Oh, I kinda remember posting some pics maybe 5-6 years ago on a similar thread.

Yep, pics of 2 interlok jackets and separated cores. 130 gr .270 Win.

After those failures, which I recovered from dead animals I threw out all my interloks and began using TSX exclusively.

I prolly still can find those dust covered POS in my gun room someplace.

quote:

Originally posted by Sagebrush Burns:
"you can't argue with success".

Sage,
I agree with; "you can't argue with success".
But somewhere along the way you have to start questioning a product that doesn't work as advertised and wonder "when will it not work for me...as advertised"?
Especially if there is a trophy of a lifetime standing there.
I guess it is all about priorities and confidence.

I'll tell you how I really feel about this issue, by asking a rhetorical question.

Would I hesitate to go on a deer or hog hunt with a 243 using interloc bullets?

The answer of course is heck no. I would go hunting, and just pick my shots carefully, as usual, and have sufficient confidence of success.

So, this really isn't a problem after all - it's just about preferences. Given a choice, I would prefer to use a better bullet in the 243. But there is yet another "after all" within all this, and that is the 243 is a perfectly good deer cartridge. It's not my first choice, but for example if I was traveling far away, and got an invite to hunt on the dream ranch using the ranch loaner 243, I wouldn't bitch at all, and be very grateful for the opportunity.

If it's a "problem" it's one of choice, mostly. Fortunately, with the 243, IMO the only bad choice is to use a varmint bullet for deer. Obviously, the 243 is intended to serve two purposes, and the bullets for it are designed primarily for one use or the other, with little cross-over. It's real simple - pick a bullet that is obviously designed for deer, which is most any 100gr or one of the TSX. If you don't mind that the bullet may come apart, then don't worry about it, and shoot a non-premium. If you definately want exit, then pick one of the premium bullets. IMO, either choice is right.

I wish all dilemmas were so easy.

KB

Thinking about this, I've remembered a few "bullet failures" I've had. Mind you, all of the animals died.

The one on the "Graphic" thread.

I shot a small spike buck as a kid with the .30-'06 and a 150 grain Partition. 100 yards with perfect behind the shoulder placement. I was astounded to see the poor thing go down and take about 5 minutes to die. The bullet didn't expand AT ALL. Pencil/caliber size hole in between the ribs, Pencil/caliber size hole out the other side between two ribs.

Last time I ever used a Partition.

I shot a nice Muley at a hard quartering away angle at 25 yards with a .300 WM and a 180 grain Accubond at 3100 fps. The entrance was oblong shaped about 4" long along the left side of the rib cage, the bullet exploded and the angle of "exit" (there was none) was between the front legs mostly in the chest. The autopsy showed plenty of shrapnel coming out of the skin like the buck was shot with a 12 gauge shotgun with #6's.

Well placed shot= yes
Animal dead = yes
Did bullet perform as expected (or advertised)= no.

Does that constititute bullet failure?
In my book yes.

The best bullets are ones that perform in a predictable fashion. Even if a bullet has known weaknesses if you are aware of those limitations you are able to compensate however if an Antelope is shot broadside hit correctly and the bullet comes apart the largest portion of the bullet (a fragment of the jacket) is found in the offside flank that wreaks of a bullet failing to perform as it is advertised or expected = bullet failure in my book.

Several years ago I succumbed to the hype and loaded Accubonds in my 30/06 instead of the normal Sierra 180's that I am used to. I did kill a large Bull elk that year but was astounded that I recovered the Accubond from a 180 yard broadside shot, recovered weight was 114 grains. On several shots just like that I always expect an exit wound, not a failure just an unfulfilled expectation of equal or better performance than I was accustomed to.
Same bullets the next year I helped my son with a follow up shot on his Bull (I had a bull tag too)which he had hit well but needed help with. I shot the running Bull at 35 yards or so at a raking angle that entered way back in the ribs and angled to the neck, my son put the bull down with another shot and we recovered that Accubond as well which was an empty jacket that couldn't have weighed 30-40 grains tops.
I've quit using Acubbonds due too my expectaions being higher than there actual performance.
I've gone back to my standby which are Sierra 180's which I'm sure I'll get flamed for as well.
Your opinions may vary.........

I have bullet failures all time with .243 and .223. The darn animal drops dead and I have to gut and skin it. The bullet doesn't do those things for me like a .338 Win Mag or some such would do.

The sweet thing about these forums is, we can gain lots of information from lots of people and it's no longer a trial and error with our bullet choice. It's nice to take advantage of the expierence of others who get to do far more hunting than I do. I will be hesitant to use a Sierra for hunting now. I will never use a Hor. SST for hunting although it is one of the most accurate bullets in my 264 and I've killed a very nice antelope with it.
This year I was lucky enough to get 2 antelope tags for Co. I shot my first doe with the 264 win. using the 130 accubond and got exactly the results I was expecting. My 2nd. goat was a small buck and I used my sons 257 roberts with 87 gr. Nos BT. Way too much meat damage. I had blood shot front quarters and couldn't use them at all.
I think that the smaller caliber shooters have to be very particular about the bullet construction they are using.

MikeM0553---From those that have not done it you hear the .243 is marginal at best and the .223 a no no all the way, but if using either you MUST use premium bullets. I don't find that true at all. Remington Core Lokts or Wichester Bulk packed--both cheaper bullets work just fine.

I had a Model seven with a 18 1/2 inch barrel that performed superbly with the Hornady 100 gr. bullets, mostly the flat based version but I also used the boat tailed 100 grain bullet. This particular rifle would barely beat 2800 fps, was very accurate and always gave good performance on deer. I never shot one past 150 yards with it and most were under 100 yards. I have a 6MM Remington with a 26 inch barrel and with the same bullets I can get around 3150 fps, this rifle at the same distances my 243 worked so well at does the dramatic blow up thing at times. It kills very well but no pretty pictures of mushroom looking bullets. Moral of story; dead deer tast just as good no matter what the bullet looks like when it reaches it's final destination.

Carpet,
Just goes to show that price and quality don't always go hand in hand. Thanks for the info. I may try some core-loc in my 6mm.

if you dont have at least 70% weight retention, with good penetration, then you have had a bullet failure. It is a failure of bullet construction.

"what part of a dead animal means the bullet failed" == the measure isn't the dead animal, it what the bullet contruction did.

personally, i don't like lead in my food, thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I have bullet failures all time with .243 and .223. The darn animal drops dead and I have to gut and skin it. The bullet doesn't do those things for me like a .338 Win Mag or some such would do.

funny, i hit animals with a 600 gr .510 bullet, and they still aren't cleaned...

do i KNOW the bullet didn't fail? why, no.. i have NEVER recovered one, nor saw parts of it in the animal.

then again, i've never had a well struck animal walk away from a 400gr .416

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Remington Core Lokts or Wichester Bulk packed--both cheaper bullets work just fine.

Obviously CM's criteria for bullet performance is directly related to whether the game dies, and little else. It's necessary to look at it that way when one is cheap and has an agenda to justify using a varmint cartridge on deer. As I said before, it's a choice. If a hunter doesn't mind explosive bullets, and tracking, bloodshot meat, or worse - meat with lead giblets all in it, then by all means choose a 223 or 243 with varmint bullets.

However, my notion, and apparantly plenty of others, re bullet success or failure is not directly tied to whether the deer dies or not. it's all about what the bullet does or is designed to to, in relation to what one expects from the bullets he shoots.

For example, last year I finally got to test a 225gr .338 Hornady SST bullets on deer. Obviously picking the shot, and bullet placment was important to avoid a lot of meat damage. Usually I just head shoot, but this shooting window was very narrow, and the deer was facing me at about 150yds. I put it right below the chin. The bullet stopped in the right ham, and shed most of its weight. The point is that I consider that bullet failure. The reason is that I'm using the 338 for deer because of the brown bears. If I have to shoot one of those, I want a bullet that will not do what the 225gr SST did in that deer, which was come apart. So, I'm switching bullets. Frankly I think a tougher bullet will actually perform better on deer, and not do so much damage. That SST was explosive out of the 338WM, which is probably a good clue that it might be a wonderful bullet out of a 338 Federal.

Also last year I got to try my 458 on deer, using the 405gr Rem bullet designed for the 45-70. It made a nice little 45 cal hole going in and about a 50 cents size hole going out. Perfect bullet performance. Little bloodshot meat, no jacket sheding. Of course it was a reduced load at about 1500 fps. From a hot load, it certainly would have killed the deer, but I'm pretty sure the bullet would have failed in my view, because of the extensive meat damage that would certainly have resulted, and those bullets are very soft, so I'm sure it would have flattened out if not come apart at full 458WM velocity. Also, that's a bullet I will not be using when hunting in brown bear turf, reduced load or not.

In both the above examples the deer pretty much just dropped at or near where standing when hit. The first one went about five feet, and the second one just tipped over.

So, again, my point is it all depends on what one wants the bullet to do. I explained two examples. There are many others. In C M's case, apparantly explosive varmint bullet performance on deer is perfectly acceptable, and it's a choice that he keeps harping about to justify. It's ok with me, but I just want to make sure that others understand what's going on there. Just because he says it's ok, doesn't mean that the bullets he uses won't fail by other's criteria. They certainly fail in my opinion.

KB

Hey mike,
You've got to realize that carpetman is also shooting small deer, probably the size of most Labrador Retreivers, and that's why the small caliber with standard bullets are just fine.

No offense, just putting it out there that the size and toughness of the game has a lot to do with caliber and bullet choice.

Not that we've ever discussed that around here

Kabluey--All those dismal things you described--tracking, lead giblets, bloodshot meat, etc I have experienced very little of. Bloodshot meat--you'll have that with any bullet/size/velocity so of course I have some--but less than with the bigger boys. Funny thing the last two .223 shot deer which did drop on the spot, I did find the bullet in the offside. Never found lead in the meat. Tracking--years ago did track a .243 shot deer that was never found. Had to have been a poor hit. You mentioned long tracking jobs that you found but never told us where they were hit. You mention shooting from chin to ham and worried about lead giblets---what about all that green stuff you spread through your supper?

Rcamulia--Labs weigh 50-75 typically. The deer I speak of are small--but bigger than that, probably 100--150 typically with 125 being a good average.

BTW Remington Core Lokts are not varmint bullets.

Mikem0553--For several years my .243 has been about all I have carried. For several years son in law and grandson were also shooting .243. I use the 100 grain Win Bulk packed and it's twin the Rem Core Lokt--they work great. I'd expect same results with a 6mm. In recent years, Ive seen more and more deer shot with .223 and results far exceeded my thoughts and expectations, so if I ever shoot another deer probably be with .223--55 grain bullet same brand as above.

quote:

Rcamulia--Labs weigh 50-75 typically. The deer I speak of are small--but bigger than that, probably 100--150 typically with 125 being a good average.

Two of the males from my dog's litter weigh over 100 pounds full grown

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Remington Core Lokts or Wichester Bulk packed--both cheaper bullets work just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Funny thing the last two .223 shot deer which did drop on the spot, I did find the bullet in the offside. Never found lead in the meat.

BTW Remington Core Lokts are not varmint bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
In recent years, Ive seen more and more deer shot with .223 and results far exceeded my thoughts and expectations, so if I ever shoot another deer probably be with .223--55 grain bullet same brand as above.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...uctNumber=1390244488
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...uctNumber=1601421787
Read the reviews on the above links to Midway.
Note no mention of use on anything bigger that coyote.
Note the frequent mention of “explosive”.
Note the whopping SD of .157.
Note that soft point is not the same as core lokt.
Note there is no such bullet as a Rem 55gr .223 core lokt.

Therefore, I really seriously doubt that either the Rem or Win 55gr 223 bullet could make it to the off side of any deer with any part of the bullet to be found. With that low SD, I doubt that such a bullet is likely to penetrat through a deer if the bullet retained 100% of its original weight, highly unlikely for a bullet designed to explode. Also, if “explosive” means anything, then where does CM think those particles of lead and jacket went, if not in the surrounding meat?


KB

I am convinced, Carpetman is the world's greatest hunter, and can do it all with the .223. No chance of a wounded animal, no issue with bullet failure even with factory ammo in a .223, no chance of poor bullet placement, nothing but perfection. They should make a movie about this guy. Right up there with Quigley. He just needs a crazy woman by his side.

I never understand why in the US, when bigger is always better, that in hunting, smaller seems to be better. "I'm more of a man if I can kill an animal with a .223 instead of a .30-06." Or the "I'm only a neck shot type of man, that shows my superior markmanship."

But I guess I'm in the minority. I'd rather use a .375. At least the odds are on MY side. But some just can't handle the recoil, and that's ok, maybe they should find an alternative activity.

Varmit guns are for varmits, and should be relegated as such. Varmits are everywhere, it's a shame they reproduce so fast.

Kabluey--no such bullet as 55 grain Rem Core lokt--been years since I used Remington--been using Win Bulk packed--if no 55 grain guess I have to continue using Win. Why read reviews? I could write my own from actual experience. Might get reviews from someone like you that has keyboard experience only--as in never done it nor seen it done. You seriously doubt that any part makes it to off side. Well call me a liar I said I saw it last two deer and only had a hole in all others. Best I recall the part that was found was 80 something % of original. I no longer eat the organs and shooting through the organs and leaving them for the varmints--I really don't worry about the lead particles--haven't found them in the meat I eat. You shooting from chin to ham get to eat the green stuff. Seems you have had plenty of it I might add.

Mdstewart--Tell us about actual experience you have done or first hand witnessed using .223. I know the answer--none--same as Keyboard Kabluey. The only thing certain is you don't know the results until you pull the trigger--no matter how big or how small.

Looks like there are some others who don't care if it's varmint bullets they use for deer. The ammo has better reviews.

Still, I find it amusing that the mfg had the gall to put a picture of a gopher on a box of CM'S favorite 223 deer cartridges.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...uctNumber=2900155127

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...productNumber=130382

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:

quote:

My friend made two perfect broadside shots at 130 yards on his animal. The bullets never exited the offside but instead seperated from the jackets and went throught the paunch and I found one tiny piece of the BT core section of the bullet in the offside flank

A bullet ending up penetrating the paunch and found in the offside flank on a "perfect broadside shot" is not what I would call a "perfect" broadside shotshot. The paunch is a long ways from the heart/lung area, even on an antelope.

Yes I do use that very bullet in the 243 Win loaded to right at 3000 fps. It is a very good bullets and has always exited on antelope when shot broadside in the heart/lung area, even after penetrating a leg bone. Poor shot placement should not be blamed on the bullet. I also agree that even with the excellent performance penetrating the paunch though the jacket core sperated the antelop was DRT. That is hardly "bullet failure".

Larry Gibson

I can say I was sharing the same small piece of shade as taylorce1 when said animal was shot. I can also say I was sharing the same shade tree as taylorce1 when said animal was field dressed. I can also say I will 100% agree with taylorce1 that these bullets absolutely 100% failed.

At the shot, the antelope simply humped up and never took another step. Hence, the reason for the follow up shot that was within about an inch of each other. Perfectly broadside and both shots perfect lung shots.

The bullets exploded so violently, they never never made it to the off side of the animal with the exception of the small fragment that was dug out of the flank.

Just so happens I also shot an antelope that same morning with a 243 Win using up some old factory Federal ammo with a 100 grain SP. My antelope was shot at roughly the same distance, I don't know the actual distance as I was concentration on shot placement at the time the animal stopped and the gun went "bang". I can say it was somewhere between 100-150 yards. The antelope I shot was slightly quartering towards me, but almost perfectly broadside. Bullet enter just behind the left shoulder and exited between the 2nd and 3rd to last rib.

Given the description of the bullet from Hornady's website, both bullets should have performed similarly; however, they were completely on the opposition ends of the spectrum regarding performance.

I even made the smart ass comment to dig around in the guts to see if you could find more pieces of bullets. And, trust me, no one would have done it as the internal organs were about the same consistancy as potato soup. There weren't even marks on the offside of the body cavity that would have indicated small fragments of lead/bullet making it roughly 12 inches from one side to the other.

Absolutely without a doubt 100% bullet failure!!!!!!

That's a mighty vicious pee dog gopher pictured on your favorite deer ammo, CM.

How do they taste?

KB

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Mdstewart--Tell us about actual experience you have done or first hand witnessed using .223. I know the answer--none--same as Keyboard Kabluey. The only thing certain is you don't know the results until you pull the trigger--no matter how big or how small.

You're right, I have very little experience with the .223, except for all those thousands of rounds I fired from an M16 as an Infantry Officer in the US Army. But I realize that doesn't count.

mdstewart--You are correct your infantry officer firings don't count towards deer hunting, no more so than my military experience counts towards it.

Whatdooyasay CM, truce?

Now that it's clear that your extensive experience trumps the manufacturer's intended use for the cartridge, gophers, let's make peace.

We have an opportunity here for us both to be right, after all. You can be right that a gopher cartridge will kill deer, and I can be right that some people use gopher bullets to kill deer.

Stuff like that happens all the time. I've heard of some guys trying to stuff two pounds of shit in a one pound bag, and others pulling a four horse trailer with a 1/2 ton pickup. I've also observed that it's generally useless to argue with guys like that.

It seemed to me that this thread got started because the fellow realized that bullets from a 243 behaving like varmint bullets was something he chose to avoid. Since it's clear that not only do you not avoid it, you welcome it, and believe in it, we can move on. There are others here, including me, who don't want to hunt deer with that kind of tool. Obviously, you can't be convinced otherwise, so proceed on and have fun. You say it's working for you, so that's fine.

I ask - where is the problem? We are in agreement - gopher bullets will kill deer and hogs. I can rely on your extensive experience to attest to that, so I have no need for such experience personally.

KB

Kablowyou--Why would I want a truce with a troll like you? You admit to NO actual experience yet call me a liar when I say I found two bullets in the offside. You put all your ignorant sayings on your tag line--a legend in your own mind. You brag about shooting animals from front to rear and spreading the green stuff throughout. You say you have to carry HUGE Magnums because of all the bears---check it out past 130 years only been about 130 bear attacks all over US to include Alaska--this includes brown.polar and black bears and many of those attacks were tame bears in zoos circuses and such. Really that isn't much of a threat---lots more killed by beestings. You make a trip to Texas to show those Texas guys how to kill pigs and they wont even leave camp and hunt with you---probably from your eating so much of that green stuff. Get some actual experience then come tell us about it.

If I'm a troll, then perhaps I'm getting good at it. I trolled you out pretty easy. I noticed your efforts to troll me into biting on your recent posts in the 223 Effect thread. I didn't read the whole thing but it seemed that those gopher bullets work pretty good for head shots. Ya'll seemed to be having so much fun sharing pictures of what explosive varmint bullets do to deer and hogs. I've seen enough of that from personal experience to bother with such a thread. But unlike the thread suggests, the experience that I remember are the ones that got away wounded from hunting companions using 223s. Something which was conveniently absent from that thread.

I wasn't gonna forgive you anyway, since you are teaching your grandkids your bad habits. Shame on you.

I see that you are becoming somewhat of an armchair or internet expert on bear attacks too, at least statisticly. Keep up the good work. Apparantly you are saying that playing the odds, and carrying a 223 for deer hunting in brown bear country is only proper too. Since you are so keen to point out the importance of personal experience, is there no limit to your vast experience with the 223?

I have a little advice for you since you apparantly are speaking from experience with eating the green stuff, as you call it. Just like with using the 223 for deer, I have no experience with eating the green stuff, since I properly clean the deer to eliminate the issue.

There is an old saying which originated at one of those public hearings out west, before the forest service. The competing testimony was between hikers and those using the same trails for horse riding and packing. One hiker stood up and complained loudly about the green horse shit in the trail. Then the horseman stood and said, among the other things, that he always stepped around the green shit, and suggested that the hiker may find that a solution to his problem as well.

KB

Kabluey--You are correct had to go to the internet to find stats on bear attacks. Such a remote deal had no actual experience nor know of anyone with any experience.
Shame on you--you admitted in past you have never shot nor seen anyone shoot a deer with a .223 and now you have experience witnessing friends do it. Been poaching?
Make a proper shot and you don't have to worry about cleaning off the green stuff. Shooting em all the way through with a magnum the way you do it--you get to eat the green stuff--even if you think you cleaned it off--it must penetrate as you are full of it.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamulia:

yup.....decayed thread again....

On the contrary, vapo. You often post such remarks, just when the discussion is getting good, and the main points of the troll (fishing expedition) are about to be harvested.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Really that isn't much of a threat---lots more killed by beestings. You make a trip to Texas to show those Texas guys how to kill pigs and they wont even leave camp and hunt with you---probably from your eating so much of that green stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Kabluey--You are correct had to go to the internet to find stats on bear attacks. Such a remote deal had no actual experience nor know of anyone with any experience.
Shame on you--you admitted in past you have never shot nor seen anyone shoot a deer with a .223 and now you have experience witnessing friends do it. Been poaching?
Make a proper shot and you don't have to worry about cleaning off the green stuff. Shooting em all the way through with a magnum the way you do it--you get to eat the green stuff--even if you think you cleaned it off--it must penetrate as you are full of it.

I find it sort of amusing how you tout "experience" so much, yet hypocritically post stuff full of opinion, speculation, and error. I have always considered that a clue that maybe someone who does that doesn't have clear lines.

It's ok to express opinion and even speculation, of course, but to say it in a way as though you are stating fact is cause for concern - specifically, maybe you don't know what you are jabbering about.

Again, I do not share your experience with eating green stuff. Guacamole and green chili salsa are the green stuff that I eat, and it's only recently that I've been able to do that, because of an old trick by an uncle when my brothers and sister and I were children. He told us that was made from green tomato worms mayonaze and spices, and was a delicacy in Mexico. I believed it for many years, but even after learning the facts, it still turned my appetite off for many years after. So, from my guacamole example, I can understand how you may be resistant to changing opinion based on fact.

Also, you misunderstood, probably intentionally, about my earlier post on the Texans and my hog hunt.

Surely you misunderstood, intentionally, my statment of witnessing deer being wounded and getting away with a 223. It's a long story, which I told in detail once, only to be dismissed by guys like you. So, there is no point in telling the long version again. IMO, guys like you will never be influenced by the full scope of fact, since choosing select portions, and inability to seperate fact from opinion and speculation, are more useful for your agenda, and presuppositions.

Even my Texas buddy didn't stick to his former opinion about the 223, and gave it up for use on deer after that incident, and now uses his 308 or the 270 I gave him, real deer rifles. Some people, like taylorce who started this thread, are capable of, and even welcome, altering their behavior based on facts and experiences; some are not.

Thanks for the red herrings, green stuff, bears, and insight. It provides further clues for others to give second thought on your (self-proclaimed) vast experience and opinions regarding the use of exploding varmint (gopher) bullets on deer.

Let me give you a clue of an example of a game changer - and evidence that you can modify your behavior by considering the facts. It's simple. All you have to do is acknowledge that varmint bullets are for varmints, and not intended or even a good choice for deer. If you weren't so cheap, it would be welcome news that you bought a box of TSX bullets, at least, if not change cartridges altogether, for use on deer.

KB

The best bullet performance I have witnessed with a 6mm was a Hornady 100 grn Interlock flat base style. The bullet completely penetrated a running white tail at about 60 yards. The damage done was extensive.

The sorriest performance came from a bullet in the same box, same box of handloads, fired in the same rifle. Difference in distance about 300 yards. The bullet did not open up. The bullet completely penetrated but did little damage other the internal bleeding. I found the buck after he ran about 100 yards.
It was really no fault of the bullet. I should not have shot at a game animal so far away.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Guacamole and green chili salsa are the green stuff that I eat

I love guacamole.

I havve my big game rifle. A 264 win mag. I use it with Nosler partision or Accubonds. Earlier I was looking for a good bullet choice to use it on varmits but the twist rate was too tight for the speed of the lighter bullets. Since that time ( about 2 weeks ago) I have purchased a 6mm X 284 with a 1 in 12 twist. This rifle will not take the heavier .243 bullets and will be used for long distance shooting and coyote hunting. I would try cor-locs if they are light enough but right now the 70 gr. nbts seem to be working.
I always wanted 1 gun to do everthing but I can't get it done so I bought the 6mm. I don't plan on switching uses of the rifles. I use enough gun to get the job done. If ( by the grace of God) I ever get a chance to hunt BIG bears, I'll need another gun. Till that time its the 264 win. for antelope or bigger, the 6mm for anything smaller.

As far as using a 223 for deer, I can't comment other than say in the state of Colorado their use is illegal for any big game. The 243 caliber rifles are ok to use if you use a 100 gr. bullet or heavier. That includes Elk and Black Bear. I know of a few people who have used the 243 for elk and all have moved up to 30-06 or larger.

quote:

Originally posted by mikem0553:
The 243 caliber rifles are ok to use if you use a 100 gr. bullet or heavier. That includes Elk and Black Bear. I know of a few people who have used the 243 for elk and all have moved up to 30-06 or larger.

I wouldn't 100% agree with these statements for two reasons.

#1) there aren't many options for a heavier than 100 grain hunting bullet of .243 diameter

#2) with the new age of monometals and the technology that has gone into improving their design and function within recent years, I believe many of these bullets are certainly capable of taking antelope/deer sized game that are under 100 grains. One that comes to mind is the 80 grain TTSX and another would be the 85 or 95 grain Nosler Partition.

I guess I also have a #3. When hunting bear or something else that bites back, I want a 30 caliber bullet or larger.

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:

quote:

Originally posted by mikem0553:
The 243 caliber rifles are ok to use if you use a 100 gr. bullet or heavier. That includes Elk and Black Bear. I know of a few people who have used the 243 for elk and all have moved up to 30-06 or larger.

I wouldn't 100% agree with these statements for two reasons.

#1) there aren't many options for a heavier than 100 grain hunting bullet of .243 diameter

#2) with the new age of monometals and the technology that has gone into improving their design and function within recent years, I believe many of these bullets are certainly capable of taking antelope/deer sized game that are under 100 grains. One that comes to mind is the 80 grain TTSX and another would be the 85 or 95 grain Nosler Partition.

I guess I also have a #3. When hunting bear or something else that bites back, I want a 30 caliber bullet or larger.

You are right. The law in Co. states 243 or larger caliber, 70 gr. min. for deer, pronghorn, and bear. 85 gr. min. for elk and moose. My mistake. I wasn't giving my opinion on the use of any paticular caliber. Just stating the rule. Thanks for making me look it up.