quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Here comes the bees again---till then I'll keep believing bumblebees can fly.

quote:

:

I don't have to prove my "theory", whatever that is. It's real simple to me - enough vs. not enough. And the math provides me the basis to distinguish which it is - enuff or not. I'm a math kinda guy, and believe in facts. Others can believe in a fart into the wind - it's their opinion. I don't form opinions based on farts, but I will form an opinion based on facts and math, and stand by it regardless of whether I actually try it or not. I don't have to shoot a deer at 300 yds with a 223 to pretty much know what is most likely to happen.

BTW, I have very little doubt that TC1 and I both can cleanly take deer with a 223, with a much better one-shot kills than 50%. The only difference is that TC1 chooses to use a 223, and I choose not to, mostly because I'm cheap, and I don't want to fork out the money for a limited use 223. Instead, I'm getting a 6.5 Grendel.

Now you may say that's theory, because I'm predicting something that I've never specifically tried - shooting deer with a 223. However, my "theory" of being able to take deer with a 223 is based on several supporting facts, such as my experience with other cartridges, figuring the math, TC1 says so, and he has actual experience, and says he uses TSX 62gr, plus a little common sense. So, if I can predict clean kills, with reasonable confidence, why can't I predict a probable different outcome by just changing the facts and scenerio appropriately?

To me this is not complicated at all. What makes it difficult is all the BS that's thrown in. As the famous line in cool hand Luke goes - "what we have here is a failure to communicate". mostly. The 223 is a known quantity, as a matter of fact. It is not a sum greater than the parts, no matter how much belief is thrown in. Change the bullet weight and speed, and figuring in the difference expected comparing a varmint bullet compared to a 62gr TSX (for example), and the results can still be predicted based on the math, and other facts.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
An idiot, of course, wouldn't be able to see the difference, actually or probably, in the BS stuff you claim, CM, compared to ketch-um-if-he-can, and M 58, shooting 62gr or 70gr TSX.

The TSX helps the 223 become something it's not - a ligit deer rifle. They sorta cut the BS in half, and at least indicate some intelligence behind selecting a pea shooter for a deer rifle.

You ran out of credability a long time ago. Now discussion with you is about like poking a stick at an armidillo, and watch him scoot about.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by miles58:
1. Sometimes I get a caliber sized hole in the hide going in and coming out.

That would get my attention. Difficult to track a blood trail, eh?

2. I need to see "the math" that differentiates one from the other.

If you can't or won't figure the math yourself, I can't or won't try to help you with it.

3. I own a .233 that I can push 70 grain TSXs out of at 3000 FPS.

That's pretty friggin fast. What's the twist rate?

4. That gun will shoot through both shoulders and exit Bambi virtually every time.

OK

5. I cannot see anything that differentiates big caliber from small, 150 grain bullets from 53 grain billets reliably enough that I would bet a nickle on what shot the deer.

That's hard to imagine.

6. Show me the numbers please.

Nope, figure them yourself. If I thought it would make any difference in your opinion, maybe, but I don't think so.

quote:

Originally posted by miles58:
A dead accurate load that carries enough velocity to create a pass through wound channel is by definition adequate.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by miles58:
1. Sometimes I get a caliber sized hole in the hide going in and coming out.

That would get my attention. Difficult to track a blood trail, eh?

Well, so far, with big Barnes or small we have had a total of one deer needing tracking, and that one had a fine blood trail even though it was a terrible first hit.

2. I need to see "the math" that differentiates one from the other.

If you can't or won't figure the math yourself, I can't or won't try to help you with it.

OK, you have no numbers, I didn't expect any

3. I own a .233 that I can push 70 grain TSXs out of at 3000 FPS.

That's pretty friggin fast. What's the twist rate?

Savage FVSS in .223, 1:9 twist, 26 inch heavy stainless barrel. It is not fast, it's a legit .223 load using 25 grains of BLC-2 which anyone familiar with the caliber can replicate.

4. That gun will shoot through both shoulders and exit Bambi virtually every time.

OK

Something that anyone familiar with Barnes bullets and shooting deer can verify

5. I cannot see anything that differentiates big caliber from small, 150 grain bullets from 53 grain billets reliably enough that I would bet a nickle on what shot the deer.

That's hard to imagine.

Perhaps you need a little more experience

6. Show me the numbers please.

Nope, figure them yourself. If I thought it would make any difference in your opinion, maybe, but I don't think so.

quote:

If it's your math, and your claim that ................................... it's on you to back up your claim.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

If it's your math, and your claim that ................................... it's on you to back up your claim.

Funny how things change.....but if you make wild claims and are called on it you can ask for cash rewards for the proof to be presented.

Did you get that Wellstone bumper sticker off yet?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Miles58,
I'm not gonna play into your game of show me the math. As I said, I agree with you about the TSX. The math is relevant, as it pertains the hole diameter, energy, and distance, etc. Yet it doesn't matter much since we are talking about a dead deer.

If all people who use a 223 for deer were as bullet conscious as you, then the argument would be different, or maybe not at all.

If I wanted to shoot deer with a 223, most likely I would use a TSX of the heaviest weight that would shoot accurately in my rifle. And I wouldn't feel too bad about it.

It is difficult to relate to the notion that the 223 for deer is preferred to a 243, or bigger, using TSX bullets in either.

Contrary to your claim, I didn't say the use of 70gr TSX 223 bullets for deer was unethical. In summary, I said that using the 223 at all for deer may have crossed you over into unethical. That's why I made the "you may be" list.

IMO, one choice doesn't make for unethical, on this issue.

I'm saying that those who use the 223 for deer, have begun the rationalizations (BS), by merely choosing the cartridge in the first place. The unethical part is what's heaped on top.

Shooting deer with a 223 isn't unethical, per se. Likewise, the 223 isn't a deer cartridge, per se. It's a paradox.

I don't think I said anywhere that the 223 is not adequate for deer. Obviously, it's conditionally adequate, as are all cartridges. It's just that the conditions upon the use of the 223 are more stringent than traditional deer cartridges.

KB

quote:

Our little keyboard commando is still in business I see. Anytime you want me to put up or shut up there vapid dog I am ready willing and able. You have the terms, either man up and put up something other than mouth or you are going to see me in your face evcery time y6ou pull your head out of your ass. Your choice vapid dog prove there is more to you than mouth. Prove I cannot back up what I told you. It's a simple thing to do. All you have to do is say I accept.

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
For years eskimos used 222 Rem on polar bear and I know that it is common to kill treed cougars with 22 lr in a pistol. Does that make either a dangerous game Cartridge???

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Kablowme--Yea the laws very rational. Some places a .223 not legal but a .25ACP is. I think in Montana you could hunt elk with .22 rimfire--not sure on that. BTW in your effort to sound intellectual change proponant(sic) to proponent and it might hide the obvious a little better.

quote:

I don't recall one post where someone told of an actual unfavorable experience.

quote:

I don't recall one post where someone told of an actual unfavorable experience.