[berettashotgun]

Legal to hunt deer in Oklahoma with a 22 caliber 55gr bullet (min) from the regs.
Legal firearm for deer -" Rifles: Centerfire rifles firing at least a 55-grain weight soft-nosed or hollow-point bullet and having an overall cartridge case length of 1 1/4 inches or longer"
"Centerfire handguns: Chambered for .24 caliber or larger and 100 grain or heavier soft-nosed bullet having an overall cartridge case length of 1 1/4 inches or longer are legal (.357 or larger) and a minimum barrel length of four (4) inches.
Semi-automatic handguns: Chambered for any centerfire ammunition with a 100-grain or heavier soft-nosed bullet and having a cartridge case size of .40 caliber or larger (includes 10 mm, .357 Sig., and 40 cal. or larger and a minimum barrel length of four (4) inches.
Handguns chambered for any centerfire rifle ammunition: Chambered for any centerfire rifle ammunition using at least a 55-grain soft-nosed bullet and having an overall cartridge case length of 1 1/4 inches or longer and a minimum barrel length of four (4) inches:neener:."
Elk regulations- "Gun: Equipment described as legal for deer gun season."
:banghead:We officially have retards doing this. common sense or proofreading ----PLEEEAASE--:banghead:
I think I'll take my 357sig ELK hunting. I'm sure it'll GIT-HER-DONE
We USED to have a minimum 270 for this.
I thought this lady I work with was crazy to take a 30-40 krag ( sweet all original rifle) on a elk hunt, but she said that people were taking 357 mag pistols out there. This is Oklahoma, we ain't got many trees where the elks are, and those trees have seen about a 20year drought in that country. Close isn't likely.
What would you consider the min cal for elk (bulls)
I personally think a min energy or projectile SD and weight should be required.

[MCgunner]

The .223 is always brought up because the tacticool crowd want's to kill everything up to brown bear with their AR15s, never mind the .223 is a prairie dog round at best. It's just the way it is. Fortunately, the .308 is available in tacticool guns, even the AR platform, so some of them can has some sense pounded into them. LOL

[Ridgerunner665]

Prairie dog round my ...

223 is a fine deer round with good bullets. I'll agree it may be a bit small for elk.

[MCgunner]

A bit small? Ya think? :rolleyes:

I know .22s can kill Texas deer under a feeder at 40 yards, but reaching out across a New Mexico canyon for a mulie is a little different. It's just not the best choice for an overall deer caliber when you have maybe a hundred better rounds available, lots, anyway. If recoil is your problem, the .243 is light on the shoulder, or the .25-06 even. The .270 is pretty easy on the shoulder and is a good elk caliber to 300 yards. 6.5x55 or 260 Remington are good all around deer/elk choices that don't kick too bad. No reason to go after a deer or elk with a smaller caliber IMHO unless you just can't tear yourself away from the idea of using an AR15.

[mgregg85]

minimum for elk? The smallest I would take is my .30x06.

[Ridgerunner665]

I've killed 180 lb. Tennessee deer with a 223 at 105 yards...1 shot kill. The key is good bullets. 100 yards or so is about the ethical max for a 223. If you are hunting where the shots are longer, then yes, there are better rounds...but within reason and its capabilities...the 223 is more suited to take deer than a 30-30.

Minimum elk round....270 Win.

[redneckrepairs]

Living right across the line from " where the elk are " in OK ( i live in Baca co CO which borders cimmaron i think it is in the panhandle of OK ) i would use the same for elk there as here in CO , my .308 and my 06 both have worked fine for me .

[jimmyraythomason]

A .223 is overkill for prarie dogs. While I think it is too light for most deer hunting situations,it is about perfect for coyote and similar sized game/varmits and predators. I can't rationalize why anyone would want to hunt elk with it though.

[ArmedBear]

223 is a fine deer round with good bullets.

Depends on the range. 105 yards is a short shot in some places, and a long shot in others.

the 223 is more suited to take deer than a 30-30.

That, it's not.

[eliphalet]

World is full of guys hunting with what they shouldn't.

I have seen em walking around with SKS's that still had a bayonet during elk only seasons. My guess is he was using Chinese steel cored FMJ ammo as it was everywhere and cheap then, but I figured it was no use even asking, and just hoped he didn't see any.

The difference between "can be done and should be done" escapes some folks.

Seen elk killed with a CCI Stinger from a 1 5/8" barrel NAA, shot between the eyes after a '06 had cut it's neck bone into, but that doesn't mean it is a good idea to hunut elk with a NAA revolver and Stingers.

[MCgunner]

.the 223 is more suited to take deer than a 30-30.

Li'l off topic, but I'll take the .30-30. Even in my 12" contender, it's fantastic on deer/hogs out to 200 yards where it drops below 1000 ft lbs shooting a 150 grain Nosler BT or 140 Barnes X.

[plexreticle]

the 223 is more suited to take deer than a 30-30.

:eek:

[learningman]

I think the poor old 223 gets more grief than any other round out there. I've used that round (out of a rifle configuration not an AR platform) to take every thing from Montana mulies on down. Good bullets and placement are key. I would never use one on an elk though. I've seen first hand how far they can travel after being hit by substantially bigger rounds. The 223 has it's place but it's not on an elk hunt. Minimum round for my taste would be a 270 win.

[rklessdriver]

With proper shot placement you could kill and Cape Buffalo with a .22LR, but I wouldn't consider the .22LR a Dangerous Game caliber.

I'm a fan of the .223. It has served me and thousands of other Marines well in combat. I have also killed quite a few deer in eastern NC with my Little Weatherby Vanguard VGX in .223. Using either handloaded 60gr Trophy Bonded bullets or the Winchester 64gr PP. Both did a good job and provided quick efficient one shot kills at moderate ranges (50-150yrds). I got some minor jacket fragmentation from some of the Winchesters but the majority of them were expanded and intact lodged in the hide on the oppisite side of the deer, provided I missed any large bones. About the same performance out of the Trophy Bonded 60gr's but I noticed when I compared bullets that had come in contact with heavy bones (ie Spine or Shoulder) the Trophy Bonded bullets were far superior in their weight retention and ability to resist seperating its lead core from its jacket.

I chalk that up to knowing the rifle, the bullets performance and your ability to place a shot where it will do it's job the best. Don't take shots you know are not going to provided you with the optimum ablility to kill that animal cleanly. It's just proper and responsible hunting.

That said; A bigger caliber gives you more lee-way in making the a less than perfect shot and still being able to cleanly kill the animal. Sometimes depending on how big the caliber is A LOT MORE lee-way.

As big of a fan as I am of the .223, I wouldn't dare try one on an ELK or any other animal roughly twice the size of a white tail deer.
Will

[MCgunner]

The .223 gets grief from ME because I just think it's stupid to choose such a minimal round on deer when there are so many better rounds available. Why would I buy one? I have a .257 Roberts, a .308 Winchester, and a 7mm Remington Magnum, all of which are better deer calibers, let alone elk, than a .223. .22-250 is popular for deer hunting in Texas and I feel the same way about THAT one, though I know it's taken a lot of deer. 95 percent of those deer were around feeders out of box blinds and stands at under 200 yards. That's kinda the way it's done in Texas, the eastern half anyway. I've also spot and stalked and still hunted. Moving deer deserve overkill in caliber. Shot placement might not be quite ideal. I've knocked deer down running at 50 yards with a liver shot before from a 7 mag. I wouldn't take that shot with a .223. I was a little behind where I intended to place the bullet, but it was still a bang/flop, probably because I was about 3" from the spine and the pressure wave immobilized him, for lack of a better explanation.

BTW, you got big deer in NC. A half ton bull elk would be about 10 times your average Texas buck. ROFL!!!!! Few are that big, but hey, few Texas bucks are over 100 lbs. When you shoot one that dresses 125, you got a real monster. LOL!

[Harley Quinn]

Those who argue these items are generally not really to well suited for hunting partners, but here is a tid bit, the 30 carbine is not designed to hunt Elk, some say it is ok, it is more powerful than all the pistol rounds you mentioned. The 223 for Elk? Come on they should have some more respect than that round. Thou I do know a guy who hunted them with his 220 swift and always bagged one (shot placement folks).

Many locations will not allow the use of .223 to hunt Elk. The Hand gun enthusist will usually go for the 44 mag or better. But the distance is a major factor.

270/308/30-06 are ones that are thought of as good ones. 30-30/35/rem. as long as the distance is not over 150 they say. Still on the light side, but they have taken lots of Elk if within the above range. One of the reasons for the 7mm Mag was a step up for Elk. Others will not go with anything smaller than the 300 win mag.

We can go bigger than these and feel good about it. But the ones mentioned have been standbys for years, the heavier bullets are usually preferred.

I would not hunt an Elk with anything like a 223:o Total survival mode and stuck out in the wilderness surviving and that is the only gun you have well that might be ok but if I was going to go to the wilderness I would have been carring something a lot more powerful than the 223 in the first place.;)

[leathermanwave]

My brothers were out hunting elk once. And there was about 15 kids and their parents with semi auto .223's. It so happened about 100 head of elk ran in between the row of kids and parents. The parents and kids opened up the the elk ending up shooting at each other. They ended up hitting one elk in the hind legs that the never found.:uhoh: also none of the parents had cow tags so they were shooting illegally.

I have shot two elk with a .270 and they each soaked up 3 round before going down. the one was hit perfectly thru the heart with the first round. The other was hit thru the lung on the 2 shot. They both ran about 150 yards after a vital shot.

I think the .270 to be the minimum for normal elk hunting. A .243 is big enough if you restrict yourselves to bow hunting shots.

[351 WINCHESTER]

No doubt a .223 with a well placed shot will work, but you really need more gun. You should take into consideration that you're out to make a clean, humane kill. Get a bigger rifle.

[moooose102]

i own both a .223 and a 30-30, unless the 30-30 is broke, the .223 will stay in the gun safe during deer season. actually, it'll stay there anyway. because i also have a 300 win mag. but you get my point. a .223 is just to small for an ethical shot UNLESS everthing is perfect! and perfect is very seldom when deer hunting. but, on the other hand, it is leagal in some states to hunt deer with a .25 automatic pistol also. go figure. you just gotta be smarter that the govt. !

[Harve Curry]

A .223 bullet is to light weight and frangible of a bullet for the heavy muscle mass and bone of elk. It's made for thin skinned creatures like us.

[R.W.Dale]

Get this I hear it's actually legal to hunt big game in some states with patched round ball from a flintlock. What kind of yahoos at the game and fish commission allow such blatantly irresponsible behavior.

EVERYBODY knows the bare minimum should be .338LM for any game weighing over 100lbs


You want retarded here's a retarded REG

IN Arkansas it's illegal during coyote season to use anything larger than 30 caliber. That's right you can blast yotes with a 30-378WBY but a .357 magnum carbine is forbidden.

Top that!

[Art Eatman]

I'd sorta hate to be out deer hunting with a .223 and figure "No problem" for the typical average 8-point at maybe 50 to 100 yards: And off at 250 to 300 yards, there's the B&C critter I've dreamed of for decades.

And that's why I don't hunt with a minimum cartridge...

:), Art

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

.223 and handguns (.357 sig?), heck NO.

.30-40 Krag, yes, definitely. That's about like .303 brit, which has taken many a moose and elk over the decades cleanly, in my understanding. More oomph than a .30-30 win.

I'd say at a bare minimum, .25 cal should be the min for elk, with a case length at least 55mm long, and bullet weight at least 115 grains (.257 roberts, .25-06, etc.). Personally, my own minimum would be 6.5x55 or .270 win. My actual *choice* would be .30-06 or .35 Whelen.... -ish. If I *were* to hunt elk with a .25-06, I'd limit myself to neck shots only. It's kind of a moot point, though, as those tags are darn near impossible to get, and the private lands cost an arm and leg to hunt on (where the elk are).

Hey, if you like that one, then stew on this one awhile: the regs also say no shot size LARGER than BB may be used on feral hogs on public lands, except during deer season. No, it doesn't say "no shot size SMALLER than BB" - you read it right, it says no shot size LARGER than BB allowed. So birdshot and rimfires are all you can use before/after deer season. No slugs. No buckshot. No centerfires. Sheer unethical lunacy.

Get this I hear it's actually legal to hunt big game in some states with patched round ball from a flintlock. What kind of yahoos at the game and fish commission allow such blatantly irresponsible behavior.

You're trying to be sarcastic/rhetorical, but your point falls completely flat, since patched ball from a flintlock, in the say, .50 cal range, is somewhere on the order of 10-20 times better of a choice than .223. Large heavy bullet for large heavy game - that works. .223 rem, notsomuch.

[22-rimfire]

223 for elk, heck no. Have some respect for the game animal. I believe the 270 win may be a bit light for elk at ranges over 100 yds.

[eastwood44mag]

Nothing on this continent that can't be killed with a .22 LR. However, just because it CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD be done. Death might be 2 weeks later of sepsis....

[eliphalet]

Get this I hear it's actually legal to hunt big game in some states with patched round ball from a flintlock.With minimum diameter requirements of .45 for deer and .50 for elk, at least that's the criteria here.

Hunting with barely adequate equipment is like fishing with cheap line. Sooner or later if you keep at it your going to hook a trophy. Good luck landing him with the cheap line. I know, I learned my lesson the hard way a long time ago. You won't find me in the woods under gunned, and I no longer own a magnum rifle, or at the river with dime store fishin line.

Edit: forgot I do have a 22 magnum.

[marksman13]

I've got no problem whatsoever with people who hunt deer with a 223, provided that they use a well-constructed bullet and practice good shot placement. That said, I don't believe that a 223 is at all suitable for elk unless the conditions are absolutely perfect.

[Ridgerunner665]

I'd sorta hate to be out deer hunting with a .223 and figure "No problem" for the typical average 8-point at maybe 50 to 100 yards: And off at 250 to 300 yards, there's the B&C critter I've dreamed of for decades.

And that's why I don't hunt with a minimum cartridge...

, Art

Absolutely right...but some of us hunt thick cover. I like to get up close and personal. I took 3 deer last year with a commander length 1911 (my Stinger has replaced my bow)

[alsaqr]

From the OK hunting regs.

"No person in the field may possess or attempt to harvest any wildlife, except waterfowl and crane, with a shotgun using shot larger than conventional BB (.180 in. dia.)."

[john917v]

A 1 1/4" minimum 22-cal. load, with a 55-gr bullet? That's not much bigger than a .22 hornet, a load that is in use by mostly varmint hunters. You can even find .22 LR bullets with 60-Gr. bullets-the Aguila Snipers, albeit it's a rimfire. A .223-that is used to kill people, who let's say average about 200 lbs. In Somalia, where people were often malnourished, and consequently much lighter and weaker, I imagine, the .223 was not at all a sure-kill bullet. Many soldiers preferred the M-14 because of the heavier-hitting .308 round. Remember, this was all against people. Then, you have an elk that I would say regularly weigh about 600 lbs., with some monsters in the 1200-lb range. We are talking 3-6 times heavier (and far more muscular) than your average human, with a round that does not always kill people with one shot (the .223). Don't think I don't like the .223-I love it, but it has its limitations, and areas where it excels.

[Art Eatman]

I don't think comparing military uses is valid. The military has no concern with clean, ethical kills. To incapacitate or stop hostility is sufficient; a wounded person who runs away is of little further concern.

Remember that hunting regs are generally aimed at Joe Average Shooter, or even Dicky Dumbutt.

One aspect of hunting with marginal cartridges is the overall skill level, not just how good somebody is from a benchrest. We must also consider the self-control against "buck fever" or other distractions, as well as awkward shooting positions or an animal's movement. IMO, if you can cope with all that, you're above the average and it's a different deal.

Just some things to think about in the difference between, "Can I...?" and, "Should I..."

Art

[koja48]

I can and have done a lot of things with a 223, but I'd never consider it for big game . . . that's why God made larger calibers . . . bring enuff gun & ensure the selection makes for a clean, humane finish.

[ArmedBear]

IMO, if you can cope with all that, you're above the average and it's a different deal.

True enough. And the few I know who are above the average don't use .223 for anything that doesn't live in a hole in the ground.

[john917v]

Art and Armed Bear, I have to agree with you on that one. Good points. On the topic of the .223, I wonder why there are relatively few bolt-action varmint rifles in .223, even though it is such a good (and common) small game cartridge.:confused:

[ArmedBear]

.22-250 is popular among the most pernicious elements of the Varmint Kong.

I've certainly handled some damn nice varmint bolties in .223. One in particular comes to mind due to its unconventional beauty. Built on a Howa varmint action, it has a hand-made top-grade figured walnut sporter stock, so it looks like a gorgeous custom sporter with a thicker barrel. Shoots like the prairie dog gun it is, though.

[H&Hhunter]

Is there any valid reason ego aside to hunt big game with a .22 CF?

If you can't afford at least one suitable centerfire rifle for hunting deer and elk then I would suggest you can't afford to be hunting at all.

[Harley Quinn]

I can remember when the first gun should do the job from one end to another as far are big game went...The old 30-06 or 308 comes to mind.

A friend of mine could only afford one gun and it ended up to be a 300 H&H from a friend who was broke. He felt that was the best he could do at the time "1965"...

This is an interesting read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.300_H&H_Magnum

It is a good one for Elk.

Gary

[Ridgerunner665]

If you can't afford at least one suitable centerfire rifle for hunting deer and elk then I would suggest you can't afford to be hunting at all.


$$$ has nothing to do with it....the number of rifles I own is a 3 digit number...as is the number of acres I own.

I choose the one that will do the job...

[H&Hhunter]

So you are telling me that you are willing to always wait for a perfect broad side shot. That you will always limit your range to 100 yards or less. That you will always have a perfect rest. Or you won't shoot?

Sounds like you must hunt under some pretty nice conditions. It doesn't always work that way for me.

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't need a rest to hit where I'm aiming at 100 yards, nor do I need broadside shots...you are assuming I use cheap bullets...I don't.

Barnes TSX bullets will give enough penetration from any usable angle..and enough accuracy to ensure neck shots if thats all that is available.

As I said before...I don't get any pleasure from hunting deer at long range....there is no sport in it...not for me.

To put it simply...If I have a 270 (or anything similar) any deer that shows himself within 400 yards is table meat...give me my target rifles (a 308 and a 300 win mag)...and any deer that shows himself within 1000 yards is table meat. Sure...I'm human...and sometimes miss...the last time was 9 years ago.

Thats all I have to say about it...if you can't understand that some people enjoy a getting close (bowhunters for example) then I'm not going to waste time arguing about it. That is TRUE hunting...have you ever had a doe step over your legs and never know you were in the world...or a nice buck, but not a shooter, come in and bed down within 10 yards of you.

You should try it sometime.

[Art Eatman]

Well, I bonked a fox on his nose with the toe of my boot. Does that count? :D And I hit a nice, fat little buck in the rump with a pebble from about ten feet. Is that okay? :D:D:D

Anyhow, the .223 is a neat cartridge for varmints. My Rugilator 77 Mk II does bad things to prairie dogs out to around 300 yards or so. It would reach farther, I imagine, but it hasn't been necessary.

IMO, folks worry too much. Go to pickin' fly poop outta pepper...

Anybody gonna watch the F1 race in the morning?

:D:D:D

Art

[X-Rap]

I think this 22 CF big game topic should be right up there with Mall Ninjas and donut eating Cops. Maybe there needs to be a specific name for these woodland big game Ninjas who risk all and hunt the worlds largest mammals with the smallest of calibers.
Who dares next to go to the .204 or have the right bullets not yet been made?:neener::D

[R.W.Dale]

In wonder how many of ya'll realize just how many advances have gone into .224 diameter bullets in the past 10 yrs. 55grn sp's are LIGHT bullets nowdays, Hell I can shoot 90grn bullets from my .223

The kind of damage and penetration a 62grn Barns TSX will do makes a 170grn SP 30-30 wound look as though the hunter was using a .177 pellet gun. With PROPER bullet selection a .223 can be used anywhere you would use a 30-30

FYI, This is the 21'st century for those of you stuck in the 19th:rolleyes:


So you are telling me that you are willing to always wait for a perfect broad side shot.

So you're saying you shoot something larger so you can get by with more of a gutshot:what:

I guess for those of us disciplined enough to not gutshoot game this is a non issue

[Ridgerunner665]

Finally...somebody who has actually done their homework. And the 62 grain Barnes TSX is the bullet I use in my 223 (an AR 15)...I would have told them that it will penetrate about 3/4 of the length of a deer (bones and all)...but they are too closed minded to listen.

EDIT: I got a lil carried away...edited for clarity

[MCgunner]

So what? There are still a BUNCH of better calibers for the chore and a rifle in those calibers costs no more. Why go with the pop gun when you can have, say, a .308? I've never owned a .22 centerfire, have no real use for one since we don't have prairie dogs or woodchucks and I don't actively hunt coyotes. And, I mean, I've killed coyote while deer hunting with both .257 Roberts and .308 Winchester. They did the job pretty danged good. You might think the .223 is the best elk and deer and hog rifle ever built, I don't know why, and I really don't care. Suit yourself, but I'll use a decent caliber for that chore since there is no end to the choices out there from .243 Winchester to .338 Win Mag and more. The only REAL reason I can see someone being nuts over using the .223 on big game is the AR15 fanatics. In that case, I say, get an AR10. Barnes makes EVEN BETTER bullets in .308 diameter for big game.

[Ridgerunner665]

Here is a pic of a Barnes 62 grain TSX...after being fired into a solid chunk of slate rock at 2,900 fps (chrono'd)...for those of you who don't know...slate rock isn't solid granite...its more like hard packed dried clay...think brick hardness...this bullet penetrated 12 inches. The only weight it lost was the petals were torn off...that don't happen in game animals.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/122_2204.jpg

[X-Rap]

Thats a facinating picture but that bullet still weighs less than half to a third of a good 7mm or .30 cal after recovery from an elk so I don't really get your point.

[Ridgerunner665]

Elk was the original topic...but it sorta got switched to deer.

And the point is ...they will penetrate.

[Ridgerunner665]

Barnes makes EVEN BETTER bullets in .308 diameter for big game.

Yep..they sure do.

I'm not trying to convince anybody to use a 223 for deer or hogs...but don't be led astray by people who have no experience on the matter telling you that the 223 is suited only to varmints...those days are gone. For deer and hogs it works like a charm...with good bullets.

How about this...lots of people use a 243 for black bear...at least here they do...would you take that 243 bear hunting loaded with 85 grain Ballistic Tips??? Hell no...you would have 100 grain bullets in it (Hornady Interlock, Speer Grand Slam, Nosler Partition and the like)...its the same principle.

Anybody who would use a 223 for elk needs their head examined and their nuts removed.

[X-Rap]

I guess here is my point, I used to have a truck with a good 300 straight 6 ford motor and it would pull a stock trailer over the mountains but it was hard work. I then got a truck with a 460 FI motor and it pulled much better but it wasn't till I got the turbo diesel that I really realized I needed a bigger trailer.:D I think that this is a fair analogy to the caliber argument even to the point that when you feel you have reached the pinicle of caliber choice you can find bigger game. Just a matter of the best tool for the job.

[MCgunner]

X-Rap...I'm glad I don't have to pay your fuel bills......:D

[X-Rap]

Fuel or powder I use the trucks just like the guns, the diesel stays parked except for the heavy stuff I got a little one for the runnin around.

[Ridgerunner665]

Well, I bonked a fox on his nose with the toe of my boot. Does that count? And I hit a nice, fat little buck in the rump with a pebble from about ten feet. Is that okay?

Yes Art, if you were being serious, that qualifies...let me guess, you were using fox pee for cover scent....I quit using fox pee myself after having one decide to mark me as it passed by.

The young bucks are easy to fool.

[eliphalet]

Your saying a Barnes 223 game bullet will penetrate 12 inches into common brick?
Excuse me if I find that a bit of a overstatement. Sorry but I would need to witness that in person.

I thought this was about proper bullets/calibers for elk of which nothing made in 223 is.

Threads like this irk me cause me to wonder how many elk these hunters have shot with the Almighty 223.
I own a 223 and have shot several elk but you can durn sure bet not with any 22 caliber and except on a forum have I ever heard of any one that did hunt elk even suggest using any 22 caliber on one.

I think what we have here is a lot of hot wind with not much to back it up but more hot wind.

[Ridgerunner665]

Bricks are about 40 cents each, the bullets are about 76 cents each + brass, powder and primer, for about $6 you can try it for yourself.

But you're right about the 223 and elk...not a good combo.

[Ridgerunner665]

It appears that you have not read the thread.223 for deer...OK with good bullets and shot placement

223 for elk...NO

[eliphalet]

I could do better I have some AP 30-06 and have access to bricks free. Past experiments tell me there is no need to try. Common or even AP is not going to penetrate a foot of solid masonry. Now if I wanted to lay 12" of loose brick and shoot it, I would imagine it could/would break a foot of em but never penetrate 12" of solid material.

Mute point, I concede, we must each believe what we believe. I am gonna leave it at that.

[Ridgerunner665]

Are ya scared to try? With the Barnes bullet.

Heres you some food for thought...Penetration tests of various 223 rounds...they were fired through a steel plate into the gel... the Barnes bullet will penetrate tissue better than any bullet on this chart.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/223steel.jpg

[H&Hhunter]

Thats all I have to say about it...if you can't understand that some people enjoy a getting close (bowhunters for example) then I'm not going to waste time arguing about it. That is TRUE hunting...

Thanks Ridgerunner.

I think I've got it now.;) Does any of this qualify

18 yards
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/AR012803.jpg

32 yards
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/AR011603.jpg

21 yards
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/AR010703.jpg

About 15 feet when it all ended
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/Dagaboys2.jpg

About 10 yards
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/Nicehog1.jpg

Under 45 yards
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/GTAllyn/Nzou1.jpg

I could go on but the point is I am NOT a long range hunter. I kill most of my stuff under 100 yards. But on occasion I have the need to reach out and touch something. That is where a sensible caliber comes in handy. Or when the shot presentation isn't just right.

No matter which way you cut it. You are taking a risk of hunting with a .22 CF. A Barnes is a good round but it's still .223 in diameter and it still isn't going to give optimal penetration or energy under any circumstances.

But nobody here is telling you not to hunt with it. Only that many of us choose not to for obvious reasons.

[Ridgerunner665]

There is nothing in those pics that I would use a 223 on...I'm going to get me a Cape Buffalo one day...I have a 458 Win Mag that I bought just for the occasion.

Only that many of us choose not to

I understand that completely...

A Barnes is a good round but it's still .223 in diameter and it still isn't going to give optimal penetration or energy under any circumstances.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that...I have seen several instances of complete penetration with 62 grain TSX's on deer...and from different shot angles.


Some nice trophies you have there BTW...

[H&Hhunter]

Ridge,

I agree if you are going to use a .223 on deer that the TSX is THE best hunting bullet available.

[Harley Quinn]

H&H,
Nice pictures, thanks for sharing, you are certainly a man of your word.
Nice to see and know, that what you say is what you are.

"Bravery lives in the heart of kind men."

Regards,
Gary

[MCgunner]

Well, if you can afford to hunt elephant in Africa, you can afford a rifle for every occasion. However, my rifle collection consists of 3 primary hunting rifles and they must do all types of hunting I might get into, from cross canyon shots on mule deer to 40 yard shots under the feeder. My contention is, the .223 will work on that 40 yard shot under the feeder, but why hamstring yourself with feeder hunting? If you hunt varying terrain, you want your rifle to be more versatile, and a .308 can nail that deer under the feeder AND that 300 lb mulie across that canyon equally well.

Now, if and when I get to go elk hunting, I'll be in a quandary over whether to use my light, handy little .308 or my heavier, but more powerful 7mm Rem Mag. In either case, I'll be using controlled expansion bullets and they WON'T be .223" in diameter struggling to make 1200 ft lbs at the muzzle. :rolleyes: I don't even consider my .257 Roberts enough for Wapiti. I'm sure I could load it with a 117 Hornady Interlock and kill one, but overkill is not shameful IMHO. I'm not sure the 7 is really overkill, though. :D Them's some HUGE animals.

[grimjaw]

I'm not a bad shot, although I haven't had the opportunity to hunt under adverse conditions as often as most people who hunt regularly. Even if I had that practice, I'd want something that would produce a humane kill with a less than ideal shot. Plus, I'm getting older and my joints creak loud enough to scare critters while trying to sneak up on them closer than 50 yards.

jm

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't hunt feeders...there is no sport in that either.

Thats like animal assassination...set them up and kill them...thats not hunting.

[MCgunner]

I don't hunt feeders...there is no sport in that either.

Thats like animal assassination...set them up and kill them...thats not hunting.

Yes, I've heard that a lot on this board, to which I say, you ain't invited anyway, so get over it. Feeders are a lifestyle in Texas, especially the eastern half. I've got a LOT of deer and, hey, I didn't take a deer last year. If there ain't no sport in it, I'd shoot my five limit every year, perhaps on opening morning, you'd think. :rolleyes:

[Ridgerunner665]

you ain't invited anyway

Don't take it out on me...its not my fault you'd starve if you had to hunt "fair chase".

Feeders are illegal here.

[alsaqr]

Only three OK counties have elk. Most elk in OK are killed in the Wichita Mountain Wildlife Refuge and on Ft. Sill.

Know a lot of folks who elk hunt in OK. None of the rifle hunters I know use anything smaller than a .270 Winchester. Much of Ft. Sill is restricted to muzzleloaders and shotguns with slugs. Shotguns must be 12 gauge.

In the Wildlife Refuge and on Ft. Sill a hunter is restricted to five rounds of ammunition.

[MCgunner]

Don't take it out on me...its not my fault you'd starve if you had to hunt "fair chase".

Feeders are illegal here.

<sigh>I've done my share of spot and stalk and still hunting, too. Anyway, I have a hog trap. I'll never starve.

I've also been told no ethical hunter would use a stand. Takes all kinds, I guess. :rolleyes: To some, it ain't huntin' unless you jump out of a tree with a knife in your teeth Rambo style. Whatever floats your boat. Personally, I think it could be construed by some as being quite unethical to use marginal calibers on game. But, whatever.....

[H&Hhunter]

On the internet ethics tend to be whatever supports our argument at the time. At least that is how it often seems.

There is nothing unethical about hunting deer from a stand in thick brush country. Just as there is nothing unethical about shooting deer with a .223 IF the guy behind the rifle is truly able to control himself and make those shots count.

I've been called unethical on this site for;

Hunting with hounds

Hunting elephant

Hunting with iron sights

Bow hunting

Rifle hunting

Using a scope

Hunting form a stand

Sport hunting

Muzzle loader hunting with an inline

Bow hunting with a compound bow

Wounding an animal

Having to shoot one more than once

Not having shot one enough times

ETC. ETC. ETC.

After a while I've come to figure out that the biggest proclaimers of true sportsmanship and absolute experts on anything tend to be the biggest B.S.ers with the least amount of field/hunting experience.

Because those guys who've been there and done it know that things rarely go by script and in the field stuff happens. Equipment fails, even the most experienced guys miss, animals get wounded occasionally, sometimes they are not recovered, so on and so forth. When A guy tells me he's never had one get away or that he's only ever made a one shot kill I know at that moment that I am talking to some one who either has not hunted much or they are full of scat.

Basically you simply can't take 90% of what you read on the net serious, there are simply to many mall ninjas, gunstore commandos and Bwanabes that post on the net.

Thats just my $.02

[TimboKhan]

H&H, excellent post.

[eliphalet]

Purty good 2 cents worth if you ask me. Lots of value there.

[alsaqr]

"After a while I've come to figure out that the biggest proclaimers of true sportsmanship and absolute experts on anything tend to be the biggest B.S.ers with the least amount of field/hunting experience."


You summed it up very well.

[MCgunner]

Bwanabes

I like that one. LOL Great post. Yeah, ethics can get to the point that HUNTING is unethical. It's getting there, trust me. Animal cruelty laws are beginning to reflect this. Getting to where you shoot a feral animal on your place, unless you have dead chickens for proof, you'd best shovel and shut up about it. It's only a small step from feral cats and dogs to game animals.

There was a push 20 years ago against bow hunting, PETA types claiming it was cruel. Don't know what ever happened to THAT one. They've been at the boat ramps opening of duck season before, too, protesting. You might think you're high all mighty ethical, just don't get too carried away with your self importance. Seems like everyone has a different slant on it. So long as you're not breaking game laws, I fail to see the lack of ethics in feeder hunting, personally. Maybe it's because I've actually DONE it and don't sit on some high horse somewhere in a state where it's not allowed, don't know. But, here, it's quite the norm and big companies like Remington Arms put their brands on feeders/timers, even bags of corn sold at outdoor stores. It's a big industry down here. If you outlawed feeders, you'd cost the economy millions and put thousands out of work. Price of corn might go down a bit, I guess, but then I wouldn't care about the price of corn anymore if I didn't need to buy it.

[berettashotgun]

Run,Forrest,run..........
Man this took off in a different direction:rolleyes:
I guess I should explain; Most of my thoughts were on the fact the regulations don't provide mature guidance to the masses.
You can hunt elk with a 45 in OK.:banghead:
Think about that for a minute. Yeah - +P blah,blah,blah....:fire:
Now consider using a 40!. Geesh...
I personally would choose a 223 for Elk over a 40 pistol.
That said, a sabot 50cal muzzle loader (not necessarily black powder) will shoot clean through a deer at 125 yards with a 300gr Barnes AND drop the animal.
Getting a permit for Elk in OK is tuff...once in a lifetime for draw in hunts and good luck in getting a leased/owned population to hunt.:cuss:
HAVE to make it count.
H&H - you look disoriented in that cape photo, two rounds? Up close? Is that a beretta double?

[Art Eatman]

The fox-bonk, I was half-asleep against a tree, watching a deer trail. a motion caught my eye, some fifteen feet off. I lip-sqeaked, and here came Foxy-Loxey. Closer and closer until Bonk! Instant bottle brush! Instant practicing of being elsewhere. Scent neutralizer? Yeah, if you count cigarette odor, campfire smoke and BO. He came from upwind...

And in some areas, if you don't hunt from some sort of elevated stand, you won't see a deer. Aw, maybe if you can crawl on your belly and ignore cactus spines and mesquite thorns. Ten feet to ten yards of visibility, if you're lucky. And it's not in jungly high-rainfall country, either. I have a 100-acre patch of that in my southeast pasture--here in the desert. You can get into it real easy, if you use lopping shears.

[H&Hhunter]

H&H - you look disoriented in that cape photo, two rounds? Up close? Is that a beretta double?

berettashotgun,

I guess I do look a little disoriented. The rifle is a Searcy .470NE. Two shots at about a 2 second interval the first at about 15 yards the second at about 15', but that is not what rang my bell. I was coming down off an awesome adrenalin high. That bull wasn't very happy with me at the time of his demise.;)

[Art Eatman]

Ah, H&H, so he had the old, "late again with the rent check" look about him?

[H&Hhunter]

Art,

He was done with looks and insults and late night phone calls. He was coming to collect.:D

[learningman]

Wow!! The old 223 can really bring the old blood pressure to a boil. Hunting ethics are a subjective term IMHO. Every on of us on this web site could have a different idea of what is the best to use in any hunting situation. The hope is that we all have some sort of common cense and use proper shot placement, caliber, etc.,etc.. Have I used a 223 on deer sized game, yes I have and have been very successful with that caliber with no BS included. That being said I would never use said caliber on an elk hunt. I have bigger boomers that I feel are much more suited for that job. I have passed on alot of big muley's because I didn't feel that I could make a clean shot on an animal with the 223. Could I have made that shot with a bigger gun, probably yes. But I din't bring a bigger gun I brought a 223 and I knew it's limitations and didn't take a shot that I wasn't completly confident that I could make successfully. To me thats the bottom line know matter what caliber you use. I have killed my fair share of game just as dead with a 223 than all of my other guns. But I take pride in my hunting and do my absolute best to make sure that my shot's are good and as clean and quick as possible. I believe that's the hope that we all share. As long as we 223 hunters use our heads and make good clean shot's then I say good hunting to all. Chose your caliber, be happy with it, and lets others do the same.

[XDKingslayer]

After a while I've come to figure out that the biggest proclaimers of true sportsmanship and absolute experts on anything tend to be the biggest B.S.ers with the least amount of field/hunting experience.

Don't let them bother you. They're always there to chastise someone elses hunting style. I've always been a firm believer that unless you're jumping out of trees naked onto your prey you really don't really have a right to comment on my hunting style so STFU.

Me, I do whatever puts tasty meat in my belly because that's what tasty animals are for.

[john917v]

There seems to be some hostility. I would like to try to clarify things. I like X's truck analogy. I like to (rather, always do) choose the most appropriate tool for the task at hand, be it hunting, metal working, jewelry-making, whatever it is. I understand that the .223 is a great round, and an even better round with higher-quality bullets like those offered by Barnes, etc. Shot placement is crucial as well. I would prefer to shoot a smaller bullet with better placement, but why not shoot an appropriately-sized bullet with the same good placement? It equates to a more humane kill. You wouldn't hunt a squirrel you intend on eating with a 45-70 Govt, would you? I would hate to loose an animal to an inadequate cartridge (inadequate for that purpose, not inferior), and to make it suffer unnecessarily. I would have no qualms using the .223 on deer at close ranges - 75+- Yds, but I would not touch Elk with it.

[Inspector3711]

I use a Daisy for elk... Come on, get real. .223 might work on smaller deer if you are really good where it's a legal round. But on elk?? Why risk it? 30 cal or above for most people is the way to go. A .25-06 - .280 will work but you need to know what you are doing. IMO most folks are better off with a bigger more hard hitting round. I own a .25-06 that has taken 3 elk (not by me) but I wouldn't use it for anything larger than deer without a whole lot of practice.