.223 Deer Load

B

buggybuilder

New member
Has anyone of this forum shot a buck with a .223? I know there are alot of better rifle calibers out there. It is legal where I hunt and all my shots will be standing shots. Any reloading receipes that anyone cares to share?
Thanks
 
I doubt I'll ever shoot a deer with a .223, but if I did I'd probably use the 60-grain Nosler Partition. My AR likes that bullet driven by 25.2 grains of H4895. My brass is FC07 and FC05.
 
I am using 24 grs of Xterminator , 65 gr Sierra Game King , CCi small rifle primer in Fedral brass. However, I haven't shot anything with it yet but this load shoots very well in my handy rifle(1 in 9 twist).It also shoots well out of my son-in-laws mini-14.
 
Boys and I have killed 6-8 with Win 64g PPs over Varget-works fine with good shot placement just like a __________(fill in the blank).
 
Last edited:
I have taken four bucks with a 223, three using hornady 55gr SP and one with a 55 Nosler BT. The three with the hornadys never took a step (one neck, two high lung) and the deer shot with the BT was hit in the liver and made it about 30 yards. Nowadays I would probably use what ever Barnes bullet matches your twist.
 
Not my first choice but I have done it a couple of times just to say I did. I used the 62 gr. Barnes TSX to good effect. There are some credible deer loads out there now in both handloading form and factory loaded also. The Barnes TSX, Nosler Partition and Federal Fusion are three that jump to mind immediately.
 
My good friend who barely knows how to use a computer only uses .223 for deer. His family owns two rifles: a ruger .22LR and a Ruger .223. he and his two sons shoot only these two rifles. He's a very, very, very dry retired Marine officer who told me in complete monotone/no emotion: "The .223 is perfectly effective at killing 200 pound mammals out to 200 yards with one shot if the shooter knows where and how to place the bullet. Anyone will shoot the .223 more accurately than anything else because it has no recoil and is inexpensive to shoot. With a proper bullet shot placement is everything, the rest is fluff."

He also admits that he would never take it elk hunting (reminding me that he limits size to 200 pounds) and only takes broad side shots at 200 yards or less. He and his sons (one is now a Marine and works on V22s) have come have come home from multi-day deer hunts empty handed after seeing many deer because, "no targets presented an appropriate shot, so we didn't shoot anything."

He uses factory loads with, I think, noslers. he only shoots this one factory loaded round because, "why would i screw around with different loads and bullets? That's dumb." I asked him about reloading. He doesn't because, "I did the math on the equipment, the required space and my time. It didn't work out so I don't reload. If you tell me that reloading will improve my shot group or increase my chances at killing an animal, you are wrong."

Funny/dry humored guy who is the very definition of practical, doesn't hunt elk, stacks up coyotes and a few deer and likes time outside more than time screwing around with guns and loads.

I'm different but really appreciate his approach.
 
Originally Posted By: mt AlMy good friend who barely knows how to use a computer only uses .223 for deer. His family owns two rifles: a ruger .22LR and a Ruger .223. he and his two sons shoot only these two rifles. He's a very, very, very dry retired Marine officer who told me in complete monotone/no emotion: "The .223 is perfectly effective at killing 200 pound mammals out to 200 yards with one shot if the shooter knows where and how to place the bullet. Anyone will shoot the .223 more accurately than anything else because it has no recoil and is inexpensive to shoot. With a proper bullet shot placement is everything, the rest is fluff."

He also admits that he would never take it elk hunting (reminding me that he limits size to 200 pounds) and only takes broad side shots at 200 yards or less. He and his sons (one is now a Marine and works on V22s) have come have come home from multi-day deer hunts empty handed after seeing many deer because, "no targets presented an appropriate shot, so we didn't shoot anything."

Funny/dry humored guy who is the very definition of practical, doesn't hunt elk, stacks up coyotes and a few deer and likes time outside more than time screwing around with guns and loads.

I'm different but really appreciate his approach.

While he is essentially correct, his veiw is a perfect illustration of how it's possible to get by with the bare minimum IF (IF!) one is diciplined enough to live within the constraints that that minimum imposes.

I would say that a tiny, tiny fraction of hunters are willing to understand AND stick hard/fast to the constraints imposed by the tiny .223. Which is just another way of saying there's what you can get by with and then there's everything else.

Grouse
 
I have shot a few deer with a .223 and the bullet I used was a 75gr BTHP from hornady. I would suggest any of the heavier bonded bullets unless you are absolutely sure of your shot placement. If you use varmint type bullets you will not get good penetration if you hit bone. I only used the BTHP match bullets because I was 100% confident in my shooting and shot placement.
 
Last edited:
I have shot a couple with the factory Barnes Vortex 55 grain TSX. Both at 100 yards and the heaviest weighed 140 on the hoof. They both were DRT.
 
Originally Posted By: The Famous GrouseOriginally Posted By: mt AlMy good friend who barely knows how to use a computer only uses .223 for deer. His family owns two rifles: a ruger .22LR and a Ruger .223. he and his two sons shoot only these two rifles. He's a very, very, very dry retired Marine officer who told me in complete monotone/no emotion: "The .223 is perfectly effective at killing 200 pound mammals out to 200 yards with one shot if the shooter knows where and how to place the bullet. Anyone will shoot the .223 more accurately than anything else because it has no recoil and is inexpensive to shoot. With a proper bullet shot placement is everything, the rest is fluff."

He also admits that he would never take it elk hunting (reminding me that he limits size to 200 pounds) and only takes broad side shots at 200 yards or less. He and his sons (one is now a Marine and works on V22s) have come have come home from multi-day deer hunts empty handed after seeing many deer because, "no targets presented an appropriate shot, so we didn't shoot anything."

Funny/dry humored guy who is the very definition of practical, doesn't hunt elk, stacks up coyotes and a few deer and likes time outside more than time screwing around with guns and loads.

I'm different but really appreciate his approach.

While he is essentially correct, his veiw is a perfect illustration of how it's possible to get by with the bare minimum IF (IF!) one is diciplined enough to live within the constraints that that minimum imposes.

I would say that a tiny, tiny fraction of hunters are willing to understand AND stick hard/fast to the constraints imposed by the tiny .223. Which is just another way of saying there's what you can get by with and then there's everything else.

Grouse




Agreed! That's why I do it differently, not interested in the limitations
 
If she was to use this load again, I would recommend her to aim for the shoulder. Lung shot was through-through and the deer ran about 60 yards with little blood in area of impact.

Originally Posted By: Hunt Nosler 64 gr bonded loaded with 25gr Varget and a CCI 400 gave my daughter her first deer last weekend out of a .223.
 
Back
Top