|
Forums46
Topics539,492
Posts9,750,321
Members87,166
| |
Most Online25,604
Feb 12th, 2024
|
|
|
 Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485749
11/17/08 12:00 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,187
OFBHWG
Extreme Tracker
|
|
Extreme Tracker
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,187 |
IN YOUR PARTICULAR SITUATION IT IS NOT A GOOD CHOICE.
When you need a Piano moved there is always someone around to help you with the stool!
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: OFBHWG]
#485750
11/17/08 01:29 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170
Jimbo
THF Trophy Hunter
|
|
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170 |
Well he borrowed the gun to hunt the weekend, and now it's Monday, so lets hear a report on if that .223 was enough!
Personally I think it's a big mistake to borrow and gun, and go hunting without nothing but the guy saying it's zeroed in.
I would have found some way to shoot the gun at a white milk jug in the middle of the night just to be sure before I took it to the blind.
As far as being enough, he said his shots would be under 100 yards which is good, but then I would only take a neck or head shot.
Let's hear the report!
Thursday at 12:45 PM
#33
Once i learned that i didn't "NEED" to kill something, and that if i did kill something all the fun stopped and work began, i was a much better hunter.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: Jimbo]
#485751
11/17/08 02:08 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 23
shox27
OP
Light Foot
|
|
OP
Light Foot
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 23 |
Boys - it was enough!!
Got to the blind at 5:45am, sat listening for an hour until it got bright enough to see a doe bedded up in the field at about 175yds. Feeder went off at 7am and startled her into getting up and wandering down towards the feeder. Another doe came in from the right, and they walked around together for 5 minutes or so. Then in from the left comes an 11pt'er. Not really planning on taking a buck, I still considered taking one of the does (both decent size). My buddy in the blind says, "you take that buck....you can't pass on that!!"
Well, watched him work his way to the does and then all of them came down to the feeder. He was begging to get shot, he must've stood broadside for 5 minutes before I got him. Went for the body shot, got him double-lunged - he ran about 30yds and dropped in the trees.
It was enough....but it's been interesting to see the different replies.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485752
11/17/08 06:42 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
Good job on shot placement. That's the biggest concern on ANY round. I personally would never use a .223. I have one for coyotes, but that's it. I use a .30-06. Always have and always will. I load my own ammo, Hornady 155 gr A-max at about 2900 fps. I never shoot the leg, always behind it. If you hit about 2 inches behind the leg the only thing you will damage is his lungs and heart. I've never seen a deer run more than 100 yds with that ammo and I've made shots to 300 yds.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: RedBone]
#485753
11/17/08 06:46 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
Quote:
There are specific reasons why the military uses the rounds they do (can carry twice as many rounds and far less collateral damage, etc...). The rounds they use are NATO and Geneva approved to specifically kill not injure. Do larger rounds kill more effectively- yes. But the larger round is a harder round to fire in automatics. If you want a smaller more mobile force the 5.56 is just fine. Also, regardless of the round if you are properly trained and skilled you can kill all the same.
Hey bro what was your MOS?
About the small round. The military switched because you can carry more ammo. That is the biggest reason. I was in Iraq too, twice. I have seen plenty of times when Good Old 5.56 didn't do the trick. There is a reason we are currently looking at the 6.8. Headshots are one thing, body shots are another. 7.62 does WAY more damage to a human, and I have never seen one walk away. 5.56 sucks for a military round. Especially with FMJs. They penetrate very light armor and heavy clothes, but that is their only strong point.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: CleanKill]
#485754
11/17/08 07:57 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,641
redchevy
THF Celebrity
|
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 39,641 |
Yes and no. Ihave killed many deer with it, I shoot 60 gr nosler partitions and will shoot both head/neck and body shots within 150 yards. Anything past that is streatching it. My roomate shot a doe with my 223 at 300 yards last weekend, I told him not to but it took wounding and never finding a deer to convince him.
matt
It's hell eatin em live
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: redchevy]
#485755
11/17/08 09:23 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
Quote:
Yes and no. Ihave killed many deer with it, I shoot 60 gr nosler partitions and will shoot both head/neck and body shots within 150 yards. Anything past that is streatching it. My roomate shot a doe with my 223 at 300 yards last weekend, I told him not to but it took wounding and never finding a deer to convince him.
matt
That sucks that had to happen, but some people will not listen. There's also the guys who say "I've done it before". Well, that doesn't mean it will always work. I choose not to risk it. .30-06 never lets the deer walk.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: DFWPI]
#485756
11/17/08 10:36 PM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14
new zealand hunting guide
Light Foot
|
|
Light Foot
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14 |
I know guys that have used them on different types of deer and are fine, but this caliber requires a head neck or heart shot with no room for error. Starting out with a larger caliber on bigger game means less chance of wounding and loosing that prize animal, perfect for becoming a marksman on varmit.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: DFWPI]
#485757
11/18/08 02:06 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 620
DEERSTRANGLER
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 620 |
I've used a .222 and .223 on deer for years. I've used handloads using either the 55 grain Sierra or the 55 grain Hornady V-max. The V-max will absolutly "blow up" once it hits a deer. I use it for Neck or head shots only. Like it was posted above it's either straight down or a clean miss. I've accounted for over 20 deer with .22 caliber centerfires in the last 10 years without one going farther than 10 feet.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485758
11/18/08 11:39 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 74
Chris
Outdoorsman
|
|
Outdoorsman
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 74 |
It will be enough. My son uses one and got a nice 8 point a year ago and droped him in his tracks. I would keep you shot at 100 yards or less if possible. We use .55 grain Hornady. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485759
11/18/08 12:27 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 37,484
Big Orn
great white gorilla
|
|
great white gorilla
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 37,484 |
Quote:
Went for the body shot, got him double-lunged - he ran about 30yds and dropped in the trees.
Congrats! 
Now, where's them pics!!!! 
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: Big Orn]
#485760
11/18/08 03:00 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 23
shox27
OP
Light Foot
|
|
OP
Light Foot
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 23 |
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485761
11/18/08 07:29 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170
Jimbo
THF Trophy Hunter
|
|
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170 |
Nice buck, and congratulations!
I shot mine this morning, using my .270 and 130 Win. power point at 150 yards angling toward me, I hit him just behind the shoulder and found later why it didn't leave a blood trail.
The bullet lodged in the hip. I saw the deer fall after it ran 100 plus yards, and piled up, so I walked to where I shot it, being curious as to the distance of the shot, and found no blood anywhere, so if I hadn't seen the deer fall, and it had been in a brushy area which it wasn't I would have probably not known if I had hit the deer or not.
Moral of the story is if you take a body shot with a small caliber like a .223 it's rolling the dice!
Still, that's a nice buck!
Thursday at 12:45 PM
#33
Once i learned that i didn't "NEED" to kill something, and that if i did kill something all the fun stopped and work began, i was a much better hunter.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: shox27]
#485762
11/18/08 07:43 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309
PrimitiveHunter
THF Celebrity
|
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309 |
Quote:
is it enough for a hill country size deer?
I don't know. You tell me.
That was the second doe I killed with that rifle that afternoon.
Practice doesn’t make perfect.
Practice makes permanent.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: PrimitiveHunter]
#485763
11/18/08 08:20 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
If your comfortable using it then go ahead. With the advice given, if you lose or wound an animal you will have to live with it. I'm not trying to be an [censored] or rude or anything. In the end it's your decision. You've been given both sides of the argument. Now you have to make a decision to continue to use the round.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: Jimbo]
#485764
11/18/08 08:58 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309
PrimitiveHunter
THF Celebrity
|
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309 |
Quote:
Moral of the story is if you take a body shot with a small caliber like a .223 it's rolling the dice!
That's true with most calibers but I agree that it may become more true as the bullet gets smaller. My first doe was shot in the head so she dropped. The second doe was double lung shot quartering away. She went about 30 feet. I was shooting Wolf phosphate coated cases with 55 gr soft points.
Practice doesn’t make perfect.
Practice makes permanent.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: PrimitiveHunter]
#485765
11/18/08 09:47 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170
Jimbo
THF Trophy Hunter
|
|
THF Trophy Hunter
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,170 |
Quote:
Quote:
Moral of the story is if you take a body shot with a small caliber like a .223 it's rolling the dice!
That's true with most calibers but I agree that it may become more true as the bullet gets smaller. My first doe was shot in the head so she dropped. The second doe was double lung shot quartering away. She went about 30 feet. I was shooting Wolf phosphate coated cases with 55 gr soft points.
Shot placement is critical with any caliber because a bad shot is still a bad shot, but even a slightly marginal shot with a small caliber like a .223 can lead to a lost deer, where as with a larger caliber the same exact shot may mean the deer drops in it's tracks with massive internal damage.
The shot I made this morning wasn't a completely broadside, but it wasn't an extreme quartering shot either, and I would take that shot any day with that .270, but there is no doubt in my mind that same shot attempted with a .223 would have meant a lost deer.
I've shot deer with .22's back before I grew up, and with .222's and I killed deer with them, but I also personally lost a couple, and saw others shoot and lose deer with small caliber .223 rifles, simply because they took body shots, and hit bone which will deflect or cause the bulledt to disentigrate on contact, and you end up finding the deer a week later when you see the buzzards and find the deer with a broken front shoulder and a puss filled wound the size of a coffee cup!
It's up to what you want to use, and have confidence in, but I will promise you one thing, and that is that it will eventually happen, and then you will understand what is being said here, but to each his own!
That said, I own a .223 and I love the rifle, but I'll shoot hog, and I will take a doe, but with a head shot, and not over 100 yards, and I have confidence in how good it shoots.
Last edited by Jimbo; 11/18/08 10:00 PM.
Thursday at 12:45 PM
#33
Once i learned that i didn't "NEED" to kill something, and that if i did kill something all the fun stopped and work began, i was a much better hunter.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: Jimbo]
#485766
11/18/08 10:08 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 251
codym
Bird Dog
|
|
Bird Dog
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 251 |
i will have to tell all the deer i have killed with it out to 300 yards they are really not dead.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: codym]
#485767
11/19/08 02:59 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
Quote:
i will have to tell all the deer i have killed with it out to 300 yards they are really not dead.
I didn't want to get to aggressive on this topic, but I feel very strongly about it and I keep seeing posts like this. If I offend anyone, than I apologize.
As I've said before, I'm sure there are people out there who have made plenty of kills with the .223. There's always the guy who says "Well I've done it since 1927 and never lost one!" That does not mean it can't happen! Anyone who gives this answer to someone who asks the question that the OP asked needs to realize that they may be leading him to disaster.
There are many factors that go into a clean kill on an animal. Animal's size, whether or not the round hits bone, internal hydroshock caused by the round's velocity on impact, actual transfer of the bullets energy into the animal, the wound channel created by the round, the velocity of the round at impact, the angle of the round at impact and so on.
There are two main areas to shoot on a deer: neck and vitals. I'm not gonna put headshot because if you don't hit where the round will strike the brain you could blow a jaw or an antler off. A neckshot usually kills by way of impact and shock to the spine. This area doesn't take much to kill a deer. If you are using a small round, this is where you should aim if possible.
The vitals are different. You need to cause sufficient damage to the heart and/or lungs to kill the animal. If you can damage the heart the animal will go down. If you can damage at least one lung in its entirety it will go down. The quickest kill here is the heart, obviously.
Now, with all that said, SHOT PLACEMENT is the BIGGEST factor in ANY RIFLE. Now, does anyone on here know the OP in person? If so, this doesn't apply to you. I can bet that almost every single person on here does NOT know the OP. You have no idea how good of a shot he is or how much experience he has. YOU SHOULD NEVER ADVISE SOMEONE TO SHOOT A ROUND THAT MAY VERY WELL NOT KILL THE ANIMAL UNLESS YOU KNOW THE CAPABILITIES OF THAT PERSON.
It's plain and simple: THE CHANCE OF WOUNDING OR LOSING AN ANIMAL IS GREATLY INCREASED WHEN USING A SMALL CARTRIDGE SUCH AS THE .223. PERIOD.
Take what you will with this. There will always be the guys who say things like what I quoted. That doesn't mean its good advice. Again, if I offended anyone I'm sorry but I really don't want to have anyone back on here in the future saying "Man I lost a deer this weekend because my .223 didn't kill it."
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: CleanKill]
#485768
11/19/08 03:12 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,669
cody
THF Celebrity
|
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,669 |
I agree CleanKill, it's not a shot just anyone should take with a .223. I've seen it done and I've seen it done poorly. I had a hunter shoot a wild spanish goat at 400 yards and drop it like a rock with a .223, when calling him on it he just smiled. The next day we came on the goats again, nailed another one from 350. That fool could shoot. I believe that the gun in question is very adequate in the hands of a capable hunter. I do not recomend you shoot it or any other gun for that matter until you have competently mastered said gun. I've seen shots botched with a .300 win mag also. I will reitterate what has been said over a million times on this forum...LEARN TO SHOOT THE RIFLE YOU'LL HUNT WITH. IF YOU HIT THEM RIGHT THEY WILL FALL!
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: cody]
#485769
11/19/08 03:49 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701
CleanKill
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 701 |
Quote:
I agree CleanKill, it's not a shot just anyone should take with a .223. I've seen it done and I've seen it done poorly. I had a hunter shoot a wild spanish goat at 400 yards and drop it like a rock with a .223, when calling him on it he just smiled. The next day we came on the goats again, nailed another one from 350. That fool could shoot. I believe that the gun in question is very adequate in the hands of a capable hunter. I do not recomend you shoot it or any other gun for that matter until you have competently mastered said gun. I've seen shots botched with a .300 win mag also. I will reitterate what has been said over a million times on this forum...LEARN TO SHOOT THE RIFLE YOU'LL HUNT WITH. IF YOU HIT THEM RIGHT THEY WILL FALL!
That is true, but I am also an opponent of the .300 mag as well. I feel it has no place in the hunting world except for moose or bear. Elk can be killed just as effectively with a .30-06 with the right round and you don't risk demolishing meat. I also don't believe most people should attempt shots at elk at more than 200 yds. A .300 mag definitely should never be used on whitetail, I don't care how big they are. It has the potential to destroy a good part of the animal. I knew a guy when I was the Marines that was from Georgia. He said he had always hunted with a .300 win mag. He said he would shoot them in the front leg and would always kill the deer even though he lost a lot of meat. I don't believe this to be good ethics.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: DFWPI]
#485770
11/19/08 04:02 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,192
TexasVine
Veteran Tracker
|
|
Veteran Tracker
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,192 |
"Clean Kill" said it well. Placement is key. I shoot a 223, 300WSM and a 45-70. I know my guns and my capable range for each gun. I take the time to learn the ballistics on my loads being shot. Most deer hunters (not all) shoot a week before season at the range and then go to the stand. Shooting at the range from a bench rest is a good place to start (sighting in) but that is not practical shooting. Fairness to the game you are shooting is responsible hunting. Clean kills are in most part a learned skill. Skill is acquired by practice. Sure you can get lucky borrowing a friend's rifle and shooting from a seat in a blind but I have seen a lot of guys miss the vitals because they have lack of time with the gun there shooting. The question isn't if a 223 is enough, the question is are you good enough with a 223. If not, a larger caliber can be more forgiving. Good luck to you and shoot safe.
Last edited by TexasVine; 11/19/08 04:07 AM.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: TexasVine]
#485771
11/19/08 07:14 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 620
DEERSTRANGLER
Tracker
|
|
Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 620 |
Got to thinking about one of the guys that I was taking to shoot a management buck on this place down in Brownwood one time. He had shot a doe with a .223 and lost it, so he went out and got himself a Ruger 7mm Rem Mag. We get out to shoot a cull buck and one pops out and he lets the fur fly. Rifle kicks back I find a pile of guts on the ground and we track the deer 600 yards across 15 rattlesnake dens. We got within 50 yards of the still alive deer and he could'nt make the shot. I popped it with my AR-15 and it was lights out. Next week he found out that he did'nt lose the deer he'd shot with his .223 due to it's ineffectiveness. When he shot that deer it ran a ways and it was near dark. He went back to camp to get a light and a friend. When he came back the deer was gone and no sign of a deer was around. The ranchers son was coming back after dark and found the dead deer in the middle of the ranch road 50yds from the hit and put it in the back of his truck and took it home. Once Charlie found out he sold that 7 mag and went back to his .223 Since then he's moved up to a .243 and has'nt "lost" a deer since.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: DEERSTRANGLER]
#485772
11/19/08 12:23 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309
PrimitiveHunter
THF Celebrity
|
|
THF Celebrity
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,309 |
The same set of statistics can be 'spun' to prove or disprove anything.
I have never lost a deer I shot with a .223.
I lost 1 deer that I shot with a .270. Actually, I found it 3 days later but between the hogs and coyotes, all that was left was the head.
Anyway, statistically speaking, the .223 is MUCH better for deer than the .270.
I also have never lost a deer shot with a Glock .357sig.
So if you look at the statistics, the .270 is about the worst rifle you could hunt with.
While the "facts" above are true, the post is tongue-in-cheek. We all know the .270 is a great deer caliber. My point is that a lot of people make up their minds based on campfire stories and personal prejudices. I don't care what caliber you use. If you hit a deer in a place where that caliber is effective, the deer is dead. The only variable (besides our ability to hit where we're aiming) is knowing the effective point of impact.
I've killed deer with .357mag, .357sig, .44mag, .223, .338wmag, and never lost one. I have killed deer with .270 and 30-30 and lost 1 with each. I vote that we quit preaching about the "best" round or the "worst" round and just agree that different rounds work for different people based on their technical skill. Yeah, that's going to happen!
Practice doesn’t make perfect.
Practice makes permanent.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is a .223 enough?
[Re: PrimitiveHunter]
#485773
11/19/08 02:09 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 232
buster2balls
Woodsman
|
|
Woodsman
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 232 |
I've killed deer with .357mag, .357sig, .44mag, .223, .338wmag, and never lost one. I have killed deer with .270 and 30-30 and lost 1 with each. I vote that we quit preaching about the "best" round or the "worst" round and just agree that different rounds work for different people based on their technical skill. Yeah, that's going to happen!
10-4 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Moderated by bigbob_ftw, CCBIRDDOGMAN, Chickenman, Derek, DeRico, Duck_Hunter, hetman, jeh7mmmag, JustWingem, kmon11, kry226, kwrhuntinglab, Payne, pertnear, rifleman, sig226fan (Rguns.com), Superduty, TreeBass, txcornhusker
|
