I like this thread...

Today we learned that Hogs are itching for a charge and a .223 is still the best deer round....much better than a .44 mag

The .44, like the .223, may not be the best all around round for a "charging" beast but I have to ask you, if a cape buffalo were changing you and running were no option which would you empth first at it? The six shots of the Calahan hand Cannon or the thirty rounds of of the inadequate AT in .223?

One day, hopefully soon, using the internet will require a license. And passing a test. Fail the test, you can't post comments on the web. I hope that day comes soon. The internet would be a hell of a lot more useful for those who are capable of using it in a constructive, intelligent manner.

The common denominator of social media is its propensity for spreading misinformation or half truths. Fortunately, ignorance is easy to detect if your BS meter is up to the task. Your comment that "Those also rifles shot 7.62 or 30-06 ammo.....". Which rifles were you referring to?

Back to the topic...........

Anyone who says a 5.56 AR isn't capable of reliably harvesting WT or hogs doesn't know wtf their doing. Your AR won't shoot 600 yards? Do you know the difference between a crescent wrench and screwdriver? If you do, you wouldn't ask stupid questions. Showing up at a dove hunt with an M1A Abrams tank would be stupid. As is stating that a 5.56 is for amateurs, isn't effective at 300+ yards, and a POS. Or an M9 sucks cause you can't hunt deer with it. The issue isn't the rifle, it's the shooter.

I'm not a rocket scientist. But I do know the difference between opinion and fact. And if the premise doesn't fit the facts, deflecting the topic of discussion with a BS response that ignores facts is to be expected. Who'll know the difference?

Regarding a 5.56 AR, its inexpensive, effective if you know wtf you're doing, and eats Walmart feed without [censored] the bed. A heck of a lot of folks never shot a firearm until they served our country and its familiar and accessible without a steep learning curve. And if it's good enough for a SEAL or SFOD operator, but it's not good enough to hunt deer. I'd assume you've never learned how to use one competently. If you did, you'd know what it can and can't do.

You want to hunt? Good, it's a win- win for everyone. If a "tactifool" has the balls to step up to the plate to learn the game, he's worth the effort to set him straight. If they don't know wtf their doing, take the time to teach them how to do it right. And don't get twisted around the axle if they don't meet your expectations or do things differently.

JFC

.

I would probably empty the .44 into my temple to avoid the pain and discomfort of being gored by a Cape buffalo.



But honestly, in what situation would a person be in where he encountered a Cape buffalo and all he had on him was a .44 or a .223? Maybe a park ranger over in Zimbabwe or Kenya who carries a mini-14 but that's about it.

Bwana would never be in that situation

That's like saying " if you were surrounded by polar bears, and all you had was a Pepsi, would you toss it to him and hope he thinks it's a coke"....

...and bolt action with wooden stocks so that makes them legit......

What type of action is an M-1 Garand, and an M-14?

See that's where you're wrong trophy. If you were proficient with either one it would be an adequate gun for the job. It's about the operator, not the tool.

Not that I would hunt a buff with either one. I'd use a .22lr.

I think his point was the R700/M70 and most every other bolt action rifle going into the woods in the US today are the progeny and refinements of the Mauser design or Springfield M1903, which were the main battle rifles in the early 20th century and still in use in combat roles into the '60's. The internal box mags were an important design feature of the military rifle. The 30-06 was designed specifically as a military round, initially labelled the 30 Government '06. The 308 was developed as a hunting round and quickly adopted by the military. Later, the M70 30-06 was fielded as a sniper rifle in Vietnam followed by the R700 in 308 as the M40, which is still in use today. Scopes were added to fulfill the sniper role. So the guys buying into the civilians should not be allowed to own military rifles are setting everyone up for trouble. Also, the "it's so powerful" argument to ban AR's in 5.56 really sets the stage for trouble. If the 5.56 is too powerful for a civilian to own, what happens to the 30-06, 270, 25-06 and most all other centerfire rounds, even a 243, which are more powerful than a 5.56?

Many hunters in the 1960's or earlier had Krags, Springfields, or Mausers as a hunting rifle.

And again, AR's and variants come in many rounds besides 223/5.56, so the round vs. the rifle are two different issues.

They are semi-auto and therefore not good for deer hunting......haven't you been paying attention to this thread....

I missed the charging buffalo class at our local range.

Hollow point or solid?

They are semi-auto and therefore not good for deer hunting......haven't you been paying attention to this thread.... [/quote]

Exactly!

That's the poke I was making Jeffbird. And I wholeheartedly agree with your statement.

Solids, of course. He's not crazy.

I disagree. A hollow point should be used when hunting buffs with a .22. You don't want to over penetrate!

Boy, have we drifted off topic or what?

Bolt action deer rifle? Doesn't look like he is hunting deer.

I don't know about drifilting off topic, but I will say I shoot my rifle much better when I'm wearing cinch jeans

"13 Cent Killers"

Could be wrong, but I doubt you'll see a .223 sniper rifle. Just far too light a bullet for single shots made with any distance to them. I know Chris Kyle's favorite was the .300 Win Mag.

Hathcock shot a .30-06, a .300 win mag and a .50 call M2 that was modified

I thought this was an "AR style rifle" question. Guess its just the .223 debate again.

OP would have to come back and say for sure, but he never seemed to contest the idea that he was referring to a regular old .223/5.56 AR. Especially since he seemed to accept that the reason some ranches don't allow an AR is because it is usually a .223. Kinda makes the .223 relevant to the conversation.

I hunt with my Garand and Mausers at times. I like the challenge. Similar to bow hunting. Not many hunt with a bow because its more efficient. It more of a challenge or more fun to them.