The "debate" over the .223/.224 as a deer cartridge seems incapable of dying, so here is a really simple yes or no poll. If possible, and it isn't, but if possible try to keep votes and/or responses, limited to only people that have or do hunt deer with any of the various .223/.224 chamberings, Please.

Question:
It has been established that a .223/.224 caliber rifle can kill deer.

Now, how many of the folks that use or have used these calibers for deer hunting would purposely go after and shoot an actual trophy buck(book quality - 170 points or bigger) with a .223/.224 rifle?

Choices:
Yes, I would with no reservations.
No, not on an actual trophy buck, book quality or not.

 

Sorry, I can't choose any of the options even if I have killed some Red deer with a 222.
All I have shot at with it, was 1 shot kills.

I would not take a .223 with me to purposely hunt any Whitetails or Red deer because it limits me to much even if I am 100% confident that I would kill any deer with a broadside shot with a high quality .223 bullet.
And that goes for any Whitetail and Red deer. Buck/stag or doe/hind. Trophy or not.

I prefer to use a caliber where I don't need to take broadside or neck shots to be sure of a clean kill.

I am not sure I answered according to your question

I would not choose intentionaly to use a .223/.224-bore rifle on any animal larger than a fox...not even a coyote. Why? Those animals feel pain as much as you or I do, perhaps more so as their senses are generally sharper. And I have and can use rifles of a size, chambering and potential lethality much more appropriate to the size of game or varmints I would shoot.

All animals other than humans generally go through life just doing their best to make it through each day, one day at a time. Only humans seem to enjoy plotting to acquire/do things not only unnecessary for maintaining their own life but even often destructive of it.

So I don't see any need to risk striking an unsporting, wounding blow or one which results in a slow, lingering death of absolute misery caused by a human predator to a victim which had no intent at all to harm its killer, to even the slightest degree.

Ive killed SW GA whitetails with mod 43 Winchester in 218bee and hornet, culled whitetails on a plantation with an old tang safety ruger 77V in swift at $ 10. / tail all with great luck by picking my shots, that said I would not shoot a whitetail with anything smaller than a 95 gr .243, as there are much better whitetail cals that I have to choose from now. to each his own, pissing and fighting on the internet is like entering the special Olympics,even if you win first place you are still a retard.

There's a reason there are so many caliber firearms. In the early days of black powder muzzle loaders they made, what they thought to be, appropriate size caliber for the size of game they were hunting. I don't believe many hunted grizzly bears with their 32 caliber squirrel rifles...even if they waited for a selected shot.

I've shot several deer with a 22-250 and 243.

And, I wouldn't worry in the least should a trophy deer step out into a shooting lane regardless of the gun I brought to the field, because I'm confident in the capabilities of the bullet being fired.

I voted no. BUT, if a 170 class deer walked out and all I had was a 223 I would take the shot. I would prefer my 22-250.

I didn't vote... and my favorite m70 is a .225 Winchester... not much difference.... i'm not a trophy hunter... I hunt because I can.... and its usually a meat hunt... most of my shooting is less than 100 yds... ive got several smallbores... .22 hornet, .222, .223, .220 swift, .22-250, and my favorite,, the .225... I don't hunt whitetails, only axis.... and they can't tell the difference between a .22 and a .308...or a .7mm... or a .264... or a 416...

I did a texas heart shot with a 64 gr 223wssm truck gun I have at 90-100 yards, what a mess. Went down like a sack of cow feed,I will not use it again. I had a 25wssm in the truck and just grabbed the wrong gun in the heat of the moment.I do like the 25 wissum with the 110 gr baccubonds or the cheaper super X 120 gr PEP load, shoots just like a 25-06.

I voted no but I have killed one doe with a .223 and that was a head shot.
Only reason I had the .223 with me that afternoon was as a backup rifle. My 264 WM was out of commission.I didn't have a ramrod to clear a bullet stuck in the throat of the barrel.

I don't know why this is even a question or a poll. Hell yes they would. Why not? The 223 kills trophy animals the same as meat animals. What is the problem here? If it's in the scope, it's a target and a shot.

Some hunters are sportsmen. That's the reason they use minimal caliblers. I'm not so sporting about shooting animals.

Easy answer for me. I have never shot a deer in the arse, nor shot when the vitals are covered with brush etc. It doesnt matter if it's a spikehorn or a world record, I wouldnt change that. makes caliber choice secondary to shot placement and the bullet itself for me.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Easy answer for me. I have never shot a deer in the arse, nor shot when the vitals are covered with brush etc. It doesnt matter if it's a spikehorn or a world record, I wouldnt change that. makes caliber choice secondary to shot placement and the bullet itself for me.

+1 on this for me. I usually use my .308 for deer, but I've killed a bunch with a .22-250, and wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on a trophy animal if I was using a.22 center fire. In my experience, shot placement trumps a bigger bullet every time.

I have killed one deer , a doe with a .22 Hornet and the only deer I have ever hit and lost, was with that same .22 Hornet and the exact same load.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I have killed one deer , a doe with a .22 Hornet and the only deer I have ever hit and lost, was with that same .22 Hornet and the exact same load.

A 22 Hornet is no .223 or a .22/250. Big difference in my book.
It's like comparing a 30 carbine and a 300 win mag.

In MOST instances when someone advocates premium bullets in this situation---they have no actual experience. It's like saying your pickup will carry a load if you use premium gas when in truth it runs just fine on regular. It sure sounds good that premium is going to be better---but it hauls the load with regular. Dead is dead. Plain old cup and core (non premium) bullet opens up and if it's path of penetration is through the vitals--you are going to need a sharp knife for the work ahead. A few thousands in a bigger cal is really not going to matter---if you drove the little pill through the vitals--the job is done. A big rack as in trophy is not a coat of Kelvar---so yes I'd shoot a trophy size just as quick as I would a non trophy. BTW Alberta Canuck--we very much disagree on this one---but it sure is good to see you posting and I hope that is a sign of improved health.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
I would not choose intentionaly to use a .223/.224-bore rifle on any animal larger than a fox...not even a coyote. Why? Those animals feel pain as much as you or I do, perhaps more so as their senses are generally sharper. And I have and can use rifles of a size, chambering and potential lethality much more appropriate to the size of game or varmints I would shoot.

All animals other than humans generally go through life just doing their best to make it through each day, one day at a time. Only humans seem to enjoy plotting to acquire/do things not only necessary for maintaining their own life but even often destructive of it.

So I don't see any need to risk striking an unsporting, wounding blow or one which results in a slow, lingering death of absolute misery caused by a human predator to a vitim which had no intent at all to harm its killer, to even the slightest degree.

Good post A.C.
Not many sportsmen left out there anymore. Just killers.

quote:

A 22 Hornet is no .223 or a .22/250. Big difference in my book.

But people still hunt and kill deer with them and with .22 Magnums and .22LR. They all use .223 or .224 diameter bullets do they not?

People have killed deer with .30 M1 Carbines and .30-378 Weatherby's, but in the end they all shoot a .308 diameter bullet.

The point of the poll, is merely to find out how many folks that are users of the various .223/.224 cartridges, will knowingly use them on trophy quality animals.

Sorry if I offended you Snellstrom, but my question concerned .223/.224 caliber rifles, and the last time I checked, a .22 Hornet is a LEGAL round for white tails in Texas.

To the best of my memory from hunting in Colorado and from the 2013 Big Game Brochure from Colorado, NONE of the various .223/.224 cartridges are legal for hunting Big Game in Colorado.

The questions remain as posted, how many folks that are consistent users of the .223/.224 use those guns when after trophy class bucks?

Smokin Joe--Duh, yes with muzzleloaders they used larger cals. But what kinfd of velocity did they have? Keep in mind that in 1915 when Savage came out with the 250-3000 Savage it would acheive the amazing, blazing speed of 3000 fps thus the name---that was an 87 grain bullet. Newton the designer wanted 100 grain bullet--but they couldn't get the 3000 fps with it. Not only decreased velocity, but they were using lead bullets that don't mushroom. So yes it would require a larger bullet.

quote:

but they were using lead bullets that don't mushroom.

Having had a little experience with muzzle loaders, your above statement is quite a bit off.

Hard cast lead bullets in modern firearms are designed for minimal expansion.

The bullets/round balls used in muzzle loaders are cast from pure lead. At 50 yards or so, a .45 caliber lead round ball will flatten out and expand to the size of a quarter almost.

Traditional muzzle loaders using traditional patched round ball create some really impressive wound channels.

Problem is none of this has anything to do with the topic the poll is about.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

A 22 Hornet is no .223 or a .22/250. Big difference in my book.

But people still hunt and kill deer with them and with .22 Magnums and .22LR. They all use .223 or .224 diameter bullets do they not?

People have killed deer with .30 M1 Carbines and .30-378 Weatherby's, but in the end they all shoot a .308 diameter bullet.

The point of the poll, is merely to find out how many folks that are users of the various .223/.224 cartridges, will knowingly use them on trophy quality animals.

Sorry if I offended you Snellstrom, but my question concerned .223/.224 caliber rifles, and the last time I checked, a .22 Hornet is a LEGAL round for white tails in Texas.

To the best of my memory from hunting in Colorado and from the 2013 Big Game Brochure from Colorado, NONE of the various .223/.224 cartridges are legal for hunting Big Game in Colorado.

The questions remain as posted, how many folks that are consistent users of the .223/.224 use those guns when after trophy class bucks?

I have plenty of experience shooting Deer with a 22/250 I haven't always lived in Colorado by the way. Even killed a few Texas whitetails with the 22/250 as well.
Just so you know....
You are always slamming any and all .224's for Deer based on your losing a deer with a 22 Hornet?
My statement stands.
By the way you and other naysayers are skewing your own poll with those comparisons. You lose a deer with a 22 Hornet so all 224's are automatically inadequate for Deer, yes that sounds about right.
Very scientific.

Crazyhorse--yes a pure lead ball will flatten some. I said mushroom. You know little sharp petals. Those muzzleloaders at the velocity back then didn't get as much expansion or penetration--thus larger cals were needed. It relates to this poll as someone coming out with the bigger cal needed. I don't think a .22 cal muzzleloader would work too well on deer.

Whether a state legalizes a caliber for hunting big game it has nothing to do with whether the caliber is enough for such game. For example in the state I live in for pistol/revolver caliber any center fire is legal as long as the gun meets the barrel length requirement. So that means if you happen to have a 25 automatic that meets that barrel requirement it's legal to hunt with it. Get the point there guys? I see it more as a political thing except for some states that actually care about what caliber you use such as Colorado. They even have an energy require at 100 yards for pistol/revolver rounds which for some calibers is tough to meet.

Mushrooming bullets only applies to cylindrical bullets. How can a round ball mushroom when it doesn't have a shank? In a sense the round ball "flattening" is like a cylindrical bullet mushrooming. In fact a flattened round ball doesn't have as thing edge as a mushroom.

A flattened round ball--at those low velocities will not cut like a mushroomed jacketed bullet--in other words less penetration. Certainly a big heavy ball will kill. Worked great on buffalo. But a smaller cal will work with the much higher velocities of today and the jacketed bullet.

Yesterday, I almost bought a barrel in 223 with 7" twist (for heavy premium bullets) for my spare upper receiver.

We have a field mouse taking residence in the house, and I thought it would be a good excuse to own a 223. But my family reminded me that my shooting hours would be limited to times when no one else is in the house.

So I bought a mouse trap instead.

It would have been fun, but what would I do with a 223 when the mouse is gone?

Armadillos -- yea, there's an idea. Premium bullets ought to penetrate their shell.

Also, bordering the farm, the back dirt road is loaded with coyote tracks, refreshed each night.

Apparantly all it takes is a lively imagination to dream up justifications to own a 223.

But this thread is about "reality", or is it - really? As consistantly demonstrated on this forum, especially the 223 on deer, "reality" is whatever one imagines it to be.

KB

quote:

You are always slamming any and all .224's for Deer based on your losing a deer with a 22 Hornet?

Whoa there a minute, I don't slam the .223/.224 calibers. You got that wrong. I used a Hornet for years on javelina and wild turkeys, and did kill one deer with the Hornet and in all honesty it was a really impressive kill. Deer never took a step, went straight down. After shooting and losing a deer with the Hornet I made a conscience decision that the Hornet was not what I wanted as a deer gun.

Over the past 20 years, I have guided quite a few people on deer hunts and they used .222's/.223's/.22-250's and even one used a .220 Swift.

All of them got their deer and with only one exception that comes to mind, the animals all went down either on the spot or within 20 yards of the spot. The one exception was a doe shot at approximately 110 yards with a .22-250. The shot in and of itself was a good heart/lung shot, but there was no exit and the doe covered about 50 yards after the hit. The only thing that saved that day was that there was an inch or so of snow on the ground and we finally found one drop of blood and about a dozen yards away we found the doe piled up dead. Had it not been for the snow, I do not believe we would have found that animal.

I prefer for my hunters to use something larger, .243/,257 Robert's/.25-06/7mm-08/6.5x55, but if they are comfortable and competent with a .223/.224 caliber rifle, then I have no real problem. Besides it is their choice, however and we are not the only ones that require this, but on our "Buck" hunts, we do require hunters to use a .243 or larger.

Getting back to the subject at hand however, on various sites around the internet, repeatedly in discussions concerning the merits or lack there of, of the various .223/.224 cartridges for deer hunting, there are always a certain percentage of the .223/.224 backers that openly state, that while they use nothing but their favorite .223/.224 for shooting does/culls, when it comes to being in a situation where a shot at an actual trophy sized buck is possible/probable, they will be using a larger caliber.

In looking at the results so far from the poll, that seems to be the way it is looked at on here. If it is does/culls it is okay to use the smaller caliber but if actual trophy sized animals are or will be encountered than most of these individuals want something larger at hand.

You missed the analogy Ray. Those ancestors knew the smaller caliber muzzle loaders weren't up to the task of taking big game just as we know today the .223 isn't the best thing to use.

Joe--I don't think I missed anything. Faster velocity and more efficient bullet allows today what was not available then. It would have required a larger bullet back then. Verbal Smith sold a pamphlet Jacketed Performance with cast bullets. He may believe that, but I don't and I don't knock cast bullets.

The voting has slowed down, but the results are the same as on any other forum I have been on.

While the .223/.224's can and do kill hundreds if not thousands of deer annually around the country. When it comes down to trying to kill an actual trophy buck, the majority opt for something bigger.

To me it seems that the problem is the confidence level of the .223's/.224's drops as the size, antler wise, as the size of the deer increases.

I voted no but openly support using a .224 for deer. I'd have no hesitation using my .22-250 for a trophy hunt but wouldn't because it is a heavier barreled rifle than I like to carry. I wouldn't take my .223 because it limits my range so much.

I have a .257 Roberts and a .25-06 that I'd grab in a heartbeat though.

My guess is, you would have the same results if you switched the caliber to 243/6MM.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
The voting has slowed down, but the results are the same as on any other forum I have been on.

While the .223/.224's can and do kill hundreds if not thousands of deer annually around the country. When it comes down to trying to kill an actual trophy buck, the majority opt for something bigger.

To me it seems that the problem is the confidence level of the .223's/.224's drops as the size, antler wise, as the size of the deer increases.

Kinda follows the logic of a fella giving a kid or his wife a 243 to hunt with, but insisting on a 7mmMag for himself.

If they were legal here, there would be some lonely rifles in my safe. Modern bullets are a game changer.......

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
When it comes down to trying to kill an actual trophy buck, the majority opt for something bigger.

To me it seems that the problem is the confidence level of the .223's/.224's drops as the size, antler wise, as the size of the deer increases.

Twisted logic or limited vision. Which is it?
If you are planning a "trophy" hunt then you are not concerned with anything but horns and success. Your conclusion that people lack confindence is in error. It suggests that people realize that the smaller gun has a shorter effective range and as such they opt for something that is capable of greater distances.

Why is it hard for you to acknowledge that any cartridge has to be used within it's effective range for the given situation? Would you take a .30-30 Win on a "trophy" hunt? Why not? To limiting? How about a .44 Rem Mag? How about a compound bow? Maybe a traditional bow?
If someone chooses to hunt with a tool that limits the range they will take a shot what's it to you? Why bash them for using something that requires a bit more hunt and less shooting? It would seem, following your logic, we should all be using a .50 BMG so as to be able to take "trophies" at any range with total devastation.

quote:

Originally posted by BigNate:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
When it comes down to trying to kill an actual trophy buck, the majority opt for something bigger.

To me it seems that the problem is the confidence level of the .223's/.224's drops as the size, antler wise, as the size of the deer increases.

Twisted logic or limited vision. Which is it?
If you are planning a "trophy" hunt then you are not concerned with anything but horns and success. Your conclusion that people lack confindence is in error. It suggests that people realize that the smaller gun has a shorter effective range and as such they opt for something that is capable of greater distances.

Why is it hard for you to acknowledge that any cartridge has to be used within it's effective range for the given situation? Would you take a .30-30 Win on a "trophy" hunt? Why not? To limiting? How about a .44 Rem Mag? How about a compound bow? Maybe a traditional bow?
If someone chooses to hunt with a tool that limits the range they will take a shot what's it to you? Why bash them for using something that requires a bit more hunt and less shooting? It would seem, following your logic, we should all be using a .50 BMG so as to be able to take "trophies" at any range with total devastation.

It's a Corvette/little dick thing.....

quote:

I have killed one deer , a doe with a .22 Hornet and the only deer I have ever hit and lost, was with that same .22 Hornet and the exact same load.

Hmmmmmm, a sample of 2, statistically irrelevant.

I have posted this before, but no one seems to want to believe me.

I specifically started hunting with a 22-250 because of the internet know it alls that said it couldn't, shouldn't, won't, can't be done.

I have grown quite tired of all this nonsense and would simply like to to tell all the naysayer to bugger off!

But here it is again, I had a friend hunt with nothing but 22-250 with 55gr factory loads since the late 70's. He has killed many deer and antelope with that rifle. Used it last year again on a 170 class mule deer.

Me and my sons have conservatively killed over three dozen deer and antelope. Shots have ranged from 40 to 400 yards. All sort of shot presentations. I will take any shot with my 22-250 that I would take with any of my 6.5's, 270's, 7mm's, 30's, 338's, 35's, 9.3's, or 404 Jeffery. I have tried to catch one of those bullets and have failed.

It works, the kicker is that there are guys that have way more experience than me. They have shot and used the 22 centerfires successfully for all sorts of game. Not just deer, antelope.

So I find it extremely funny, no make that ridiculous when some internet know it alls tell me you shouldn't, wouldn't, can't, won't.

You are simply wrong, there is no other way to put it. People used to believe the world was flat, and the earth was the center of the universe. Open your minds, and maybe, just maybe go out and get some real experience, or not. You decide.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
The voting has slowed down, but the results are the same as on any other forum I have been on.

While the .223/.224's can and do kill hundreds if not thousands of deer annually around the country. When it comes down to trying to kill an actual trophy buck, the majority opt for something bigger.

To me it seems that the problem is the confidence level of the .223's/.224's drops as the size, antler wise, as the size of the deer increases.

Maybe it has to do with the 2 choices you have been giving in the voting

If you had asked if I would feel totally confident about making a clean 1-shot kill on a trophy buck when I was out hunting with a 223, then I would answer yes.

But I couldn't just shoot at it from any angle as I could with a larger caliber.
And you need to use the right bullets.

I couldn't care less about the size of the antlers, as I am not a trophy hunter.
I am a hunter and great tasting meat and a good looking trophy is just a bonus and not the reason for why I hunt.

I have killed dozens of deer with my AR-15 since 1976. I used the Speer 70gr Semi Spitzer and kept velocity at 2850 fps or less. Most shots were in thick cover and less than 50 yds. A few to 200yds. I almost always got complete penetration and would break the shoulders down. Many shots were at an angle that had the bullet enter behind the shoulder and exit through the liver and out behind the last rib.

The only reason I went to bigger calibers is the large hogs that started showing up, the 223 is light for a 250 to 350 lb boar hog or sow. Deer wise it will eat their lunch.

I have killed exactly five Kodiak Island blacktails with 6 shots out of my AR-15. I used Nosler 60-grain solid base bullets, all were good hits at under 200 yards. The extra shot was on the first deer, who did not appear to be hit so I fired again. A few seconds later he tipped over. The two bullet holes were 2" apart. The next four deer were shot once, and I waited for them to die.

That is where the problem with the small calibers can arise: A slower reaction to the bullet strike and some time for the animal to die. They can travel some distance in twenty seconds and is some types of cover that could mean a lost animal. Using a .300 Savage or .45-70 on other hunts in the same location anchored the animals immediately - or very close to it. No problems recovering those animals, a blind cat could find them.

Can you kill deer with a .22? Sure. Most here seem to have been shooting rather small deer rather than 250# mule deer - which of course helps with killing power. Should you use a .22 on deer? Up to you, but the saddest reason of all to use one is to prove to people you don't even know that you can do it. Sad logic indeed...


.

To me, sad logic is people that have minimal to no experience telling other people what they should, shouldn't, can or cannot do.

with my 22-250 and the right bullet, no questions asked I would!