[DReicht]

Is it humane to hunt deer with a .223 chambered rifle? I've heard yes and no, with success and failures.

[SoCalShooter]

I think so. What makes you doubt it?

[Art Eatman]

Shot placement is far more critical, so one's skill as a rifleman is of increased importance. Light bullets start out with less energy and slow down more quickly, so the range is more limited. And, the size of the animal is important as well.

IOW, it's "situational".

Me, I limit my use of my .223 to coyotes and smaller. For deer, I go with my .243 or one of the larger critters...

:), Art

[North Texan]

I've been killing hogs with my .223 using 55 gr. Sierra Gamekings. I started using those bullets because I kept running across hogs while coyote hunting. If I see a shooter this year while out coyote hunting, I am comfortable enough with the rounds performance I would probably take the shot.

However, if I'm deer hunting, I'll probably be carrying the 25-06.

[Lennyjoe]

Not my first choice by any means.

To each his own though. Heard a few sucess stories with .223 on deer in the past.

[Legionnaire]

I wouldn't criticize you for using a .223, but I wouldn't use one myself. Minimum caliber I'd use on deer or other medium game would be .243, and my preferred round is .308 (although I also use a .30-30 and a .44mag). .223 seems a bit light by my reckoning.

[mete]

Considering that many states prohibit it - NO.

[screamin eagle]

I have shot several deer with a 223 and they all ran abut 30 yards and then dropped and that is a behind the leg shot. Just this past weekend i shot a spike behind the leg with my mini-14 and dropped him in his tracks.It depends on the shot placement.i use 55 grain winchester surperme ballistic tips and they have never failed me.To me it is a good light weight rifle with many uses. my .02

[X-Rap]

the fact that a 22 center fire will kill a deer in not debatable, a 22 rimfire will kill a deer.The point is that someone usually the DNR/DOW has to set the minimum and usually it is 6mm or greater. The reasons are many but I would guess that if the same man shot 100 deer in the field some of those shots would be less than perfect and some would be down right lousy. Given the fact that larger calibers and bullet weights carry greater energy and generaly hold together better after stricking bone thus giving greater penetration.We all remember the shot that dropped the whatever like it was hit with Thors hammer but the sad truth maybe that some that don't just drop may walk away to die a miserable death.I'm not denying shot placement as being paramount I'm only saying that we being imperfect at times should shoot in general calibers that will dump enough energy into the animal to make the most efficient kill with a mangeable weapon.just my 2c

[phantomak47]

As the old timers say, use enough gun. You can do better than a 223, why not the 243?

[Grumulkin]

Man, Gentlemen, I'm really proud of you. Not really any flames for our new poster (and welcome by the way). I posted something in favor about taking deer with a 22 centerfire here a month or two ago and felt like I lit a match in a gasoline can.

[MCgunner]

I prefer more meat in the bullet than .22 caliber offers. Step up just a little bigger and the.243 offers 100 grains of bullet that is designed to perform on medium game. My .257 Roberts is a neat gun, can handle a little heavier bullets than the .243. Both calibers are very light on the shoulder and can varmint as well as hunt medium game. I don't see why anyone would want to use a marginal caliber like the .223. There are many better choices.

JMHO of course. I think some of the people hunting deer with a .223 are mall ninjas trying to find something they can actually USE their AR15 for, if they don't have varmints they can shoot with it. It will work, especially on smallish Texas deer, but it's certainly not a deer caliber in my mind. Some here in Texas swear by the .22-250 and it's a cut above a .223, but it still uses those tiny bullets. Lots of guys are looking for a light recoil rifle and some are thinking of letting the kid use it. I've always said, if the kid can't handle the recoil of a .243, he ain't got no business deer hunting. I was 11 years old when I shot my first deer with my grandpa's .257 Roberts (now mine). Yeah, it pelted me a bit, but I rolled with it. I became recoil tolerant at an early age. I've fired up to 375 H&H as an adult and found it tolerable for hunting. I say, start kids with a .243. Don't let them shoot it from a bench, though. Let them shoot it sitting or standing positions so they can roll with the recoil. When a deer pops out, they'll know what to do.

[1911 guy]

Sticking with heavy for caliber bullets, mid range and excellent shot placement, go for it. If any of these variables is out of the envelope, forget it. It may not even be legal, check your states game laws. A few states have a .25 caliber limit, ruling out even the .243, a favorite of many for deer.

[22-rimfire]

I wouldn't recommend a .223 for whitetail hunting. If that is all you've got, you are a good shot, and you keep your shooting distance down, yes it will work. From my perspective, you need to examine your own abilities, and ask yourself the question if you really are prepared for deer hunting.

With the change in regulations this year in my state, both the .222 and .223 are legal. But so is the .22 Hornet. A 25ACP is legal too if you have a barrel length of 4" or more. Doesn't make it a good choice.

[Art Eatman]

I set myself up to be able to shoot most any deer I want, including a running buck at a couple of hundred yards or a standing buck at some 300 or 400 yards. It's not that I will take that shot; it's that I can take that shot with a real-world chance of Bucky piling up right there or within a minimal distance.

That's why I've mostly used the '06. Anything within 500 yards, I own it.

Art

[X-Rap]

I'm not insulting anyones manhood just bragging on my little girl.She just shot a dam nice heavy racked 3pt. mulie this morning not with a 243 or 25 cal but the same rifle she shot he first elk with when she was 14 she's now 17 and probobly weighs 105 soaking wet she shoots a m77 in 280 and recoil has never been an issue for her my step mom shoots m70 in 280 and is small.

[22-rimfire]

Dreicht: Sounds to me that you are in the same place you started from with opinions both in favor and not in favor of the .223. Guess it is up to you if it is legal in your state.

[DReicht]

:) Basically, and thanks for the welcome.

I'm not even attempting whitetail hunting until next year, or maybe even the one after. Around then I'll be picking up a 308 CZ 550 so this was really more for just curiosity because I've heard so many different opinions. I'm reserving my .223 for small game hunting, especially since its a 1 in 12 twist.

Thanks again guys.

[quatin]

I read alot of these threads (not just on THR) and in the end the argument ends with: "Just shoot it in the head". :D

*Edit
Just realized something, I go to a public range and I'm starting to see alot of hunters come in to "zero" in their rifles. Just once I went up to the target stands during ceasefire to retrieve my target and I noticed :what: the majority of the targets in the 100 yard range had haphazard 8 inch groups. ( This was like a row of 10 targets ) Only one in every 10 was there a neat group in the center, most everything else had some .30 cal holes barely inside the 4 ring. (This is all benchrest mind you) I guess people who shoot like that really need to have a larger caliber, but if you can shoot a 1 inch group at 100 yards, it wouldn't seem like a gamble to aim for the head.

[DReicht]

Heh I'm at about 1-1.5 inches at 50 yards. I've only recently started shooting but I have a few rifles. .22 I use for heck shooting, but my .223 I really work on accuracy and the mechanics of shooting. BAR 308 is just a beast that I'm working on being able to handle.

[MCgunner]

Well, with one rifle, I can shoot 3/4" five shot groups at 100 yards, but I still shoulder shoot deer. Call me a pessimist. :D

[Northslope Nimrod]

For neck or head shots. Not for body shots.

Don't use it. Here in Utah, you can use any centerfire cartidge with an expanding bullet. (if shot from a rifle). Handguns require so many foot-pounds. .243 is lightest I would use.

[MinScout]

No, the .223 is not adequate for deer and there's no plausible reason to use it. If a person is so afraid of recoil that he is unable to use an appropriate cartridge, then he probably should'nt hunt.

[FireArmFan]

There's a lot of debate on this. My state makes it an easy choice for hunters because you can't hunt deer legally with .223 in Minnesota.

[.45 AUTO]

A .223 will kill a deer, but with a lot less margin for error. I personally would not recommend it, or feel comfortable using it. You hear reports on the battlefield of .223/5.56x45mm not doing its job on the enemy. Deer are usually a little harder to bring down compared to a human. And U.S. Soldiers are using the M-4/M-16 platform with burst/Full auto capable fire, how much more effective would one shot be to a deer compared to three to six or more shots on a human? The Millitary does use FMJs which are not as effective as SPs, but still.

[Art Eatman]

Something that may well hold for any cartridge and any game animal: Choose your shot carefully. Consider the whole package deal: Size of animal, distance, and what the animal is doing and what you're doing.

If you're sitting in a stand and maybe have a fair rest, and the animal is just standing there at a fairly close distance, you can do a lot of killing with very little cartridge.

You start adding in factors like an off-hand shot and a longer distance and the situation changes a whole bunch. If the animal is walking along, that's another factor. Etc., so on and so forth. That's why I said above that it's situational.

Just because you see a deer doesn't mean you MUST shoot at it. First, think.

:), Art

[hps1]

I've been hunting deer in Texas for over half a century and, until last week, have been of the belief that the .223, even though it has enough power to kill a deer, is really not suited for that purpose. Furthermore, I have not been a fan of neck shooting deer. Not that it is not a very lethal target, but because a deer can move that target in a heartbeat, resulting in a wounded animal should the move occur just as your shot breaks. I know, "you either kill the deer or get a clean miss", but that is not always the case. Back when we were still fighting screw worms in S. Tx. I shot one poor buck that had a 2" hole in his neck that was at least a week old. Had I not shot the buck, he would have suffered a pretty horrible death from screw worms.

Well, last week, I went to set up my deer stands and do a bit of coyote hunting, so took my Bushmaster Predator along. Deer season is open, but we are still a few weeks away from the rut and not apt to see a "shooter" buck.
We are required by landowner to shoot two does and I always like to get them out of the way as early as possible.

Monday morning we set up at a cattle guard and started to call. About 10 minutes into the stand, a doe sticks her head and neck out of the brush 35 yards from me, looking straight at me. I froze, rifle on sticks and, after a few minutes, she looked the opposite direction. Had lots of time to think about it and when she turned back toward me, I shot her center of white patch w/55 gr. bal. tip. Can't remember ever seeing a deer go down so fast, right where she stood.

That afternoon, set up on another coyote stand and had 5 does feeding toward me. When the largest was 85 yards away, she stopped with my decoy half way between us. She was fascinated by the decoy so presented a very steady target, looking straight toward me. Sitting and using shooting sticks as a rest, centered the white spot and she, too dropped where she stood.

Does this make the .223 a deer cartridge and the neck shot the perfect shot placement? I don't think so, but will have to admit they both will work under ideal conditions. As has been said, it all depends upon the situation and the ability of the shooter to place the shot under field conditions.

With the does out of the way, the deck is now cleared to hunt the "muy grande", but will be carrying my .338 WM next week.:)

Regards,
hps

[Plink]

People have successfully hunted deer (illegally) with .22 rimfires. It's all about shot placement. That doesn't mean that a .22 rimfire is optimal. .223 is legal to hunt deer with in this state, but I certainly won't do it. I feel it's a bit too light for the purpose. To my way of thinking, it's better to have a little too much gun, than perhaps not enough gun.

[Art Eatman]

hps1, the very first deer I ever killed was a very patient doe at maybe 30 yards or thereabouts, using my uncle's Sako .222. White spot. Works every time. :)

Long ago in the way-back-when, it wasn't uncommon for some cityboy "hunters" to go down to south Texas ranches and buy a deer from a ranch hand. $5 per point, my father told me. The hand would sit somewhere near a stock tank during the night and pop Ol' Bucky between the eyes with a .22 rimfire. The hunter could stay in camp and drink whiskey and play poker--and have something to take home to Momma to show he'd been a good boy.

IOW, most anything will work if the circumstances are right. Me, I just don't trust Mr. Murphy.

Art

[kungfuhippie]

two points;
.223 is not a deer caliber, yes it will kill a deer. Why use it when you can get a better-suited gun? I mean a .243 is minimal, a 30-06 will kill deer and bigger very dead. Something inbetween works great.

I know I'll sound like a tree hugger, but don't head shoot deer. a head is a little target. A deer has a little brain, even smaller target. When you miss and blow the deer's lower jaw off so it slowly, painfully dies you'll understand. Even the best shot should aim for the vitals. It's not the movies, it's reality.

[hps1]

IOW, most anything will work if the circumstances are right. Me, I just don't trust Mr. Murphy.


Couldn't agree more, Art. Not planning to take up deer hunting w/the 223, or advocating its use by others, but in the two instances previously mentioned, both deer were, as you said, "calm" and not apt to make a sudden move, both were within very easy range for precise shot placement and were facing head on. If any of the above conditions had not been present, the decision would have been not to take the shot.

Regards,
hps

[steveracer]

stick with the heaviest bullets you can get that will reliably expand. 69 grains has worked well for me on deer in upstate NY, where they run BIG for whitetail. My brother and I both have killed tham with .45ACP, and the .223 is MUCH more powerful at any distance. I encourage you to hunt with that round, because, like my brother, you will likely practice with that particular round A LOT, as it is inexpensive. We use NEF single shot .223 rifles with 1.5x scopes, and get reliable kills every year with 77 grain loads under 150 yards. Have fun!

[Byron]

Steveracer,what kind of accuracy are you getting out of the 77 grain bullets? Is your a 1 in 12 or 1 in 9 twist? Thanks, Byron

[steveracer]

I believe they are 1 in 10, but I'm not 100% certain. The 77grain sierra rounds are cutting one hole at 100M, and I haven't shot them at any greater distance for accuracy, but the farthest end of the range is 220M, and I'm hitting Coke cans pretty regularly at that distance. The 77 grain round is as big as you can get for .223 without the OAL getting a little too long for most rifles.
My brother swears by the 69grain round, and has filled his tag every year for five years with the sam box of 50 I bought him with the rifle.

[countryrebel]

I have shot many deer with my 223's and they all dropped on the spot with wolf 55 grain hollow points.All my friends that have used 223's on deer dropped with one shot also,and this is not 100yds and under, canyon hunting at least 200 plus.

[High Planes Drifter]

Im sorry to respond to a question with a question, but did this stem from a SHTF rifle idea (AR15 for SHTF)? I just know that it does alot. My appologies if it didnt, I was just asking.

I do not use or would recomend the .223 for medium sized game >100lbs.. There are just too many other fine choices.

[Keith Wheeler]

About this time every year my best friend calls me up and tells me about his latest deer harvested with a Mini-14. Usually in the 120 yards range. One shot and they're on the ground.

Not trying to attack anyone, but the only people I know who say a .223 is too light for hunting deer are those who've never used a .223 for deer hunting.

[HGUNHNTR]

I have no problems killing deer with winchesters 64 grain Power point for the .223 at 100yds or less. In Nebraska its legal, and works very well

[captonion]

Whitetails are not at all hard to put down.Shot placement is the major factor with any and all calibers.The 223 is plenty for deer on a broad side/quartering away shot within 200yrds easily.You dont want to take any bad frontal/shoulder shots because you dont have enough bullet for that.DONT USE VARMENT BULLETS.BarnesX or Nosler Ps are best IMO.

I have shot a 265lbs(dressed) buck at 160yrds with a 225Win/Nosler partition,and that deer didnt go but 20yrds.Mind you it was a broad side double lung shot.If the deer would have been facing me or quartering towards me I would not have taken the shot.

The people who cry that the 223 is not enough gun just are not good enough shots to use a 223.

[quatin]

I was talking to a guy at the range who said he keeps a .222 around to take shoulder shots on deer (Texas). He was there shooting a 30-30 and a .270 wsm, so he had options for power. I've seen more success stories than failure stories with .22 cals on deer.

[Caimlas]

My impression is that it depends on four factors:

1) The range of your shot. I would not take a deer with .223 past 100 yards with my AR - it has a 16" barrel - but I would feel comfortable out to 150 on a wind-free day.
2) The size of the deer. In the north half of the country, whitetail deer are larger than in the south. I wouldn't take a buck with .223, but a doe I generally wouldn't have any qualms.
3) Wind - .223 is lightweight and easily buffeted by wind. I wouldn't trust it in a windy locale past 50 75 yards.
4) Bullet selection. I would most certainly not shoot a deer with .223 without

That said, I know people who hunt deer with 18" .223 rifles from horseback (reservation) and have no problems felling deer up here in SD.

[spooney]

It all depends on where you are from. Most of the hunting in Oklahoma(or the part of it that I hunt anyway) is out of stands or blinds. Max range is usually 75-100yds, some people have much more than that, I am speaking in generalities. Average deer are in the 70-120lbs. range. These are small deer and short ranges, if a .223 is what you shoot the most accuratly then why not use it?

I was started out with a .243, the rifle was much to big for me and it beat the holy hell out of me, I basically gave up hunting after two years of not being able to hit anything at all. I have since become more interested in firearms and have started hunting again as a consequence but my point is that to say "if they can't handle a .243 they shouldn't be hunting" works against what we should all be doing to preserve the future of our sport...and that is promoting the sport amongst these younger generations.

If it takes a gas powered .223 on a 75 pound deer at 35 yards to keep a kid interested in hunting I say let the kid use it, better to have someone who is interested and is then going to develop into a shooter and hunter than to have a kid go back to his PS2 and sit on the couch all day.

[WolfMansDad]

There's been a lot of "If you can't handle the recoil of a .243, you have no business hunting" in this thread. I take a different view.

If you can't place your shots well enough to kill a deer with a .223, you have no business hunting. A .300 Winchester Magnum is ineffective if you hit the deer in the leg or the gut.

[Jimmy Newman]

If you can't place your shots well enough to kill a deer with a .223, you have no business hunting. A .300 Winchester Magnum is ineffective if you hit the deer in the leg or the gut.

I can shoot 3" to 4" groups all day long at 200 yards from an iffy rest (tree branch, sandbag on a rock, etc.) with my deer rifle, which is not fantastic accuracy but is certainly plenty for hunting. I have shot deer from 50 yards to 250 yards. I have not lost a deer. I have not gut shot or leg shot a deer. The bottom line is, even on solid body shots, larger calibers are more effective than smaller calibers. I have seen deer run a long way with solid body hits from .223's and even .243's. I have seen many fewer deer run a long way with solid body hits from rifles in the range of the 7mm-08 or .270. If I had to, I'd shoot a deer with a .223, but I wouldn't shoot a big deer with one and I wouldn't shoot a deer at any kind of range with one. I wouldn't use .243 for a big deer at range, either.

The people who are against using .223 are not against .223 because they can't hit anything. That's a patently ridiculous statement. If someone just can't use anything bigger than .223 for one reason or another, fine. But in my opinion they shouldn't be shooting at big deer or at long ranges and bullet selection is absolutely critical. It takes a .223 bullet a fifth of a second to travel 200 yards. That's a long time, long enough that if a deer starts moving, your shot can suddenly not hit the perfect spot. It's situations like this where the lack of margin with a .223 can be a major problem. The margin is also a problem when the deer is at an angle, so shot selection (a completely different issue from shot placement) is also much more important with a .223 than with a heavier caliber.

I started shooting a 7mm-08 rifle when I was eight years old. With a rifle of reasonable weight with a recoil pad, anyone who does not have a physical disability or injury can learn to shoot a heavier rifle than a .223. It's not an innate talent. It takes practice to learn to shoot without being affected by recoil. But it's something that anyone can learn.

[shootinvet]

To me there just isnt any justification for using a .223 round for hunting larger prey animals. And i dont buy the argument "if you dont like to hunt with .223, you must not be able to shoot." It sounds like it is a big ego boost to shoot animals with the smallest possible, caliber....though more challenging and many times successful....doesnt make it right. Thats why its illegal in many states to hunt deer with them. If you want to be proud of your accuracy, shoot some crows or pd's at 300. I can mow my entire yard with scissors, theres just not any reason to.

[trotter@ku.edu]

I've recently bought a Smith & Wesson M4 and spent a considerable amount outfitting it with a Trijicon ACOG.

I'm an avid shooter and can punch excellent groups out to four hundred yards (as long as my range is). The armed forces use a similar set up to kill people (pretty similar size to a deer) out to 600 yards (as high as the 4x ACOG is marked up to). Why won't the .223 work on a deer under 300 yards, it works on people?

D. Trotter


Sidenote: I know all to well the argument about the army needing a bigger caliber but the .223 isn't going anywhere so lets not get into that.

[Art Eatman]

trotter, until recent years the bullets generally available for .22 centerfires were primarily varmint-type: Blow up on small game.

The situation has changed in recent years, with new and heavier bullets with thicker jackets now available.

And the thing about military use is that there is no issue of "clean, ethical kill". I have care and respect for Bambi; none for an enemy. :D

Art

[trotter@ku.edu]

So assuming proficiency with the .223 rifle, can I hunt with these heavier bullets at reasonable distances (sub 200 yards) or do I need to spend more money on a larger caliber and keep the .223 for coyotes and the range.
-D. Trotter

[oklahoma caveman]

well here in oklahoma a 223 is legal and with reason. i started hunting many years ago with a 30-30 so kick isnt the problem. but a few years ago i bought a 223 handy rifle. good lil gun. with good soft point ammo i feel completely confident in my ability to kill any deer in the woods with it. in fact i have killed several. not a single 1 has ran more than 50 yards. what it all comes down to is being able to make the shot. do not take any shot that you dont truly belive that you can make.

i will say this: in the hands of a person who hasnt shot the gun and who cannot make good decisions as to making an ethical shot then yes the 223 is a bad choice. otherwise it is just as good as any other.

and for you big bullet guys i have shot a3006 alot and have never been truly impressed that it is all that much superior to any other round.

[Funderb]

hunting with ball/fmj is not humane.
With .223 hunt grade ammo, better be a marksman.

[stevereno1]

if you are hunting deer with a .223, you are not a sporstman. the cartridge is not suitable for a deer. If you respect the animal, then choose a round that will kill it quickly. go with a .270 to a 300 win mag. y'all can argue on which is best on any caliber inbetween.

[oklahoma caveman]

:fire steveo i been huntin whitetail since i was 8 i started with a 30-30 now hunt with a 7mm08 30-30 30-06 and a 223! i also hunt ducks with a 12 guage 3 1/2. not afraid of recoil. prolly got more experience than you. i got the 223 on a good deal and desided to hunt with it. with the proper bullets and shot placement it is just as good as any other. your ona them magnum guys who trying to make up for somethin else. sure a 300 will kill any deer in the woods. but its overkill and man a box of shells will empty your wallet

[Art Eatman]

stevereno1, you must not have read through the thread, and you're offering an opinion with no reasoning behind it. And the name-calling is a no-no at THR, not to be tolerated.

I think most folks here would agree that the .223 is not the first choice for a deer hunting rifle. However, the bullets of the fairly recent R&D, these last several years, have changed the picture from the old days of "Varmint Gun" limitation.

Smaller deer and precision shots easily mean cleanly killed deer.

stevereno1, it's common for the central Texas whitetail to be small because of insufficient hunting and too many deer for the habitat. Many will dress out at 50 to 70 pounds. 80 and up has become uncommon in many areas. I really have difficulty in believing the .223 is insufficient...

Art

[Caimlas]

I read a study done a while back that someone posted a link to on here where they did a study - not sure if it was a scientific one or not - of deer kills. Basically (and as I remember it), they were trying to figure out what attributed to successful, clean kills. The number one contributing factor was shot placement, with the other factors being statistically insignificant (iirc), though my bias wants to say that the smaller calibers actually did better. IF that's the case, I'm going to guess it's because

Let's put it this way: for me, I seem to be a better shot with my .223 than I do with my .270 winchester, and I know it's not the gun or the caliber; it's me, and not because my accuracy is worse. It's because I take longer to make the same shot, and I'm more cautious. I flinch and take more time positioning myself on the rifle because I've been kicked in the eye by the scope before, and it's not pleasant. So, at least in my situation, I'd say the .223 would be just fine. I've heard more than enough stories about people killing deer with .22 - and have seen enough actual evidence of same - to not feel an inherent bias against a specific cartridge.

On the other hand, two seasons ago I shot a small doe with a double-lung-and-heart shot and, thinking I missed, shot again. The damn thing ran 200 yards before dropping and probably weighed less than 40 pounds dressed. I shot her with a .30-30 at under 100 yards. (In my defense, the damn thing looked bigger than it was... but it was still tasty.)

[stevereno1]

I apoligize for the name calling. I do, however stand by my statement that the 223 is not a deer round. I would call it irresponsible, for anyone to hunt deer with anything less than a 243.

[stevereno1]

I'm sure that a 22lr in the right place would kill an elk!

[stevereno1]

Caveman, I applaud you on your vast experiance. I have only hunted for the last 25 years, as I am only 36. I assure you though, that I have harvested over 100 whitetails, 5 of them wallhangers, and have never heard of any deer hunter using a 223. I currently use a 7mm rem mag. and my next deer rifle will probably be a 7mm-08.

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

if you are hunting deer with a .223, you are not a sporstman. the cartridge is not suitable for a deer. If you respect the animal, then choose a round that will kill it quickly. go with a .270 to a 300 win mag. y'all can argue on which is best on any caliber inbetween.

LOL... whatever. People pass around these little chestnuts of "wisdom" on the internet and in the editorial pages of Field and Stream. I wonder how many of the people who repeat things like ".223 is inappropriate for deer" have ever seen any evidence for that belief or even given the statement a second thought.

I've used .223 on deer and I've never lost one. In fact, I've never had to shoot twice. Those were body shots and the deer died where it was hit. You don't get any deader and quicker then that be it from a .223 or a .600 Nitro Express.

Not sportsmanslike? How "sporting" is it to sit 300 meters away and blast a deer across a bean field with your .300 Win Mag? :barf: Some people have an odd notion of "sporting" and nonsporting... or even sporsting :rolleyes:

[GunTech]

Two deer killed last weekend with 223. One was shot at 150 yards with a 64gn Winchester PowerPoint and walked about 10 feet. Shot through the lungs, the bullet exited through the offside shoulder, breaking the leg.

The second was shot at 200 yards with a 53gn Barnes TSX. Bullet hit the heart and lungs, and exited through the shoulder blade. DRT.

A good hit with a 223 is more than adequate. With a bad shot, a high powered catridge probably won't fix things.

As long as you understand the limitations, 223 is fine for small deer and moderate ranges. If you put the bullet in the right spot, it's sudden death. After blowing a huge chunk out of a small whitetail with my 308, I switch to 223 and dropped a doe at 200 yards no probelm, and no fuss.

[stevereno1]

I shot a 6 point whitetail last week with my 7mm rem. mag, and I don't recall it "blowing a huge chunk" out of it. I seem to remember a small entrance wound, a small exit wound, and a massive interior wound. Whatever, I'll let ya'll go on with your deer-slaying 223's, my bad.

[GunTech]

M1A at 150 yards. Bullet was a 165gn Sierra Game King. Exit wound was about 4 inches across, three ribs shattered and front leg almost blown off. It was a medium sized white tail doe

[GunTech]

270 - 300 mag for white tail? Those must be tough deer down there. More deer have been killed with 30-30 than probably any other centerfire round, and if you look at the energy levels past 200 yards, 30-30 and 223 aren't that far apart.

In the early part of the 20th century it wasn't uncommon for deer to be taken with 32-20, 22 hornet and other anemic rounds. This was in the days before the super-magnums, when hunters relied on shot placement and skill. Before that, deer and even elk were ( and still are) killed by BP weapons including patched round ball fired at pretty modest velocities.

I can't believe that the deer population has gotten so tough that only heavy calibers will do. In the Nordic countries, the venerable 6.5x55 Mauser is considered and ideal moose round.

Finally, Bell killed around a thousand elephants with nothing more than a 7x57 Mauser.

Could be that it's the shooter, not the round.

[jimmyraythomason]

I had much rather have a serious deer hunter using a marginal caliber than a marginal hunter using a serious caliber.

[stevereno1]

I thought that a 30-30 was inbetween the 270-300 win mag. my bad.

[GunTech]

The point was that 30-30 is not that far, in terms of energy, ahead of 223. 38 spl is between 270 and 300 mag by your definition. Would you consider it adequate for deer? 32 acp?

[stevereno1]

I am a serious deer hunter, and have taken many whitetails in my day. Ya'll are starting to tempt me into getting a 223 bolt action rifle. I have looked at the savage model 12 for coyote, but now, i may try it on a whitetail!

[stevereno1]

a 38 spl is not a centerfire rifle round as specified by law is it?

[stevereno1]

a t-shirt sighting, "kill all laywers, except mine"

[Deer Hunter]

I'll put it this way: If I didn't trust a hunter with a .223, I would definantly not trust him/her with a .338 Win mag. It all comes down to picking your shots.

[Albatross]

The deer around in my hunting area are pretty small (large buck is probably around 120 pounds), but I myself (when I was younger, poor and with endless free time) killed a number of deer with just a .22 long rifle and know of many people who regularly hunt with .223.

Although, by far (due to bears) 30-06 is the most popular.

/Never a sportsmen, always a meat hunter.

[GunTech]

a 38 spl is not a centerfire rifle round as specified by law is it?

What law? There are a number of rifles chambered in 38spl/357. In Montana there is no regulation for hunting rifle or handgun caliber.

[jmorris]

You can use a screwdriver as a pry bar and a 223 for deer hunting. Neither were designed with that application in mind and sometimes don’t work.

[jimmyraythomason]

The microwave wasn't originally intended to cook food either. Usually, when devices don't work,it can be attributed to user error.

[Funderb]

I know this seems like an overly common and annoying comment,
but silver bear makes a 7.62x54r soft point that is a phenomenal deer stopper.
But either way, with .223, did you want to hunt with an ar?
That'd be interesting. There really aren't too many .223 bolt options out there.

[jimmyraythomason]

Actually,all of the major firearms(who make rifles) manufacturers offer the .223 Rem in bolt action.

[oklahoma caveman]

around here alot of people use the 223 and kill alot of deer with it. as iv said its not the size of the bullet that maters it is the ability to place the shot into the vital organs of the animal

[Art Eatman]

The caveman's comment takes us back in full circle to the myriad other posts on this subject: Shot placement is what's the most important.

Enuf for now. I have no dooubt that somebody else will bring this up again. :D

Art