quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
All of us kids growing up on a West Texas ranch started our deer hunting with .222s and 25-35s and it always worked. My kids and grandkids used the 222 and 223 on deer and antelope. I fed a fence crew in Mexico on a ranch we had there with a 223...

In all cases we long ago settled on the 60 gr. Hornady SP or HP, and it has never failed to mushroom perfectly and penetrate deeply. Keep shots to 200 yards and under, and keep velocity under 3000 FPS...

If I had to hunt deer and antelope the rest of my life with a .223 I would not feel under gunned, but I would be limited to the shots I took...

+1. Anyone who says the 223 isn't an adequate round for 100-140 lb game either never used it or used the wrong bullet. I don't think it's limitations as a combat round should characterize it as a failed small to medium game round. All that said, you can usually find a 22-250 in the same size rifle and there is a definite benefit to another 600 feet per second with a 60 gr bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:
With the right bullet the 223 will do the job on deer, but it's pretty light. The one season I carried it chasing whitetails I passed on shots that would have been a simple thing for an '06. Compared to the centerfire 22s a 243 looks like a sledgehammer. The small CZ is indeed a very nice little rifle, but it's most interesting as a custom 6.5 Grendel...

What he said......., really a 223 is good for many, but for me, I prefer a 221 or 222 w/40-50gr for varmints/Lil Gun powder (fireball 40@3600) but for larger game a 6mm/223, 6mm/tcu (223 improved case) or even the ppc based rounds i.e. the 7.62x39 in CZ, or a custom bbl in 6.5 Grendel would be much more sure on killing powder, the 6.5G my pick. That said, a properly loaded and aimed 223 will get the job done and lots of ammo is out there if you need factory and cannot always load your own.

Oh, 6.5 G ammo is there Wolf ammo @ like $10/20 rounds is not a bad option vs what some ammo runs now. Yes, 223 will be cheaper. If you used it mostly for smaller targets 223 no problem, larger ones and need cheap ammo, get a 7.62x39 version, just less range than the 6.5.

Having used the round in VietNam I chose to carry an AK47 instead, however; I used the .223 for many years for prairie dogs and in 99' my shoulder surgery prevented me from using my regular deer rifle. I loaded Hornady softpoints but switched to Nosler 60gr. partitions, many deer have fallen to the little cartridge, throught and through the lungs and they do not go far.

Recently 06', had to use the M4, 77gr bullets and they proved very satisfactory on non-four legged quarry. For what its worth the .223 will do as much as the rifleman is capable of...even to some pretty unbelievable ranges.

SFC E7 (retired)

quote:

For what its worth the .223 will do as much as the rifleman is capable of...even to some pretty unbelievable ranges.SFC E7 (retired)

I'm sorry but I can't buy that at any price. roger

The biggest problem is ammo avaliability and price with the war going on

With the average weight of elk being 555 pounds, commonly hunted with 150 gr bullets at 3000 fps, then the average mule deer at 137 pounds should be commonly hunted with a 37 gr bullet at 3000 fps. That is more like a .218 Bee than a .223.

What does it all mean?
We carry too much gun for deer and not enough for elk.



http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/yf/foods/he125w.htm

Definately not a wise option for hunting deer, unless you are up for chasing it all day. Sure, there are stories of bringing down deer w/ .223, sounds like overconfidence. Using .223 for deer is irresponsible.

quote:

Originally posted by shab911:
Definately not a wise option for hunting deer, unless you are up for chasing it all day. Sure, there are stories of bringing down deer w/ .223, sounds like overconfidence. Using .223 for deer is irresponsible.

Shab,

first welcom to the forums...

you are use to those big MN deer... a 223 might not be a wise option there.. I hunted and lived there for 15 yrs, so I can relate..

however in many other parts of the country where deer are no where near as big, a 223 will work just fine...proper shot placement is the key...as with any caliber...

I always thought is was funny, after many years of hunting MN and WI every season.. Wisconsin DNR allows 223s, and thinks a 410 shotgun is too small for deer... however MN DNR thinks a 410 is just fine for deer hunting.. but a 223 is too small... vs

quote:

Originally posted by shab911:
Definately not a wise option for hunting deer, unless you are up for chasing it all day. Sure, there are stories of bringing down deer w/ .223, sounds like overconfidence. Using .223 for deer is irresponsible.

Then the 30-06, 7mm mag, and 300 Win Mag are irresponsible for elk.

If P then Q
Not-Q
therefore not-P

I know a guy that has shot elk for 30 years with a 30-06, and he has never got one down in less than 2 shots.


What does it all mean?
1) A truly adequate elk rifle is too heavy and kicks too hard, so we make do with multiple shots and shot placement.
2) Because they don't weigh too much or kick too hard, we can carry lots of overkill for deer and sneer at the .223 with moral indignation.

But if we took a good look at ourselves we would see what BS'ers we are about the .223 and deer.