The 223 as a viable big game round.

[Suther]

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.

Its not just the increase in diameter. A 243 has a fair bit more power in general, it's shooting heavier bullets at greater speeds. A 223 can do what, 2900fps with 70gr? The 243 goes faster than that with 100gr pills. The 70gr 224 cal pill has a significantly lower sectional density than the 100gr 243 as well...

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."

Fair enough. I have never worked behind a gun counter, so I guess I'm just not exposed to this sort of thing... I guess the guys who make such poor decisions don't come to the internet and tell people about it...

Man, how do these people even get PAL's and hunting licenses without knowing the basics of bullet construction and suitable use?...

 

[brybenn]

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."

I watched a guy fight with his 7x57 mauser for over 10 minutes he yelled at me. Called me stupid but he never did get that 7mm rem mag cartridge to chamber.

Ive seen alot of 308 brass fired from a 3006 at my club
And once bought a 32 special for a screaming deal because it wasnt accurate with the 3030 ammo the guy was firing. I agree ppl can be stupid but no law will change or fix that until they make it mandatory to pass a test to breed

 

[brybenn]

Where i live i can use a 270wby for coyotes but cant use my 9x19 carbine. Yup. Laws can be stupid

For the record yes i agree a 223 can humanely kill a deer when properly loaded. Would i choose to use one ? Most likely not. I hunt in bow and muzzleloader only area for deer so if i choose to use a centerfire i must travel so i bring a more appropriate deer rifle. Thats just me though. I believe in bringing enough bullet and a gun capable of firing it

 

[nowarningshot]

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.

You understand what your talking about with the 7x57?

Bell shot elephants with 275 rigby(7x57) in the days of the ivory trade. Body shot them with fmj, then the crew would find the carcass by vultures in a day or two to recover the ivory. Shoot a few each day and keep the crew working.

Really hoping it's a analogy you didn't understand. That your not advocating shooting game animals with a under sized caliber, having it run off, and leaving it for scavengers.

 

[grelmar]

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.

Best argument so far.

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.

Not sure about the "East v. West" part but definitely agree on the "Bush v. Open territory" argument.

Lots of thick bush hunting out here.

Like a lot of these caliber debates, it really comes down to effective ranges, and the type of hunting people are doing. Thick bush v. open country, mountain v. flatland, etc.

Boomer's argument really is the best one presented so far. I'd rather leave it to hunters to decide what best suits there purpose, than have some arbitrary restriction imposed by a bunch of bureaucrats who've never held a gun.

 

[todbartell]

If Nosler can deliver some of the new for 2018, Accubond .224" 70GR, I will load them up. We have a nice 3 week long antlerless WTD season here and my Ruger 5.56 Scout would make it more fun

 

[MiG25]

Those 70 grain accubonds have caught my eye, unfortunately don't have a rifle that will shoot them.

 

[rifleman762]

Don’t see where I decided to make decisions on people’s behalf. Just noting it could be a problem. Please read gatehouses post as he points out his take on my view in a polite way.

Yes, you decided people shouldn't be allowed to hunt big game with a 223 because they MIGHT choose the wrong ammo/bullet. That's the same logic as a Liberal deciding that you shouldn't own a semi-auto because you MIGHT go on a shooting spree. Like others and myself have said; many other legal big game cartridges have the same issue of both varmint and big game loads being available. How do you legislate against ignorance/inattentiveness/stupidity? I say you shouldn't even try. How about I build a 270 Ren (straight walled 22 Hornet case) and shoot deer with it? It would be legal but still dumb. Or even more likely: someone might use a Keltec Sub2000 in 9mm. It's legal...but not advisable.

I realize that many people are not gun nuts and make seemingly obvious mistakes. I was at the range with a gentleman who tried to chamber 308 Marlin Express in his bolt action 308 Winchester. What can you do except politely point out his mistake and don't make a big deal out of it?

 

[todbartell]

Those 70 grain accubonds have caught my eye, unfortunately don't have a rifle that will shoot them.

easily fixed! Better start shopping around

 

[rifleman762]

In the thread about changes to legal cartridges in Saskatchewan I said that, if you feel like there NEEDS to be rules regarding allowable cartridges for big game, it should be based on bullet weight and muzzle energy. As a quick suggestion, how about 62gr and 1000 ft-lbs? The Federal Fusion 62gr 223 Rem is supposed to be a decent deer load. It has 1200 ft lbs muzzle energy and penetrates a deer's vitals. A 125gr HP 357 Mag out of a rifle has 1153 ft lbs. Both are capable of cleanly killing a deer when used within their limitations. And with these proposed rules, no one will accidentally go deer hunting with a 17 Hornet. Or try kill a moose with a 58gr V-max from a 243 Winchester.

 

[Buckmastr]

Yes, you decided people shouldn't be allowed to hunt big game with a 223 because they MIGHT choose the wrong ammo/bullet. That's the same logic as a Liberal deciding that you shouldn't own a semi-auto because you MIGHT go on a shooting spree. Like others and myself have said; many other legal big game cartridges have the same issue of both varmint and big game loads being available. How do you legislate against ignorance/inattentiveness/stupidity? I say you shouldn't even try. How about I build a 270 Ren (straight walled 22 Hornet case) and shoot deer with it? It would be legal but still dumb. Or even more likely: someone might use a Keltec Sub2000 in 9mm. It's legal...but not advisable.

I realize that many people are not gun nuts and make seemingly obvious mistakes. I was at the range with a gentleman who tried to chamber 308 Marlin Express in his bolt action 308 Winchester. What can you do except politely point out his mistake and don't make a big deal out of it?

Give it a rest. There are better cartridges to hunt deer with than a 223 rem. And you don't need to be a liberal to know that.

 

[rifleman762]

Give it a rest. There are better cartridges to hunt deer with than a 223 rem. And you don't need to be a liberal to know that.

I didn't say that there weren't better cartridges. I use a 300 Win Mag because I like using the same rifle for all of my big game hunting. But the question was: is it a viable big game round? Yes, absolutely. Is a 243 Win ideal for elk? No, but it works. Is a 30-30 the best moose cartridge in the world? No, but it works. And if someone wants to use it, go right ahead. Just don't shoot the moose at 460 yards across a swamp like I did with my 300WM. Choose your weapon and choose your limitations. Like slug hunting deer in a shotgun-only area.

 

[doc25]

Yes, you decided people shouldn't be allowed to hunt big game with a 223 because they MIGHT choose the wrong ammo/bullet. That's the same logic as a Liberal deciding that you shouldn't own a semi-auto because you MIGHT go on a shooting spree. Like others and myself have said; many other legal big game cartridges have the same issue of both varmint and big game loads being available. How do you legislate against ignorance/inattentiveness/stupidity? I say you shouldn't even try. How about I build a 270 Ren (straight walled 22 Hornet case) and shoot deer with it? It would be legal but still dumb. Or even more likely: someone might use a Keltec Sub2000 in 9mm. It's legal...but not advisable.

I realize that many people are not gun nuts and make seemingly obvious mistakes. I was at the range with a gentleman who tried to chamber 308 Marlin Express in his bolt action 308 Winchester. What can you do except politely point out his mistake and don't make a big deal out of it?

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.

Above is what I wrote. Once again stop,read it and tell me where I said we should stop people from using the 223 for hunting deer. Personally I don’t care what you use. You can run them down with your car if it makes you feel good. So maybe stop screaming like a little Antifa b!tch and read what I wrote.

I pointed out a potential problem, that’s all. In fact if people do start wounding a bunch of deer with 223’s someone will come along and take that right away.

While I’ve never looked for 223 deer bullets at places like canadian tire or Walmart most 223 bullets sold there are probably designed for varmint shooting or are fmj. I’m sure you know what bullets to use but you also can not speak for everyone getting the right bullets. I’m sure most Walmart employees that open the ammo case are not well versed in which bullets are best for what game either.

Has your rage subsided yet?

 

[SHELL SHUCKER]

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.

Nicely put.
Nothin' worse than regulations made up by folks that have little or no experience with firearms or shooting sports. The global brainwashing is in high gear.

 

[StoneHorse]

I've been thinking of loading up some .224" 60 grain Nosler Partitions for use on coastal blacktail.

 

[hoytcanon]

For me personally, it boils down to my belief that more animals will be wounded with diminutive cartridges being used on big game animals... there really is no "need" for it. I concede that it can certainly be done, and in the hands of a skilled loader/shooter/hunter, it can be done easily... unfortunately that just is not the profile of many (if not most) of the hunters in the woods/plains/mountains... a skilled loader/shooter/hunter, will use a proper bullet, with a sufficient load, will understand body posture and place the bullet well and will understand the ballistics of his/her equipment choices and will stay within it's limits... I fear that more often than not, this may not be the case. I like to add margin to my choices and tactics, that includes cartridge, load, distance etc... nobody is perfect all the time, so why push the limits when it is not necessary? I won't be using a .223 for deer, or a .22-250, or even a .243... I have so many better choices in my safes... but if it is legal and you want to make any of those choices, then have at it... I hope you use wisdom in their application... and when you relate your experiences to others, I hope you also relate some qualifying statements.

 

[Suther]

Those 70 grain accubonds have caught my eye, unfortunately don't have a rifle that will shoot them.

What kind of twist do they need? (I'm assuming that's your problem?)

 

[Suther]

In the thread about changes to legal cartridges in Saskatchewan I said that, if you feel like there NEEDS to be rules regarding allowable cartridges for big game, it should be based on bullet weight and muzzle energy. As a quick suggestion, how about 62gr and 1000 ft-lbs? The Federal Fusion 62gr 223 Rem is supposed to be a decent deer load. It has 1200 ft lbs muzzle energy and penetrates a deer's vitals. A 125gr HP 357 Mag out of a rifle has 1153 ft lbs. Both are capable of cleanly killing a deer when used within their limitations. And with these proposed rules, no one will accidentally go deer hunting with a 17 Hornet. Or try kill a moose with a 58gr V-max from a 243 Winchester.

75 or 87 grain vmax in the 243 still poses that same problem, same with 25cal varmint loads I think?(250-3000 was originally loaded with 87gr pills to make that 3000fps)... unless you make the weight 100+ (which eliminates anything under 243 basically anyways) then there is no hard line that separates deer bullet from varmint - on the other end of the scale, there are ttsx in 55gr 22cal and 80gr in both 243 and 257cal, and I bet all three of them will drop a deer no problem but would be illegal with a weight minimum of 90gr+ to eliminate the 80+gr 243 varmint bullets.

The only real solution is education. Clearly anyone making a mistake like this didn't actually learn that there are different types of bullets for different hunting situations and they are not always interchangeable... Which I feel like was discussed in both pal and hunting courses...

If this is as much an issue as some suggest, what can we do to help the problem?

 

[cath8r]

Maybe legislate the bullets used and not the calibre.
Broadheads for bowhunting have a minimum size and other legal parameters ie: not barbed etc.

 

[rifleman762]

Maybe legislate the bullets used and not the calibre.
Broadheads for bowhunting have a minimum size and other legal parameters ie: not barbed etc.

And bows usually have a minimum draw weight to ensure sufficient penetration of the vitals. Although a 40lb compound bow will shoot faster than a 40lb longbow. Ideally, I'd like to see the cartridge rules simply eliminated. But our govt officals in Alberta have decided it's necessary to have a dividing line for big game firearm hunting. How do we come up with a rule (that is effective, easy to understand, and able to be enforced at the field level) to replace the existing one. The existing rule of nothing under .24 calibre is easy to understand and enforce but is not effective. Even the rule about non-expanding bullets is out of date with the introduction of Woodleigh Hydrostatic Solids. They cause massive cavitation without expanding. I don't think there is a good answer other than putting a page in the hunting regs with advice about bullet selection and forget about trying to devise a rule. And have some focua on it in the hunter course for new hunters. Education instead of legislation.