The 223 as a viable big game round.

rral22 said:
The fact that someone has done something is not proof that it is a good idea to do it. You can shingle a roof with a tack hammer if you want, but that doesn't mean a tack hammer is a good roofing tool. I've eaten lots of steak using a table knife, but, if I can I like to use a steak knife.

Why do we never see forum threads trying to prove a 6.5x55 is " capable for deer"? Because everyone KNOWS it is (with virtually no limiting conditions on its use). Why do we see so many repeated threads trying to prove the .223 is "capable for deer"? Because everyone KNOWS it will actually kill deer (although everyone also KNOWS that you must be within the quite real limiting conditions that using the cartridge impose), but everyone also KNOWS that there are lots better rounds available, so people keep trying to justify their use of a barely suitable tool for a job.

So go right ahead and use your tack hammer to shingle your roof if you insist. People will see your new roof when you're done, but they will also have lots of thoughts about why you would insist on doing so.
Click to expand...

Roofing is amongst jobs I would never do. Your argument is invalid.

They let people spear hunt big game. You gonna tell me that's unethical too? How do you feel about archery? Both of those techniques require you to "be within quite real limiting conditions" as you say....
 
The .223 should be legal for big game hunting, not because its a great idea, but because legislating against it is a bad idea. Previous attempts to place limitations on centerfire cartridges that can be used for big game hunting have been so badly executed, that the intention of the legislation becomes suspect. When cartridges on either side of an arbitrary line do essentially the same thing, there is no benefit to imposing the arbitrary line. Clearly centerfire cartridges have a measurable and observable superiority in performance over modern rimfire cartridges, so legislation that prohibits rimfire cartridges for big game hunting is reasonable, but placing limitations on centerfire cartridges can't help but be arbitrary, heavy handed, and complicated.
 
Theres been plenty of deer shot with .223 and 22-250's over the years in the maritimes. You also got to consider the distance your shooting. The hunting spots around me you probably wouldnt be more than 100yds away from the deer.
 
frabill said:
Roofing is amongst jobs I would never do. Your argument is invalid.

They let people spear hunt big game. You gonna tell me that's unethical too? How do you feel about archery? Both of those techniques require you to "be within quite real limiting conditions" as you say....
Click to expand...

Wow! Talk about being unable to understand or use analogy as a logical tool! You actually think that because you're not going to shingle a roof, the "argument is invalid"??

I also never said it was "unethical" to use a .223; I said it was just a bit stupid to do so when there are so many better tools.

Thanks for making the " it's just a bit dumb" argument look more valid.
 
I think the biggest problem with this new regulation is going to be people buying a box of 223 off the shelf and shooting deer with varmint bullets because they don’t know better. Whereas with a 308 or so you would have to look pretty hard to find something with a varmint bullet.
 
doc25 said:
I think the biggest problem with this new regulation is going to be people buying a box of 223 off the shelf and shooting deer with varmint bullets because they don’t know better. Whereas with a 308 or so you would have to look pretty hard to find something with a varmint bullet.
Click to expand...

Let's assume people are stupid and we need to make decisions on their behalf. Thanks, Liberal.
 
rral22 said:
The fact that someone has done something is not proof that it is a good idea to do it. You can shingle a roof with a tack hammer if you want, but that doesn't mean a tack hammer is a good roofing tool. I've eaten lots of steak using a table knife, but, if I can I like to use a steak knife.

Why do we never see forum threads trying to prove a 6.5x55 is " capable for deer"? Because everyone KNOWS it is (with virtually no limiting conditions on its use). Why do we see so many repeated threads trying to prove the .223 is "capable for deer"? Because everyone KNOWS it will actually kill deer (although everyone also KNOWS that you must be within the quite real limiting conditions that using the cartridge impose), but everyone also KNOWS that there are lots better rounds available, so people keep trying to justify their use of a barely suitable tool for a job.

So go right ahead and use your tack hammer to shingle your roof if you insist. People will see your new roof when you're done, but they will also have lots of thoughts about why you would insist on doing so.
Click to expand...


Nobody really needs to have a thread to “prove” anything with the .223 anymore. It’s 2018 and the .223 deer capability is well documented for anyone that wants to Google it.

I think that some still question it because there are still misguided laws (like Alberta’s) that forbid it, so it raises the question.
 
doc25 said:
I think the biggest problem with this new regulation is going to be people buying a box of 223 off the shelf and shooting deer with varmint bullets because they don’t know better. Whereas with a 308 or so you would have to look pretty hard to find something with a varmint bullet.
Click to expand...

Hasn’t been the case here in BC where it’s always been legal. It’s legal to shoot moose with a 17 Hornet here, but nobody does it.
 
East vs West. Is 223 good for deer?

In the east, we think of deer being a 25 to 75 yard proposition, most of the time.

In the West, when someone says 300 yards, they mean it.

Here is the east a 223 with a 64 gr Winchester soft point is an excellent deer cartridge.

In the West, I would say it is ok in the bush, but not a good choice for the open fields.
 
223

azfCtwWm.jpg
 
rifleman762 said:
Let's assume people are stupid and we need to make decisions on their behalf. Thanks, Liberal.
Click to expand...

He made a good point... my son used to work in outdoor retail and he told me many stories of people mistakenly buying varmint ammo to go big game hunting... the problem would be exacerbated by starting with a common varmint cartridge... the point hardly makes him a "Liberal."
 
rral22 said:
If I was forced to use a .223 for deer, I expect I could do so quite effectively. However, I'm not forced to use it, so why would I actually choose to do so when there are so many more effective cartridges for the job? use a genuine elephant cartridge for elephant hunting; ?
Click to expand...

Dead is effective. You can’t get deader then dead. So yes a 223 is just as effective as anything else. Shooting a 338 win mag and hittin it in the back leg (seen it) won’t kill said deer. Seems most people make up for bad shooting with a bigger magnum.

I also have a 6x45 that I built. It’s the same case as a 223 but by going up in bullet size .019 it was all of a sudden legal for deer last year.

One of the most successful elephant rounds was a 7x57 Mauser.
 
hometownhero said:
Dead is effective. You can’t get deader then dead. So yes a 223 is just as effective as anything else. Shooting a 338 win mag and hittin it in the back leg (seen it) won’t kill said deer. Seems most people make up for bad shooting with a bigger magnum.

I also have a 6x45 that I built. It’s the same case as a 223 but by going up in bullet size .019 it was all of a sudden legal for deer last year.

One of the most successful elephant rounds was a 7x57 Mauser.
Click to expand...

Yeah, taking head shots with military ball ammo. Are you saying that's how we should be hunting with the 223 too??

I'm not sure I buy into the whole "what if you buy varmint ammo" argument. Many of the calibers just above the 223 (6mm up to 270) are also loaded with varmint bullets, particularly the 243. Can't say I see many reports of people buying the wrong ammo for any of them.
 
Suther said:
I'm not sure I buy into the whole "what if you buy varmint ammo" argument. Many of the calibers just above the 223 (6mm up to 270) are also loaded with varmint bullets, particularly the 243. Can't say I see many reports of people buying the wrong ammo for any of them.
Click to expand...

He worked at a dedicated sporting store, and the more discriminating shooters were making that mistake... in these parts most once-a-year hunters buy their ammo at CT... what do you think that CT (et al), stock for .223 and .22/250? .22 cal CF is legal here for big game.
 
Back when I hunted, our rifles did double duty for medium game and large game (mostly we hunted moose), so an all around cartridge that could also shoot larger game was preferred. I’m finding this thread interesting mostly because I’m interested in the experiences of hunters that have used the .223 cartridge which I might have handy in an emergency/survival situation (I don’t think it would be my first choice otherwise).

My question is this though, with larger cartridges available, even if adequate, what are the advantages of using a .223 cartridge? Is it just the lighter recoil? Perhaps a lighter rifle to carry? Is there really any advantage to choosing the .223? I understand the assertion that the .223 is cheaper to practice with ..... maybe there are a lot of people with target guns or semi autos that would like to use their gun to hunt without buying a larger caliber?
 
Suther said:
Yeah, taking head shots with military ball ammo. Are you saying that's how we should be hunting with the 223 too??

I'm not sure I buy into the whole "what if you buy varmint ammo" argument. Many of the calibers just above the 223 (6mm up to 270) are also loaded with varmint bullets, particularly the 243. Can't say I see many reports of people buying the wrong ammo for any of them.
Click to expand...

What I am saying is that going up buy .019" doesn't all of a sudden make something "a deer gun".

For the 7x57 that is what they had and used the shot placement needed to be successful. We have off the shelf controlled expansion 223 ammo so use the same shot placement as you would with something that is a hardly noticeable difference in diameter.
 
Suther said:
Yeah, taking head shots with military ball ammo. Are you saying that's how we should be hunting with the 223 too??

I'm not sure I buy into the whole "what if you buy varmint ammo" argument. Many of the calibers just above the 223 (6mm up to 270) are also loaded with varmint bullets, particularly the 243. Can't say I see many reports of people buying the wrong ammo for any of them.
Click to expand...

Actually it happens all the time:
"Sorry sir, all we have in stock is 70 gr loads for your .243." "Ahh, those'll work."
Or how about:
"Yes we have two types of .243 ammo, Federal 90 gr for $55 and Federal 70 gr for $35." "Ya, I'll take 2 boxes of the 70 gr."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom