.223 for everything, the gunnutz version

Meanwhile back at my reservation many a moose have been taken cleanly with 22wmr.

Come on boys. Everything on the continent can be taken with a recurve bow and arrow.

Its not the tool but the operator.

We used to take whitetail with snowshoes and a knife. Chase one out of cover in to the deep stuff and keep on him til he cant go more. Bleed him out.

233 is a nice caliber. Do all for sure.

Nice in a semi auto.
 
I'm not on Rockslide, so maybe someone can give me the Cole's Notes - why is this even a thing? Is it that .243 recoils too much for the modern hunter? Is it because .223 ammo weighs less so you can either carry more of it, or shave 4ox off your pack? It's almost like these fads come and go; when they are "in" people crow from the rooftops that it is the most effective ever....

Some examples of this in the past:
WSSM - it gave you a 3/16" shorter action, which of course made it very handy.
RSAUM
Ruger Compact Magnums
.375 Ruger - illegitimate claim to the throne

Meanwhile the .30-06 and .270 keep getting it done, as they have for the last 119 and 103 years respectively.
 
1899 said:
I'm not on Rockslide, so maybe someone can give me the Cole's Notes - why is this even a thing? Is it that .243 recoils too much for the modern hunter? Is it because .223 ammo weighs less so you can either carry more of it, or shave 4ox off your pack? It's almost like these fads come and go; when they are "in" people crow from the rooftops that it is the most effective ever....

Some examples of this in the past:
WSSM - it gave you a 3/16" shorter action, which of course made it very handy.
RSAUM
Ruger Compact Magnums
.375 Ruger - illegitimate claim to the throne

Meanwhile the .30-06 and .270 keep getting it done, as they have for the last 119 and 103 years respectively.
Click to expand...

Nobody is suggesting that you need to change from your 30-06 or 270….
 
1899 said:
I'm not on Rockslide, so maybe someone can give me the Cole's Notes - why is this even a thing? Is it that .243 recoils too much for the modern hunter? Is it because .223 ammo weighs less so you can either carry more of it, or shave 4ox off your pack? It's almost like these fads come and go; when they are "in" people crow from the rooftops that it is the most effective ever....

Some examples of this in the past:
WSSM - it gave you a 3/16" shorter action, which of course made it very handy.
RSAUM
Ruger Compact Magnums
.375 Ruger - illegitimate claim to the throne

Meanwhile the .30-06 and .270 keep getting it done, as they have for the last 119 and 103 years respectively.
Click to expand...

There are a some advantages to using smaller cartridges.

Recoil from a 223 is considerably less than a 243
223 Ammo can be bought in bulk and therefore less expensive to practice with. And as recoil is less, it's easier to practice with.

If I had a new hunter to train I would show them how to shoot and use their equipment and give them a .223 rifle and a case of ammunition and tell them to go to the range at least once a week until hunting season. If they did good practice they would be better shooters than 75% of hunters that have been hunting for decades but only shoot one box of ammo a year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGY
Fair point with the training part GH. I started my boy off with a .223 for centerfire practice and still use it to this day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGY
I think there is lots of people that like to chase the extreme, the smallest chambering legal for big game to say they can do it same with the guys using the other extreme of the biggest chambering they can handle for deer size game lol, 458 win mag for exemple to go after deer size game just to say they can do it!
 
Everyone knows it has to be the .223 Ackley Improved to be useful...
Currently a topic of choice on another Canadian outdoors sporting site.
Cept someone wants to shoot a moose with it.
All that is missing is a quote I listened to about walking into Guided Hunt Camp with (insert cartridge here) and gaining instant respect.
To each their own I suppose.
 
1899 said:
Where did I say I interpret it in that way?

It was a simple question. Why is this a thing? Should be easy to answer if you are on board.
Click to expand...

Lot of reasons. Cheaper to shoot (if one has a budget for that sort of thing).
More fun to shoot a lot (the more you shoot, the better you get, the better you get with a rifle the better you place your shots, versus shooting AT an animal).
Easy to spot bullet impacts (seeing bullet impact on game is one of the most overlooked aspects when it comes to game recovery in my opinion).
More forgiving in the event of a poor hit (with the caveat that one is using a 77TMK or 73/75/88 ELD m) compared to a bonded or mono.
Faster time to death (same caveat as above with bullet choice.)
 
FLHTCUI said:
Everyone knows it has to be the .223 Ackley Improved to be useful...
Currently a topic of choice on another Canadian outdoors sporting site.
Cept someone wants to shoot a moose with it.
All that is missing is a quote I listened to about walking into Guided Hunt Camp with (insert cartridge here) and gaining instant respect.
To each their own I suppose.
Click to expand...

Thinly veiled jab at me. Pretty funny really,

It ain’t “wants to shoot a moose with one”, it’s “killed 3 bull moose and a bull elk in three years with the 223 Ackley Improved and the 88 ELD m, at varying angles and distances during our 2 day spike/fork/tripalm/10 pt season and then switched up to a 22 Creedmoor for this season and killed a 6x6 elk and a tripalm moose with the same 88 ELD m, and will continue to use the 88 ELD m because it is an incredibly effective bullet on game.”

At least get it right.
 
KodiakHntr said:
Thinly veiled jab at me. Pretty funny really,

It ain’t “wants to shoot a moose with one”, it’s “killed 3 bull moose and a bull elk in three years with the 223 Ackley Improved and the 88 ELD m, at varying angles and distances during our 2 day spike/fork/tripalm/10 pt season and then switched up to a 22 Creedmoor for this season and killed a 6x6 elk and a tripalm moose with the same 88 ELD m, and will continue to use the 88 ELD m because it is an incredibly effective bullet on game.”

At least get it right.
Click to expand...
I wasnt tossing You under the bus if I wanted to I would have named you specifically , but hey you go fill your boots .22 cal centre fire are legal.
You showed me.
 
Opinion: 223 for everything is a civilian evolution from the GWOT. Lots of vets stateside transition to hunting/sport shooting and they go with what’s familiar - the AR then onto to a fast twist Tikka and the like. Cheers to the folks over on SlideRok for their evidence based thread. It’s worth the read. And I totally agree, with all previous posts here, that ammunition and training is the way. Wish I had that knowledge when I started out. Over 20 years I’ve learned: Shot placement is king, bullet construction is queen and cartridge really means jack. When I read that it really stuck with me.
 
Sights4Nights said:
Over 20 years I’ve learned: Shot placement is king, bullet construction is queen and cartridge really means jack. When I read that it really stuck with me.
Click to expand...

I think the whole shot placement argument gets overplayed quite a bit. In an ideal world everyone would always make the perfect shot regardless of what they are using. But that isn’t the case and sometimes it goes sideways.

I think a more relevant take on it is using a bullet that makes a marginal hit more effective, by damaging more tissue in the immediate area of the hit to a sufficient depth and width that something important is damaged enough that it immediately incapacitates the animal or it slows it down sufficiently enough that effective follow up shot(s) can be delivered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom