223 for deer hunting

Puma,
Mighty strong words! You have just taken it on yourself to declare that a whole bunch of the people on this board are unethical hunters!
It is one thing to say that you do not approve of the 223 for deer and that you would never recommend it to others, it is quite another to brand others who sincerely disagree as unethical.
Many people include many hunters consider bow hunting as unethical, and with some strongly held convictions on the issue. But bowhunters, most fine sportsmen, do not consider themselves unethical.
The state has the right to regulate the behaviour of us as hunters. Other hunters do not have that right and when they assume that right by branding and labeling others, it cause hard feelings and ill-will where none should exist.
So you see this issue, like most things in life, have more than one valid viewpoint, and I believe that in this case we should disagree and still respect the other fellows view. And then maybe just drop the subject in a very deep well.
OC /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I just got back in the house from the last hunt of the last day of a busted deer season. As usual I carried my faithful 30/06--which is way to much gun for our little whitetails /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif But that is a whole other subject.
 
Ozark Charlie
I have no problem calling the kettle black when it's black!! As I don't have a problem pionting out maybe some of us hunters need to have an "Ethic's check-up"!! I also have no problems jumping dead in someone's **** when needed. The only folk's who would be offended by what I've said are those that think it's O.K to bend the rules to suit there need's! I'm a bow hunter as well- an bow hunter's have a deeper ethical behavior I've found becuase of our limitation of equipment we used in the sport of bow hunting. We have to get closer, make dead certain of our shot placement or we wound and or loose an animal. Our equipment is top notch to ensure once we take the shot it will give us a clean kill. And we practice alot to ensure we can make the shot and we know our limit's!!!

The question still stands who has seen a tv hunting show that advocates the head shot- who knows any top name in the hunting field that advocates the head shot on big game- anyone?
Any of the top name advocate the 22 calibers as a biggame cartridge? Though they may be legal-
doesn't mean that it's right. Rant off!
 
454Puma, Kind of judgemental aren't you? I have hunted with a bow myself. I have seen good heart shot deer, cover several hundred yards. more than enough ground for someone that isn't experienced at tracking to loose a deer the size of my pick up. does that make a bow unethical? Yes it does... in the hands of someone that is incapable of tracking a wounded animal or making a clean kill. You make it sound as if all archers adhere to a higher code of ethics than riflemen. I once whitnessed a brown bear get hit twice with a 338 once through a shoulder and once through the lungs. It took us better than a day to recover that bear. It was over a mile from where it was shot piled up in the middle of a stream. Does this mean the 338 is unethical to use on brown bear? Yep, if a person isn't willing to put in the time to recover the animal. I watched a guy gut shoot a sitka black tail on Kodiak once with a 300. The deer was never found. Does this mean that the 300 is to small for deer? I don't think so! I would say that any gun in the hands of someone like this guy is unethical. He was using a gun that was outside his comfort range for sighting in properly, he was afraid of the recoil. On the other hand, of the four moose that I have personally head shot fell in their tracks PERIOD. What I have observed through this topic and others like it is that many people like to compensate for poor judgment or lack of self control (taking less than Ideal shots) by using big guns. I am not in any way saying that using small calibur rifles and taking head shots is for everyone, it isn't. I personally am comfortable making a shot at a fist sized kill zone at a couple hundred yards. Whether I'm using my 338 or my 22-250 I would bet money that my groups at 200-300 yards are better than most archers at their average shooting distance. Even if I'm using my 338 I WILL NOT take a questionable shot. Not even on a predator, Just last week I passed up a wolf at 700 yards. Had it been 500 yards I would have been comfortable taking the shot. Could I have guessed and compensated for the extra 200 yards and made a kill? (he was sitting facing me) I probably could have with not to much problem. But it was questionable so I didn't even try. The fact is is that the size of the gun is only a minor part of hunter ethics. The bigger part of hunter ethics not taking a shot that is less than ideal. Or worse yet, not tracking a wounded animal until it is found. Oh yea, last winter I watched a lady on a hunting show (on the outdoor channel) blow the front leg off an antelope with a muzzel loader. Does that make it alright? Lets not set our standards by what the show us on tv! Otherwise we may as well start shooting each other beacase we disagree. Respectfully,AW
 
Alaskan Wolfer
No I don't think I'm being judgemental at all!! Just trying to bring a sense of ethic's to this discussion about using an infeiror/marginal at best cartridge on big game. And you are absolutely correct in your statments and you also answer the questions as well. The gentlemen who took a rifle (.338) that was not comfortable with it on a hunt was wrong and should have made a better chioce in his firearm. Thankfully he was able to recover the bear. Hopefully he will make a better choice next hunt or practice enough to get better with that .338. My question to you was this guided hunt? If it was, the guide should have made sure the hunter was capable of shooting the .338 efficiently/accurately enough to hunt with it. Especially since it was the guide whiom probably put that requirement on the hunter to have at least that caliber to hunt with him. This ethic's thing cuts both way's. If guides are going to require a certain caliber to use there services then it's there responsibility to ensure the hunters are up to the task at hand.

A good debate is never a waste of time. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
WOW...what a heated topic. If no one else is going to day it then I will. I have the up-most respect for everyone on this board and especially the more seasoned hunters. However...just because a large caliber weapon was needed in the past doesn't mean that it is needed today. Technology has advanced over the years and bullet designs have improved. A .223 is more than enough for a deer by todays standards. I realize that it is hard to swallow for some people but both Jerry and I have done testing with the .223 so we are very familiar with it's capabilities. Shot placement is key with any cartridge so that is not a factor inherent to just the .223. Being an ethical hunter has to do with a lot more variables than caliber of bullet. I would say that it is one of the least variables to being an ethical hunter. All of these statements can be supported by research and statistics so there is hard data to back it up. The only thing I would add is to the more seasoned (older) hunters....don't be so closed minded to new technology and don't knock it until you try it.

Again...I have a lot of respect for everyone here but I have a lot of data to support my statements.
 
Puma,
Just to answer some of your comments I have in my files articles by Jim Carmichael, Finn Aagaard, and Brian Pearce, each discribing their use of .22 centerfire on deer. Surely you would not discribe these gentlemen as unethical. None advocated the use of those calibers but pointed out that it could be done. And discribed situtations when they had done it. And you seem to be fixated on headshots. None of those men were talking about headshots, but the same shots to the lungs that you take with your bow.
Point 2. I am sure that you are an ethical bow hunter, but trust me. There are just as many slob bow hunters as there are gun hunters. Ethics is as someone above said has more sides than just the choice of weapons.
Point 3. The only people who would be offended by what you said are those who don't want to play by the rules. What rules. Your rules. No I don't chose to play by your rules. I play by my rules within the legal guidelines of my state. Ever hunter has that right without being branded by others.
In other words we have our own likes, dislikes, opinions and ethics. We just have to live with that fact because we sure as shooting are not going to change anyones mind.
So you canhunt with your '06 or 7 Mag and if I choose I'll hunt with my .223 and that is the way it ought to be.
OC /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Ozark Charlie

"None advocated the use of those calibers "

Ozark my piont exactly!! Yes you can take deer with a .22LR/22Mag/.223 never said you couldn't
and it's even legal in some states to use such weapons, doesn't mean an ethical hunter needs to.
As you said it's your choice -have a nut! Just that there are better choices for a more ethical kill. If you like taking the chance that you may wound and not recover a deer cause you used an inferior cartridge go for it ! :rolleyes:
 
TAZMAN, Yes! I do agree with you that "Shot Placement" is a key factor in harvesting ANY game animal, however remember this very important aspect of the kill and harvest (to often over looked or disregarded by many hunters) "Penetration of the Vitals" by the bullet is a must! High velocity light bullets are subject to giving shallow wounds on big game. Head shots and neck shots on deer or any other big game animals.......Well, let's just say that is NOT my cup of tea gentlemen.

All the accuracy in the world will NOT down your animal for keeps, if the bullet does not penetrate the very important "Vitals Area". This is the area that a .22 caliber is weak in period. I learned a long time ago as a young hunter (using factory bullets) that .22 caliber high velocity rifles on big game NOT the way to go (unless your using premium bullets) and back in those days, only the handloader stood a better chance at bringing home their meat.
 
I used a .223 this year for dear and had good luck with it. Both deer I shot only ran about 15 or 20 yards. When I feild dressed them I check to see how much damage it did and the lungs where shreded in one and the heart was made into hamburger in the other. I had a complete passthru on both deer with a with an exit hole the size of a half dollar. So I have no problem useing one for deer. I used a 55 grain hollow point. Good luck.
 
I'll stick with my 308. I agree with the guy earlier, if all I had was a 223 & wanted to go deer hunting, I would use it.

I was looking over some ballistics the other day. As I suspected it is rather easy to get a load in 223 than has more energy than a 44 mag,(mostly comparing rifle to handgun). I also venture to say the average shooter would be more accurate at 70 yards with his scoped 223 compared to a handgun, scoped or not. Nobody seems to scoff at a hunter going out with his 44 mag, or smaller handgun. I know the arguments of heavier slow slugs, but energy is energy.

I did bag a buck once with my 357. It would of been easier with a 223. Bullet selection is critical because of all the varmint loads for a 223.

I am not trying to plug the 223 for deer, but if I was given the choice between a 223 or 44 mag handgun I'll take the 223 with the proper bullet.
 
To summarize what we have learned,

1. Shot placement with any cartridge is important.

2. Proper bullet selection is important with any cartridge but critical with the .223 or 22-250.

3. .223 is capable of harvesting any sized deer if rules 1 and 2 are followed.

Would these statements be a good summary of all the posts?
 
This topic is a pain in the butt!!I started hunting with a 223 with proper deer bullets(Nolser P 60gr ,trophy bonded Bear claws 55gr a few years back mainly do yo the fact I have a several thousand dollar custom 223 rifle and didn't see the need to run out and buy a new Rem bolt gun,put a good scope on it for use a few days a year to hunt deer.I was unsure of how the 223 would do myself as I had been using a Rem 7 mag in years past. Well with 4 Big mature bucks in the past years and another big mature buck bagged this season,Plus a nice 3.5 year old buck kill by a friends son after I loaned him my rifle this season that brings the total to 5 stone dead and mounted on my wall mature bucks,One dead 135lbbuck in my buddys freezer Plus a doe he took on doe day this season with me in the stand watching his 12 year old son.No losses,run aways,or anything bad.Till the deer start running off when I shoot them I will be staying with the 223 and I don't see them getting away after looking at the hole on both sides of all the deer I have shot. Only one deer did not have exit hole.That was the buck I shot this year and I hit him in the shoulder as it was a long shot 150 yards through a lane in the bush and the TBBC bullet went through the shoulder in to his lungs and turned upward hitting his spine.He didn,t take another step and was dead before I got there.The hole the bullet has left going out the far side has been about a 25cent coin. Good,short trail. Mature bucks here are around 150-170lbs tops on average.The 223 with good bullets is more than a match looking at Real Holes in the deer I have shot and I always check out the damage when field dressing.If I was hunting up north where the deer can be much heavier in weight I would step up to a 243 min myself even though the 223 would mostlikey kill them to.The main difference I have seen compared to my 7mag is my mag drop most deer in their tracks with a lung shot from shock I guess,the 223 they normally run 20 yards and pile up from my experenie.
 
Speaking of the 105 Howitzer, my dad shot an elephant with a 105 in Viet Nam. I ques it was quite the sight to behold. Oh yea, he also shot a water buffalo with, you quessed it a 223.
 
I shot 2 deer this year with a 22-250 and my son shot one with it. one went about 60 yrds that was hit on the shoulder(my bad) untill i let her have another right behind it. the other went right down. both of these where at about 150 yrds. the one my boy shot right brhind the shoulder ran about 70 yrds. these were 55gr win psp's. i didn't want a gun that was going to kick the kid but wanted to use it first to make sure it would do the job. my grand mother had 13 kids to feed and when they made a meat drive she always took a stand. one drive her little 222 cracked 5 times and 5 gut piles where left in the woods. its just like you guys have been saying if you can make the right shot and stay off the heavy bone 22's will work. if you have the option go bigger do it. i mostly hunt with an 06 and like how they go down with that much better. i also have seen deer run along way with the heart shot out of them with 270 too. i took the heart out of a nice buck this year with 165gr 06 that went 85 yrds before he gave up. my boy won't be hunting with that 22-250 next year. by then i will have a 260, 7mm-08, 243, or maybe this 257 wssm i've been hearing about. i just don't want to take the chance of having one get away and ruining him. the one he shot this year was from a solid rest broad side at 40 yrds.
 
Good Grief people, this thread started on NOV. 1 2002. and was probably an extension of another one at that time. I do realize my reply will put this dead horse back to the top, but hey it's not like 100 or more others haven't done the same.

To this Topic....I SAY GOOD DAY SIR!!!!
 
I am getting in the game here late but here is my take. Bullet construction determines the bullets effectiveness, energy (within reason) is more or less irrelevant. Bullet placement with a bullet of adequate construction kills - not speed, and certainly not fancy numbers from a ballistic chart. The problem with most .224 bullets is that they are of light construction and lack the sectional density for deep penetration.

A bow kills because of penetration and massive blood loss resulting from poking a 1 1/2" diameter hole through something. Even the best bow out there has only 80 ft /lbs of energy, which is about like a .22 Short. Yet a bow will shoot straight through an elk (even if bone is hit), while a .22 caliber varmint gun (with 15 times the "energy") will blow up on the surface if it hits bone.

I have killed one deer with a .223 Remington and tracked more than a couple that were shot with small caliber rifles. I shot mine just behind the shoulder and it ran quite a ways without leaving a blood trail. Complete bullet failure - no exit wound. I think the bullet was a 55g CoreLoct - I don't remember. Had I not been hunting a field, I probably wouldn't have recovered it. Now if you used a Barnes XLC or a Trophy Bonded bullet - I could see it being more effective.

I wouldn't do it again. I have many better choices in the safe and I am not taking another chance with a caliber that is marginal. Varmint guns were NOT designed for big game hunting. As others have said, yes they work with darn near perfect placement (especially head or neck shots); however, why limit yourself to something that has virtually zero margin for error? Local hunting may play a part. In the Southeast, we often hunt planted pines or very thick forest. You certainly do not have time to set up a rest and fire.

I am a very good shot as I am sure many of you are as well; however, when you have walked a mile out of the woods carrying your rifle, stand, pack, etc - and a big one jumps out of the pines, you WILL be hard pressed to make a perfect shot that you can so easily make sitting at the range with sandbags supporting the rifle. Eventually, you are going to make a less than perfect shot on a deer, and you will wish you have a proper rifle when you do.
 
i use a 22-250 for deer hunting and have for atleast 15 years i use to use a .243 but took accuracy and speed over bullet weight i know i will catch he11 over this but i use 52 gr. bthp i have used and seen other deer shot with 60 gr. sp and it will shoot right though them in no bone is hit i have used .221 Fire ball but dont recomend them. Here in Missouri the requirements are that it be a centerfire so I guess a .17 Rem. is leagle here
 
there is nothing wrong with deer hunting with a .223 i personally deer hunt with my ar-15 rifle and not a single deer has run more than 100 yds after being hit. you just hold out for a good shot.
 
We use about the same a Doggin_yotes. I shoot a 22-250. My dad also shoots a .221 fireball and we both use 52 gr BTHP. Last year I shot a 11 pt. at about 110 yards and he ran about 60 yards and fell over. My dad also shot a doe at about 230 yards with the 221 and dropped it right in his tracks. I beieve that using a 22 cal rifle is a good choice. I believe it takes more of a hunter to use a 22 cal bucause you hae to make the good shot instead of just hitting the deer and killing it. See ya MOyotehunter
 
I feel that the 223 would be large enough. I have no experience with the 223 but I use a 22-250 with 55grn bullets. I have two 243's and one 270 but I deer hunt with the 22-250. Have lost deer with the 243 and the 270 but not the 22-250. I have shot several with it and get the same results, about 2 feet straight down. The shot placement is a bigger factor with it. I shoot the white patch under the chin. I have more confidence with it than the 243 and 270. Some people think that just because they use a large caliber they can take questionable shots and also end up with wounded deer. I know that my gun has limits and I can't take questionable shots but then again should anyone regardless of caliber. If you are confident in your shooting abilities for a perfect shot and willing to wait for that shot, go ahead and use it.
 
Back
Top