thanks TC1. its not a perfect clone but close enough for me.

257 Roberts is a great deer cartridge!

And Geedubya that's just plain mean showing off all that good food!

Great pictures of the pork dinner and it made me hungry again. I wish that the areas I hunt had pigs but they haven't made their way up into Idaho yet, that I'm aware of.


One of the reasons that many folks use the .223, 22-250 and .243 calibers for deer is that they most likely shoot these the most and feel most comfortable with them.

I've got a Marlin 1895 Cowboy in 45-70 with the 26" octagon barrel and have worked up a load with a 405g cast bullet that pushes it out at 1970fps. It is not a comfortable round to shoot and after about 5-7 shots with it the fun vanishes. My .300 Win Mag load is a 180g bullet at 3100fps which produces less recoil than the 45-70 but still after about 10-12 shots with this, at paper not game, I'm looking to pull out anther shooter.

My .223 gets shot about 350-500 rounds during the spring and summer at rock chucks, jack rabbits and coyotes. If I were to go Elk hunting with my .300 Win Mag I would check the zero on the scope say 6 shots and hopefully take less than 4 to slay an elk, maybe only one. Total of maybe 10 shots/year vs. 500-600 per year with the .223 with hunting in the fall and more varmint calling in the winter.

The more you shoot a rifle the more comfortable you become with it. After many years of this type of volume with the .223/22-250 and shooting small targets at 250-400 yards, shooting a deer in the lungs at 200 yards looks like it's a piece of cake. Hard to miss that large of a target. We've shot rock chucks, when the wind is down, at 300 yards in the head as that was all that was visible. That's the size of a softball; compare that to a broadside deer at 200-250 yards and it's cake time again. Simple.

Our varmint rigs are all set up with trigger work done, barrels floated and good glass and are all capable of holding .50-.70 at 100 yards. To me the fun of shooting is hitting stuff and if our rifles don't hit stuff they are sold and we buy more.

I agree with TC1--Nice looking rifle. Geedubya also posted nice looking rifles. TC1 your .223 makes me drool. I know you have posted pictures of it before but it is worthy of posting again for others to drool over.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I agree with TC1--Nice looking rifle. Geedubya also posted nice looking rifles. TC1 your .223 makes me drool. I know you have posted pictures of it before but it is worthy of posting again for others to drool over.

Not a problem. It's my favorite .223

TC1 very nice rifle. pair ir with mine and we have the beauty and the beast do you have a picture of your m40?

TC1

Absolutely gorgeous rifle.

Enjoy!

GWB

This thread should have been in archery and it has two pages. Just wait until it's a deer shot with a .223.

For sure a beautiful rifle TC1 thanks for sharing the pictures.

CM
You just don't have the slightest grasp of psychology. The .223 shooters don't like recoil and they don't go into big bores because they don't shoot big bores because of the recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I find it amusing that here on the small cal forum that EVERY thread about deer and .22 cal will bring on many trolls singing the praises of large cals. I don't see small cal guys trolling on the archery forum telling the guys to use a rifle. I don't see small cal guys going to the large cal section telling them they should be using a .22 cal. The large cal guys frequently tell how you can shoot through trees or mountains or whatever obstacle and pretty much hit them anywhere at any angle. Advocate shots that I don't care what you have, my opinion is you should pass on the shot. Advocate that the kill zone is enlarged---you can make a bad shot and the bigger gun compensates. Heck with a magnum just getting close on the shot is good enough. And oh yes use PREMIUM bullets by all means. Plain old cup and core have worked for me, but PREMIUMS would kill them deader. We are told repeatedly things that can't be done, but we have experienced doing them numerous times. Told things like the 30-06 is not that good but a .300 magnum is the ticket (I'm to listen to a person that knocks the 30-06?) I guess us small cal guys are so inexperienced that we need big brother guiding us.

SR4759--That is a duh. For sure people shoot .223's because of the lack of recoil. They know what they can do as they have done it. But they don't go to big bores and tell those folks they are wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . There Is NO Perfect Caliber For Hunting White Tails, and this site and this world would be damn boring if hunters were limited to One Specific Caliber. . . .

Oh I dunno . . . we could call it Obamacaliber! But it would have to cost more, have less velocity, poorer accuracy and be inaccessible.

quote:

Oh I dunno . . . we could call it Obamacaliber! But it would have to cost more, have less velocity, poorer accuracy and be inaccessible.

carpetman, not everyone is saying that you or anyone else is wrong. Some of us are simply saying that in OUR OPINION, the various .223's/.224's are the be all/end all of deer rifles.

I don't personally like the .243, but I feel for the inexperienced, it is a better choice than any of the .223's/.224's. I feel that the .257 Robert's/.25/06/.257 Weatherby/6.5x55 Swede/7mm-08/7x57 are all better choices.

If a hunter is experienced enough and disciplined enough, then the .223/.224 caliber rifles do an excellent job. But for the inexperienced, once or twice a season deer hunter, there is no margin of error due to several factors, the most critical being lack of experience and expertise with their choice of gun and cartridge.

I do not suggest anyone run out and get any of the magnum rounds, because again there is the lack of experience and expertise.

You continually run the .223/.224 up the flag pole and expect everyone to bow before it, and IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

I am happy for you and your success with the rifle/caliber of your choice. You are successful with it and that is great. Please have the decency to understand that ALL hunters do not share your views nor do the majority of them expect you to share theirs.

Crazyhorse--To begin with if I experience a deer being shot, I report it. This forum is for discussion is my understanding. If it happens to be a .224 so be it. It is not a matter of running it up the flagpole. Certainly if someone is selecting a rifle for a youth, I'll report lots of favorable experience with the .224's. Get real, an EXPERIENCED hunter cannot put English, hook, slice or any special twist on a shot that a young an inexperienced hunter can't do. You take the young hunter out and let them shoot the rifle. They are comfortable with it as there is little blast and recoil. You then take them out and give them a good rest and you wait until a deer at reasonable range makes a good presentation. You don't let them take poor presentation shots, you have them pass and the deer won this time. Same thing an EXPERIENCED hunter with a big gun should do. Then it's just a matter of hitting the kill zone. My experience is that the young inexperienced, under conditions I described can do this with high regularity. I'll buy into that this is marginal caliber or less than optimum or any of the other labels the keyboard experts put on it, IF they can explain to me how a shot that takes out heart, liver, or lungs or combination thereof is not going to kill that deer. I have strong opinions as to why I don't like some of the rounds you run up the flagpole. I do like the 30-06 which you put down. Very obviously neither of us would select each other as the expert we would listen to. So we can agree that we disagree.

First, I do not put the .30-06 down anymore than I do the .223's/.224's. Learn reading comprehension. I PERSONNALLY DO NOT LIKE the .30-06/.308/.270 or the .243, but I OPENLY recommend them to anyone looking for a hunting rifle.

I think .223's/.224's are great for hunting coyotes/javelina, and other similar sized critters, I just personally do not believe that they are the best things going for shooting white tails.

Second, a .243 or .257 Robert's does not produce that much more recoil or muzzle blast than the majority of the .223's/.224's in a properly stocked rifle.

Third I have been basically agreeing to disagree since your first post on this site concerning the use of .223's/.224's as a deer cartridge, especially for the inexperienced hunter.

Fourth, I rarely if ever recommend the majority of calibers I prefer for hunting deer or practically anything else.

Fifth, you do run this topic up the flagpole if for no other reason than to get a rise out of Kabluewy, and you damn well know it as does everyone else.

You simply cannot accept the fact that while many folks openly admit that the various .223's/.224's can and do kill thousands of deer annually across the U.S., many also feel that those calibers are the optimum choice under any circumstance.

Lastly, you do not seem to be able to grasp the concept that also yearly, hunters with little or no hunting experience, and I am referring to adults here take to the woods with .223's/.224's and they have no concept of what the optimum conditions are for taking a shot at a deer with those calibers. They don't know the proper type bullets to use, they can't judge range, they have no real concept of proper bullet placement and the list goes on.

Can and do the same things happen to these type individuals using a .243 or larger caliber, Yes, but there is a little more room for error in case everything is not just exactly perfect

The fun never ends

I use and like it. I also agree it's not the optimum whitetail cartridge. For me and my hunting opportunities that's not a big deal.

Some of us will continue to use it and others will continue to throw rocks. I can live with that.

Saying something that you and other folks that like using the .223's/.224's say:

quote:

I also agree it's not the optimum whitetail cartridge.

Is not throwing rocks, it is merely stating a FACT that you and other users of those caliber's openly and freely admit too.

All I am saying, which is repeating what many others have said in these discussions, if the folks that like using those calibers are getting the results they are after, then by all means, keep on doing what you are doing.

But touting those calibers as the be all/end all cartridges for hunting white tail deer under ALL conditions in North America simply does not wash, especially when the individuals using those calibers openly admit that.

Can those calibers kill white tails and mule deer, Yes. Thousands of deer are killed annually across America with those calibers, By Individuals That Are COMPLETELY Aware of Their OWN Limitations And Those Of Their Equipment.

At the same time no one has any idea as to how many deer are wounded and lost annually by people that Do Not operate within the Limitations of their Own Abilities or the Limitations of the Equipment they are using.

Simply agreeing with individuals that successfully use those calibers, BUT Willingly admits to the limitations of those calibers, is not throwing rocks.

It is no different than anyone claiming that Magnum Rifles are not the Be All/End All for hunting White tails and me agreeing with them even though I normally hunt them with various magnum calibers.

So what's the problem other than spouting your opinions as facts, and yes you are throwing rocks.

Those Huge animals around Olney, Tx do require magnums, I forgot to factor that in. With a big gun you can hit em anywhere and not get cripples? So much more room for error you never have to pass on a shot.
Think maybe with Kabluey it is catch and release? I could never hook a crazyhorse--way to savvy and too badly needed to keep us small cal guys straight. BTW have you ever posted anything about an actual experience you had?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . . At the same time no one has any idea as to how many deer are wounded and lost annually by people that Do Not operate within the Limitations of their Own Abilities or the Limitations of the Equipment they are using. . . . .

I think this is a fair point. In fact, I know it is: is there anyone who would not accept this logic on other issues (like gun control)?

Full disclosure: I say this as someone who wouldn't use anything less than a 6mm to hunt deer, assuming the world as we know it doesn't end. Then, all bets would be off.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
So what's the problem other than spouting your opinions as facts, and yes you are throwing rocks.

Forgive me . . . but which opinions has he represented as facts?

Carpetman, everything I post is based on my own personal experiences over my hunting career.

Last year here around Olney, I killed 4 does. One with my wife's .257 Robert's, one with my Model 94 Marlin in .44 Rem Mag, one with my Model 94 Winchester in .38-55, and one with my .375 H&H.

I use what I want to, same as you, as I have stated more than once, I have killed deer with a .22 Hornet. I just found its usage on deer had limitations that I was not interested in dealing with for various reasons, but I have no trouble using the Robert's or my 6.5x55, if that is what I choose to carry.

I have guided several folks that killed their deer with a .223 or a .22-250 and while I wasn't overly enthusiastic, they worked within their limitations and those of their equipment, and all made one shot kills out to 125-130 yards. I would have preferred they had been using a .243 or something larger, but it worked out. One caveat however, when we have buck hunters booked we limit them to .243 or larger rifles.

As I stated in my previous responses, you are entitled to your opinion and to use whatever you want to in your hunting, I just do not agree with .223's/.224's being a optimal choice.

I have the same rights as you and I will use whatever I want to in my hunting. If that is the .257 Robert's, that is what I will use if it is my .375 then that is what I will use.

Also, just to correct one of your assumptions, I only take shots that I am sure of making, simply because even the big rifles have to be shot so that the bullet goes where it will accomplish the job it was designed to do.

Crazyhorse--If you only take sure shots, how do you know so much about the bigger cals having so much room for error? You have a limit of minimum of .243? Whose rule is that? Texas it is not a requirement. Is this a case of you having to babysit the unknowing small cal guys? All those one shot kills with .224's and you preferred something larger---that would have killed em deader. I'm with you there, nothing like under killing something. Antlers do make em harder to kill so a .243 might marginally work where a .224 never would. Killing a buck with a .223? What an imagination.

A sure shot for me and the larger calibers starting with the .257 Robert's moves out to 200-250 yards. I don't think personally a .223/.224 is going to be a consistent killer at that range.

Going up from the Robert's I will stretch things out to 300 yards if necessary, but I much prefer things under 200 or better yet 150.

As far as what caliber we limit our buck hunters to, that is our option and if a person does not want to abide with it, they won't hunt with us.

It is my bosses property and he can set any rules concerning the caliber being used that he wishes as long as they do not violate the rules of the state of Texas, placing a minimum caliber limit of .243 on hos properties is well within his right.

You seem to have lost all comprehension of the discussion. You and TC1 have both stated that the .223's/.224's are not the optimal caliber for hunting deer under ALL conditions. Personally, however you both use them and enjoy using and are successful using them. I have no problem with that.

My entire opinion still rests with the idea that Personally, I Simply Do Not Believe that those calibers are the BEST Option under ALL Conditions one encounters when hunting deer. I DO NOT recommend the calibers I use except on rare occasions. Contrary to your assumption about my attitude toward he 30-06, as I have stated many times, I simply don't like the 30-06 but when asked by people just getting interested in hunting what calibers I recommend, in order .243/.25-06/7mm-08/.270/.308 and .30-06.

Just like it is your right/option/choice to use the .223 class rifles, the exact same things apply to my choice of equipment.

Crazyhorse--Don't put words in my mouth. I have not said any cartridge is optimum or not optimum. I say a well placed shot will do the job. I have asked and nobody has answered as to why any of them that takes out a heart, lung, or liver or combination thereof doesn't kill the deer (the goal). When that happens, why is not a consistent killer? Please explain. you have stated the .224's will work in the hands of an experienced hunter. You did not explain what an experienced hunter can do over an inexperienced that does make the well placed shot. You have stated under less than optimum shots how a bigger cal works better. To me that wreaks of the old gun counter garbage of hit em anywhere with a magnum. A bad shot is a bad shot and bad results. If the shot is not right, I pass and I can say I have never passed a shot I would have taken if I had of had a bigger gun. Certainly the land owner can set any rule they chose, I did not question that, you didn't have to explain that to me. You state the .224's will work, but you require larger. Sounds like you question your clients shooting ability. A larger gun is not the answer. You should give them some practice and teach them some shooting skills. Make sure you put them on good shots, scrap the notion that a bigger gun is going to make up for a shot that shouldn't be taken. I personally don't like the 25-06. My view it doesn't do a thing the .270 doesn't do better. The recoil of a 25-06 with a 120 grain bullet and a .270 with 130 is all but identical, with the blast of a 25-06 being louder. But what does my opinion count? Had people not liked the 25-06, Remington would not have adopted it. Sales are very good for the 25-06. So my opinion doesn't matter. I would never question someone else using one. I do thank you for allowing me to have the right to hunt, in Texas with a .223. I'll not extend that right to you to hunt with what you prefer as someone in a higher pay grade makes that determination unlike you, I don't have that authority.

Crazyhorse--You have mentioned that your posts are based on actual experience. You mentioned conditions where the .224's are not consistent killers. Would you please relate some actual experiences where a well placed shot was made with a .224 and it didn't work?

Dude, I have stated over and over again that I just do not believe the .22 caliber center-fires are the best option for hunting white tails under all circumstances. That has nothing to do with being inconsistent killers, both you and TC1 have stated the same thing.

TC1 posted this.

quote:

I use and like it. I also agree it's not the optimum whitetail cartridge. For me and my hunting opportunities that's not a big deal.

Carpetman posted this
[QUOTE] I'll buy into that this is marginal caliber or less than optimum or any of the other labels the keyboard experts put on it

Many folks, me included have said over and over again, that the .22 center-fires can and do kill deer on a regular basis, But, They Do Not Feel They Are The Best Choices Under ALL Circumstances.

Have I witnessed and skinned and gutted deer with .223's and .22-250's and even .22 Hornets, Yes. I am not disputing the fact that deer can be and are killed annually with .22 center-fires.

However I DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE OF THE OPINION THAT .22 CENTER-FIRES ARE NOT THE BEST CHOICE as a deer rifle.

That is what your whole argument is about nothing more. You want everyone to bow down to you and your Holy Grail of how great .22 center-fires as instantaneous killers of white tails and that ain't gonna happen.

If you and anyone else are happy and comfortable with the results you are getting, By All Means Keep Doing What You Are Doing And More Power To You.

Try to have the civility and maturity to permit others to do the same and that also includes allowing people to have and form their OWN opinions as to what they believe is an adequate caliber for hunting deer, and you can not do that.

You continually try to convince everyone that your choice is the best and that anyone THAT does not agree with you know absolutely nothing about deer hunting and has no experience deer hunting. You are wrong.

Some people and a couple of states, believe that the .22 center-fires are not adequate for hunting deer.

As for your childish comment about me proving anything, no matter what evidence I could put forth, you would say I was lying.

Contradictoryhorse urr uhh Crazyhorse which way is it? Two posts earlier you say it is an inconsistent killer then you open up with it has nothing to do with being an inconsistent killer. Why didn't you use my full quote--I said I'd buy into it being marginal or any other label if they can explain how a deer with heart, liver, lungs or combination thereof is not going to die--something to that effect. And you suggest I might question your integrity???? Amazing. Yes some states have cal laws that exclude .224 and I think some you could use a .25ACP but not a .223. Nothing against bow hunting--It is legal in all states---and .224's not???? This isn't a matter of me trying to convince anyone--it is a matter of posting what happens and some troll like yourself comes along with all their yada yada yada. Face it--the deer died--it worked. I still haven't seen any of your posts where a well hit deer and it didn't work. Poorly hit I'm sure they ran off. Once again thanks for the permission to use .224's in Texas. I had deep fears of a game warden catching me and not having your blessings on it.
I want everyone to bow down to my choice? Not true at all. Read my posts and I use a .243 most of time--use to be 30-06. The posts I have made about .223's have been nephews, grandson and such. I just post what happens and I'm being childish to ask the same of you? to

Carpetman, do me a favor, go back thru my responses on this subject and point out ANYWHERE that I stated

quote:

Two posts earlier you say it is an inconsistent killer

. I re-read every one of my responses and find no where that I made that statement.

My but we are throwing a little tantrum aren't we Prisilla, got your little girl panties wadded up in a bunch.

The point remains, Prisilla, if a person is satisfied with the results they are getting out of the equipment they are using, that is great.

That Does Not Mean That Anyone Or Everyone MUST Agree With Their Choice Of Equipment, That Is Life, PERIOD.

Just because some one/any one does not like a particular cartridge/caliber, that does not mean they think that particular cartridge/caliber is worthless or of no use or will not perform as intended within its own particular limitations, it is merely a PERSONAL choice. Not unlike a person choosing Chocolate ice cream over Vanilla, both are good, but while some folks like one, other folks like the other one.

And as far as ANYONE being a troll(?) Here was your OP that started this train wreck! Looks to me like you were trolling for KB there Prisilla.

Carpetman wrote:

quote:

I can usually make a post about someone shooting a deer with a .223. My son in law shot a very nice buck, but he used a bow. I haven't been out yet as it has been hot and I like to wait until the flies are gone. Maybe I can take someone out with a .223.Ol Kabluey is up in Alaska in his cabin and doesn't have internet.

Crazyhorse you are correct you didn't say the .223 is an inconsistent killer----you said your opinion it is an inconsistent killer. You say your opinions are based on experience. Maybe you can relate an experience where a deer came back to life to validate that the .223 is an inconsistent killer. Prisilla? Is that the Spanish spelling of Priscilla?

Please point out where I said "In My Opinion, It Is An Inconsistent Killer".

Find that statement and quote it, you can not, because I did not say that.

I again re-read ALL of my responses, And In None Of Them did I say anything about it being my opinion the .22 center-fires are inconsistent killers.

If you can point out which response I made that comment in Do So.

Also for your information I am a Native Born Texan with 0 Mexican ancestry. So insulting me that way just shows more of your childish nature.

Your grabbing at straws. You have your opinion about the use of .22 center-fires for deer hunting and I have mine, neither of us is going to change the others mind, but you have started losing ground with your argument, since you admit to doing most of your OWN hunting with a .243 and earlier a .30-06.

As far as recommending the .223 for kids and the inexperienced so they won't be bothered by recoil, your making the same mistake so many people have made over the decades, by saddling beginning bird hunters with a .410. A .410 is an experts gun, a person has to have years of experience to consistently kill birds with that small shot charge and limited range.

I know of a lot of kids and women that over they years killed their first deer with a .222, but as they got older they graduated to the .243 or larger calibers. The past few years I see kids of 8 and 10 years old using properly proportioned rifles, starting out with .243's.

If the recoil of a properly stocked .243 or .257 Robert's "Bother's" a normally health youngster, maybe that youngster is still too young to be hunting deer.

Come in here for a little catch and release and have one on the line flapping his jaws so hard I can't release him.

Read 2nd sentence of your post Dec 7 at 19:27.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
A sure shot for me and the larger calibers starting with the .257 Robert's moves out to 200-250 yards. I don't think personally a .223/.224 is going to be a consistent killer at that range.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I think .223's/.224's are great for hunting coyotes/javelina, and other similar sized critters, I just personally do not believe that they are the best things going for shooting white tails.

Second, a .243 or .257 Robert's does not produce that much more recoil or muzzle blast than the majority of the .223's/.224's in a properly stocked rifle.

Third I have been basically agreeing to disagree since your first post on this site concerning the use of .223's/.224's as a deer cartridge, especially for the inexperienced hunter.

you do run this topic up the flagpole if for no other reason than to get a rise out of Kabluewy, and you damn well know it as does everyone else.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
If the recoil of a properly stocked .243 or .257 Robert's "Bother's" a normally health youngster, maybe that youngster is still too young to be hunting deer.

I don't see much to argue with about the above quotes, unless one just likes to argue.

It's amusing that CM didn't use the actual quote, but intentionally misrepresented it. So, what's new?

KB

It seems to me if the 224s were such great deer calibers every body would be using them all the time.

Their users wouldn't have to defend them so hard.

I have shot deer with them and killed them but after killing deer for over 45 years.

They are not my top choice.

I don't think there hardly is a caliber I have not shot at deer with. 9.3 comes to mind but is it really much different then calibers around it. (calibers not cartridges) minus some of the over 45 cal stuff


I started deer hunting with a 250sav even then I found out for some shots in thick timber even that was lacking.

I found that I prefer at least a 150gr at 2400 or more.

My 300sav 165 at 2400, 270 150 at 2700, 30-06 180 at 2600, 308 165 at 2600 all work very well or any caliber there about.

I have killed deer with very thing from 22lr to over 40 cal DGRs.

Yes they well all kill deer the middle range calibers are a very good compromise.

Well Carpetman, I am going to stand by that statement, I DO Not believe that the .22 center-fires, more specifically the .223 is a consistent deer killer AT THE RANGES I LISTED, ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE AGE GROUP YOU RECOMMEND THE USE OF IT FOR.

You tout the .223 as being the best caliber to start young hunters, INEXPERIENCED HUNTERS, out with due to problems of recoil, then you turn around and expect those same "Hunters" to accurately place their shot in the head of a deer at 200 yards or farther?

You seem to have really selective memory and reading comprehension skills.

I also posted this in response to Michael458's post:

quote:

Second, I also am a Big Bore fan, but your statement below, from my experience with clients shooting .223's, fits everyone and every .223 bullet and is as accurate a statement as I have seen on the whole .223 for deer issue.

quote:

I don't hunt deer, and I am a big bore sort of fellow. Make no mistake however, a 223 loaded with these bullets, and hit proper, there is no survival. Do not make a bad shot, with this small caliber, there won't be a blood trail to follow. But hit the vitals with this bullet, and the show is finished, this is guaranteed.

The point I have made in EVERY response is and will remain, From Experience, I have seen a lot of deer killed clean with .223's and other .22 center-fire's including one I killed at around 80 yards with a .22 Hornet, MY OPINION however is that the .223 and the other .22 center-fires, are NOT the best choice for hunting deer under ALL normal hunting conditions.

Shooting a feeding deer at a measured distance from basically a bench rest, is mainly a Texas condition, and it does not take place over all of Texas.

Even though I personally do not like the round, the .243 is a hell of a lot better choice, with the .270/.308 or .30-06 being at the top end for the AVERAGE 2 or 3 weekends a year deer hunter in America.

Carpetman, Sir, you are entitled to and have the right to your opinion, but you continually keep running this issue up the flagpole, knowing full well that many folks simply are not going to agree with you, because they ate entitled to and have a right to their opinions.

You can refer to it as fishing if you want to, and some folks favorite method of fishing is TROLLING! You have a Good Day!

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
It seems to me if the 224s were such great deer calibers every body would be using them all the time.

Ya think so? Ford makes a pretty good pickup truck, does everyone drive one?

The .223 isn't the "best" choice for deer. I don't think anyone has said it was but for some reason the "anti" crowd always try to steer the discussion in that direction. It has it's limitations. Used within those limitations it's a very viable choice for deer.

I am fortunate enough to get to hunt less than 30 minutes away from my home. Our hunting season is 4 months long. I can take 8 deer per season. I can "tag" out in the first week if I choose to. There are probably more deer than people in this state and I hunt in the most deer populated county in the state. There is never any pressure for me to shoot and if I pass on a shot I don't loose any sleep over it. Everybody's situation is different. If I had to pay big bucks to hunt deer and my opportunities were limited I wouldn't use a .223. If I was on a high dollar hunt I probably wouldn't use a .223. If I didn't get to go but a few times every year I probably wouldn't use a .223 but none of that applies to me. For me and my situation the .223 works great.


When I hunt with my .223 there are three important things I consider; distance, presentation and shot placement. When all three things fall into place the .223 is a very effective round for whitetail deer.

I just wish everyone would look at this a little more rationally and realize that just because it's not a good choice for you it doesn't mean it's not a good choice for me. I've done it too many times that I know it's effective on deer.

I know this is never ending and have no desire to have the last word on this subject. I've said my peace and will move on.

Enjoy the debate,
Terry

quote:

Originally posted by budiceale:
TC1 very nice rifle. pair ir with mine and we have the beauty and the beast do you have a picture of your m40?

Hey budiceale, sorry I missed this post. Here is my very loose interpretation of a M40. I haven't taken anything with mine yet but it's been a lot of fun on the bench so far.



Terry

Crazyhorse--I've not made ONE post about a 200 yard shot. The deer I have mentioned have all been within 100 to 150 yards. I have not made ONE mention of a headshot for that matter. At distances more than that it would be based on OPINION as I've not seen it done. There are many here that have reported doing it at much longer ranges. I haven't. Prairie Dog shooter, you ask a very good question. Why is everybody not using them if they are so good? I'll give you my answer. I had high doubts about them when I had no experience with them. My grandson and I were on a stand and there was a doe about 60 yards away. He had a Rem 600 in .222 and wanted to shoot it. At first I said no. I changed my mine and gave him permission. I had great reluctance. He shot it and it took off in a dead run. I was kicking myself for letting him shoot as there wasn't a whole lot of light left and I could visualize a tracking job. It made the 60 yard death run that I have also seen with bigger guns and was piled up dead. Since that time, I have seen a large number of deer shot with .224's and NONE have gone as far as that one did. The results have been totally opposite as to what my OPINION would have been. So had I weighed in on a thread such as this with an OPINION it would have been wrong. One thing that is always lacking is an actual report of a well placed shot and it didn't work. One guy (not on this thread but in this forum) reported 20 shots and deer ran off. I mentioned spray and pray didn't count. He stated they were all aimed shots. He didn't say how many counties away by the 2nd or 3rd shot. I'm still amazed at how well they have worked and needless to say after seeing it repeated numerous times I have changed my opinion. Most of the ones I've seen shot have been by youths. I firmly believe if they are shooting something they can handle they have a better chance of making a good shot. I'll take a good shot with a small gun over a bad shot with a big gun any day. MY OPINION is the 30-06 is big enough for everything in North America. Look how many carry bigger guns and turn up their nose at a "wimpy" 30-06. This is true for Texas whitetail--go figure. In Alaska you always hear you need bear protection. I lived in Alaska two years myself and never found that need. Google up bear attacks and records are kept. In past 130 years less than 1 death per year in all of North America from all species of bears. Most were from captive bears in zoo's and circuses. Look up deaths from bee and wasp stings and there is much greater need for fly swatter or bug spray than a bear gun. But look how many are carrying big boomers. As TC1 said, Ford makes a good pickup but everybody doesn't drive them.

This is so confusing no matter home many threads we have on this topic. Is it a good idea or a bad idea to hunt deer with a .223?

Sorry, couldn't resist.