The 223 with lightweights and small scopes
- Thread starter pathfinder76
- Start date
Hello Joel!
Have used plenty of 53 and 55 grain Barnes bullets in a 223AI on deer at distances out to 200 yards, and even further, and found the results simply devastating for the deer! You should really try it!
Hope this helps!!!!!
R.
Have used plenty of 53 and 55 grain Barnes bullets in a 223AI on deer at distances out to 200 yards, and even further, and found the results simply devastating for the deer! You should really try it!
Hope this helps!!!!!
R.
Not sure I wanna put my hand up here….
Buuuuut I have used the 45 TSX (12 twist), as well as the 50/53 TSX (12 twist), the 45/53 TSX and 55/62 TTSX (9 twist) on critters ala various 223AI’s, as well as the 50 GMX via 8 twist RAR.
On deer and black bears, they can be effective, IF you are a bone shooter and they are pushed fast.
And the faster they are spun, the more effective they are. Twisted faster at the same muzzle velocity creates more terminal damage in similar shot placements.
There’s nothing really new here though, mono’s - regardless of caliber - don’t generate the same size of temporary and permanent wound cavity as softer constructed bullets. They definitely track straighter in flesh, and likely penetrate deeper due to retained mass.
Dropping a bullet weight class or two when going from a traditional cup and core to a mono makes a lot of sense in that regard. You push a smaller mono bullet faster and it will make a bigger hole due to increased velocity, and you get similar or increased penetration to what you would see with a heavy traditional bullet. You end up with a more similar wound profile with some added penetration from what I’ve seen. (Ie, like going from a 180 gr psp versus a 165 tsx from a 300wm - while it isn’t an apples to apples similarly, it isn’t grapefruit to watermelon comparison either.)
Buuuuut I have used the 45 TSX (12 twist), as well as the 50/53 TSX (12 twist), the 45/53 TSX and 55/62 TTSX (9 twist) on critters ala various 223AI’s, as well as the 50 GMX via 8 twist RAR.
On deer and black bears, they can be effective, IF you are a bone shooter and they are pushed fast.
And the faster they are spun, the more effective they are. Twisted faster at the same muzzle velocity creates more terminal damage in similar shot placements.
There’s nothing really new here though, mono’s - regardless of caliber - don’t generate the same size of temporary and permanent wound cavity as softer constructed bullets. They definitely track straighter in flesh, and likely penetrate deeper due to retained mass.
Dropping a bullet weight class or two when going from a traditional cup and core to a mono makes a lot of sense in that regard. You push a smaller mono bullet faster and it will make a bigger hole due to increased velocity, and you get similar or increased penetration to what you would see with a heavy traditional bullet. You end up with a more similar wound profile with some added penetration from what I’ve seen. (Ie, like going from a 180 gr psp versus a 165 tsx from a 300wm - while it isn’t an apples to apples similarly, it isn’t grapefruit to watermelon comparison either.)
Thats good info, thanks Kodiak!
Have you been disappointed with them or had bad results when not hitting bone?
What concerns me and the reason I ask is that I'd rather not have long tracks and poor blood trails when shoulders aren't punched. I don't feel like thats been the case with larger monos I've used.
Have you been disappointed with them or had bad results when not hitting bone?
What concerns me and the reason I ask is that I'd rather not have long tracks and poor blood trails when shoulders aren't punched. I don't feel like thats been the case with larger monos I've used.
Hmm. I don’t know if I’ve been disappointed per sè… I did have a 62 TTSX not open up on a whitetail once, but it still killed him. He did run maybe 200 yards, and he left a bloodtrail, but it was across my field so it wasn’t like I wouldn’t have found him even if he didn’t leave any blood. That one entered at his last rib, cut a couple ribs off as it went in, and was lodged in his neck meat, so 3+ feet of penetration.
What I have seen, for me, is that mono’s will result in more runners, regardless of where they are hit, and will
take a little longer for the critter to die when compared to softer bullets, especially so with softer bullets twisted very fast.
There’s a trade off there to be made at some point, and for me it’s in using hard vs soft bullets in larger calibers. From my 280AI it’s 150 TTSX’s for elk. I expect to punch those lengthwise from quarter to quarter on bulls for as far as I care/need to shoot elk (400 yards and in, typically much much less than 100 yards). Same with my 300 Ultra (although that doesn’t get used anymore) 168 TTSX’s. Same thing, elk up close.
With the smaller caliber stuff, in my experience soft bullets spun FAST tends to yank the rug out from under critters. I don’t think I’ve had anything go more than 20 yards when shot in the front half with a 75 Amax or 88 ELD m, and the majority of them went straight down.
But thats just me, your results may vary.
What I have seen, for me, is that mono’s will result in more runners, regardless of where they are hit, and will
take a little longer for the critter to die when compared to softer bullets, especially so with softer bullets twisted very fast.
There’s a trade off there to be made at some point, and for me it’s in using hard vs soft bullets in larger calibers. From my 280AI it’s 150 TTSX’s for elk. I expect to punch those lengthwise from quarter to quarter on bulls for as far as I care/need to shoot elk (400 yards and in, typically much much less than 100 yards). Same with my 300 Ultra (although that doesn’t get used anymore) 168 TTSX’s. Same thing, elk up close.
With the smaller caliber stuff, in my experience soft bullets spun FAST tends to yank the rug out from under critters. I don’t think I’ve had anything go more than 20 yards when shot in the front half with a 75 Amax or 88 ELD m, and the majority of them went straight down.
But thats just me, your results may vary.
all good, when I hunt predators I use something big enough and legal for the awake ones through winter and big enough also for black bears, and deer, and moose, and elk, and sheep, and antelope, legal for all them too, Alberta pretty cool place to live as a hunter, we got it all, except .223 legality for big game, when I referenced .223 as a little light meaning standard light for cal off the shelf stuff...no issues there with off the shelf Grendel/arc stuff as it's heavy for cal but unnecessary here for anything but steel as you don't need it for coyotes, yup the hand loaders finding fast twist rigs can tweak .223's to kill elk at 400 (rokslide special), the wolves are like deer though, so off the shelf...also, the 6.5 and sure the arc will hang, kills big game damn fine, I don't get the lack of versatility as a hunter focus but I guess there are shooters just like to shoot targets, I've tried to like the .223 but find it's just an overweight .17 hmr...and find the hmr more versatile and fun lol
What lack of versatility are you referring too?
Epic thread where emotions run high and traditional thoughts and practices are shot dead and then buried by heaps of photographic evidence in the form of detailed necropsies showing exactly what that cartridge/bullet combo delivers.
Tradition is tough to break and we are all wise to heed the advice of the old timers who have been there done that but the fact is fast twist rates and a properly constructed heavy for caliber bullet are dropping things just as well the components and equipment of the 1950s.
That sloshing sound when you roll them over to start guttin'.
Cabin fever kicking in early, I see...
As far as the thread goes, I like to match the scope to the cartridge potential for the most part, but sometimes to the intended environment, ie. A lower power optic for brush country. My three .223's all wear 4.5-14's, but I have a .218 Bee with a 2-7 when that seems the ticket... on the other end of the spectrum is a .220 Swift wearing a 6.5-20.
As far as the thread goes, I like to match the scope to the cartridge potential for the most part, but sometimes to the intended environment, ie. A lower power optic for brush country. My three .223's all wear 4.5-14's, but I have a .218 Bee with a 2-7 when that seems the ticket... on the other end of the spectrum is a .220 Swift wearing a 6.5-20.
There’s grizzlies where I elk hunt too. In fact, I had one in come in at a dead run from 70 yards out in the timber while cow calling this September. Young bear, maybe a 3 year old, probably why he ran at me from so far out. Incidentally, that saved his life, as it gave me time to identify him and yell and step out from the tree I was behind so he veered off when he was still 20 yards out.
Then I walked home after that in the dark, since I was only 900m from my barn, and no 338 needed.
Here’s the thing though (since you seem to actually want to be outraged - apparently that wasn’t meant as tongue in cheek like I previously thought), it isn’t that “someone on the internet did something so I have to as well”, it’s “what are the actual requirements to get the job done efficiently and effectively? What combination of bullet construction, rotational velocity, and impact velocity are required to achieve that consistently?”
Legitimate question, when it comes to on-game terminal ballistics, what do you need to see for you personally to feel comfortable shooting a deer? A bear? An elk? And how do you achieve that?
(Sorry Chuck, this thread spiraled way off into the weeds. Apologies.)
