.223 For Deer Hunting

[Bitmap]

The .223 is not a suitable deer round. PERIOD!

I don't know about GA but in many parts of TX a buck might run 100lbs on the hoof. I've seen pics of peoples kids with their first buck and the kids are bigger than the deer.

For something that will not weigh more than 100lbs I think the .223 is a suitable round.

 

[H&Hhunter]

John Taylor said it best about Bell. The one and only reason he wasn't killed by an elephant was that he was lucky.

When people ask for advice I give it to them straight. I don't mince words or make exclusions for the top or bottom 10% of the bell curve.

I'll say it again. The .223 is not a suitable deer cartridge. PERIOD!

Just like the .275 Rigby is not a suitable elephant cartridge. Both will kill the stated game and both take a perfect shot in the perfect place at close range to do so. Which makes them less than suitable.

PS

Bell used a .416 Rigby when hunting elephants in heavy cover. He only used the .275 in open areas where there was no chance of a close range charge. he was good shot but he wasn't stupid.

 

[Cougfan2]

I live in Oregon where it is legal to hunt Deer with a .223. That being said, I personally wouldn't do it. It might be sufficient for the little Blacktails in the western part of the state, but I personally think the .243 Win is the minimum I would be comfortable for Blactail or Whitetail Deer. Big Mulies or Elk, I'll stick with my 30-06.

 

[GunTech]

Well, there is obviously a difference of opinion here. I've seen lots of deer killed by 223 here in Montana. I don't use the round myself for deer but know many here who do. And I have personally seen many deer taken with the 223 with less than perfect shot placement. A shot anywhere in the 'boiler room' is usually adequate at less than 100 yards.

This is a debate that will probably go on and on. I can recall the same thing being said about Elk and the minimum cartridge. I've been told many times that 260 in inadequate for the job, and yet it 6.5x55 is the favored round for Moose and similar beasties in Scandanavia.

And as noted, black powder rounds that were routinely used to kill deer in the last century have much less energy than the 223. I'd rather have a rifle that can be shot accurately, than one with a lot of power.

YMMV

 

[Sunray]

"...the same thing being said about..." You'll get all kinds of opinions about that too.

 

[Deer Hunter]

A .223 is just fine for most deer you'll ever meet. Even the "monster" bucks can be taken by this small round. It's all about the bullet, the placement, and the hunter's capability. Those who feel that this round is not ok for hunting may not have the confidence in themselves to use this round, and that's perfectly fine. For the rest of us who know that it is indeed not a 200+ yard round, or a suitable heavy-brush gun, but know how to place the shot and what bullets to use, it works just fine.

Use what you're comfortable with, and know how to use it well. Doesn't matter if it's a .223 or a .375 H&H. I'd rather hunt with a guy that knows how to use a .223 instead of a guy who was brainwashed into believing that the only way to hunt deer was with a .30-378 WSSSM.

 

[GunTech]

Cougfan2,

I hunted in Western Oregon (used to live in Beaverton) and i would have no problem using a 223 on Western blacktail. My dog weighs more than any Oregon blacktial I've ever seen.

I did shoot one with a 458 and 405gn cast lead. It was adequate for the game. LOL.

 

[birdbustr]

I live in Colorado where it is illegal to hunt big game (deer, antelope, elk) with anything smaller than .24 caliber. I think this is the only thing that I agree with as far as Colorado and hunting.
However, I am from South Carolina and have a lot of family in Georgia where you are. As you stated you need to thin does out. So what you are talking about is a doe that weighs 50-125 lbs max.
In this case, I think that as long as you aren't planning on shooting over 100 yards and can hit EXACTLY where you intend to at a broadside deer inside of that range, you should get a clean kill with a Hornady or Barnes bullet.
Bottom Line: Too many variables to make it work. Hunt with a larger round! I like anything 7mm (.284). You need a round that can reach across those soybean fields out there, or shoot through a briar thicket and not get deflected. Don't take a chance on making a deer suffer needlessly.

 

[learningman]

You hunt with a round that you feel comfortable with. I've taken no less than two deer a year when I lived in central Montana. Whitetails and central Montana muley's as well. Most of my hunting was done on ranches south west of Great Falls. Open flat country with tons of coulees to scare up some deer. The 223 never let me down. I'm afraid I have to respectively disagree with those who say it is absolutely not a deer round. I've had alot of meat end up in my freezer with a 223 to prove otherwise. Again its a personal choice, but a choice that needs one to take better prepared shot's than if he/she were using a larger caliber rifle.

 

[woof]

I think the best point that has been made is that a .223 will kill a deer with a perfect shot and a .300 magnum will wound with a poor shot. Extending that a little further - most shots fall somewhere in between. A typical shot is one that is perhaps not directly in the vitals but in the periphery. With that shot, the more adequate calibers will still be humane killers and the .223 will not. So I guess it boils down to - if you want to ensure that you are as humane a hunter as possible and you think it is possible you might make something less than a perfect shot, you might not want to use the .223.

 

[GunTech]

Personally, I thinbk the rules being applied to 223 go for any cartridge. You shouldn't shoot unless you have a good shot. With the 223, and other low powered rounds like 30-30, 7.62x39, etc you need to understand the limit on range these catridges require. None is appropriate for over 200 or so yrads in most cases.

It;s exactly the smae for handgun hunting and black powder. You must understand the limits of your weapon. If you compare the 50 caliber BP round ball with around 400 ft-lbs of energy at 100 yards, the 223 with around a 1000 ft-lbs looks pretty good.

 

[Harley Quinn]

Guntech,
You have mentioned this a couple of times:
You can use a 100gn bullet out of an original 244 if you don't use a spitzer. It's the length of the bullet that determines the stability for a given twist, not the weight.

I just remember the reason the 244 was scrapped was its poor showing against the 243 and what I read was the twist in the rifling was the major down fall, and why they went to the 6mm Rem. Same case etc just you could go for a heavier bullet and better accuracy as I remember.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/6mm.htm

I also liked the design of the cartridge of the 244/6mm better than the 243 win for reloading purpose's. But what I now have in the safe is a nice bull barreled Ruger 77 in 243Win The others have gone down the road.

Funny about the accuracy of a certain item, makes it a keeper

 

[DDawg]

Check your post.

I think you just said your .223 likes 160 grain bullets.
Sorry.. I added an extra 100 grains.

 

[Grumulkin]

While I'm generally down on cartridges with less "oomph" than something like a .243 with an 85-grain bullet or heavier, modern bullets in a .223 will do the job within the described parameters.

Man Art, it looks like you're coming around. I thought you were solidly against .224 caliber centerfires for deer hunting. I guess I now agree with you.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Use whatever you like of course.

And good hunting.

And good luck!

 

[Buzz]

I am not a fan of .22 caliber centerfire rifles for deer hunting. If it were the only option I had then yeah I would use it with the heaviest Barnes TSX it would shoot accurately. Of course the .223 has enough energy to burst the vitals and make a killing shot; however, the problem with most .22 caliber centerfire bullets is they are fragile and don't exit or when they do exit they leave sparse to no blood trail. Sure there are partitions, TSX, etc for the .223 now but I am still far from impressed with the exit holes on those either. When I was younger I watched a farmer slaughter hogs with a .22 caliber revolver. It killed them dead as a doornail but the shot was at point blank range and certain of the placement.

The areas I hunt are often extremely thick with a lot of undergrowth and some areas are very swampy. Even with a perfect heart lung shot, a deer can cover a lot of ground dead on their feet. For that reason I'm a lot more comfortable using something stronger with heavier bullets such as the 6.5x55, 7x57, .308, etc that will break shoulders, exit, and dump them on their rear ASAP.

I suppose the worst possible endorsement for the .223 that I know of comes from a couple of guys that run tracking dogs. They say they love the .223 because it keeps their dogs in business.

 

[hamourkiller]

I have used the .223 for years, I handload the speer 70gr round nose and keep the velocity @ 2700 fps. This way the bullet holds together and penetrates well, even for angled shots. Seldom do I recover a bullet. I hunt typical East Texas cover, most shots at 40 yds or so, but have killed up to 150yds with no problems. The Car 15 is the best deer stand gun I have ever used, it is compact and easy to move in the box stand.

Here is a nice doe i killed with a 20" Colt SP1. Bullet entered between neck and shoulder and exited at last rib on off side.


Here is a nice doe I killed with my son using a Colt CAR-15, one shot through both shoulders @ 75 yds or so


If you use proper bullets and good shot placement the .223 will work for you. Is it in the 30-06 or .270 class of weapon? No. Is it a workable deer rifle for less than 200 yd shots? Yes

Have fun and enjoy.

PS: I have used the Winchester Factory load 64gr powerpoint with complete satisfaction and it is my go to round when I run short of handloads.

 

[GunTech]

Harley Quinn,

You are dead right about the 244. Remington envisioned it as a varmint round and gave it a slow twist. Winchester gave the 243 a faster twist so it wouls stabilize heavier rounds for a light deer gun. Remington rerelease the 244 as the 6mm, the only difference being a faster twist. For those who wa nted to hunt deer with the old 244, you could load round nose 100gn bullets which would stabilize in the slower twist thanks to thier short length compared to spitzers. However, the round nose have a rather poor BC compared to modern pointed bullets and lose velocity much more quickly.

This is also a problem with older 6.5 rifles. Thier slow twist rates is designed for round nose bullets, and if you try to use heavy spitzers or boat tails, they frequently won't stabilize them.

This is why people who base twist on the Greenhill formula should remember that it was developed around round nose bullets, and spitzers and boat tails require a faster rate of twist.

 

[Harley Quinn]

Guntech.

I am glad you pointed this out for me and others, thanks. Those tech answers are important for all of us, who are not as versed as to the whys and whats of development that occured.

The funny thing about that whole situation is they could have used a longer (heavier) bullet in the AR's for military and still had a great shooter with lighter bullets in the years of confict that developed the "Stoner" if they wanted them to tumble The twist and bullet length (weight and config. making it longer in a given caliber)

Guess they were short on engineering and hindsite is 20/20

HQ

 

[koja48]

No doubt a .223 will dispatch a deer-sized critter, & even though I own one that consistently maintains cloverleaf groups at 200 yards, I wouldn't use one unless it was a survival situation. As hunters, we have an obligation to effect a swift, clean kill. Bring enough gun & a .223 ain't it for deer.

 

[H&Hhunter]

You know, for the most part if you have to ask the answer is no!

You can sit here and rattle your teeth and scream froth at the mouth and cause the veins to pop put of your neck. But no matter how much noise and how many if then but when comments you make the .223 is a very marginal deer round.

It isn't even legal in many places.

There is a reason for that.

Here is what we've heard so far.

The .223 is great deer round, for really small deer.

The .223 is a fantastic deer round at really close range.

The .223 is a great deer round with really good shot placement.

All of these qualifiers make the .223 a acceptable deer round under perfect conditions. But it is not a good or even an acceptable deer round under general field conditions in the real world.

From a stand over a corn bait with a good rest it can pressed into service.

If you are ultra picky about your shots in real life field conditions it can be pressed into service.

But the .223 is ONLY a good general purpose deer round in one place and one place ONLY and that is the internet!

 

[GunTech]

The .223 is a fantastic deer round at really close range.

The .223 is a great deer round with really good shot placement.

I have to take issue with 'really close range', since about 90% of all deer killed are bagged at 150 yards or less. And that same statement is true of many rounds. As for the latter, the is no cartridge that will compensate for poor shot placement. I've seen a deer gutshot with a 375 H&H bound away as though unharmed and go several miles before being dropped with a second shot.

As noted previously, you have to no the limitations of the tool. When comparing the 223 to BP rifles or handguns, it holds iup fairly well, although I rarely hear people complain about large handguns or BP rifles being unsuiable for deer.

For those who missed it, a 223 has 2.5x the energy of a 50 caliber round ball at 100 yards and 1.5x that of a 44 magnum at the same range. If the 223 is inappropriate for hunting, then using the same criteria, no one should be allowed to use BP rifles or handguns for hunting deer either.

 

[GunTech]

Harley,

RE 223, you need to remember that the military is restricted to ball ammunition. The 223 bullet was based on a reduced scale 30 caliber FMJBT bullet. The Hall study sugggested that small caliber high velocity rounds to be just as effective in producing as casualty as larger caliber ones. The M193 55 grain bullet turned out to be very effective, thanks to its instability and its propensity to fracture at the canneleur, creating multiple sub-missiles while the M80 7.62x51mm ball tended to flip over and drill right through the target (Most spitzer bullets flip over when striking flesh because the center of gravity is close to the base).

How much difference does this fragmentation make? Casualty studies in Vietnam indecated that at typical combat ranges, the M193 was 11% more lethal than tghe M80 7.62x51, even though the latter was a much more powerful round.

Naturally, this does not apply to hunting, whether the use of full metal case bullets is unethical and often unlawful. In the case of expanding ammunition, the 308 leaves the 223 in the dust.

 

[sansone]

.223 absolutely does the job with good shot placement. usually someone with a single shot rifle ONLY takes a shot if it's good

 

[hamourkiller]

To each his own, in Texas the .223 is legal and it is an efective round when the hunter is competent.

If it is legal in your state and want to use it, lay with the heaviest expanding bullets and you will do fine. Shoot them behind the shoulder or through the shoulders and they will be down within 40 yds or so.

My AR-15 has done great service for me since 1976 and will continue to do so.

Have a good hunting season and shoot them deer with that .223.