Why not the 223?

[Guest Republican]

Why do so many people argue that the 223 is not a good choice for deer? They say the bullets make shallow wounds and the deer run off like they are wearing body armor.

Just last year I killed 2 deer with 55gr varmint tipped bullets. Both deer dropped almost instantly with lung shots. One was a nice 8 point. Bought the ammo at Walmart cost $10 for a box. It worked as good as the $40 a box stuff I bought for my 30.06 the previous year. I know there are bonded 223 bullets out there which are designed for deer by the way.

I get it that some guys feel macho using a 338 magnum for 90lb does, but why do they throw off on the more than capable 223? Can someone explain this mentality?

[EastHipster]

Bigger Better faster.

 

I'm a .223, 30/30, Recurve Bow shooter so you're preaching to the Choir

[KahrMan]

The 223 if fine for perfectly placed shots.  The problem is you do not always have a perfect broadside shot.  In my opinion, the 223 is to small for the less than perfect shots. I want a little more power for shots that are not just punching through lungs.

 

 Our jobs as hunters are to ethically take animals.  I would rather see a hunter use something more than the minimum required to give them a little leeway.  Of course this is my opinion and you know what they say about opinions...

[Guest Republican]

Ok. I get the shot placement issue, but your saying that with a larger caliber you can intentionally take a poor shot. Where do you aim poor shots at with larger calibers? Can I depend on a 300 to be leathal with a shot to the hip or guts?
Personally, If I don't have a lung/shoulder shot with any caliber I don't shoot.

[Caster]

I'm a hypocrite. I tell most people that its a bad idea but I have no qualms about using it. I'm also VERY picky and patient. I'm fine with not taking a shot and going home empty handed. I wait for the perfect shot or take a pass.

I use a Barnes bullet and put it either right on the heart or, of the stars are in alignment, I will put it in the head. *gasp!*. I can also shoot a half inch or less at a hundred with my CZ527. Side of the head between the ear and eye and they fall right there. Tis is not to be taken lightly though, too low and you can destroy the jaw and they will run away only to starve to death.

It's incumbent on EVERY shooter to be absolutely honest with themselves about their skill and ability. It's also of the utmost importance that if you are going to take an animals life, do it fast and as painless as possible.

[KahrMan]

I am not saying take an intentionally poor shot.  As they say, sh*t happens.  The deer takes a step or you flinch or you deflect off a branch you didn't see...  There are lots of reasons, most beyond the hunters control, that can cause the bullet to impact somewhere other than where it was supposed to.  Having a larger caliber just gives you more margin of error.

[Caster]

Ok. I get the shot placement issue, but your saying that with a larger caliber you can intentionally take a poor shot. Where do you aim poor shots at with larger calibers? Can I depend on a 300 to be leathal with a shot to the hip or guts?
Personally, If I don't have a lung/shoulder shot with any caliber I don't shoot.

I don't think that is what he's saying at all. I think what he's trying to say; for example. The deer is turned at a 45 degree angle and you take a heart lung shot. It might not get both lungs. Or the heart at all. If using a 60g soft point in 223 and for example it hit a shoulder blade. It could deflect and not do the damage needed for a clean kill. A 168g from a 308 will not bat an eye at that same shot, it will penetrate that bone and turn vitals to pudding.
I know Kharman is most likely using a 30/06 and if I had to hazard a guess, around 180g. This does NOT give him the ability to take a poor shot nor do I think he would. It DOES allow him to take a more difficult shot with an amount of confidence you don't get from smaller calibers.


I may be wrong.

[KahrMan]

I don't think that is what he's saying at all. I think what he's trying to say; for example. The deer is turned at a 45 degree angle and you take a heart lung shot. It might not get both lungs. Or the heart at all. If using a 60g soft point in 223 and for example it hit a shoulder blade. It could deflect and not do the damage needed for a clean kill. A 168g from a 308 will not bat an eye at that same shot, it will penetrate that bone and turn vitals to pudding.
I know Kharman is most likely using a 30/06 and if I had to hazard a guess, around 180g. This does NOT give him the ability to take a poor shot nor do I think he would. It DOES allow him to take a more difficult shot with an amount of confidence you don't get from smaller calibers.


I may be wrong.

 

Very well said Caster except I use the more manly caliber of 45-70. :D

[Guest Republican]

I gotcha Caster and I agree totally. A nice buck could probably make you take a bad shot if that's all you had.
I guess I been listening to the guys in the gun stores to much. You know the type, those guys that have something to prove.
I hunt for recreation, so I guess I have a different mentality than some, but low recoil and accuracy are definitely on my priority list for a deer rifle and the 223 seems to be perfect for it. Also, my wife and children can shoot a 223 easily as well.

[ted]

This works .223 DRT ammo a friend of mine hunts with it and that's all he uses now sold his 30-30 and his 30-06 and uses his Ar-15 now for deer and hog hunting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Tsi9uEY8AQ

[ted]

This is a better vid DRT .223 ammo 180 yards Ar-15 . I think I'm going to try it this year with my Ar http://www.youtube.com/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DoONgBVyXVNQ&v=oONgBVyXVNQ&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DoONgBVyXVNQ%26desktop_uri%3D%252Fwatch%253Fv%253DoONgBVyXVNQ Edited July 15, 2013 by ted

[Spurholder]

Here's some Barnes TSX in 70 grain love:

 

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=94628

[ShaunM]

I have killed several deer with a 223 rifle. While it can be effective I do like bigger calibers. With the right bullet and shot placement the 223 will kill deer. Its just not my first choice since I have bigger calibers in the safe.

[Chris]

Nothing wrong with the .223. If it puts the deer on the ground then that's the end of the argument as far as I'm concerned.

I might well try out some of the DRT ammo, but like Kahrman, I'm a fan of larger calibers.

 

.308 Remington Core-lokt in 180gr has great penetration and allows for less than ideal follow up shots.

 

For example, I made a less than ideal first shot on a black bear (it's rare but it happens) and had to make a follow up shot as he fled into the woods.

I was able to pop him on the run and pierced him stern to stem.

Entry wound was on the right hip. It broke the hip and penetrated the entire body.

The round was discovered (at the airport xray) in his brain, perfectly mushroomed and apparently fully intact.

Little ole .223 can't do that.

[Guest Republican]

I have some drt 380 ammo. Didn't know it was available in 223. Thanks for the tip and the videos.
Good bear story, however, bear are usually a little more scrappy than a deer. I prob would consider the 223 underpowered for bear as well, especially the 150lb and up bear.

[whiskey]

Yes a .223 can cleanly kill deer. So can a .22 short. That doesn't mean that either should be recommended for the task. I killed lots of hogs in Florida with a .22mag. I won't recommend hog hunting with a .22mag. 

 

A .223 is a suitable choice if the shot is well placed. That said, my daughter put a 100gr .243 in a doe's chest a few years ago. Knocked the doe down, but the shot was a little high, top of the lung. The doe traveled a long way and was only recovered with the aid of a dog. She was only off a couple inches. If that shot had been made with a 30-06, I don't think the deer would have gotten back up. Part of the killing equation is transfer of energy. A larger diameter bullet of heavier weight has the ability to transfer more energy. That, coupled with the larger margin of error that a larger caliber can compensate for, make the .223 a less attractive recommendation for deer. 

 

I don't have a problem recommending a .223 in an AR style rifle to get a kid or lady started hunting. The low recoil helps them practice more and so long as a responsible hunter is coaching them on shot placement, then it's one more hunter joining our ranks. 

 

But if a full grown man walks into a gun shop and says, "What's the best caliber for deer hunting?" I don't think the answer should ever be .223. 

 

I believe that Tennessee changing the law to allow any center fire caliber for deer hunting is proof enough that the .223 can be an effective round for deer. Hunt with what you like, hunt how you like, be responsible and enjoy the sport. That's way more important that the caliber you choose. 

[austin7.62]

If I can find a decent SP, I'm going to try to use 5.45 this year! Gasp!

[10-Ring]

I don't normally recommend a .223 for deer but after reading the comments here I wouldn't object to most of you guys using it.  I know it sounds bad but I think that a .223 can be an effective round against deer, it's probably just not suited well for the general public to take deer with.

[whitewolf001]

I've never hunted so forgive my ignorance but why wouldn't one always go for head shots anyways?

[EastHipster]

I've never hunted so forgive my ignorance but why wouldn't one always go for head shots anyways?

Statistics.

 

Deer Head=Small

Deer Vitals=Bigger

[whiskey]

I've never hunted so forgive my ignorance but why wouldn't one always go for head shots anyways?

Deers heads are always moving and usually right as you pull the trigger.

Even the best shooting hunter will sooner or later hit low and blow a jaw off, causing a slow painful death.

[Guest Bonedaddy]

That DRT ammo is some expensive stuff but it works. I have some for the Mini and my pistols. That stuff in 9mm will make a watermelon explode like someone put an M80 in it and it was some of the most accurate 9mm I've shot. The 79gr. .223 20rd box is like $60 or so. The 'yotes sho' don't like it.

[DaveS]

The 223 if fine for perfectly placed shots.  The problem is you do not always have a perfect broadside shot.  In my opinion, the 223 is to small for the less than perfect shots. I want a little more power for shots that are not just punching through lungs.

 

 Our jobs as hunters are to ethically take animals.  I would rather see a hunter use something more than the minimum required to give them a little leeway.  Of course this is my opinion and you know what they say about opinions...

KahrMan explained this very well. Also remember that a lot of slouchy hunters don't wait or take the perfect shot. There is nothing wrong with .223 in the hands of a skilled hunter/shooter.

 

Dave S

[Caster]

Deers heads are always moving and usually right as you pull the trigger.

Even the best shooting hunter will sooner or later hit low and blow a jaw off, causing a slow painful death.

Yep, this is not a method to take lightly.
Best shot was one grazing. They will eat, look around and eat again. Take aim while the deer grazes and wait for it to look around. When it takes back to grazing again and moves into your view, take the shot. Randomly aiming at a deers head is irresponsible. You must be sure of your shot. BUT, that goes with any shot really. Edited July 18, 2013 by Caster

[jakflak]

I've never hunted so forgive my ignorance but why wouldn't one always go for head shots anyways?

This isn't call of duty White Wolf haha