Another .223 deer

07 December 2010, 18:09

carpetman1

Another .223 deer

My nephew is a pharmacist and works long hours. This past week-end he got a needed break and came down and we hunted deer. Saturday we only got a glimpse of one running away. Sunday he shot a small yearling buck. Texas whitetail are known for being small and this one would have only gone about 80 pounds(young deer). He took out the liver and the deer dropped on spot. Was kicking when we arrived and nephew used pistol for finishing shot. He was using his sons CZ rifle in .223 and my reload. The reload is a 55 grain Win bulk packed. We found the base of the bulet in the off side. First time we didn't get complete pass through. This base had formed a perfect mushroom and weighed 40 grains which would be 72.7% of original weight. This bullet and the same bullet in 100 grain for .243 has taken many many deer by me, friends and family.

08 December 2010, 20:38

Stonecreek

Just an instance of one more ignorant deer without internet access which just doesn't know it can't be killed by a .223. When will they ever learn?!!!

08 December 2010, 20:42

carpetman1

Stonecreek--You got that so right. We keep getting lucky all the time that we have only shot ignorant deer that don't laugh at us.

08 December 2010, 20:53

Bernie P.

Those CZ's are sweet little guns.I have a 527 American in .223.I haven't used it for deer but I might give it a try next season with the 60gr Nosler Partition.

08 December 2010, 21:30

carpetman1

Bernie P--Two years ago my great nephew shot his first deer with my Rem 600 in .222. This was using the 55 grain Win bulk packed bullet. So his dad bought him the CZ in .223. We sighted it in and that afternoon he got his second deer with it. Same bullet used. The one with the .223 was shot too far forward--through shoulders no vitals hit but contrary to what I'd have thought, it was dead instantly. I understand your thinking of using a premium bullet, but bullet placement is the real key. Yes I really like the CZ's--except the backwards safety. In air guns I am especially fond of the .20 cals and for that reason I think I'd like a CZ in Ruger .204 but I don't know what I'd use it for that I don't already have covered. I know--when getting a gun that doesn't matter.

08 December 2010, 22:07

Black Fly

Congrats on your success. I prefer not to use my 223 for deer, but they work, as does the 222. I get a little excited and do not claim to be a dead eye shot, so I tend toward a bit bigger caliber. But the 223 does work.
Just wanted to chime in on the possible reason for the kill w/o the heart/lung/spine hit. If I remember an old vertebrate anatomy class, there is a major nerve bundle in the shoulder, just a bit high of center on most deer. A hit there will disrupt the circuits and down it goes.
Bfly

08 December 2010, 22:11

rcamuglia

Congrats to all of you!

An 80# deer is unheard of around here unless you are talking about fawns.

I'm sure the .223 was adequate.

08 December 2010, 23:06

TC1

Where was it stated the deer only weighed 80lbs?

08 December 2010, 23:30

theback40

In the first post he said 80#
I like the 64 grn win bullet, I dont think I would try the 55's as the 64's work so well. I have an Inuit friend that uses a .223 for caribou, he shoots for his whole family so kills several a year. The 64 grn factory load is all he uses and has one shot kills with heart/lung hits. A caribou isnt very hard to kill for it's size.

08 December 2010, 23:33

rcamuglia

quote:
Sunday he shot a small yearling buck. Texas whitetail are known for being small and this one would have only gone about 80 pounds(young deer). He took out the liver and the deer dropped on spot.

09 December 2010, 03:33

carpetman1

Black Fly--If you get excited and don't shoot so well that might be more reason to use a smaller rifle. Bigger ones don't enlarge the kill zone.

09 December 2010, 03:36

carpetman1

theback40--I lived in Alaska a couple of years and shot a caribou and witnessed several being shot and heard many stories from people that shoot them. My opinion is opposite of yours. They are hard to kill. Moose seemed to be easy which isn't what I expected.

09 December 2010, 04:17

Idaho Sharpshooter

Don't you all know the 223 is only good for killing people?

Rich
don't ask how I know...

09 December 2010, 05:33

carpetman1

Idaho Sharpshooter--Maybe you are on to something. The .223 is only good for killing people. You know a lot of people say they are a people person, some say a dog person and some estranged say a cat person... Maybe these deer are people deer.

09 December 2010, 05:43

Black Fly

I understand where you are coming from. I write it off to being excited and a poor shot(self deprecating humor), but the real reasons are more related to my hunting style and the guns I love to use. I am not bothered much by recoil and shoot a number of over 375 caliber rifles. I know a 416 Talor is a bit of overkill, but there just are not many cape buffalo in PA. And I haven't seen an elephant in my green beans since I got the rifle.
I prefer to still hunt thick cover and hunt for larger deer. The thick brush results in very close shots much of the time. I seldom get a broadside shot or a standing shot. Two hole blood trails are preferred. With bigger bodied deer, a little more bullet is not all bad; I've killed quite a few in the 180 to 200 pound range. As the sherif said on Cool Hand Luke, "A man must know his limitations." For me my 257 Robts is a light as I prefer for deer. Not that smaller won't work, they are just not the best tool for me.
Bfly

09 December 2010, 05:57

kingd

Tell'em to shoot for the neck. It'll drop'em in their tracks. Won't need a follow up shot for small TEXAS deer. Been there, done that.

09 December 2010, 06:07

carpetman1

Black Fly--now that you have clarified that the recoil and blast of the big boomers is not an issue, you are probably correct going smaller wouldn't help. For me having a good rest is very important. Last years deer was one of the easiest, I had a mesquite tree limb at just the right height. .257 Roberts--great round should work great. Put it in right place and blood trail is not a big issue--they don't usually go far.

09 December 2010, 20:22

theback40

quote:
theback40--I lived in Alaska a couple of years and shot a caribou and witnessed several being shot and heard many stories from people that shoot them. My opinion is opposite of yours. They are hard to kill. Moose seemed to be easy which isn't what I expected.

These are quebec/Labrador bou, but I cant see there should be much differance. What about them have you found difficult? My first I shot was with a .264 and a 120 nosler solidbase, ran 20 yds and down. The same with a .308 150, 6mm 100 grn, and my friends .223 64 grn. I've shot and witnessed 10-12 shot and the results were all the same no matter the caliber. My friend claimed that was the usuall, his problems disapeared when he stopped using cheap fmj .223 ammo to shoot them.

10 December 2010, 01:42

carpetman1

theback40---I only shot one and it was a young one--dropped on spot with 150 grain bullet 30-06. I saw 2 more shot that day and they took more than one shot--too many years ago to recall exactly but I think one was 30-06 using 180's and may not have been hit so well. I also saw a massacre on a frozen lake ---15 or so caribou walked onto it and here came a dozen or so snowmobiles and cripples all over the place. The main basis for my statement was friends that lived there and were good shots told of many experiences where even though hit well with adequate rifles ran a fairly long distance. Moose on the other hand seemed to stop and possibly stand a little longer before falling --but fell. Yes fmj would be a poor choice.

10 December 2010, 02:13

scottfromdallas

I've honestly come around on this a little. I bought a book called "Rifle Bullets for the Hunter- A Definitive Study" which is a great book for us that overanalyze everything (most regular posters on AR fit this catagory).

It states that premium 223 bullets like the 60 grain Nosler partition actually produce almost indentical wound channels as a 150 grain bullet from a 30/30. It said as long as impact velocity is over 2600 FPS there is no difference in terminal performance. Supposedly this was based the autopsies of hundreds of deer (under 200 lbs) and Bullet test tubes with Deer bones.

I have no experience shooting Deer with a 223 because I have other choices but Deer are small here in TX. I could see how a partition, TSX or Swift could but them down quick if you hit them in the vitals.

Just food for thought. Like I said, this is from a book and not my personal experience.

10 December 2010, 03:00

vapodog

quote:
a great book for us that overanalyze everything (most regular posters on AR fit this catagory).

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill

10 December 2010, 03:34

JonP

This is getting tiresome. I'll take my 6.5 x 55 or 7 x 57...then i don't need to worry what angle is presented or if there's a little brush between me and the 10 pointer I've been waiting for. Yes, you can kill deer with a 223, 204 or a 25-20....but all of those cartridges have their limitations and when I go afield, I want to limit my limitations.

Texas deer may not be much bigger than eastern coyotes...but my neighbor took a 10 pointer that dressed at 192 lbs (NY state)in typical brush cover...his 35 Rem was a better option for the job.

10 December 2010, 04:15

theback40

quote:
This is getting tiresome. I'll take my 6.5 x 55 or 7 x 57...then i don't need to worry what angle is presented or if there's a little brush between me and the 10 pointer I've been waiting for.

Pretty easy to solve, no-one here said YOU should use a .223 ect, this is about results people who have and do use them have had!

10 December 2010, 06:27

JonP

quote:
Pretty easy to solve, no-one here said YOU should use a .223 ect, this is about results people who have and do use them have had!

Then they should get down from the pulpit, stop talking about it and just go do it.

10 December 2010, 06:36

Jim C. <><

quote:
just doesn't know it can't be killed by a .223.

Don't think anyone has said deer can't be killed with a .223. They have also been killed with .22 RF. But, that doesn't make either of them deer cartridges.

10 December 2010, 07:23

MickinColo

It’s all a “look at me”, “look at what I’ve done!” scenario. If you feel the need to brag about it, then it must be something new in your life. Ok, cool, you shot a deer. Congratulations.

10 December 2010, 07:29

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by MickinColo:
It’s all a “look at me”, “look at what I’ve done!” scenario.

That's nothing but an assumption on your part. Funny thing is, we never hear from you except on these type threads. What does that say about you?

10 December 2010, 07:36

MickinColo

quote:
Originally posted by TC1:
quote:
Originally posted by MickinColo:
It’s all a “look at me”, “look at what I’ve done!” scenario.

That's nothing but an assumption on your part. Funny thing is, we never hear from you except on these type threads. What does that say about you?

Why are you so sensitive about this topic?

10 December 2010, 07:37

TC1

I'm not, why are you?

10 December 2010, 07:44

MickinColo

Yes it maybe an assumption on my part but it seams that the small caliber boys need to flaunt their exploits in front of the world, like it’s some kind of special accomplishment.

10 December 2010, 07:51

MickinColo

I just question some people’s motivations for posting on some topics.

10 December 2010, 07:59

TC1

Well, it's probably because a few here that seem to be completely ignorant about the subject at hand seem to think it's a stunt and something that shouldn't be attempted. Those that have done it aren't flaunting thier exploits, they have found out it's really no harder to kill a deer with a .223 than any other caliber and are just reporting thier results. They aren't "small caliber boys" they are regular hunters and sportsmen.

10 December 2010, 08:02

rcamuglia

I hate to admit it, but 80 pound deer (the size of a Labrador Retriever) should be easy to kill at less than 100 yards with a broadside shot and a .223.

Where I lose all my marbles is when I hear of the .223 and similar varmint cartridges being used on much bigger game or much more extended ranges.

Or as miles58 has posted he would be fine with, the use of the .30-'06 on "everything else" above 500 pounds including Hippo, Rhino, Lion, Cape Buffalo, and Elephant.

As Buggs Bunny would say...What a Maroon!

10 December 2010, 08:07

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by rcamuglia:
I hate to admit it, but 80 pound deer (the size of a Labrador Retriever) should be easy to kill at less than 100 yards with a broadside shot and a .223.

Where I lose all my marbles is when I hear of the .223 and similar varmint cartridges being used on much bigger game or much more extended ranges.

Or as miles58 has posted he would be fine with, the use of the .30-'06 on "everything else" above 500 pounds including Hippo, Rhino, Lion, Cape Buffalo, and Elephant.

As Buggs Bunny would say...What a Maroon!

Case and point.

10 December 2010, 08:12

MickinColo

The title of this thread is “Another 223 Deer”. That title isn’t meant to start some grap? Come on TC, you and I get along but let's get real here.

10 December 2010, 08:12

Kabluewy

I've been thinking of loading up some mild loads for my 458 to take hog hunting in a month. I would like to shoot some game with it, since so far all I've shot are targets.

Which is the bigger stunt? Using a 223 or a 458 on hogs?

Ya'll are just having toooo much fun without me.

10 December 2010, 08:15

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by MickinColo:
The title of this thread is “Another 223 Deer”. That title isn’t meant to start some grap? Come on TC, you and I get along but let's get real here.

Again, why does it bother you?

10 December 2010, 08:17

TC1

quote:
Originally posted by Kabluewy:

Which is the bigger stunt? Using a 223 or a 458 on hogs?

KB

Not sure. which would be less dead after being shot?

10 December 2010, 08:20

rcamuglia

quote:
Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I've been thinking of loading up some mild loads for my 458 to take hog hunting in a month. I would like to shoot some game with it, since so far all I've shot are targets.

Which is the bigger stunt? Using a 223 or a 458 on hogs?

Ya'll are just having toooo much fun without me.

KB

Welcome KB! I've missed you!

The Taylor Index shows a number of 4 for the .223 and a 55 grainer at 100 yards. It also states that a number of at least 6 is needed to kill an antelope or mule deer at that range. This Jackalope is within the range of sensibility IMO.

One thing is puzzling though. The Index calls for a number of 17 as being needed for whitetails. Wouldn't a big muley be tougher than a small whitetail?

10 December 2010, 08:22

Kabluewy

TC,
Good point. I suppose I might as well use the 458, since I don't own a 223, but if you guys keep talking this way about how great it is, I may try it.
I'm getting old enough to be tired of having my eyes crossed every time I pull the trigger.