.223 Rem. enough gun for deer?

[Unregistered user]

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

The old twist was a lot slower, and the military (and the general populace) began to use the heavier weight projectiles, consequently the bullets were "barely" stabilized.

Being FMJ, the did not deform on impact and the heavy end on cup and core spitzers is on the base. This would give it a propensity to turn over (once) so it would naturally lead with the heavy end.

I am not sure that this was planned; as Oki said, the idea is to wound and maim, to use up resources. This is dependent of course on who you are fighting, somewhat. If you are fighting Zulus, for instance, that might not be the best tack.

Todays fast twist .223, 5.56, "Wylde" chambered barrels are designed to handle the 70+ weight .224 bullets that are common now. I don't believe you see very much turning over of the bullets anymore.

It was an intentional design and nothing new that was covered in "The black gun". Brit .303 underperformed Mauser rounds in its original form so they put aluminum/wood tips ahead of the lead under the jacket to cause upset on impact thus bigger deadlier wounds.

[1quietbear*]

Not to start a fight but why take a chance and use too small a calibre that might cause an animal to go off wounded. Use a round that'll put r down. I'm a 30/06 man through and through, all types of load/bullet options to suit almost any need.

Keep your stream clean

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by 1quietbear*

Not to start a fight but why take a chance and use too small a calibre that might cause an animal to go off wounded. Use a round that'll put r down. I'm a 30/06 man through and through, all types of load/bullet options to suit almost any need.

Keep your stream clean

It sure would be nice for small kids to use as a starter. I know of 2 12 year olds that are tiny. Puny actually. They can't handle the recoil of a "legal" calibre.

A .223 will do just fine. I would use a 55 grain TSX bullet. I am positive the deer would die every bit as fast as your 30/06.

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

It sure would be nice for small kids to use as a starter. I know of 2 12 year olds that are tiny. Puny actually. They can't handle the recoil of a "legal" calibre.

A .223 will do just fine. I would use a 55 grain TSX bullet. I am positive the deer would die every bit as fast as your 30/06.

Neither was I but I believe what that a large frame person feels recoil worse than a small frame.
I think it was Jeff Cooper that wrote about it that a small guy moves and flexes with the recoil where a big guy gives less so takes it harder.

[huntin]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

It sure would be nice for small kids to use as a starter. I know of 2 12 year olds that are tiny. Puny actually. They can't handle the recoil of a "legal" calibre.

A .223 will do just fine. I would use a 55 grain TSX bullet. I am positive the deer would die every bit as fast as your 30/06.

they are to small to shoot a 55grn out of a 243? maybe not the best hunting bullet but hardly ounces of kick

[Bolete]

Originally Posted by huntin

they are to small to shoot a 55grn out of a 243? maybe not the best hunting bullet but hardly ounces of kick

A 55 grain .224 diameter TSX is a hunting bullet. A 55 grain .243 bullet is a very light varmint bullet. The two don't compare.

[wasteland.soldier]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Neither was I but I believe what that a large frame person feels recoil worse than a small frame.
I think it was Jeff Cooper that wrote about it that a small guy moves and flexes with the recoil where a big guy gives less so takes it harder.

Yep. I'm sure he said it in his articles too, but it's in Art of the Rifle.

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by huntin

they are to small to shoot a 55grn out of a 243? maybe not the best hunting bullet but hardly ounces of kick

I shoot the 55's out of my .243. They explode on a gopher. That is way worse than a .223 55 TSX ever could be. It isn't even close to the same thing.

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Neither was I but I believe what that a large frame person feels recoil worse than a small frame.
I think it was Jeff Cooper that wrote about it that a small guy moves and flexes with the recoil where a big guy gives less so takes it harder.

I don't believe they can. No.

There is no reason in this world that a .223 will not humanely kill a deer. Why do we have laws like this, yet allow people to lob lead at ranges that can allow an animal to walk a few feet before the bullet gets there, just because the bullet is larger than .23?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Neither was I but I believe what that a large frame person feels recoil worse than a small frame.
I think it was Jeff Cooper that wrote about it that a small guy moves and flexes with the recoil where a big guy gives less so takes it harder.

Generally speaking this is the consensus with all things taken for granted but there are many other factors that involve felt recoil than a person's frame size.

Whether or not a person knows proper shooting form is the most important part.
Many times when a comment like Cooper's is made ,the comparison is made considering that both shooters have equal ability.
Cat

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Generally speaking this is the consensus with all things taken for granted but there are many other factors that involve felt recoil than a person's frame size.

Whether or not a person knows proper shooting form is the most important part.
Many times when a comment like Cooper's is made ,the comparison is made considering that both shooters have equal ability.
Cat

Agreed Cat. Also take into consideration that the noise will make a big difference to a new shooter also.

[roper1]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Though I thought small military rounds were designed more to wound than kill. More stress on opposing forces to take care of wounded soldiers than dead ones. No?

All kinds of weapons, in the hands of experienced shooters, would be deadly on various game. However, many hunters aren't experienced, so a bit of overkill is useful, IMHO.

x2

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

All kinds of weapons, in the hands of experienced shooters, would be deadly on various game. However, many hunters aren't experienced, so a bit of overkill is useful, IMHO.

So because a 243 is legal it is ok if someone doesn't put the time in and just goes to whack one in the guts? They aren't experienced so no biggie?

That makes no sense. A bad shot is a bad shot.

I watched my buddy take a bad shot with a .257 Roberts. The deer took us 2 1/2 hours to find and finish. He got jumpy and shot it in the paunch. Overkill did nothing for that deer.

I watched a Waterbuck go for 3 days this year in Africa that was shot badly. They aren't that much bigger than a deer. Maybe 450-500lbs or so. It was shot with a .378 Weatherby. It doesn't get much more overkill than that. That thing never was killed. We had to go to the airport and the trackers were still following it.

It all boils down to if the cartridge can humanely kill a deer. And the answer is yes it can.

[Big Sky]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

I watched my buddy take a bad shot with a .257 Roberts. The deer took us 2 1/2 hours to find and finish. He got jumpy and shot it in the paunch. Overkill did nothing for that deer.

I watched a Waterbuck go for 3 days this year in Africa that was shot badly. They aren't that much bigger than a deer. Maybe 450-500lbs or so. It was shot with a .378 Weatherby. It doesn't get much more overkill than that.

When did 257 Roberts become overkill for deer? Of course, this question is rhetorical.

I have never been to Africa, probably never will. Anyway, what would be a sensible cartridge for Waterbuck?

[Youngbuck13]

Just another opinion to consider in why I know it could be an effective cartridge but not sure if I would allow it.

Given that .223 is available in one of the most varieties today, I believe that if we allowed big game hunting with it many people would be using some of the cheapest available ammo even if there were ammo requirements. This would become one of the hardest things to enforce. There are too many available, cheap, inneffective loads out there for .223 for me to be comfortable opening it up to use on big game. I know this goes for other calibres as well so please dont tear me apart but I would like to hear what you guys think of my point of view (with respect please). If to be legalized, I really do hope that out of respect for the animals that people will do their due diligence in becoming a better marksman to ensure a quick clean dispatching of the animal.

[catnthehat]

There are ineffective rounds available for most big game cartridges these days, a bad hit with anything will result in a wounded or unrecoverable animal, and the bottom line is it is all about end user responsibility.
One cannot build in every conceivable block for idiocy, the old cartridge laws proved that and today with the new law elimination of the case length , once can go out and use a 25/20 if one wants to.
I would much rather hunt with a .223 with a proper bullet than a 25/20 any day of the week!
Cat

[brownbomber]

Originally Posted by Dick284

There is zero reason why it would not work.... And a great big pile of if's attached.....
All those if's equate into a great big quagmire, dealing with choosing proper bullets, picking perfect shots, not shooting too far, and the list goes on, and on.

How is a seemingly endless list of if's dealt with from a bureaucratic standpoint?

By regulating or legislating the use of the item that brings a bunch of if's into the equation.

Unfortunately our rules and laws are written to the lowest common denominator.

Unfortunately the lowest common denominator is far to common in the hunting community.

Bingo
Can't regulate stupidity of the individual and can't deny the oppurtunity to the stupid (until proven) and even then others will make it difficult for the rest. Then the gvt gets the blame by regulating when really it's the fault of the LCD by forcing rules to be implemented

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Big Sky

When did 257 Roberts become overkill for deer? Of course, this question is rhetorical.

I have never been to Africa, probably never will. Anyway, what would be a sensible cartridge for Waterbuck?

The other post was saying that the legal cartridge allows for overkill in case of a bad shot.

Waterbuck can be easily killed with any deer cartridges. They are about 450-500 pounds. A .378 Weatherby is legal for Elephant and Rhino.

[58thecat]

Yep the 223 will kill a deer plain and simple. Again a misplaced shot from say a 338 will not.....nor would a misplaced shot from the 223.

[Big Sky]

If a guy is going to use a heavy recoiling round, lots of practice is needed to get used to the recoil and become proficient. Some guys will use something that is too powerful for their skills because they think it gives them a margin of error. I think that in most cases, their logic is flawed. I'm guessing that is the case with the 378wby in the above post.

When people choose cartridges at the other end of the spectrum, they usually cite the "bullet placement" arguement, saying that if they limit their range and take broadside shots, their choice of cartridge is sound. The light recoil makes for an easy to shoot rifle. But, how many guys would turn down a shot from a tough angle, at a 'too far' distance on a trophy whitetail because they chose the smallest legal caliber. I'm guessing that the temptation would be too great for a lot of hunters.

In many situations, moderation is a wise choice. When someone starts a thread asking for a suitable round for their wife, girlfiend, son, daughter, etc, the most common suggestion is 7-08 and other similar rounds. These moderately sized cartriges can be loaded down to make them an excellent option for a beginner, but still have the ability to work well for experienced hunters.

Imo, 223 and other similar rounds would have to be among the worst choices a guy could make for a deer rifle.

[fordtruckin]

Originally Posted by abbgdr

It's legal in the state of Idaho,, has been as long as I can remember. My brother kills his deer every year with one

Its legal here in MT as well. From Page 13 of the regs:

Firearms During the General Season: • There is no rifle or handgun caliber limitation for the taking of big game animals.

Does anyone use one? I'm sure they do but I've never heard of anyone using a .223 except for coyote/wolf/cats. I guess I would use one as long as I was within the limitations of the rifle/cartridge/bullet, but that goes for anything I shoot at. I've seen way to many people wound animals because they're to quick on the trigger or pretending to be artillery, with cartridges much bigger than the lowly .223rem. Unfortunately to many people don't know their limitations and thinking they're some shooting Casanova like Annie Oakley!!

[Ranch11]

Friend in BC is using a 221 fireball using 55 grain TSX. 223 is enough.

[saskaman]

the military uses the 223 rem to injure and take enemies out of the fight not to kill. because everybody does the "no man left behind" method therefore you wound 100 of their men they have to get them off the battlefield where the opportunity to wound more arrises and then they have to take several of their men and keep them back to care for the wounded.

[Bowman90]

In alberta the smallest you can hunt big game with is a .243 pretty sure the regulations.