Not convinced that is true for everyone. Hard quartering to me is not the same as texas heart shot. Big difference between a national level long range shooter with a great rest and very accurate rifle is something like a 280, and the average guy. Also, if truth be told, probably a difference between the first day of a 10 day hunt and the last evening, on an animal big enough to quality for the book.
The 223 as a viable big game round.
- Thread starter chuck nelson
- Start date
Not convinced that is true for everyone. Hard quartering to me is not the same as texas heart shot. Big difference between a national level long range shooter with a great rest and very accurate rifle is something like a 280, and the average guy. Also, if truth be told, probably a difference between the first day of a 10 day hunt and the last evening, on an animal big enough to quality for the book.
nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Anyone with access to any other centerfire and ethics would not do it. Enough gun that one good hit is quickly fatal, minimal or no tracking.
What exactly is anyone trying to prove?
What exactly is anyone trying to prove?
saskgunowner101
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- near Prince Albert
The way some of those fellas get all wound up, it's amazing.
I just feel like you have to be too picky with a 223. If I'm taking my kids out, I want to maximize their chance of success and to me that means picking a bigger gun than a 223. Besides, going bigger is rarely a bad thing(assuming they can shoot it of course), no such thing as too dead but there is certainly such a thing as not dead enough.
If memory serves 223 made it's big advances in being designed for shooting humans AND not killing them, 2 more to pack them away. I'm sure they will kill a deer, hell a 22 will kill a deer and many other things, possibly not the best for the purpose.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Neither would a 40gr from a 22lr, just choose your placement and distance accordingly.
rifleman762
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
True. So now the real question is: at what distance and what shot placement is it ethical to shoot an adult deer with a 223? My short answer is that the distance is too short for my liking so I would use a larger larger case capacity cartridge and/or a larger diameter bullet. I have killed several whitetail does with an SKS and they only went about 20 to 30 yards before piling up. But that was in a spot where I knew I would be shooting them at closer than 100 yards. Easy peasy with iron sights.
A semi-auto feeding from Stanag mags using factory ammo will have a different answer than a short action Remington 700 with hot handloads and a heavy bullet when chambered in the same cartridge. But if you have a Rem 700, why not use 243 Win or perhaps 22-250?
If a longbow is an ethical deer hunting weapon, then a 223 Rem definitely is...it can kill quicker and from further away.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
That's been my experience over the years. No fuss, & no big bang to alert others. Take 'em in tight & make the shot right.
What makes me laugh is that the same guys who will tell you that a 150 grain bullet out of a 270 is plenty for a 1000 lb moose (which of course it is), will turn around and tell you a 75 grain bullet from a 223 is stunt shooting on a 250 pound whitetail.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Hard to argue the old hammer to the noggin' either on a critter ye sucked in to gettin' a hand fed apple snack fer a couple of weeks or so.
Every weapon works within its limitations. I,for one, despise the unbridled ignorance people display condemning the .223 centrefires. Bowhunters faced the same kind of ignorance when bow seasons were made and expanded.
Nobody can honestly deny .224 centrefires effectiveness on game,within its limitations.
The same reason bowhunters don't shoot at deer at 150 yards and .30-06 shooters dont shoot at deer at 2000 yards.
Nobody can honestly deny .224 centrefires effectiveness on game,within its limitations.
The same reason bowhunters don't shoot at deer at 150 yards and .30-06 shooters dont shoot at deer at 2000 yards.
rifleman762
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
What I meant is that both work within their limitations. I realize that an arrow has much less kinetic energy than a centerfire bullet and it kills by slicing and dicing instead of hammering a hole with a blunt instrument. No way on earth would I shoot a deer with a bullet carrying the same amount of energy as an arrow from my bow. (Yes, I bowhunting too.)
I don't shoot 223 for coyotes beyond 150 yards to pathetic of a killer for me I want to see bang flops.
If I had to use a 223 on deer I would keep my shots to within 50 yards.
Fortunately I don't have to = back in Nov 2009 I spotted a huge 4 point mule deer buck at 700 yards had no time to close in before dark just as well I was packing my T/C Contender carbine with my 21" stainless factory tapered 223 barrel had been calling coyotes headed back to my hotel (I was on a working trip) swapped the 223 barrel off and installed my 308Bellm barrel onto the frame.
Next morning at daybreak I was where I had spotted the buck except he was now on the complete opposite side of the huge logging cut that was covered in snow my shot was 210 yards the 150gr Rem CoreLok at 2620fps dropped it within 20 yards I would never of even thought of taking the shot if I still had the 223 barrel installed.
If I had to use a 223 on deer I would keep my shots to within 50 yards.
Fortunately I don't have to = back in Nov 2009 I spotted a huge 4 point mule deer buck at 700 yards had no time to close in before dark just as well I was packing my T/C Contender carbine with my 21" stainless factory tapered 223 barrel had been calling coyotes headed back to my hotel (I was on a working trip) swapped the 223 barrel off and installed my 308Bellm barrel onto the frame.
Next morning at daybreak I was where I had spotted the buck except he was now on the complete opposite side of the huge logging cut that was covered in snow my shot was 210 yards the 150gr Rem CoreLok at 2620fps dropped it within 20 yards I would never of even thought of taking the shot if I still had the 223 barrel installed.
No, and that's a myth that needs to die. It started back with the original adoption of the cartridge and M16 platform, and the politics around it. Robert McNamara was one of the new breed of Washington Technocrat "whiz kids", and deeply data driven. He loved his stats. One of the things that Remington did right, was that they did extensive research on the terminal performance of the cartridge, and presented the research to McNamara and the DoD. Among the many pages of research, was a section detailing the "Wounding Profiles" of the cartridge. It listed wound channels, cavities, etc. The point was to show just how lethal the cartridge was.
McNamara was not very popular with a lot of the old school Washington Wonks and political Generals. They deliberately misused the language of the reports to make it appear that the cartridge was only going to wound enemies that you would much prefer were just dead. There was a lot of push-back against the M16 and 5.56 cartridge, because both were developed outside the government arsenal system, so there was a whole bureaucracy and thousands of government jobs at risk if the precedent was set for small arms development entirely by private enterprise or outside the arsenal system in general - "Not Invented Here" is how the US ended up with the .308 (7.62 NATO) instead of any number of better cartridges being developed in Europe, and the M-14 instead of the FAL (the FAL was, is, and always will be, a better military rifle than the M-14 could ever hope to be).
Anyway, the military had no interest in a cartridge that just "wounds" - and still doesn't. It would actually put them in a legal grey area they don't want to be in, in terms of both The Hague and the Geneva conventions.
Also, even though the military 5.56 ammo is designed to be lethal, it's still a FMJ round, designed to remain intact and not expand upon contact. That's a very different beast from .223 hunting projectiles, which are designed to either shatter (frangible), or expand (soft point), and dump energy in an entirely different way.
Now... Having said all that...
I still wouldn't shoot anything bigger than a coyote with .223 Remington. That's more of a personal preference/bias than anything. I will, and have, hunted deer with 7.62x39, and found it to be more than acceptable at reasonable ranges (I don't flatland hunt deer, just bush, so I'm not shooting much past 50-75 yards). Realistically, by the numbers, .223 should be just as effective at those ranges so long as you're using a 65-75 grain soft point. But that skinny little bullet gives me the willies. I want something with a bit more mass and diameter.
Lots of people that need a lesson in ballistics...
I think people should have the choice to use 223 for deer. It is more than capable of a clean kill. You all seem to think people would hunt with 55gr FMJ rounds or something... To those that say "if you don't get the right shot placement..." That applies to any and all calibers.
Anyways I won't be following this thread, when people form.uneducated opinions it is hard to show them any other way.
I think people should have the choice to use 223 for deer. It is more than capable of a clean kill. You all seem to think people would hunt with 55gr FMJ rounds or something... To those that say "if you don't get the right shot placement..." That applies to any and all calibers.
Anyways I won't be following this thread, when people form.uneducated opinions it is hard to show them any other way.
