carcass weighed just short of 200 lbs at the butchers

Congratulations...there are stories of lions being killed with a spear too...so what?

The 223 is NOT the best tool for the job. EVERYONE here agrees with that. It can be done..so what?

I'll continue to go hunting with the best tool for the job...and gladly give up bragging rights to those that need them. I suspect that those that brag about killing there deer with a 223, 17HMR, 204 etc are seen pretty much as idiots by most hunters anyway. Shooting the biggest animal with the smallest caliber is about "sport"....I don't consider hunting to be sport.

This subject is 100% agreement and no controversy--boring. Please post on mmy thread about using .25ACP maybe we can get some flames going.

rcamuglia

You really do need to read your Taylor a little more correctly. If you'd bother to read his African Rifles and Cartridges, Chapter 1, Definitions and details you will find he is referring to hunting large dangerous game at close quarters. With regards to small bores on smaller game he states;

"In the case of soft-skinned non-dangerous game, such as generally shot at medium and long ranges, theoretical mathematical energy may possibly prove a more reliable guide (referring to his Index of Knock Out Values), provided a suitable weight of bullet is chosen for for the weight of animal against which is to be used."

He further states;

"I have only worked out the Knock-Out value of certain small bores to show that they can not be considered safe weapons to take against dangerous game at close quarters in thick cover...."

He goes on discussing what will drop elephants and other dangerous game or at least stun them with a head/brain shot. Any one who really reads Taylors writings about his Knock Out Values understands this.

Deer are generally not considered dangerous game, even at close quarters.

The big mulie I shot died where he was laying.

The resort to name calling gives us a perspective of your ability to reason. You are stuck on your opinion, so be it. That the rest of us do kill deer with cartridges that are "wanting" according to Taylors Knock Out Values apparently upset you. BTW, I do have a good selection of larger cartridges to use and I most often do use them out of choice. However, simply because of my choice I do not think that smaller cartridges such as the .223 are not quite capable of humanely killing deer when used by responsible hunters.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Clearly, shooting 250lb game with a 223 (we've had the same discussions around 17 and 204 calibers)is all about the "sport" and less about the killing....sort of like a contest...


quote:
BTW; the largest mulie deer I've shot (mount is hanging on my living room wall and not quite as large as the one pictured but a very nice on anyway) was shot with a .223 using a 62 gr Winchester PP. The gutted and skinned carcass weighed just short of 200 lbs at the butchers


Congratulations...there are stories of lions being killed with a spear too...so what?

The 223 is NOT the best tool for the job

Thanks for adding more sanity to the argument at the risk of being lumped in with Hitler and Tojo!

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by perry:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
You do the math. What kind of twist rate does it take for the 70gr TSX 223?

Talking about the 70 gr TSX is mostly hypothetical BS, because it won't work well (stabilize) in most 223s.

KB

Your an idiot and just proved that this is an emotional argument for you. Given statistical/mathematical fact you throw it out based on the rifle??? WTF. If you can't keep up with the intellectual level of this conversation keep your dumb ass comments to your self. RIGHT BULLET RIGHT PLACE. Yes, a varmint bullet in ANY caliber is inadequate for medium sized game HOWEVER that has nothing to do with my previous comments. Try to keep up

Perry

p.s. I apologize to most of you guys, I don't believe in mouthing off behind a keyboard.

Just so I understand - this is an emotional argument for whom? Just when did this become intellectual? Since you joined the frakus?

And just when did the rifle and twist rate get excluded from this intellectual debate? Seems to me the rifle/bullet combo is all part of it. However, in this case another factor appears to me to be part of it - namely the mindset of the shooter. If ya balieve it, then it's true - right?

Oh, so when given a fact, now you say it's the right bullet in the right place, etc. So does that mean your comment about the 70gr TSX was just fluff? Apparantly we are in agreement, and most of 223 guys just use on deer what they normally use in the 223 - varmint bullets. You have an odd way of agreeing in this intellectual debate.

Maybe we'll start calling you fluffy.

Do you often mouth off, as you say, when you get emotional behind the keyboard? If you slobber and drool when you're like that - then I suggest that you back off from the keyboard a little.

KB

"70gr TSX just fluff" Don't follow you there.
I have killed hundreds of animals with the 70gr TSX and stated so in previous posts...that counts as experience...right???

The intellectual aspect is the FACT that the 70gr TSX works everytime it is tried...when placed where it should be. That being the case how is the 223 inadequate?

No droolin' here. You called the facts BS...that does cause me to bang the keyboard a bit.

Perry

quote:

Originally posted by perry:

"70gr TSX just fluff" Don't follow you there.
I have killed hundreds of animals with the 70gr TSX and stated so in previous posts...that counts as experience...right???

The intellectual aspect is the FACT that the 70gr TSX works everytime it is tried...when placed where it should be. That being the case how is the 223 inadequate?

Perry

Hundreds -- of animals -- would that be deer?

Every time it is tried -- would that be every time you have tried it, or when anyone tried it?

Placed where it should be -- would that be head shots?

How is the 223 inadequate? I think we missed some point here. I think most agree that the 223 will adequately kill deer in the right circumstance. The "right" circumstance is debatable. Perhaps most agree that the 70gr TSX will more "adequately" kill deer than the lesser bullets, especially varmint bullets.

However, the question is how many actually can and do use the optimum bullets for the task, in a cartridge that is marginal. I say that most goobers who use the 223 aren't concerned with ethics, or they wouldn't be hunting deer with the 223 in the first place.

I'm talking about the guys who think this 223 is some kind of magic wand, and make little distinction between varmint bullets, compared to those most likely to hold together, and who have little idea what 200 yds does to the energy of the 223 compared to what it's doing at 100 yds.

Sure there are some who respect the limitations of the cartridge, like perhaps you and TC1, but I think you are vastly outnumbered but the numbnuts, and in a way by advocating this cartridge for that use, you are encouraging idiots.

KB

quote:

The big mulie I shot died where he was laying.

Obviously.

I'd bet the farm that he did not fall at the same location where you shot him in the chest cavity or anywhere nearby.

How long did it take him to get to where he was "laying"?

How much suffering did he endure that he wouldn't have if you'd shot him with a caliber/bullet combo suitable as found in, let's say, the OGW formula or TI index?

Do you care about how long an animal you shoot suffers before it dies?

Do you enjoy the fact that an animal dies more slowly when shot with your .223 and that's why you choose it over more suitable cartridges?



None of you have answered AzGuy's question as to WHY you choose this chambering over others.


Well, we are waiting......????

And the "guns in this chambering are easy-handling" crap won't fly........

rcamgulia--You must have me on ignore---I answered the question why the gun was chosen.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
rcamgulia--You must have me on ignore---I answered the question why the gun was chosen.

Found it! No one is on "ignore", the thread is so long I just forgot!

So chalk one up for choosing the caliber for the youngins'.... I'll buy that as a good choice to get youth started.

Hopefully they could make a good shot on short range jackalopes so as not to be traumatized watching one of God's creatures die an unnecessarily slow, painful death. This may turn them off to hunting in general.

But why would adults choose it?

I was flipping through the 11th edition of Handloaders digest and found... Are 22's all you need? by Bill Davidson.
"aside from Kodiak-grizzly bears and elk and moose,one or the other (22 cal) will do whatever you need to do in the field with a rifle"
And that was in print.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by perry:

"70gr TSX just fluff" Don't follow you there.
I have killed hundreds of animals with the 70gr TSX and stated so in previous posts...that counts as experience...right???

The intellectual aspect is the FACT that the 70gr TSX works everytime it is tried...when placed where it should be. That being the case how is the 223 inadequate?

Perry

Hundreds -- of animals -- would that be deer?

Every time it is tried -- would that be every time you have tried it, or when anyone tried it?

Placed where it should be -- would that be head shots?

How is the 223 inadequate? I think we missed some point here. I think most agree that the 223 will adequately kill deer in the right circumstance. The "right" circumstance is debatable. Perhaps most agree that the 70gr TSX will more "adequately" kill deer than the lesser bullets, especially varmint bullets.

However, the question is how many actually can and do use the optimum bullets for the task, in a cartridge that is marginal. I say that most goobers who use the 223 aren't concerned with ethics, or they wouldn't be hunting deer with the 223 in the first place.

I'm talking about the guys who think this 223 is some kind of magic wand, and make little distinction between varmint bullets, compared to those most likely to hold together, and who have little idea what 200 yds does to the energy of the 223 compared to what it's doing at 100 yds.

Sure there are some who respect the limitations of the cartridge, like perhaps you and TC1, but I think you are vastly outnumbered but the numbnuts, and in a way by advocating this cartridge for that use, you are encouraging idiots.

KB

Agreed. Sorry for calling you an idiot and having dumb ass comments.

Yes 100's, probably 50%/50% deer/hog and most are not head shot. I shoot for the neck when the shot is presented but the boiler room from almost any angle is no problem for the 70gr TSX under 200 yards. I have never lost a deer/hog with that bullet. I have missed, but never hit and lost.

Perry

Somebody tell me why folks think it's good to start their kids out deer hunting with a weapon that is marginal at best. .223s for deer and .410a for ducks, etc. If the kid is so small that he can't handle a proper weapon, he shouldn't be hunting. Or if the parent isn't willing to spend the time needed to aclimate the kid to a proper weapon, he shouldn't be hunting.

With the progress that has been made with bullets, and in the hands of a skillful hunter, I will concede that the .223 is capable of taking deer. At least on a par with a .243. But you notice, everybody that defends the use of the .223, makes a point of saying you have to put the bullet in the right place and you have to pass on any doubtful shots. (I take that to mean they are aware that the cartridge gives you little leeway)

So why stick such a weapon in a kid's hands?

And please don't make post about how your kid is one kewl hand Luke that shoots .5" Moa's at 500 yards and has killed thousands of deer as well as some charging black bears. If he is, he is considerably different than most of the kids that are nervous, excited, inexperienced and (this is gonna cause a blast) under-trained?

Just when I tried to things a bit, people are going to be nice to each other about the thread.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

None of you have answered AzGuy's question as to WHY you choose this chambering over others.

In the hands of a good marksman the 223 is a very effective medium game getter.

If you're not that good of shot, you better pack a bigger rifle.

wasbeeman,
all shitting aside.
When my neices and nephew passed their huntersafety tests to hunt, I built a rifle for them. it was a mini MkX in .223, but I wanted a little more bullet weight so barreled it to 6mmTCU. With 80 grn Rem bullets @ 3000 fps it now has 10 1 shot kills on whitetails. Most of the bullets exited, only hitting the off shoulder stopped them. The rifle with its MPI fiberglass stock, and 4x compact scope weighs 5# and is very easy to shoot for them, starting them with a reduced load and working up. They are allowed to shoot only when I give the nod, and have only to concentrate on the shot, not worry about recoil. With all that said, I really think I over thought things, and the standard .223 with a good bullet would work just the same under the same conditions for the kids.

quote:

Originally posted by perry:

Agreed. Sorry for calling you an idiot and having dumb ass comments.

Perry

I just have to follow up on that. I do believe it's a rare thing on this forum to offer a peace appology. Offer accepted. And likewise, I hope I didn't offend you either, since that was not my intention. I may have thought it, but I didn't say it, and tried to stay in debate, rather than make it personal.

That apparantly is impossible for some. IMO, it takes so little to be humble, and curtious, for real men. So why is that so difficult for some? It's beyond me.

KB

wasbeeman-----Ok the youth weighs lets say 1/3 of what an adult weighs. So to keep it proportional all the hunting rifles available to you weigh 3 times what they weigh----lets say 24 pounder was the lightest available for you. Then lets up the recoil 3 times. So lets not try to match it to their size and give them a 30-06 and they do as Larry Gibson described--close eyes and jerk.
Yes--I say put the bullet in right spot. You know what? Despite what the guy at the counter told you---you have to do that with a big magnum too. You really cant make bad shots with one and the deer drops. But that notion sure has sold a bunch of em.
My kid aint kewl---from the descrition you gave, but somehow from his first deer on at age 9 he has taken about 4 EVERY year---20 years old now. In fact he got 4 this year--3 with .308 and for some reason he used his .222 on one. The .222 one was a spike--dropped where he stood. I attribute a lot of his success that I DID NOT expose him to too much recoil and develop a flinch in him when he was coming along. He has smoothest trigger pull you'll ever see.

quote:

In the hands of a good marksman the 223 is a very effective medium game getter.

If you're not that good of shot, you better pack a bigger rifle.

gunmaker

I think we all agree on this, but it still doesn't answer the question of why would it be chosen over mo' betta' killin' calibers.

Challenge?

Cost?

Only rifle you have or can borrow?

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
why would it be chosen over mo' betta' killin' calibers.

The 223 only kills for those who shoot them.
Bigger calibers makes em kriddurz mo'deader.

quote:

I attribute a lot of his success that I DID NOT expose him to too much recoil and develop a flinch in him when he was coming along

I agree. But hopefully he was shooting targets and small game with the .223 and showed proficiency before you turned him loose on deer.

quote:

Somebody tell me why folks think it's good to start their kids out deer hunting with a weapon that is marginal at best. .223s for deer and .410a for ducks, etc. If the kid is so small that he can't handle a proper weapon, he shouldn't be hunting. Or if the parent isn't willing to spend the time needed to aclimate the kid to a proper weapon, he shouldn't be hunting.

Starting kids with light recoiling guns is the way to go, but they need to show proficiency with targets and small game before they advance.

By "advance", I mean hunt bigger game with a bigger gun not hunting bigger game with the smaller gun. This opens the door to a lot of things going wrong.

Matching the gun to the game is not just for adults whether it's a shotgun or a rifle.

Just got this in an email that confirms what I thought after it was brought up here anyway:

quote:

Subject: Combat Firearms "Report Card" from Iraq



This email from a Marine who's in Iraq . No politics here; just a Marine with a bird's eye view opinion:

US Weapons:



1) The M-16 rifle:

Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine version is more popular because it's lighter and shorter, but it has jamming problems also. They lack the ability to mount the various optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picatinny rails, but the weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over there and even torso hits can't be reliably counted on to put the enemy down.


8) The M-14:

Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

It's a lengthy mail with more interesting things.

Ok, let's ask this question; just where do we draw the line (cartridge wise) that seperates the "goobers" from the real hunters...the 30 RUM?

I've worked a lot of sighting in days over the years and worked game enforcement during deer season as a LEO. I've seen a hell of a lot of "real hunters" with magnums that couldn't hit squat. I've also seen a lot of youngsters given 7-08s, .308Ws and '0s along with the .270s and 7 Mags who couldn't hit squat either be cause they were afraid of the rifles as evidenced by lifting their heads back, closing their eys and then jerking the trigger. The fathers usually sort of sighted them in for the kids call it "good enough". A M94/M336 30-30s? Hell, I've heard over the years that the 30-30 was "marginal" for deer so you want to start kids off with a "marginal" cartridge? Besides that the M94 kicks fairly substantially and many a youngster can shoot them for crap.

So just what does seperate the "goobers" from the real hunters? A magnum? An '06? I don't think so. Deer are not hard to kill. If you think so then you haven't killed very many of them. Marksmanship is what counts. If a youngster or any person can put a bullet solidly where it needs to go (head, neck or heart/lung) then the deer is dead. If they can do that with a .223 and not a 30-30 or '06 or 30 RUM then which one should they really be using? The answer is obvious.

Please don't play the "ethics" card again. If you can't understand what part marksmanship and being able to put a bullet where it belongs then ethics you have not. If shooting deer with a more powerful cartridge is what makes you a hunter then I guess you all hunt with some real god aweful magnums. Personally the .223 is not my choice of cartridge for deer hunting, the '06 is. However, I would not recommend it for anyone who can not shoot it well. I also hunt deer with other cartridges, a .35 Remington this year to be exact. The question here was;

"Who has taken what medium game (hogs deer ect) with what .223 load?

Note I am NOT asking an ETHICAL question. I just want to know whats been done, and pics are great."

Those of us who simply answered that question should not be subjected to the ridicule of those who think it should or shouldn't be done. It is legal where I hunt so your adverse opinions are moot.

Larry Gibson

One thing is readily apparent in the replies by the nay sayers, they have never used the 223 to kill deer. Basing opinions on no experience is not exactly an intelligent arguement.

It is true that deer are not hard to kill, they are not heavy boned, or thick skinned. What i really wonder about the "magnumitis" crowd is are they upset when many pounds of edible meat is destroyed???

When i was a newbie i used a 30-06 for deer, but here in the east, with short distances, i found it too much of a good thing. I moved on to a 6.5X55 in a 700 classic and i believe that is probably the best all around deer killer i have used.

With this said, i am truly confident that the .223 with quality bullets will kill just as effectively as any other caliber, even on big deer. I have seen a couple of guys kills in Alaska on black tails and they are not "little" deer. The terminal performance was on par with "real" deer calibers, thats how much difference the premium bullets have made for 22's

As a side note: no i have not killed any deer with a .223 but the empirical evidence is too great to ignore, and i bet more deer have been maimed with magnums because a lot of macho men couldnt drive their rigs properly. As another side note: i killed my deer with a 7mm SAUM this year so im not anti-magnums, just anti- neanderthal mentality.

I have also killed a few deer with a bow that only has about 50 ft/lbs of energy so i guess in some eyes i like to see animals suffer

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
Ok, let's ask this question; just where do we draw the line (cartridge wise) that seperates the "goobers" from the real hunters...the 30 RUM?

Marksmanship is what counts. If a youngster or any person can put a bullet solidly where it needs to go (head, neck or heart/lung) then the deer is dead.

If you can't understand what part marksmanship and being able to put a bullet where it belongs then ethics you have not.

The question here was;

"Who has taken what medium game (hogs deer ect) with what .223 load?

Note I am NOT asking an ETHICAL question. I just want to know whats been done, and pics are great."

Larry Gibson

I respect your non-ethical question. So, I have attached all the pictures of all the deer and hogs I have taken with the 223.

Also, since you went into such a tyrade on a non-ethical question, with emphasis on marksmanship, and some arbitrary dividing line between goobers and hunters, I'll say that it would surprise me if someone actually admitted that marksmanship is not important. So, what's your point?

Also a "goober" can be carrying a 223, or 30-06 or 35 Rem. It's not the caliber of the gun that makes one a goober, it's the caliber of the person -- except those from Georgia, where everyone is a goober. The term is not derogatory there, but a term of friendship.

KB

PS -- Numnutz though can generally be identified easily because they hunt deer with a 223.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
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.

Hey Kabluey and Hot Core (AKA Hitler)

Amazing and totally inconceivable that a guy with absolutely no combat experience(me) could have an opinion that turns out to mirror what the guys on the ground believe (be true in fact, for you goobers).



signed, R (AKA Tojo)

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I have no experience
I have an opinon

quote:

Originally posted by fgulla:

I have also killed a few deer with a bow that only has about 50 ft/lbs of energy so i guess in some eyes i like to see animals suffer

No fgulla, it's not ft-lbs of energy that kill with a bow, it's the cutting action of the broadhead on vitals which might be better than the hydro- kinetic shock of any tiny .223 bullet. My bow has 81 ft-lbs but just shoots flatter (and blows through bone).

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I have no experience
I have an opinon

For clarification for those who appreciate such things, I have as much experience or more than anyone in this discussion in not hunting deer with a 223. It's a sacrifice, but I feel it necessary to do a control test comparing the 223 to a 308, or a 6.5x55. So far the 308 is far ahead, and counting. I'm gonna work on the 6.5x55 next, however I expect similar results. I know it's hard to remain objective, with the 223 at zero and all, but unfortunately it is likely to remain that way for me, so I'll just have to keep my objective hat on.

I'm even thinking of doing a test comparing the 243 to a 223, since I consider the 243 the minimum ethical deer cartridge. It would be interesting to join the minimilist crowd, just to see how it feels. Gotta be open minded about these things, and you can't beat experience. So, far I have great experience at not wasting my time and money on a 223. It's a challange, but it's working for me.

Who said that I have no combat experience? I never said that. I have been shot at and missed, chit at and hit. That counts - right?

KB

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

By "advance", I mean hunt bigger game with a bigger gun not hunting bigger game with the smaller gun. This opens the door to a lot of things going wrong.

Matching the gun to the game is not just for adults whether it's a shotgun or a rifle.

Most people don't come to the AR forum to be told what to think. They can get that treatment from their local liberal news.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
Ok, let's ask this question; just where do we draw the line (cartridge wise) that seperates the "goobers" from the real hunters...the 30 RUM?


Larry Gibson

Absolutely not, Larry and this is the whole point.

If you look at any of the tables given, whether it be the TI or the OGW formula, it simply has to do with physics and terminal ballistics. If you choose the cartridge with the minimum requirements according to the data for deer, it would be the .243 Win and a 95 or 100 grain bullet. This takes into consideration marksmanship as well. All shots are assumed to be placed in the vital area of the animal. Legality has nothing to do with it and adverse opinions are not moot.

A more powerful cartridge does not make you more of a hunter than the next, but choosing one minimizing the chance for losing an animal or making game suffer needlessly makes you less of a "goober"

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I have as much experience or more than anyone in this discussion in not hunting deer with a 223.

KB

Maybe if you look, you could find the right forum for that discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I have as much experience or more than anyone in this discussion in not hunting deer with a 223.

KB

Maybe if you look, you could find the right forum for that discussion.

Is that an opinion? lo and behold !!!

KB

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

By "advance", I mean hunt bigger game with a bigger gun not hunting bigger game with the smaller gun. This opens the door to a lot of things going wrong.

Matching the gun to the game is not just for adults whether it's a shotgun or a rifle.

Most people don't come to the AR forum to be told what to think. They can get that treatment from their local liberal news.

It's just an opinion from a guy with a little bit of experience holding shooting clinics for kids (and lessons for adults on a private basis; PM me HA! , thanks for the opportunity for some shameless self-promotion!) and a sense of right and wrong instilled by reasonable, hard-working family!

I don't care if you guys have an opinion. And you don't seem to care that the person that started this thread didn't ask for yours.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
I don't care if you guys have an opinion. And you don't seem to care that the person that started this thread didn't ask for yours.

On this we can agree. Nor do I care if you have an opinion, but I didn't ask for it either. Actually I'm glad that you have opinions, since that means you can distinguish them from fact - presumably.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
I don't care if you guys have an opinion. And you don't seem to care that the person that started this thread didn't ask for yours.

I don't think we've heard yours. Are you just here to scrap with Kabluey?