quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

You are getting real close to the truth there teancum. Throw in the concept of belief, along with please don't confuse me with physics, and ya got it.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by Oddbod:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:


Suppose you were the mighty hunter, and the game could bite back, and you had to stand at ground level, no elevated stands? What would be your definition of adequate be then? Would you continue to play around with a pea shooter, for sport? Would you then pay any attention to the ballistic specs, and mfg bullet design specs, or continue with nonsense? It's easy to talk BS, when nothing more is at stake than your ego.

KB

Unless I'm very much mistaken, hundreds of thousands of men put their faith in .224 on a daily basis & it isn't teeth & claws on the other side - all done with FMJ too.

I've just read all of this thread & the anti's accusations of rudeness from the pro's is laughable - tiz the other way round IMO.

Far as I can see; if you're confident of the shot with the caliber at hand then what's the problem?
Seems to me the naysayers may well be lacking in confidence - or ability?

Now I understand; I've been thinking wrong all along. All I need is confidence of the shot at hand with the caliber of choice, and there's no problem. Great!!!

I've been practicing real hard with my Walther PP in 7.65, and can consistently get 2" groups at 20 yards. I've got a black bear coming to my feeder station everyday. Now that I fully understand that all I need is confidence of the shot to be taken with this caliber, I think I'll go out tomorrow morning, set up in a blind next to the feed station, and when that shot I know I can make comes up, I'll have the confidence to take the shot, knowing that with my superior marksmanship, I will take that bear in one shot; DRT.

I now fully understand; all I need is confidence in my ability with the caliber at hand. The rest of that crap; ballistics, sectional density, energy, foot pounds of energy; that stuffs all for the jokers of the world.

Thanks for clearing this all up.

Glad to help with your clarification.

I however, using your logic, think you are over-gunned and would move down to the .22 short.

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

You are so right!

Just the other day, that bitch wife of mine and me were in the kitchen, and a doe deer came up to our bird feeder, and she said, "you better do something 'bout that damn doe eatin my birdfeed."

I told her to shut the hell up wit her bitchin, I went in the love palace (bedroom), retch under the bed, and pulled out my .22 derringer. I tolt her I wuz going to teach that damn doe a lesson; we'd be eatin her for supper.

When I started for the porch, that bitch said, " You can't shoot that doe deer wit a .22, you ain't man enough."

I immediately bitch slapped that whore half way across the kitchen, and I said, " I'll show you what a man really is. I'm goin to shoot that damn doe deer right in the eye sockets; the top barrel of this here derringer in the right eye, the bottom barrel in the left eye."

That filthy whore said, "No, go get your damn .223 and shoot that damn doe deer with some real lead."

Now that really pissed me off, and I bitch slapped her back across the kitchen where she was to begin with.

That's when i told her; I told her I did, "I been practicing wit this here derringer at beer cans for 3 days, and by God, I can shoot the "g" off of Old Enlish 800 can at least 3 outa 10 times, sometimes more. So don't question my decisions you stupid whore, what the hell do you know anyway. I know how fer that damn deer doe is, I'm taking dead aim at her eye sockets, and I know by God that I'm man enough to pull this shot off."

So jest before I went out the back door to the porch, I slapped that bitch whore one more time, told her what an imbecile she was for questioning my manhood, and went out to shoot that damn doe deer in the eyes sockets.

That's what I did now. And any man who wouldn't do the same is nothing but a God darn pussy.

And that's all I got to say, and it's as good as blood.

Uhhh, this is really not a follow-up post, but merely thinking out loud, so to speak (write). Maybe I'm wrong, and just don't know how to read between the lines anymore.

One thing I know is that I'm ducking and hiding, because I definately don't want the be collateral damage, caught in the cross fire of that one. After all, the 223 is known for it's ability to settle disputes, domestic, interstate or international, and easily go through sheetrock walls.

I really don't want to go down, shot by another man's wife, accident or not. A computer screen is practically nothing for a 223.

If it was up to me, man, I would leave the little wife out of this. Now that bit of advice is from experience that even the most naïve will appreciate, including TC1. There are just some certain provocations one just doesn't want to make, even jokeingly. I'm kinda thinking you haven't been bit by that one, or you would know for sure and instinctively not to go there.

BTW, I won the bet - seven pages and counting. Next year - Winter Solstice Games.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by Oddbod:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:


Suppose you were the mighty hunter, and the game could bite back, and you had to stand at ground level, no elevated stands? What would be your definition of adequate be then? Would you continue to play around with a pea shooter, for sport? Would you then pay any attention to the ballistic specs, and mfg bullet design specs, or continue with nonsense? It's easy to talk BS, when nothing more is at stake than your ego.

KB

Unless I'm very much mistaken, hundreds of thousands of men put their faith in .224 on a daily basis & it isn't teeth & claws on the other side - all done with FMJ too.

I've just read all of this thread & the anti's accusations of rudeness from the pro's is laughable - tiz the other way round IMO.

Far as I can see; if you're confident of the shot with the caliber at hand then what's the problem?
Seems to me the naysayers may well be lacking in confidence - or ability?

Now I understand; I've been thinking wrong all along. All I need is confidence of the shot at hand with the caliber of choice, and there's no problem. Great!!!

I've been practicing real hard with my Walther PP in 7.65, and can consistently get 2" groups at 20 yards. I've got a black bear coming to my feeder station everyday. Now that I fully understand that all I need is confidence of the shot to be taken with this caliber, I think I'll go out tomorrow morning, set up in a blind next to the feed station, and when that shot I know I can make comes up, I'll have the confidence to take the shot, knowing that with my superior marksmanship, I will take that bear in one shot; DRT.

I now fully understand; all I need is confidence in my ability with the caliber at hand. The rest of that crap; ballistics, sectional density, energy, foot pounds of energy; that stuffs all for the jokers of the world.

Thanks for clearing this all up.

Glad to help with your clarification.

I however, using your logic, think you are over-gunned and would move down to the .22 short.

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

You are so right!

Just the other day, that bitch wife of mine and me were in the kitchen, and a doe deer came up to our bird feeder, and she said, "you better do something 'bout that damn doe eatin my birdfeed."

I told her to shut the hell up wit her bitchin, I went in the love palace (bedroom), retch under the bed, and pulled out my .22 derringer. I tolt her I wuz going to teach that damn doe a lesson; we'd be eatin her for supper.

When I started for the porch, that bitch said, " You can't shoot that doe deer wit a .22, you ain't man enough."

I immediately bitch slapped that whore half way across the kitchen, and I said, " I'll show you what a man really is. I'm goin to shoot that damn doe deer right in the eye sockets; the top barrel of this here derringer in the right eye, the bottom barrel in the left eye."

That filthy whore said, "No, go get your damn .223 and shoot that damn doe deer with some real lead."

Now that really pissed me off, and I bitch slapped her back across the kitchen where she was to begin with.

That's when i told her; I told her I did, "I been practicing wit this here derringer at beer cans for 3 days, and by God, I can shoot the "g" off of Old Enlish 800 can at least 3 outa 10 times, sometimes more. So don't question my decisions you stupid whore, what the hell do you know anyway. I know how fer that damn deer doe is, I'm taking dead aim at her eye sockets, and I know by God that I'm man enough to pull this shot off."

So jest before I went out the back door to the porch, I slapped that bitch whore one more time, told her what an imbecile she was for questioning my manhood, and went out to shoot that damn doe deer in the eyes sockets.

That's what I did now. And any man who wouldn't do the same is nothing but a God darn pussy.

And that's all I got to say, and it's as good as blood.

Simple amazing from a sick mind. Never saw one move to the sewer so fast....what a minute MickinArkansas did post one that was similar a while back.

I bet your wife thinks this post is swell.

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:
I bet your wife thinks this post is swell.

My bet is there is no wife.

Wow, this caldren of wizzard brew, boiled over quickly with the addition of toads warts.

Toxic.

KB

quote:

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

there is an abundance of folks around here who confuse the concepts of 'confidence with their firearm and shooting abilities' vs " pompous over inflated egos, who happen to own a firearm"..

They don't know who they are, but the rest of us do...

the fall into the " the older I get, the better I was " crowd...

Off for a week of fishing where there's sunshine and no snow. Maybe this will be here when I get back and I can learn more about what it takes to kill a deer!
have fun guys

Doesnt matter what forum your on, as soon as .2234 vs deer pops up theres more controversy than Chevy vs. Ford...

I've seen way too many dead deer shot with a 223 to totally discount it. Use a TSX or Partiton or even a TBBC at sane ranges and that deer is dead.

The one variable is always the same, the naysayers havent used one but will go on their soapboxes and admonish the uninformed how they owe the animal better etc, etc, etc ad nauseum, quite entertaining, now let me sit back and

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:

quote:

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

there is an abundance of folks around here who confuse the concepts of 'confidence with their firearm and shooting abilities' vs " pompous over inflated egos, who happen to own a firearm"..

They don't know who they are, but the rest of us do...

the fall into the " the older I get, the better I was " crowd...

The last doe I saw wounded and got away, shot in the neck with a 223, was done by one of those guys with a lot of confidence in his new and highly accurate AR, and had been shooting tiny groups at the range. If the event humbled him any, it was maybe 30 minutes - about the amount of time he spent trying to find that doe.

Some people never learn the saying "the older I get the better I was". It's sorta like "hire a teanager, while he still knows everything". Somewhere in the middle, they are both replaced with 'confidence with their firearm and shooting abilities'. It's still about the person, which is the flaw in the argument.

Why won't folks just look at the cartridge, and leave out the human factor? I think it's because variables confuse the issue, just the way some like it.

KB

quote:

Why won't folks just look at the cartridge, and leave out the human factor?

KB

These .223 threads must indeed be frustrating for you as most of the people are posting examples of the success of the caliber on deer.

It can be so when people just don't do want you want them to do, when their experience is more strongly held than you rambling opinions.

I reach out to you in the hour of your travail.

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:
It can be so when their experience is more strongly held than you rambling opinions.

I'll bet you had no problem finding a job as a teenager.

"The older I get, the better I was" . Add the words "or thought I was".

I hope you grow out of it someday.

What's the difference in confidence, and ego?

None in your case.

KB

Interesting read.

I guess that any cartridge can be used to kill most anything. But....

Under ideal circumstances you may be just fine, a broad side shot to the ribs withe a 22 cal centerfire at nominal range.

I am concerned about the less than ideal (seems those situations find me more than the ideal).

I lost a deer to a 30/06 180 RN a few years back. Certain heart shot, snow, and good sign, never found him-until next spring. Killed a few with an AR and 224 75grn Bergers, DRT almost. 416 Rigby and 350 Magtips, no problemo.

Which is best? For what shot? The 223 and a Texas heart shot? The 416 an a board side at 50 yds?

Use enough gun for the worst conditions expected for the game at hand and you'll likley settle on something larger than a 22 centerfire, unless your decision cyle is run by emotion.

Best;

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

Remember....... it's all about confidence.

You are getting real close to the truth there teancum. Throw in the concept of belief, along with please don't confuse me with physics, and ya got it.

KB

I retract some of the things I said about you teancum. Maybe you are on to something after all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconfidence_effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence


Interesting reading at least, especially for those wanting statistics.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
So, you think us "anti's" make this chit up?

You think it has anything to do with our confidence or ability?

You think we are rude, when we are trying to be nice?

How's this for nice? Your ignorance is laughable, and pathetic. Are you laughing now?

There is little doubt about the controversy around the adequacy of this cartridge, whether it's the military version or the sporter.

It was designed to wound or kill combatants, and there's been a huge amount of research around trying to get it to do a better job. It seems like the best way to do that is substitute the 6.8 or the 6.5 in its place.

What's laughable is those of you who think us anti's have no basis for our position on this and our argument. If you read a little, objectively, anyone can see that it ain't so simple as just a matter of opinion, mine or yours.

Still laughing?

Want stats? Read the attached links.


KB

http://www.marinecorpstimes.co...e_SOST_ammo_021510w/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56x45mm_NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington

Yep; rude & incapable of reason. Exactly as I said.

Ok, Odd, you are right. I appologize for being so rude to you and teancum. So, I'll share a good idea with the two of you, which if you are so right, you can make a fortune. Conisder it my good will, Christmas gift, or just being nice.

Think of all the millions the Govt has spent of research and testing on the 5.56x45. You and teancum can apply for a contract to sort out this "it's all about confidence" business with the troops. I have no idea how many millions of dollars such a concept is worth to the military, but think of all the money they will save. They can stop testing now, and just figure out a way to give the troops a dose of confidence. I don't know whether you can bottle it, or put it in a pill, but I suspect the prototype should be especially made for the two of you to test personally. An OD green suppository laced with a little xlax seems about right, especially for teancum.

Keep us informed how that all comes out for you.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by fgulla:
Doesnt matter what forum your on, as soon as .2234 vs deer pops up theres more controversy than Chevy vs. Ford...

I've seen way too many dead deer shot with a 223 to totally discount it. Use a TSX or Partiton or even a TBBC at sane ranges and that deer is dead.

The one variable is always the same, the naysayers havent used one but will go on their soapboxes and admonish the uninformed how they owe the animal better etc, etc, etc ad nauseum, quite entertaining, now let me sit back and

This will be my last post on this subject, as I am convinced it has little to do with real ideas than hypocrisy. But here it is:

#1---No I have no experience shooting deer with a .223 of any make or configuration in that caliber; nor would I ever consider doing so, unless it's the only gun I have and I am in a survival situation. It is ballistically insufficient to be considered a deer round and was never developed to be one.

#2---As specified in "Cartridges of the World", quote, "the .223 Remington can be classed as an excellent medium-range varmint cartridge at ranges out to 250 yards."----No where is it listed as "appropriate" for big game of any kind, regardless of bullet weight.

#3---Any cartridge, given the optimal environment, can be successfully used to take game such as whitetail, or even elephant. The true question is the ethical implications in intentionally selecting a ballistically inferior caliber to take such game. Intentionally doing so is ignorance at the minimum, unethical at best, and borderline criminal in intent.

#4---I'm a darn good shot; some might say I am better than darn good; but nevertheless, I can never see a situation in a sporting environment, where I would intentionally choose a .223 as a viable deer cartridge.---Most all of us own multiple guns, most with calibers at least in the .24 range, yet some will intentionally select a .223 instead of their more ballistically efficient rifles to shoot deer. And we wonder why we have so many anti-hunting organizations in the US. If you can't help hunter's rights, at least don't use poor judgement and hurt our efforts. If a caliber choice appears unethical to the majority of the populace to include hunters, then perception is 75% reality. If you truly cherish your hunting rights, why continue this line of thinking and posting it on internet forums which are clearly being monitored by our enemies? As I said earlier, if you want to shoot deer with your .223, do so without having to boast of your manly accomplishments. Quite honestly, none of us here are impressed; we could all do the same, we just choose not to do so. It doesn't make you more of a man, a superior marksman, or a great hunter. It just says you have privately chosen to use the caliber of your choice, even though that choice is overwhelmingly questionable. It's Ok, shoot your deer with your .223. Just don't flaunt it.

#5---And to address your final potential argument: "I recommend the .223 because of the lack of recoil, or I don't like recoil anymore," or any of the other so-called lame excuses you use:

If recoil is an issue, buy a DPMS LR308-L, a light weight AR version in a gas-operated gun and use Federal reduced recoil ammo at 170 grains. The recoil isn't there, yet the short range knock down power is substancial out to 150 yards. Or better yet, buy a Browning BAR Synthetic in a .7mm-08, use the 150gr HotCore loads, and the recoil is virtually non-existant.

#6---The truth of the matter is that you guys that want to utilize the .223 think it's such a grand trick to shoot whitetail and be successful. It's not a trick at all; all of us are just as good as you; we just choose to be ethical and efficient (scientifically), not based upon personal success, but based upon decades of data. Your arguments are weak, unsubstanstial, and detrimental to the hunting community as a whole.

Good Hunting, Mike

I'm out in the morning using a .323 caliber after whitetail or bear, with the confidence that my caliber choice is ethical and appropriate.

Carpetman1,

Your righteous indignation of my accusations about your motivations on page 2 looks a little lame right now.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Your arguments are weak, unsubstanstial, and detrimental to the hunting community as a whole.

Good Hunting, Mike

I'm out in the morning using a .323 caliber after whitetail or bear, with the confidence that my caliber choice is ethical and appropriate.

Good post. It's (mostly) a clean opinion, well supported and well stated.

Congrats on the 8mm. My favorite too. Good hunting.

KB

Mickincolo You bowed out--but have made weak attempts to come back twice now. You said it was boring and it is up to 7 pages. Your other accusations are without merit. I'd say you have major integrity issues you need to deal with.

Carpetman1,

I thought I might have really offended you so I backed off. But you proved me wrong. You’re fair game at anytime now.

Carpetman1,

I see that you enjoy reading your turmoil. It’s a good fight so far.

quote:

Originally posted by MickinColo:
Carpetman1,

I thought I might have really offended you so I backed off. But you proved me wrong. You’re fair game at anytime now.

Wow!!!!!!!

Carpetman1 you had better watch out, you are "now fair game at anytime"!!!!!

Aren't you afraid????

mdstewart


Bye Bye !!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

quote:

Originally posted by MickinColo:
Carpetman1,

I thought I might have really offended you so I backed off. But you proved me wrong. You’re fair game at anytime now.

Wow!!!!!!!

Carpetman1 you had better watch out, you are "now fair game at anytime"!!!!!

Aren't you afraid????

LOL, how much pain can anyone inflict on anyone on the internet?

Carpetman 1 and you are about the same, I kind of like you guys but you’re full of “stuff” half the time.

I'm fair game? Wonder if he'll use a .223?

Way to lower the boom MD!

Mdstewart,

Excellent, well thought out and written post.

I can honestly say that I will never use a 223 for deer.

But it is simply because I do not own one, and don't plan on owning one.

Advances in bullet technology have made the .223 an adequate choice. There simply is enough energy to cleanly do the job.

I have used reduced recoil loads in a 270 Win for deer. Specifically for my wife, nephews and son. To be honest, in the field I cannot tell the difference in the end result between reduced loads and my 22-250's. Good shot = venison in the freezer.

But I recovered a high percentage of the 270 bullets. I believe this to be because the reduced velocity and energy for the expanded frontal area tends to keep the bullets in the deer where they can be recovered.

I am a big believer in two holes, be it with a rifle or bow. It greatly increases the chances for recovering the animals and putting it in the freezer. This has been documented in wounding, and wound lethality studies.

I would dare to bet that most lost animals are due to bad shot placement, rather than percieved "inadequate" cartridge selection. The factors leading to bad shot placement are multifactorial.

1. Person is plain and simple a bad shot.
a. improper training/practice
b. cannot perform under stress
c. has a flinch due to recoil
2. Bad shot presention and bad decision to shoot at said presentation.
3. Equipment failure
a. loose sights
b. inaccurate firearm/cartridge combination.
c. inadequate bullet for the job
4. Improper knowledge of where to place a shot.

I will take a 223 with proper shot placement over a bigger cartridge in the wrong spot every time!

Whatever it takes for someone to accomplish proper shot placement is first and foremost.

As I have stated before, shot placement relegates all other discussion to secondary importance.

quote:

Originally posted by SDhunter:
Mdstewart,

I can honestly say that I will never use a 223 for deer.

But it is simply because I do not own one, and don't plan on owning one.

Advances in bullet technology have made the .223 an adequate choice. There simply is enough energy to cleanly do the job.

.

This post amazes me from a guy who has been arguing for the use of the .223. You are mistaking the better penetration of modern bullets for "energy". There is no difference in energy between a 55 grain cup and core bullet and a 55 grain monolithic at the same velocity.


This video explains to me why you all shoot puny deer with a varmint cartridge:

quote:

Originally posted by SDhunter:
As I have stated before, shot placement relegates all other discussion to secondary importance.

Your argument is flawed.

As precise as I can say it, my disagreement is: It's ballistics - physics - bullet preformance, which regulates all other discussion to secondary importance.

Who said shot placment isn't important? It's always relevant.

The variables around the human factors and shot placment are practically the same whatever the cartridge. Except maybe the 223 may have a better ratio of shot placment due to practically no recoil.

The one factor that kinks the "all things being equal" variable is energy, and the lack of it from the 223. The other wildcard variable is the use of explosive varmint bullets in the 223.

Deal with the relevant issues, such as ballistics - physics - the I'll actually listen to you.

I'll ask a question:

Is shot placment more important, or the same importance, or less important, whether using a 308 or 223 for deer? And why?

Ask the same question comparing the 308 to the 270. Same answer?

KB

quote:

223 may have a better ratio of shot placment due to practicall no recoil.

I don't get this.

Recoil happens AFTER the trigger is squeezed. I can shoot groups with a .338 RUM or a 17 HMR equally well.

Some fear and anticipate then jerk the trigger so the .223 is now their deer rifle?

RC, like most of this, it's a state of mind, until we deal with physics, and that's what the advocates like to ignore and avoid thinking about.

Reaction to recoil (or blast) after the trigger is pulled, or in anticipation of it, is one of the human factors, and it varies unpredictably from one person to another.

Other human factors (variables) which vary unpredictably are the decision to shoot or not, patience, estimating range and limiting the range at which a shot is taken, skill, etc. These are relevant generally whatever the cartridge of choice is, to about the same degree.

The key concept is that the relevancy is always there with the humam factors and of about the same importance, but the affect on the outcome will vary greatly, and it's not predictable, objectively. So, in considering variables, deciding which is driving all the others, sort out that variable which is predictable and measurable first. The affect on the outcome relating to ballistics - physics - is always relevant too, but this is very predictable.

In evaluating the 223 as a deer cartridge, it seems to me that the relationship of the variables only causes the 223 to be less desirable, since in those inevitable times when something goes wrong, the 223 has much less room for margin of error.

(All other variables being equal, including shot placment) A neck shot that misses the bone by 2" with a 223 may allow the deer to escape wounded, where the same shot placment with a 308 would kill the deer DRT. A 200 yds shot with a 223 is more likely to only wound the deer, compared to the same shot with a 308. A hit in the shoulder blade with a 223 varmint bullet will result in death - tomorrow, and half a mile away (or the next day), where the 308 will drop the deer now, with the same hit. I'm talking about the exact same shot placment, will more often result in DRT with the 308, compared to the 223. I use the 308 just as merely an example of an adequate deer cartridge.

It's all about energy and bullet performance being up to a certain level to cover those inevetable phuck ups, or bad judgments.

This has practically nothing to do with confidence, which is also a big variable.

What I'm saying is when these advocates of the 223 stop trying to justify their choice of using the 223 by claiming it's adequate ballistically, and saying that those opposing or choosing other more adequate cartridges just lack confidence or skill, I'll respect their opinion more (a little).

Yet, I'll always have issues with folks who engage in deer hunting with a cartridge that I consider inadequate, and question their motives for such a choice. It's not that I think they need to justify it to me, personally, but to others who respect hunting heritage, all of us. It just doesn't set well with me.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
RC, like most of this, it's a state of mind, until we deal with physics, and that's what the advocates like to ignore and avoid thinking about.****************************************************Yet, I'll always have issues with folks who engage in deer hunting with a cartridge that I consider inadequate, and question their motives for such a choice. It's not that I think they need to justify it to me, personally, but to others who respect hunting heritage, all of us. It just doesn't set well with me. KB

Well stated, KB, roger

I'm still struggling to understand why the 223 is bad but archery isn't. There is certainly a far greater potential for error and therefore (using the same logic as the current nay-sayers have against the 223), archery is only an exercise in ego too. Truth is, any yahoo can buy a bow and sharp pointy sticks and hunt without without five minutes of practice. The damn quivers hold seven or eight rounds and you know the bastards lob arrow after arrow hundreds of feet just to see how close they can come to a strike. That doesn't make all archers slob hunters.

Not that I agree but the logic applies if one accepts the arguments (especially a bigot's broad brush condemnations like mdstewart).

Then there are the semi-auto idiots that think volume fire is the responsible alternative to stalking. Most of them shoot the 30-06, 308 or some other "responsible" caliber, so does the proper caliber selection somehow mitigate the yahoo-ness of it all?

In the end, cartridge choice does not define the character of the user, regardless of how much some would say to the contrary. The carefully thought out decision of when, how and where (and more importantly when to pass an opportunity) is the defining character issue just as it is for the archer.

My prson 223 use is usually for coyotes with very light bullets that don't tear up hidesw or hogs at ranges arounf 35-50 yards where any bullet in the cabesa is lights out. I can't cary two rifles but I can carry two types of ammo and should an opportunity to havest a deer present itself within a reasonable window of certainty I will not hesitate to load up and take the shot. My lifetime sample is about 90 deer with a 223 which makes me something of an expert relative to those that have never done it.

Of all the deer I've shot with all calibers over a lifetime, Ive missed three or four outright for various reasons and lost exactly two but only overnight. One with a 270 140 gr boat tail Hornady that came apart early (I had help losing it with a single digit IQ deer dog) and a hurried frontal shot with a 338-06 that hit just barely too far to the right. Had to wait for the buzzards to find that one. I'm not happy about either but they are what they are and the 223 was no where around to take the blame.


Not one miss out of the fabled 90 with the 223 and not one deer hard to find within 15 minutes of the shot including waiting time right after the shot. Most were DRT. That wasn't luck or anything like it; it was simply the right gun and bullet for that particular shot with a competent shooter that new when not to shoot.

The bigg difference, tigg, is that we don't hear of archers out there with 30-35 lb bows deer hunting, or long range bow hunting. And they don't get on the internet touting their rights and manhood and nimrodsmanship for such a stunt, regardless of whether it was a well thought out decision or not. Thinking out such a stunt only makes it worse to follow it through, IMO.

If they did, I'm sure their character would be in question. So, by analogy why woudn't the advocate of the 223 deer rifle likewise have his character in question?

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
My prson 223 use is usually for coyotes with very light bullets that don't tear up hides ---
I can't cary two rifles but I can carry two types of ammo and should an opportunity to havest a deer present itself within a reasonable window of certainty I will not hesitate to load up and take the shot. My lifetime sample is about 90 deer with a 223 which makes me something of an expert relative to those that have never done it.

Of all the deer I've shot with all calibers over a lifetime, Ive missed three or four outright for various reasons and lost exactly two but only overnight.

Not one miss out of the fabled 90 with the 223 and not one deer hard to find within 15 minutes of the shot including waiting time right after the shot. Most were DRT. That wasn't luck or anything like it; it was simply the right gun and bullet for that particular shot with a competent shooter that new when not to shoot.

You are indeed an unusual expert.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
The bigg difference, Tigg, is that we don't hear of archers out there with 30-35 lb bows deer hunting, or long range bow hunting. And they don't get on the internet touting their rights and manhood and nimrodsmanship for such a stunt, regardless of whether it was a wel thought out decision or not. Thinking out such a stunt only makes it worse to follow it through, IMO.

If they did, I'm sure their character would be in question. So, by analogy why woudn't the advocate of the 223 deer rifle likewise have his character in question?

KB

Red herring, K. A 223 is not the same as a 35 lb bow. And it ain't bragging of you did it. I used the word bigot in the literal sense: one who refuses to accept the obvious in the face of overwhelming evidence to the fact.

You're not there yet but using some pretty silly rubber & glue type logic...and you should quit calling people names who have yet to use one on you.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
My lifetime sample is about 90 deer with a 223 which makes me something of an expert relative to those that have never done it.

Trigger

There you go confusing the anti lads with a wealth of EXPERIENCE with the .223!!!!! Don't you know that your EXPERIENCE runs contrary to their highly held opinions, physics, and energy factors??? This statement alone will cause grief, distress, and probably constipation.

Why, according to them you actually didn't take 90 deer.!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
you should quit calling people names who have yet to use one on you.

Sorry about the name calling. How 'bout I call you tiggerspert from now on. There's always the resident expert, so I'll nominate you. Actually, I'll second that nomination, since you nominated yourself.

Seriously though, it's practically impossible to effectively argue the issue with such an amount of experience that you have. I dunno how to do that except to say that perhaps you are not the average person in this respect.

I'll say something about what gives me a clue that you are legitt, rather than merely making stuff up. You say you carry two types of ammo for the same rifle. Different game, different ammo. That's what an expert would do, IMO. Also, it would take a thoughtful and deliberate person to take into account any difference in POI that might happen with different bullets/ammo, same rifle.

I never gave it much thought, because I seldom carry a rifle with a detachable mag. I did and still do consider using some light loads in my 458 or 375 for deer, and have the normal heavy loads handy, just in case, but I haven't done it because I always figure that if I needed the backup ammo, in such case, I wouldn't be able to switch in time anyway. Not expert enough, I suppose.

Every time I think of it seriously, I get visions of my obituary saying something like: "Redneck, aka kabluewy, found all chewed up by brown bear. Apparantly the poor fellow tried to switch ammunition in his rifle, since a Ruger 458 was found nearby, with the bolt open, and clutched in the deceased's hand was a 458WM round. The next of kin have been notified to come fetch the parts remaining, and a free rifle to boot."

Likewise, every time I think seriously about laying out good cash for a 223, I can't help but think about what I would/could/should use it for. I have yet to answer that question adequately. It really boils down to that. They cost at least as much as any good rifle, so I figure I should get one that has utility. It's kind of a variant on the question of why would I take a 223 deer hunting, when I have much more appropriate rifles for that? I just don't see fun and satisfaction in hunting big game with a varmint rifle, and it actually goes a little further. I actually find it sorta close to disgusting. Maybe that is all about emotion.

My question is: Can I still be a Republican conservative and feel slightly disgusted for those who hunt deer with a 223?

It's ok to be a skeptic, right?

I'll say it like this, and consider this a humble statment, before a field of expert judges. I have lost count of the number of deer I've shot. I have lost count of the number of deer that got away, wounded. I always figured my recovery rate is above average, but maybe not. Certainly, the number of deer I have shot at and recovered aren't close to 90, probably closer to 50 or 60. I'm estimating that maybe I lost 6 or 7 over the years. Part of the point is that I remember the number of years, but not the number of deer. I can say for sure that none recovered or lost were shot with a 223. I can also say, very humbly, that IMO if I had been using a 223 for the number of years it took me to shoot at even 25 or 30 deer, my loss ratio would be much higher. Now that's not counting any of the head and neck shots I've taken, because I believe the outcome would have been very close to the same. I simply can not relate to the level of success some of you guys claim with any caliber, and especially with the 223. In my humble opinion, assuming I am completely not willing to say it ain't true, then the only explanation I can come up with is that I simply can not relate to the luck or skill level that we are dealing with here with the successful 223 deer hunters.

However, that's looking at the past. Should I look at the posibility of using a 223 in the future, I can envision a pretty high success ratio. Because of my opinion of the 223, I would be very selective with my shots, and very careful. I might actually do OK. So relating to it in that way, actually helps my understand what may be happening with some of you experts and those who claim success. In my view, the use of the 223 is not a willy nilly thing. To get the success you guys are claiming, you have to be good, and you have to be selective. There just isn't enough margin with the 223 to be sloppy or crude or inexperienced.

I can relate to it somewhat because I used a CZ in 7.62x39 for a while, and I now consider it a marginal deer rifle too. As I remember I got three deer with it, and two hogs. I lost one hog too. The lost one was at about 125 yds, and the hit was low. That was my error, but with a 308 it would have turned out different. All those recovered were head shots. So, with a little experience, and being very careful, I could maintain a good recovery ratio with a 223 or 7.62x39. BTW, I got rid of the 7.62x39 because I don't like hunting hogs or deer with the restrictions such a rifle places on me. I don't want to always be restricted to head and neck shots, or limit my range to 125 yds. And I hate tracking hogs in the briers.

My next experiment with a small caliber deer rifle is a mini-mauser in 6.5mm Grendel. It has a little more whack (Vel, SD & BC) than the 7.62x39, and a little better trajectory. It's my compromise, and hopefully will satisfy any small efficient cartridge hankerings for a lifetime. I hope you 223 deer rifle fellers are appropriately jealous. Let's compare notes next year - whattdoya say?

KB

quote:

This post amazes me from a guy who has been arguing for the use of the .223. You are mistaking the better penetration of modern bullets for "energy". There is no difference in energy between a 55 grain cup and core bullet and a 55 grain monolithic at the same velocity.

You are correct, but the monolithic will penetrate deeper. The monolithic typically expand to a smaller diameter. Physics dictates that a smaller frontal area will retain energy better. Allowing that energy to be used in penetration.

On a complete pass through it doesn't matter, there was enough energy to do the job.

quote:

RC, like most of this, it's a state of mind, until we deal with physics, and that's what the advocates like to ignore and avoid thinking about.

What difference do the actual physics numbers make?
Honestly, thousand of deer are shot with 223's every year. Whatever the physics of the 223 is...it is enough. Look it up. It's in all the reloading books.

The difference here is all opinion and personal philosophies. We are all free to choose what we want.

I just know that from what I have seen, my 22-250's are more than adequate for deer. Add that to what others have done, makes the 223 adequate also.

I don't use a 22-250 as a stunt, to prove my manhood. I started using it to see for myself. That way I can talk somewhat intelligently, with experience. I have been more than happy with the results.

Bottom line is this. You are not going to change my mind. I certainly am not going to change yours. Even when the facts and actual experince have proven many times over and over again that it will work.

The anti arguement is smoke and mirrors, emotional, philosophical, anti hunters, ethics etc. Physics will not support it.

Simple physics has shown many, many times that the cartridge works. That is the bottom line, just because you choose to not accept that reality, and are trying to discredit those that have been there and done that shows the substance of your arguement.

Prove to me that it doesn't work, I will eat crow and apologize. You will not be able to do it because it has been done many times.

Just to stir the pot, why use a 308? why not a 338 WM? Physics indicates that a 338 WM is more better correct? Or why not a 375 H&H? There is even more better physics with that cartridge.

BTW, I have shot deer with both. There it is again, actual experience.

The proponents have admitted during this discussion that the 223 has its limitations, leaves less margin for error, is best used in certain situations (the referenced "223 location") and that all makes good sense. In capable hands, in the right situation, with the right loads, I really don't have a problem. Its NOT best practice for the vast majority of hunters and doesn't offer the best weapon for some hunting situations or presentations. We all seem to acknowledge that.