223 Fallacy

[mdauben]

I don't understand why people are buying these large cartridge rifles to hunt here locally. I could see the light if they were big time hunters that go out of state to hunt and may want to go after Mulies or Elk. However, that type of hunter would more than likely have a few rifles to choose from.

I admit, I probably would not chose a .223 to hunt deer, but I will agree with you that something like the .30-06 is probably more than you need for *just* whitetails. I lean towards lighter cartridges like the .243, .25-06, or 7mm-08 personally.

I will bite, go ahead and explain your theory. Just my opinion, our military has used it for years to kill people. Deer aren't trying to kill you and your buddies. It makes sense to use something effective.

Not to say .223 is good or not for deer size game but the military's choice of the round involves more than *just* terminal effectiveness. Controlability in full auto, number of rounds a soldier can carry in a combat load, cost of buying billions of rounds and the logistics of delivers same to the soldier all carry weight too.

 

[DeepSouth]

There have been several times when I needed "more gun" when I was hunting. So I default to Springfeild Armory..... Bring Enough Gun.
I deer hunt with a 7mm Mag or 450 marlin 95% of the time, I duck hunt with a 12ga filled with 3.5" shells, I've never hunted elk but there's a Model 70 375 H&H mag. Waiting For the day. Personally, I wouldn't hunt anything bigger than coyote with a 223, and would love to see the milatary upgrade to a .30 cal bullet. But I could honestly cannot care less what YOU hunt with....if it's legal and you want to hunt with it then get after it.

As far as what something WILL do, that's a silly and irrelevant conversation.
I'll defer to the current fad of hunting wild hogs with air rifles.

 

[Ar180shooter]

Any hunter who uses a 223 for deer hunting should be asked one question. Would you be willing to hunt with only 1 round in your rifle? There are very few semi-auto rifles where I live except for the 223. Too often I hear the bang, bang, bang, bang associated with the AR15. One bang and the deer starts running and they shoot as long as they can see the animal standing. I was against using the 22 caliber rifles for deer hunting in Oklahoma and I still am. Oklahoma limits the magazine capacity to 7 rounds specifically because of rifles like the AR15.

Me personally? Yes. I'm relatively new to hunting big game (only started a few years ago), but am a long time service rifle shooter. Of the 2 deer I have shot, one with a .308, the other with a .223, both were through the heart on the first shot. When I hear bang bang bang bang bang when I hunt, it's guys emptying their 30-30's. A hit in the heart with a .223 is better than a gut shot with a .300 win mag. For this reason, I think demonstrating shooting proficiency should be a mandatory part of obtaining a hunting license.

 

[Ar180shooter]

My personal opinions on .223/5.56 and deer were different in the '80s vs. today and the difference is bullet technology and weght (and the twist rates that go with them). I would never hesitate to use a 77gr. Barnes on even fairly large whitetail.

Mike

Yep, even something like a 60gr Nosler partition is sufficient.

 

[Hunterdad]

I'd want something bigger than 223 up here in NY. My buddy shot a does that was 180lbs last season and the bucks go 200+.

 

[bflee]

I have killed deer with all three. If I was going to battle in a short range war I would take the 223. If i were going somewhere long range I would want one of the others.
They kill quicker. No doubt about it, but you can carry twice as many 223. Most people buy them because you can get bullets anywhere.
I have found a happy medium. 6.5 creedmoor. It will kill anything and is short action and great at long range.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

For the average white tail deer in NE Oklahoma I'd say the OP is right. None of the deer that we shot when we lived there field dressed more than 8o lbs. so, with the right bullet in the right spot, it should work fine.

 

[scaatylobo]

SHOT PLACEMENT - duh uh

To all those that want to argue about this caliber.

I say that no one would argue that it is SHOT PLACEMENT ,that is THE primary stopping ability of ANY round.

yes,ok = if you want to take sloppy shots then use a 416/460 etc or whatever nitro express overkill you like.

But as to being "taken out" by a shooter,long as that shooter takes a head [ brain ] shot = it will not matter.

So to all the ethical hunters I say = use what you like as long as an ETHICAL good shot will drop the critter.

Yes,I pass up many shots ,no matter the caliber.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Kill people or take them out of action?? The military considers a round's job is done if an enemy combatant is incapacitated

No. Ask any combat infantryman if they agree with that (I don't and I'm a combat infantryman.) I've seen men continue to function after being hit repeatedly -- and that's a hairy situation.

Nowadays, we teach troops to shoot until the threat is neutralized -- that is, the bad guy drops. And there are a lot of complaints about the 5.56 in regard to its reliability in killing the bad guy before he kills you.

My position on the .223 for deer is, I have a safe full of rifles. Why choose a marginal cartridge when I have so many others?

 

[Andrew Leigh]

Hunting is about risk management.

If you have no risk, i.e. the deer will present perfectly, will stand dead still and your shot placement is perfect and you manage to avoid major bone structure then I am sure that a .223 will suffice.

However those of us who have hunted for some time will know that there is risk, and that the scenario painted above is not always possible. So what some of us do is to get a little insurance. We do this in upping calibre, loading with premium bullets knowing that we can break bone and achieve greater penetration without bullet breakup.

On my side of the pond we tend to do a lot of hunting and it is big business. Every animal we shoot we pay for, missed shots are charged for and two missed shots will invariably find you off the hunt. You hit it you pay for it, even if you don't recover it.

So commercial game ranchers here, based on hard experience, will have at absolute minimum a .243 as the calibre they will allow for Impala sized animals, some ranchers even go up on this. Why you may ask? Because many hunters are actually not as hotshot and accurate as they tell the world, animals do not always cooperate. Here hunters do get exposed as each hunt is accompanied by a tracker who's job it is to report missed shots, impact shots without recovery, there is no place to hide.

@scaatylobo, not even .400 calibre will compensate for a poor shot placement. Just today was told a story by a "hunter" in which it took him 7 shots from a .375H&H with .270gr ammo to eventually take down a Blue Wildebeest. He still does not believe that I do it with one shot from a 30-06 with a 180gr. bullet

 

[6.5swede]

And there are a lot of complaints about the 5.56 in regard to its reliability in killing the bad guy before he kills you.

Understandably so, given the antiquated 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets which prohibits “the military use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body" . The whole logic of the convention is flawed and counter-intuitive to me. If I were to use a .224 caliber for hunting medium game, I wouldn't be picking a FMJ or frangible Sierra blitzking, matchking either. Modern, more well constructed, expanding bullets would change the game significantly and have, at least, for civilian hunters.

 

[BSA1]

The 45-70 is the superior choice

With the right shot placement with the right bullet it can work, but it is a marginal choice for the job. I would rather give my self a better margin for error and the deer a better chance of being killed quickly and cleanly.

I agree. It's called ethics.

MY question to the O.P. is why use a round that has questionable performance on less than perfect shot when the 45-70 is superior in all respects. A 405 gr. cast lead bullet has plenty of penetration and destroys less meat than high velocity rounds that results in wasted meat because it is bloodshot. The 405 gr. bullet cuts a nice round hole with no bloodshot meat or as the old saying goes "you can eat right up to the hole."

 

[R.W.Dale]

My thoughts on the matter are folks who think 223 isn't sufficient for deer simply aren't good enough shots to use a 223 on deer.


Flame if you want but IMO this turn about is just as fair as questioning someone's "ethics" based in cartridge choice.

"Ethics" is just a word people use to describe away the difference in marksmanship skill some folks possess over themselves

 

[witchhunter]

Please don't equate military standards to standards set forth by our fathers and their fathers, especially on Fathers Day! I remember when the .223 (5.56)was adopted as our military round, many servicemen did not think it was adequate, many still don't. It is apples and oranges to compare a battle rifle to a sporting rifle specific to big game. Use the appropriate gun for the job at hand. Look at it this way, not all whitetails are 120 pounds standing broadside, and I have seen mule deer soak up hits and travel quite a ways before laying down. Sometimes they are lost.

 

[rule303]

This debate has come up so many times I can't keep track. In short, the .223 (or any similar .22 centerfire for that matter) can work with the right bullet, and proper shot placement. If you put a hole in the vital organs of an animal it will expire. To dumb it down, in most cases a bigger caliber will make a bigger hole, and create more tissue damage, causing a faster death.
Combat requirements are a lot different than hunting, where the goal is a one shot humane kill. There have been complaints about the 5.56 as a combat round going back 50 years. Bullets have improved since then, but there are still complaints about the 5.56 being inadequate in some cases. While I was not around when the .30-06, or 7.62x51 were our standard service rifle round, I doubt there were issues with its effectiveness. If magically you were able to get the ballistics of a 7.62x51 round with the recoil, ammo and rifle weight similar to an AR/M16 and 5.56mm, that is what the military would be using. But since such a combination doesn't exist, they make compromises.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Understandably so, given the antiquated 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets which prohibits “the military use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body" . The whole logic of the convention is flawed and counter-intuitive to me. If I were to use a .224 caliber for hunting medium game, I wouldn't be picking a FMJ or frangible Sierra blitzking, matchking either. Modern, more well constructed, expanding bullets would change the game significantly and have, at least, for civilian hunters.

But not, in my opinion, enough for me to take a .223 out of the safe during deer season, when I have a 6.5 Swede, a .30-30, a .30-40, a .308 and a .30-06 right next to it.

 

[MinnesotaFats]

Theres a big point here being missed. OP says:

The woods here are thick and brushy. 100 yards would be a long shot and more like under 50 is realistic

.
.223 may work for whitetail (with good shot placement) but is by NO means a good brush round. Due to its small size, deflection is very likely to occur shooting through "thick and brushy" woods. With his scenario of 50 yards and brush why not go with a 12 ga, or like others have said, the .45-70.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Theres a big point here being missed. OP says:

.

.223 may work for whitetail (with good shot placement) but is by NO means a good brush round. Due to its small size, deflection is very likely to occur shooting through "thick and brushy" woods. With his scenario of 50 yards and brush why not go with a 12 ga, or like others have said, the .45-70.

Shooting through brush and "brush busting rounds" is a pure fantasy perpetuated by folks who've never hunted in thick woodland.

There are no brush cartridges! Not even a 12ga slug all will deflect if shot into plant life.

There are however brush guns. Usually described as light handy easy to carry carbines that offer the option of a rapid follow up shot if needed. Of which an ar15 is an outstanding example.

 

[6.5swede]

Vern,

I'm not in disagreement with you. I don't think a 223 is an "optimal" deer (medium game) cartridge either but if the shooter picks a suitable bullet and puts it in the right place, it's very effective. I hunt a ranch that is over run with hogs. I'm frequently toting a 222 mag or 223 while hunting other varmints/predators. Frequently a shot at a hog presents itself and I've taken countless hogs with one shot using these cartridges, so I'm very comfortable with them.

I wonder how many posters on this thread would not ever use a .224 caliber on a deer, but have no problem shooting them with a bow?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

A bow is a whole different kettle of fish. A good broadhead will cut a channel more than an inch wide through a deer. My experience is that often the arrow will not completely pass through, and as the animal runs, it will rattle in the brush, causing more bleeding. The deer will quickly bleed out from a good hit.

 

[MinnesotaFats]

R.W.Dale, I stand corrected. Curious, I just now located an article by Craig Boddington regarding bullet deflection. I do hunt in thick brush and was always told this wives tale but never questioned it. You learn something new everyday. But the fast and small .223 round would still have a better chance of fragmentation upon striking brush compared to a 12 ga or .45-70. Right?

 

[6.5swede]

Assuming that distance was maybe 40yds, so you're saying that wound channel would be greater than one from a .224 caliber 55gr or 62gr TSX leaving the barrel at 3000+ fps and impacting the deer at 75-100yds?

 

[R.W.Dale]

R.W.Dale, I stand corrected. Curious, I just now located an article by Craig Boddington regarding "brush busting". I do hunt in thick brush and was always told this wives tale but never questioned it. You learn something new everyday.

Several tests have been done over the years. With differing methods and results differ slightly. But the reccourring theme is ALL projectiles will be deflected more than you'd ever want to rely on intentionally if avoidable.

I even have a personal observation of the phenomena I'll share. I once was "squirrel/deer" hunting with #4 buck and a 12ga single shot. I was sitting with my back to a short little rock ledge in the middle of a dry creek when I heard some motion behind me which turned out to be a decent sized buck no farther than 20 FEET away. I couldn't be discrete in my movement being so close and so far towards my rear.

Knowing I had just one chance I rapidly wheeled, turned sighted and fired hitting the deer with what I thought was a very solid hit that actually knocked the deer down, at that instant I also noted a small not even 3/8" sapling fall over from being struck by the shot appx halfway between me and the deer

To summarize the story the #4 was an underperformer (obviously) and the deer was a difficult track but was recovered. But what was surprising was at that close a range how that little twig had split the shot load into two distinctive parts with many pellets towards the front of the chest, none at all in the middle and more in the guts.

Brush busting is a crapshoot that should be avoided. But that doesn't mean some guns carry and hunt better in that terrain than others even though caliber doesn't really come into play

 

[1948CJ2A]

My personal opinions on .223/5.56 and deer were different in the '80s vs. today and the difference is bullet technology and weght (and the twist rates that go with them). I would never hesitate to use a 77gr. Barnes on even fairly large whitetail.

Mike

^ This.

If you have a fast enough twist that will stabilize a 70-80gr .224 bullet in your rifle then I would consider taking it whitetail hunting.

But why when there are so many BETTER choices? Can it be done? Sure. I agree that 30-06 is more than enough rifle for whitetail; however, you don't have to use 180 or 200gr bullets... you could use 150s and that would be a better deer choice IMO. I think the sweet spot for deer is .257 caliber through 7mm. The 270 would fall in this range. I personally have taken the most deer with a 7x57 and 25-06.

I have a 22-250 with a 1-14" twist that will not stabilize the longer bullets and I would not hunt whitetail with it.

But hey, different stokes for different folks.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Assuming that distance was maybe 40yds, so you're saying that wound channel would be greater than one from a .224 caliber 55gr or 62gr TSX leaving the barrel at 3000+ fps and impacting the deer at 75-100yds?

Oh, yes. An arrow kills differently from a bullet, but a good hit with a broadhead will bleed any animal out quickly.

Other bowhunters are free to jump in here.