223 has served me well.

Status
Not open for further replies.
ANATION

ANATION

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
161
Location
Pennsylvania
Just realized that in over three decades of hunting that I have killed more game with the 223 (bolt action) than any other rifle caliber. The tally includes: two whitetails (probably won't use it again for deer but I have with Partition handloads), five turkeys (Pa allows centerfire in the fall), several crows, and dozens of woodchucks. Never really considered the round versatile but my own experience contradicts me.

Side note: The 243 comes in a close second but I've only harvested deer and chucks with it.
 
I have killed numerous deer, hogs, and turkeys with 223 from both AR15 and a Mossberg MVP. Very effective for all with Hornady's 75 grain BTHP match. I have also killed lots of deer with my 243. I got a Ruger 6.5 CM that I killed my last buck of the season with in 2019. All excellent rounds. I just don't believe in sucking up a bunch of recoil if I don't have to.
 
I like the round a lot too. I shoot it a lot at the range from both bolt rifles and AR's. I can buy very accurate factory loads cheaper than I can handload for anything larger. Virtually no recoil and low cost makes it possible to shoot a bunch. I've killed deer and coyote with 223. But there aren't a lot of opportunities for varmint hunting here and rifles aren't legal for turkey. So my hunting experience is somewhat limited.

To me 243 is sort of stuck in no mans land. Any of the 22 center fires are better for game smaller than deer and with good bullet choices are certainly adequate for deer. The 243 is bigger, more expensive, and with more recoil necessary for smaller stuff. It may well be the ideal deer round, but is very much borderline for anything bigger than deer.

The 26's with lighter bullets are still a viable varmint caliber, are great on deer, and with heavier bullets are suitable for anything else in the lower 48. With recoil only slightly more than 243, and at less cost.
 
jmr40 said:
I like the round a lot too. I shoot it a lot at the range from both bolt rifles and AR's. I can buy very accurate factory loads cheaper than I can handload for anything larger. Virtually no recoil and low cost makes it possible to shoot a bunch. I've killed deer and coyote with 223. But there aren't a lot of opportunities for varmint hunting here and rifles aren't legal for turkey. So my hunting experience is somewhat limited.

To me 243 is sort of stuck in no mans land. Any of the 22 center fires are better for game smaller than deer and with good bullet choices are certainly adequate for deer. The 243 is bigger, more expensive, and with more recoil necessary for smaller stuff. It may well be the ideal deer round, but is very much borderline for anything bigger than deer.

The 26's with lighter bullets are still a viable varmint caliber, are great on deer, and with heavier bullets are suitable for anything else in the lower 48. With recoil only slightly more than 243, and at less cost.
Click to expand...

Good point on the 243, especially if you own 22 centerfires and larger calibers. I took a chuck this year with a 6.5 Creed. For me, and other's millage may very, the 26 diameter is the limit for varmints, not including coyote. Anything more is a whole lot of recoil for minimum gain. But, of course in our line of interest, if it tickles your fancy have at it.
 
I don't know why everyone thinks 223 isn't a good deer round. Do your part and they are on the ground. Are there better rounds sure. 223 is plenty with proper ammo and shot placement. Heard stories from the "oldsters" about hunting deer with 22 mag. That's all they had. And it worked. I think the problem is folks take bad shots then blame the caliber. A bad shot is a bad shot. Just my two cents. For what it's worth.
 
I second the use of 75gr Horndady BTHP's I've taken a couple of deer with this round. Normally I use 30-06 for hunting but surgery on the shoulder prompted me to use my AR a couple of times on deer until I healed.
 
It's the rifle caliber I shoot the most, two bolt guns and 2 ARs (and building a 3rd).

The only things I've killed with it are muskrats, beavers, coyotes, one fox, and a a lot of cardboard silhouettes in matches. It's easy to load for and easy enough on the shoulder for long practice sessions. Brass is free and even match bullets are reasonable. There's really nothing not to like.
 
ANATION said:
Just realized that in over three decades of hunting that I have killed more game with the 223 (bolt action) than any other rifle caliber. The tally includes: two whitetails (probably won't use it again for deer but I have with Partition handloads), five turkeys (Pa allows centerfire in the fall), several crows, and dozens of woodchucks. Never really considered the round versatile but my own experience contradicts me.
Click to expand...

I think the only thing I've taken with a 223 is a raccoon. I have, however, taken a deer with a 204 Ruger at a bit over 250 yards and one with a 222 at about 80 yards. I've taken four deer with a 22-250 including one at about 360 yards. I consider the 223 Remington and 22-250 fairly close to each other balistically.

One professional hunter I hunted with in South Africa did a lot of culling. We're talking hundreds of zebra, wildebeest, etc. His culling rifle was a 22-250. If I remember correctly, he said it was on its third barrel.
 
.223 is a great round if used properly. When shooting deer shot placement is the key to success. Years ago I use to use an old Remington 700 in 222. I shot gome good deer with that rifle. A little over thirty-five years ago i bought a Ruger 77 in 22 Hornet for deer hunting in Pennsylvania. Any centerfire rifle was legal that's why I bought it. I shot a four point buck with it. The only animal ever taken with that rifle. Shot it just behind the left front leg.

A friend; a member on here shot a doe at my daughters farm in New York last year with his 223 rifle, one shot/one kill.
 
Meeks36 said:
I don't know why everyone thinks 223 isn't a good deer round. Do your part and they are on the ground. Are there better rounds sure. 223 is plenty with proper ammo and shot placement. Heard stories from the "oldsters" about hunting deer with 22 mag. That's all they had. And it worked. I think the problem is folks take bad shots then blame the caliber. A bad shot is a bad shot. Just my two cents. For what it's worth.
Click to expand...
if people can kill deer just fine with a bow, .223 should be more than adequate.
 
I’ve used a 223/5.56 to kill several deer, more pigs and coyotes than I can count, bobcats and several skunks. I’ve always been happy enough with the performance on everything other than large pigs and even then, if I had put the bullet in the neck or ear hole I would have been okay. It’s not my first choice for a deer rifle, but it has proven more than adequate for me. 69 grain Federal GMM was my go-to load for a long time. Killed several deer with that round. Bang-flops on every deer I ever shot with it. All high shoulder shots on small Mississippi deer.
 
daniel craig said:
if people can kill deer just fine with a bow, .223 should be more than adequate.
Click to expand...

While your statement is correct, know that they kill by somewhat different methods; bows kill only by cutterage , exsanguination, and if you hit where you should, dual tension pneumothorax. Instantaneous shock and tissue rending by temporary cavity, sometime extreme depending on bullet design, add to the other methods with a bullet. Either way, an ethical, accurate shot is key to a quick recovery and better meat quality.
 
marksman13 said:
I’ve used a 223/5.56 to kill several deer, Killed several deer with that round........Bang-flops on every deer I ever shot with it. All high shoulder shots on small Mississippi deer]/b].
Click to expand...

Probably acceptable for the smaller southern deer. A bit light for the larger midwest deer that can be 300-to-400 lbs. Not saying it can't be done, but shot placement is more important.
 
Rembrandt said:
Probably acceptable for the smaller southern deer. A bit light for the larger midwest deer that can be 300-to-400 lbs. Not saying it can't be done, but shot placement is more important.
Click to expand...
It has done well on 250+ lb pigs. Deer aren’t any harder to kill. That said, it would not be my first choice if I was headed to hunt Saskatchewan.
 
.243 win....

70gr BT for chucks.....yeah me likey a lot :)

Shot one deer w factory 100gr. Double lung and didnt fall over as fast as hoped.

Back to 35 rem for timber ghosts
 
Rembrandt said:
Probably acceptable for the smaller southern deer. A bit light for the larger midwest deer that can be 300-to-400 lbs. Not saying it can't be done, but shot placement is more important.
Click to expand...
It can and has been done, with proper shot placement. That should be one's criterion before stepping into the wood with any caliber, even .35 Rem.
 
The 5.56mm/.223 is my favorite caliber. This year i will fire over 4,000 rounds of that caliber, the vast majority at targets. i don't deer hunt with the .223 because the majority of my deer hunting is with a muzzleloader. Have killed dozens of wild hogs using the .223, mostly at close range. Good bullets for hogs include the .53 grain TSX, the 62 grain TSX and the 55 grain Sierra Game King. My longest coyote shot with the .223 was just over 350 yards.
 
Meeks36 said:
I don't know why everyone thinks 223 isn't a good deer round. Do your part and they are on the ground. Are there better rounds sure. 223 is plenty with proper ammo and shot placement. Heard stories from the "oldsters" about hunting deer with 22 mag. That's all they had. And it worked. I think the problem is folks take bad shots then blame the caliber. A bad shot is a bad shot. Just my two cents. For what it's worth.
Click to expand...

I use to think the same thing till one day on a hunt with a 22-250. Almost always used head shots or behind the ear. A big Axis buck with a nice rack showed up that I was not expecting. Well not wanting to mess up the head for a mount I took a behind the head neck shot. He went down and got right back up so I popped him again and he goes down gets up and is getting around on 2 front legs. Popped him again and down for good...Never again will I take a .22 Cal on a deer hunt. There is no need for all of that when I can dispatch one with a much more efficient caliber in one shot...
 
I once got a solid scolding for admitting to shooting crows with a .223. The guy doing the reaming was under the impression that a .223 on crow is a dangerous shot even as they sit in a cornfield. He changed his tune when he saw the terrain is nowhere near as flat in Kentucky as it is in Arkansas.

I haven’t killed as many critters with .223 as I have with 20ga, 22lr, or .270, but it is easily one of the most versatile rounds out there. It is overkill for small game like squirrel and rabbit, but it doesn’t blow them up making them inedible, just messy. On larger game it still works, and although I would not intentionally go after elk or moose with a .223 I feel certain that in a survival situation that a well placed shot or string of shots would get the job done well enough. It may not be the most effective hunting round, but neither is a 7.62x39 and that’s supposedly almost exclusively what African poachers use for elephant. The point there is that enough volume makes up for lack of power or penetration, so in all likelihood, .223 is leading the pack or a close second to 7.62x39 in terms of versatility, but when combining the right bullet and the right platform to fire the bullets from, it can easily take down anything on this planet... elephant and hippo may just require a lot more shots than a whitetail or a coyote.
 
Rembrandt said:
Probably acceptable for the smaller southern deer. A bit light for the larger midwest deer that can be 300-to-400 lbs. Not saying it can't be done, but shot placement is more important.
Click to expand...
Shot placement is ALWAYS important. All deer have the same internal organs/vitals. Larger deer are larger and weigh more, but the increase in weight and mass is more or less evenly distributed over a larger area. The location and vulnerability of the vitals doesn't change, so an increase in overall live weight doesn't equal an additional hundred pounds of material over and around the vitals that must be penetrated. Put a ragged hole through the vitals (which are required for life support of ALL deer) and you can reasonably expect consistent results. The biggest limitation of the 223 is the energy loss accumulated during time of flight over a given distance negatively effecting terminal performance. For this reason, the 223 is a poor choice for scenarios where a hunter is on open ground firing across "bean fields" or at a deer on "the next ridgeline", but for shots taken within the 100 yards or less where most deer are harvested, I have found it to be very effective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
22 centerfires for deer. A personal experiance
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
Art Eatman
A
D
  • Locked
Conn.'s shelters serve venison, but R.I.'s can't
Replies
2
Views
1K
Ron L
R
Johnm1
  • Locked
Fall Hunting Season Has Begun
Replies
10
Views
892
Johnm1
Johnm1
M
  • Locked
Campfire tales of great hunts and good shots; eyewitness or otherwise
Replies
19
Views
2K
tahunua001
tahunua001
Lefty38-55
The PA ‘One-of-a-Kind’ Flintlock Deer Season Turns 50!
Replies
15
Views
467
wis bang
W
Back
Top