[DDawg]

I've got a beautiful Ruger #1 .223 that I would love to deer hunt with.. I'm not looking to kill any monster bucks; I need to thin out some does on our property.
It likes 60 grain bullets, and my buddy who's a much better shot than me can cover a 5 shot group with a dime at 100 yds with it.
I traditionally hunt with a higher caliber but I'm dyin to hunt with this Ruger.
What do ya'll think about hunting with this caliber? Should I aim for the traditional heart lung shot? Some people have said to aim for the head or neck, but I would rather not make such a high risk shot.
Any opinions are appreciated.

[GunTech]

What's your twist rate? If you only take reasonable shots, the 223 will get it done. I like the Barnes TSX for 223.

[W.E.G.]

Check your post.

I think you just said your .223 likes 160 grain bullets. :confused:

[baz]

160 grain bullets in .223? Must be darts.

[GunTech]

Naw. Depleted uranium.

[ndolson]

I was told by the guy that I bought my Savage 10FP in .223 from that using 64 GR softpoint handloads, deer would be well within reason. Whether or not that's true, I don't know. I just pole holes in paper.

[W.E.G.]

Folks hunt deer with .223 all the time. Some states prohibit it. A well-placed shot from a reasonable distance with a good .223 hunting bullet will leave an ordinary deer DRT.

Make good shots, because you won't want to track a deer shot with a .223.
No exit wound. Very little EXTERNAL bleeding.

[mod700]

i agree with W.E.G. as long as you dont get crazy and try to take long shots, and place them well you should be fine shooting them. as far as the neck and head shots.........hmm its all up to how good you feel about putting the bullet where you want it. i usually only shoot head and neck shots to finish them off if its needed. sometimes i spine them.

[TehK1w1]

Previous posts have said it for me, but I will reiterate-if you know your limits and shoot accordingly, a .223 should be fine.

[H&Hhunter]

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

It can be pressed into service and it is capable of killing deer sized game with perfect shot placement. But it is not a good choice and you are begging for trouble using any .22 caliber rifle on big game.

I've killed deer with a .223 I've even killed cow elk with one but it isn't a wise choice.

[learningman]

I've hunted deer with 55grn ballistic tip bullets for nine years now and have yet to not bring an animal home. Shot placement and knowing when to pass for a better oportunity is the key in my book. I use a Smith and Wesson model 1500 I bought off an old rancher near my folks place. Been a great gun and a fun round to shoot. I've taken some pretty "long" shots but the animals were broadside and in perfect position for the kill. I've never lost a deer I hit with it. Good luck hunting.

[glockman19]

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

I agree

Sounds like the same guy who posted on calguns.net,

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=66550

Here's my respose to that guy:

Deer hunting with a .223 IMHO is the wrong thing to do. Use the right tool for the job. I hunt with a Remington 700 CDL in .30-06.

I would consider the use of a .223 irresponsible and inhumane on a deer hunt

Your the kind of person (notice that I didn't say "Hunter") that gives hunters a bad name. Hopefully there won't be any wounded deer running around the woods after you leave

As others have stated...Good Hunting is doing the right thing when no one is watching.

Is it legal to use an AR15 type rifle - yes
Is the AR-15 an appropriate dear rifle - NO
Is it legal to use .223 caliber ammo - yes
Is the .223 caliber an appropriate Dear (Large Game) round - NO
Is it legal to use a semi auto rifle - yes
Is a magazine that holds 10 rounds legal - yes
A magazine holding 20 or 30 rounds is legal too.

Have you ever hunted deer? probably NOT based on your post.

[GunTech]

Cripes. The difference between a heavy 223 and a light 243 isn't that large, and yet the 243 is deemed an appropriate cartridge and the 223 isn't. As someone else observed when looking at this same debate, in days of yore, rounds like the 32-20 were employed to kill deer on a regualr basis. Have deer gotten that much tougher?

My neighbor, and elderly gentleman and quite the outdoorsman and character, routinely dispatched his deer with a 22 hornet.

It all comes down to understanding the limitation of the tool. a 223 at 100 yards has more energy than just about any handgun does at the muzzle, and yet I seldom hear compainst about handgun hunters using weapons of inadequate power.

I just donlt understand why some people feel they need a super-ultra-magnum to shoot a modest sized buck. Such a round won't make up for a badly bungles shot. Better to have an accurate rifle that you can use effectively, IMHO.

I ouldn't take a shot at a deer with a 223 past 200 yards (and better still, under 100). But I wouldn't try a 300 yard shot with a 30-30 either.

[marksman13]

guntech is on the money. Use the right tool for the job. A properly placed 223 will do the job every time. A poorly place 300 WSM will rarely get the job done. Pay no mind to those who reccomend against a 223. They do not know your situation or your skill level. That is why I hate blanket statements about what will or will not work to effectively kill a deer.

In the future, try using the search function. It will save some time and hard feelings. Good luck with whatever you decide is best for you.

[Dos]

Use 243 and larger.

[Big Daddy K]

nevermind

[Grumulkin]

I think 160 grain bullets in a 223 are too light. You need at least 220 grain bullets to kill anything with it other than maybe a rat.

[Kimber1911_06238]

possible, yes....ideal, no. 160 grain bullets? i'm not sure that they exist.

[jmorris]

“The difference between a heavy 223 and a light 243 isn't that large”.

A 68gr 223 is going to be at 2900fps (1270ft/lb) where a 70gr 243 is running a 3500fps (1904 ft/lb) 30% is IMO a large gap. FWIW I don’t really like 243 either, not because it lacks sufficient energy, but I like to use heaver projectiles (140gr and up) and that moves you to 6.5mm +. Can you kill one with a 223, sure. Was it designed to be used as a deer hunting cartage, no. This topic reminds me of the photo below.

[phantomak47]

When it comes to handguns, "friends don't let friends shoot mouse guns"....I think that this applies to hunting calibers and hunting rifles .............


These threads pop up every 3 weeks with out fail, its like people want to see how little they can get away with in terms of caliber. I still believe , use enough gun.....................................

[learningman]

Caliber debates are always a subjective topic. One person see's things one way while another see's a different way. It dosen't matter if it's a 223 or a 375 H&H. There always someone who will dissagree with the topic in one form or another. Thats what makes a good debate, differing opinions. Is the 223 to small for deer, I don't think so if one takes the time and makes a quality shot for a good clean kill. I can honestly say that for the eight to nine years I've used a 223 I have never lost a deer that I've hit. I'm not saying I'm some supreme marksman, but my shots where on targets that gave the best chance for sucess. I didn't shoot at a deer otherwise. But regardless the size of caliber all shots should be taken that way. If your not comfortable with the size of caliber, then find one you are comfortable and use it. I've seen a deer dropped in it's tracks with a 22lr. Not the most idealic round for sure but for that application it worked. But then in my opinion a the 300 win. mag. I use for elk is to big for deer. To each his own. Good luck and happy hunting to all.

[Art Eatman]

If you're mostly just thinning out does, and doing the usual Georgia short-range shooting, the last factor is your own emotional thing. If you don't get all excited and have a big adrenalin rush, it's easy to bust the neck or wait for that perfect cross-body shot.

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.

I dunno. It's the usual deal, I guess, about skill and control. A really skilled shooter for whom thinning is just another day at the office isn't the same deal as an excited Joe Average.

Art

[Harley Quinn]

Yes it has been done. But the 100 grain out of 243 or 6mm is where most are starting I'd think. That was the problem with the 244, it could not stabilize that 100 grain bullet.

Must be a reason, many locations want you to use a bullet larger than 22 ;)

[Sunray]

"...a heavy 223 and a light 243..." It's not so much the weight as it is the construction of the bullet. Most .223 bullets used in factory ammo are made for varmints. Varmint bullets designed for rapid expansion upon impact without much penetration. These are NOT suitable for deer.
.243 bullets under 85 grains are usually varmint bullets too. They're not suitable for deer either.
Use the right bullet.
Up here, any centre fire is legal for deer. I still wouldn't use a .223 though. A small Ontario deer is the size of a large Texas deer. 300 pounds live weight isn't unusual. The deer get fed well on the miles and miles of soy bean and corn fields with no natural predators.

[GunTech]

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.

RE 223 hunting bullets, I opt for well designed modern ones, which have very much changes the game. I've seen more than a few 62gn BNarnes TSX go in one side of a deer and out the other. A 223 has very little recoil, and is easy to shoot accurately, even for someone of small stature, like a child. Better an accuracte shot than a flinch and a miss or bad shot.

The shooter is what makes the difference. Bell dispatched over 1100 elephants, most with nothing more than a 7x57.

[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:D

[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.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a178/HamourKiller/LongyAR-15.jpg

Here is a nice doe I killed with my son using a Colt CAR-15, one shot through both shoulders @ 75 yds or so
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a178/HamourKiller/RKdoe.jpg

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:uhoh: 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!:rolleyes:

[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.

[Harley Quinn]

Hamourkiller,

The one picture shows a pretty good wound on the upper right shoulder/back area. Was that an exit wound made by a .223:what:

Gunsight, again your information is appreciated.

I am in H&H's corner here, the best thing is to get a better round for shooting bambi;) .270 a real good one for it, .308/06 is a great one also.

But, if all you have is a .223 and you are truly interested in testing your skills, I'd stay inside all the parameters set down :p

[DDawg]

Thank you for all the comments.
My friend(an experienced hunter and reloader) has custom loaded some deer rounds and the field I'll be hunting in is no more than 100 yards across. I primarily plan to hunt with my bow and my Marlin 35. I think the Ruger #1 .223 will be fine for small does.

[txgolfer45]

Hamorkiller said:

"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."

Agree. People have to realize that most deer in TX are not big like in the Midwest or Colorado. Does may only weigh around 110 lbs and bucks not much more. If I'm meat hunting for does, a .223 will do just fine in TX.

[hamourkiller]

No that wound was a quick second shot that I got high on and the bullet clipped the top of the shoulder. At that time I was used to a Rem 742 bdl 30-06 and if you could see the deer after recoil you beter shoot again. The AR-15 kicks such a small amount you can put several rounds into the deers shoulder area. I soon learned to make my shot and let the deer have time to expire. The 70gr speer round nose bullet has great penetration.

Where the CAR-15 shines is in the thickets, with the stock 2/3rds collapsed and its 16" bbl it is very quick, its overall dull finish helps hide if you are stump sitting. When you come to trail and can see, it can also reach out further than my ruger 44 carbine. (Another fantastic brush rifle).

The main problem with the AR platform is at extreme close range, 10 to 15 yds or closer. The sights being so much higher than the bore means you will shoot low, I had to learn to aim as if I was going to break a deers back then the round would hit center mass of the kill zone. This problem is made even worse with a scope as the sight gets higher off the bore. The solution was to use the Colt 3 power scope with its bullet drop compensator and zero dead on at 100yds then turn the comp to 300 setting. This gave raised the impact and if a deer stepped out at distance just turn it back to 100.

I hope all enjoy the new season.

Hank

[Buzz]

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.

Will all due respect, this strikes me as one of those cases where paper ballistics are given far more credence than they deserve. By the same token a Remington factory loaded .45-70 using a 405g bullet at 1330 fps has less energy than a .22-250 using a 55g Pointed Soft Point at 3680 fps. Now - which one would you rather have in your hands for big game? A load that will blast broadside through a bison or one that is made to kill varmints? I've killed big game with both and can tell you there is no comparison in the wound channels between them.

As I said before - there is no doubt that a .22 caliber centerfire will kill a deer. I just hate the smallish or non existent blood trails they create. The following pictures are the type of terrain I tend to hunt. The first swamp picture is when the water was up several feet, but you can get an idea of the vegetation. Even standing in the middle of this flooded road you can't see 20 feet in the woods. The second one is swamp privets. This stuff is so thick you have to crawl in to get your deer out. We cut shooting lanes for them to step out in and even if an animal runs 40-60 yards, you can have a serious mess on your hands without good blood.

The swamp
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f203/7x57/Guns%20and%20Hunting/Woods/IMG_4311.jpg

Swamp privets - these are about 12' to 15' tall
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f203/7x57/Guns%20and%20Hunting/Woods/HaralsonSwampPrivots.jpg

I realize my hunting parameters are certainly different that what some may want but I want something that can bust through both shoulders and have one dead within a few steps every time. For me that just isn't a .22 caliber centerfire. I notice a lot of you guys that like the .22 centerfires are from Texas. Even though we are your southern brethren, I do think the deer in the Piedmont region of Georgia tend to be a good bit bigger.

This is a pretty typical mature doe for the part of the state I hunt. I'm not a midget either - 5'10" and about 210#. :D
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f203/7x57/Guns%20and%20Hunting/Animals/BigDoe.jpg

[eliphalet]

This subject seems to get beaten to death every few months. I wonder if anyone on either side of this ever changes their mind as everyone sure seems set in their opinions.

[H&Hhunter]

Every time some dude gets a new .223 rifle we have one of these threads.

Like I said if you have to ask.......

[Jimmy Newman]

Just to add one more worthless opinion:

I live in Texas with our "tiny little deer." I haven't shot a single deer with a rifle smaller than a 7mm-08 or handgun smaller than .41mag. I don't plan on changing that any time soon :).

[GunTech]

Well, I'll admit I've never used a 223 on deer myself, just know plenty that do.

Terrain where I hunt is mostly open, with the occasional arroyo or strips of trees. Shots range from a few feet to several hundred yards. Most of my deer have been shot in the 200-400 yards range. The 223 is not appropriate for this.

[H&Hhunter]

Shots range from a few feet to several hundred yards. Most of my deer have been shot in the 200-400 yards range. The 223 is not appropriate for this.

GunTech,

That is precisely and exactly what I have been saying this whole time. The use of the .223 is a very limited proposition on deer sized game.

As I stated in my first post I HAVE killed deer and even cow elk with a .223. Everything must be perfect for it to work. The .223 is not a suitable deer round. It can however be pressed into service in certain conditions.

Let me define suitable in this case I think that is the fly in the ointment for some.

Suitable means to me a round which will perform at reasonable distance in the case if deer hunting out to 300 yards and closer and will reliably kill the chosen species even if the shot is from less than perfect angles. It should also have the capability top break major bone and have enough energy and mass left to continue to penetrate to the vitals at the furthest distance used. Of course the bullet chosen must be up to the task as well.


Just like the .275 Rigby is not a suitable elephant round because it will only get the job done reliably in two circumstances. A side brain shot at close range or a rear brain shot at close range. If you get in a tight situation in close cover and are charged you are as good as dead with a 7X57 in your hands.

I never said either won't kill the specified species. They are simply very minimal for the job and inadequate unless everything is perfect.

There are no flies on the .223 it is a fantastic round for it's intended purpose. Shooting deer with it is pushing the outside of it's design envelope.