The 223 with lightweights and small scopes

If I wasn't so set on using monos, would be all over that grendel. Short of if you're worried about big bears around you, having deer, bear, moose capability out to at least 350 meters sounds pretty dang good.

The 223 really only fills the fun/trainer role for me unless ammo ever becomes real scarce or its all I had.
 
blakeyboy said:
What about 6 Grendel? I mean Arc...

I don’t get .223 for Alberta. Coyotes and targets only, not even mountain lion legal which are on menu when calling coyotes and frequently come in, also a little light for wolves which will also come to the call here. Can’t shoot deer etc either. There are way more versatile single digit ft/lbs recoil options that can do it all. We just used a 6.5 Grendel with factory ammo for 6 seasons and 20 animals, 7 species, 10-420 yards, average shot distance 160-165 and average recovery distance about 10 yards. Legal for everything and you can watch it happen in scope in average weight rifles. The top 25-30 gr of powder burning choice for our province. The 6 Grendel (arc) will be right next to it. The x39 case is also milsurp case. So yeah I don’t see the .223 for this province reloader or factory guys, guess I don’t like 1 trick ponies and just prefer max versatility things overall.
Click to expand...

You do you stinky, but I’m not worried about killing a wolf with a 223.

But you would think the Grendel or Arc would have caught on by now being as great as it is.
 
pathfinder76 said:
Interesting thing about the rifle. When I got it back I didn’t like how I originally bedded it. It sat to high in the stock. So I apprehensively took the bedding out (you know how well it shot) and rebedded it. Accuracy was not affected. :)
Click to expand...

I’d considered doing the same a few times over the years. But didn’t want to risk messing with such a hammer. You’re a braver man than I. <grin>

Though I’m not surprised to hear the accuracy held. Mr. Leeper knew how to put a rifle together.
 
No worries, they’ve caught on and will keep gaining. The x39 case is going to take over the AR length cases as now there’s 22 arc released this past fall too. Another argument another day but disagree on that point, it has caught on, big time, it’s done nothing but gain. The 6.5 will remain the heavy and hunt crossover favourite.

Still curious why you like the .223 for this powder class here in this province?
 
blakeyboy said:
Still curious why you like the .223 for this powder class here in this province?
Click to expand...
For the same reason that the .22 caliber cartridges are not legal for big game , and for the same reason some people like a single shot compared to a bolt action , and others prefer brakes to unbraked rifles
Doesn't really matter, and doesn't bother many people as much as others .
Cat
 
Exactly. When I hunt deer I hunt deer with a rifle to kill deer. Elk and Moose the same. But I don’t understand how a 6 ARC can wallop a moose or elk and a 223 not be enough for a wolf. That is interesting thinking for sure.
 
Cause some well if it’s legal I’d better try it fool would be launching 40gr varmint bullets at a 500 yrd deer because he hit a gong with it once. That’s why it’s not and imo a reasonable restriction in Alberta. Otherwise arguably the best varmint cartridge around. It’s a nice place to be even if the target guys like it. Which some may find offensive. Not naming names.
 
The 223AI is the single most dirtiest trick you can have in a deer rifle, where legal.
Wouldn't hesitate to use one here, if allowed.

R.
 
What would you load it with?

They're definitely big game capable but the rounds that look like they really do a number are all heavy for caliber with lots of fragmentation....go figure.

I'd like to see what a 53-55 gr Barnes TTSX does as fast as you can get it going from an AI
 
mMgIIFR.png
 
I didn’t even make it 24 Hrs (campfire?!) into the new year before being totally and utterly offended.
Where’s my medication?
 
Joel said:
What would you load it with?

They're definitely big game capable but the rounds that look like they really do a number are all heavy for caliber with lots of fragmentation....go figure.

I'd like to see what a 53-55 gr Barnes TTSX does as fast as you can get it going from an AI
Click to expand...

It would definitely be loaded with bullets, Joel. The correct bullets for the job, and the distances intended.
Explain "lots of fragmentation"? And where did you observe this?
A 53-55 grain Barnes, on a deer, at a reasonable distance, is quite simply devastating.

R.
 
Rman said:
It would definitely be loaded with bullets, Joel. The correct bullets for the job, and the distances intended.
Explain "lots of fragmentation"? And where did you observe this?
A 53-55 grain Barnes, on a deer, at a reasonable distance, is quite simply devastating.

R.
Click to expand...

Oh! That's what I've been doing wrong this whole time! You're supposed to load a bullet in the damn thing!

Well that certainly explains the lack of blood trails.

"Lots of fragmentation" seems rather self explanatory, but since you asked, it means that plenty of little pieces are no longer attached to the bullet, which coincidentally, weighs a lot less if it is recovered. I have a sneaky suspicision that the low weight coincides with all those little pieces that are no longer attached. "lots" is entirely subjective, but I'd imagine based on gel testing something like a 77gr TMK or 75gr ELD is about half its starting weight at the end of its journey.

I've observed this phenomenon mainly with my eyes, and in deer I have shot with a couple 77gr match bullets, in deer that others have shot, and in gel tests that I have seen.

If I may ask, what does "quite simply devastating" mean? Especially compared to larger cartridges like 6.5 CM, 308 Win, etc?
 
Last edited:
Joel said:
Oh! That's what I've been doing wrong this whole time! You're supposed to load a bullet in the damn thing!

Well that certainly explains the lack of blood trails.
Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise in the least... When you get it sorted, make sure the pointy ends are the ones sticking out of the cartridge. They tend to fly better that way.

R.
 
Rman said:
Doesn't surprise in the least... When you get it sorted, make sure the pointy ends are the ones sticking out of the cartridge. They tend to fly better that way.

R.
Click to expand...

Good to know. But they really don't fit in the hole in the end of the casing. Its far too shallow and not nearly wide enough
 
Joel said:
Oh! That's what I've been doing wrong this whole time! You're supposed to load a bullet in the damn thing!

Well that certainly explains the lack of blood trails.

"Lots of fragmentation" seems rather self explanatory, but since you asked, it means that plenty of little pieces are no longer attached to the bullet, which coincidentally, weighs a lot less if it is recovered. I have a sneaky suspicision that the low weight coincides with all those little pieces that are no longer attached. "lots" is entirely subjective, but I'd imagine based on gel testing something like a 77gr TMK or 75gr ELD is about half its starting weight at the end of its journey.

I've observed this phenomenon mainly with my eyes, and in deer I have shot with a couple 77gr match bullets, in deer that others have shot, and in gel tests that I have seen.

If I may ask, what does "quite simply devastating" mean? Especially compared to larger cartridges like 6.5 CM, 308 Win, etc?
Click to expand...

Joel... no one can help you... except you. You need to try things for yourself, and see what results work best for you. Arguing about stuff on the internet for the sake of arguing is kinda silly, no?
Results are just that. Results. If the result is a dead critter, then there really isn't much to argue about. Is there?
Dead is dead. Devastating is also dead. Compared to larger cartridges that also make things just as dead? The question is flawed.
Speed kills. More speed kills better, within bullet and desired target parameters. It really isn't that complicated?

Speaking of results, those that my very good friend Pathfinder76 posted above most definitely speak for themselves?

R.
 
Who was arguing?

I asked a very simple question. What do you load your 223 AI with. If that's argumentative I really don't know what to do about it. Can't imagine how one could be LESS argumentative.

And the question was absolutely not flawed. "Dead is dead". Well, FMJ kills. I guess 5.56mm green tip is just as devastating as 375 H&H.

If someone asked me why I considered a bullet devastating, I'd respond in terms of internal damage, distance game travels before dying, blood trails, etc. Mainly because I like talking about those things. Not giving someone a hard time.

You seem bound and determined to have an issue here where absolutely none exists on my end.
 
Joel said:
Who was arguing?

I asked a very simple question. What do you load your 223 AI with. If that's argumentative I really don't know what to do about it. Can't imagine how one could be LESS argumentative.

And the question was absolutely not flawed. "Dead is dead". Well, FMJ kills. I guess 5.56mm green tip is just as devastating as 375 H&H.

If someone asked me why I considered a bullet devastating, I'd respond in terms of internal damage, distance game travels before dying, blood trails, etc. Mainly because I like talking about those things. Not giving someone a hard time.

You seem bound and determined to have an issue here where absolutely none exists on my end.
Click to expand...

You are...
Your question was answered.
The question is flawed, as animals are dynamic, not static. And dead is always most certainly dead.
Use the green tip then, as you obviously don't like fragmentation.
Devastating? Shoot a deer with a 53-55 grain Barnes, at 223AI speeds, between 150 and 200 yards, and report back your findings. A better adjective will be more difficult to find than the result.
Your issues are obvious, and are yours, not anyone else's.

R.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom