223 Fallacy

[Bruno2]

I live in NE Oklahoma. Our deer population is mainly the whitetail. Most of the hunters here for some reason shoot 270 and 30-06. When you look at the used gun sites on FB and other online gun sales sites here they are loaded down with 270's and 30-06's.

I don't understand why people are buying these large cartridge rifles to hunt here locally. I could see the light if they were big time hunters that go out of state to hunt and may want to go after Mulies or Elk. However, that type of hunter would more than likely have a few rifles to choose from.

I tell people all the time to get a 223 bolt gun. I cant count the times people have told me that 223 wont kill a deer. I am like really, they kill people with them everyday and people are bigger than Whitetails. Why don't you think a 120lb whitetail will go down from a 223? I usually tell them as a person you don't want to be shot with a 223 even from 400 yards.

I just don't get it.

 

[crazysccrmd]

It works, but nowhere near as well as a 270 or 30-06. You have a much reduced range and a much smaller margin of error with a 223/5.56 than a larger caliber.

Hunting deer and shooting people are two entirely different things. You can't compare the somewhat marginal performance of 5.56 on people to the performance on a game animal.

 

[C-grunt]

I wouldn't call 223 performance on people "marginal".

Funny you should bring this up OP. My uncle has a ranch in Duncan and I go hunting there every few years. Shot my first buck there a couple years ago. That same week his best friend's girlfriend shot her first buck with a 223. The best friend is also a taxidermist and remarked at how well the 223 worked. He specifically said he thought it was going to be marginal and was surprised at the performance.

 

[P.B.Walsh]

Quick, humane kills is what should be driving the acquisition of these calibers, and the fact that they are insanely popular and traditional helps out to.

A .223 would work down here in Alabama too, but the are more efficient calibers for humane kills. Not saying it wouldn't work, but there are other calibers, like a 30-06 that are "better".

 

[crazysccrmd]

I've used it firsthand and still consider it marginal. It gets the job done ok, but not as efficiently as 7.62/308.

With the right hunting bullets and proper shot placement within range it will certainly kill a deer. Like I said though, you have a lot less room for error when compared to a larger cartridge.

 

[rcmodel]

And .223 for deer or other big game are against the law in some states.

rc

 

[Bruno2]

It works, but nowhere near as well as a 270 or 30-06. You have a much reduced range and a much smaller margin of error with a 223/5.56 than a larger caliber.

Hunting deer and shooting people are two entirely different things. You can't compare the somewhat marginal performance of 5.56 on people to the performance on a game animal.

The woods here are thick and brushy. 100 yards would be a long shot and more like under 50 is realistic. So ranging out to 300 yards or more isn't going to happen very often.

I am not knocking the 270 or 30-06. They are both excellent rounds or they wouldn't have stood the test of time, but 223 kills the Whitetail. I know quite a few people that use it and cant recall a lot of complaints of the round not killing deer. I just don't see the need for that much velocity and energy for a small game animal.

 

[Bruno2]

Hunting deer and shooting people are two entirely different things. You can't compare the somewhat marginal performance of 5.56 on people to the performance on a game animal.

I will bite, go ahead and explain your theory. Just my opinion, our military has used it for years to kill people. Deer aren't trying to kill you and your buddies. It makes sense to use something effective.

 

[Jackal]

WDM Bell killed elephants with the 6.5x55.... I figure a deer can drop to a 50gr sp. I'd also likely wager than hundreds of thousands of deer and other medium sized game have been felled by .22lr headshots since the late 1800's.

 

[paintballdude902]

Yup, and elk were hunted to the brink of extinction with the .30-30. does that mean its the best option? nope.....

 

[HorseSoldier]

All cartridges are compromises and trade offs on performance. 5.56mm is optimized for anti-personnel use where portability of ammo in quantity, low recoil for fast shooting and handy/light weapons, and similar considerations are a big part of the equation.

Unless you plan on needing a double basic load of ammo to bag one deer, it may not be the optimal deer cartridge out there.

On the other hand, I can't speak for Oklahoma deer, but for the whitetails in Alabama where I grew up, 270 and 30-06 is much more than you need. My recollection is .243 and 7mm-08 were the cartridges of choice for the friends of mine who were really die hard serious deer hunters.

 

[Goosey]

To put things into perspective factory .223 has less energy than factory .25-35 with smaller, lighter bullets that have lower sectional density... not like the .223 can't kill a deer humanely, many people do exactly that, but is it really the best choice out there?

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

Goosey,

It's a choice, even if it may not be the best one. That's the important thing, to be able to make that choice for ones' self.

I would not use it, but then again, maybe I'm a bad shot. I'm sad to say that Indiana is a state that restricts rifles for deer, though they're loosening up a bit.

I would love to have a choice.

Regards,

Josh

 

[Theohazard]

Hunting deer and shooting people are two entirely different things. You can't compare the somewhat marginal performance of 5.56 on people to the performance on a game animal.

I will bite, go ahead and explain your theory. Just my opinion, our military has used it for years to kill people. Deer aren't trying to kill you and your buddies. It makes sense to use something effective.

Crazysccrmd is completely right: A deer-hunting round and a military round designed to shoot people are two entirely different things.

The 5.56 is a terrific military round for several different reasons, few of which transfer into a good hunting round. First, it's effective at killing people at short to medium ranges, but there are other rounds that would be better for killing people, like the .270, .308, .30-06, .300 Win Mag, etc. But where the 5.56 really shines as a military cartridge is its light weight and low recoil, combined with the low weight of rifles chambered in 5.56.

Just ask anyone who has had to carry a full combat load; the weight of your ammo makes a HUGE difference. Sure, a larger caliber like 7.62x51 would be more effective against humans, but the ammo weighs twice as much and the rifles are noticeably heavier. Also, the extra recoil would make fast follow-up shots less accurate, especially with full-auto fire.

But for a hunting round, the weight of ammo is far less of a concern: You're not going to be carrying hundreds of rounds if you're just going deer hunting. Also, an increase in caliber in a hunting rifle doesn't add anywhere near as much weight as an increase in caliber in an auto-loading military rifle. Also, with a bolt-action hunting rifle recoil isn't anywhere near as much as a limiting factor.

So sure, a .223 deer-hunting rifle will work pretty well, but there aren't that many downsides to going with a larger caliber like a .270 or .30-06, and the more powerful caliber will usually kill the deer more quickly and humanely. But the 5.56 is a great military cartridge because it balances effectiveness with light weight and low recoil, two things that are far less important in a bolt-action hunting rifle.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The 30-06 brought 2 generations through wars and home. Add that loyalty to the fact surplus rifles chambered in 30-06 were very inexpensive for about 50 years it's no wonder the 30-06 is still a top seller.

The 270 has it's following too. It's a necked down 30-06 that shoots flatter and faster than the 30-06 and it's a good deer and goat cartridge and with less recoil than the 30-06 too.

As for the .223 being good enough for deer, that's probably true in most cases but also in many cases it's not legal by State law to use a 22 Cal on deer. Also, why settle for good enough when you can have very good.

I completely agree the 30-06 is probably too much rifle for Whitetail Deer and that's why in the thick brush of Northeast PA I leave the 30-06 home and take the 30-30 out to the field, (or the 45-70 if the bears are around) but not all the time. I'm one of those who really like the 30-06. I handload a 165gr bullet and I don't break my shoulder overloading it either.

 

[Goosey]

Goosey,

It's a choice, even if it may not be the best one. That's the important thing, to be able to make that choice for ones' self.

I would not use it, but then again, maybe I'm a bad shot. I'm sad to say that Indiana is a state that restricts rifles for deer, though they're loosening up a bit.

I would love to have a choice.

Regards,

Josh

Yes, I don't have a problem with people choosing to use .223 for deer, it's surely no .17 HMR or .22 LR, although it wouldn't be my choice.

 

[ZGunner]

Here another thread along the same lines that got locked awhile back:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=749593

I take a .223 into the deer woods now and again. Usually I tote my .308 though. Admittedly, I've never shot any game with either. But I would feel comfortable taking a shot on a deer with a 55gr Hornady SP.

 

[Pete D.]

cartidge choice

Hunting deer and shooting people are two entirely different things. You can't compare the somewhat marginal performance of 5.56 on people to the performance on a game animal.
I will bite, go ahead and explain your theory. Just my opinion, our military has used it for years to kill people. Deer aren't trying to kill you and your buddies. It makes sense to use something effective.
__________________

All of what was said in response to this idea so far is true.
In addition, there is a tremendous amount of anecdotal evidence from hunters that animals in general are harder to kill than us humans.
There are plenty of "I shot it and it dropped right there." stories, yes. There are also many stories of animals that should have dropped right there and did not...ran off with absolutely incapacitating wounds.

Deer can be killed with just about any cartridge.....many animals can be (outdoor writer Ross Seyfried once stalked and took an elk with a single shot chambered for the .455 Webley pistol cartridge). Deer get taken with the .22 rimfire - often by poachers who aren't going to care a whole lot about how many deer get wounded and run off.
Lions can be killed with the .223...that doesn't mean that it is the best choice for hunting one (admittedly a whitetail is not going to come after you if you screw up as a lion might.)
Of course, hunters can and do screw up shots with heavier cartridges - there is no magic bullet. Some, though, have more mojo than others. Go for mojo.
Pete

 

[22-rimfire]

I live in NE Oklahoma. Our deer population is mainly the whitetail. Most of the hunters here for some reason shoot 270 and 30-06. When you look at the used gun sites on FB and other online gun sales sites here they are loaded down with 270's and 30-06's.

I don't understand why people are buying these large cartridge rifles to hunt here locally. I could see the light if they were big time hunters that go out of state to hunt and may want to go after Mulies or Elk. However, that type of hunter would more than likely have a few rifles to choose from.

I tell people all the time to get a 223 bolt gun. I cant count the times people have told me that 223 wont kill a deer. I am like really, they kill people with them everyday and people are bigger than Whitetails. Why don't you think a 120lb whitetail will go down from a 223? I usually tell them as a person you don't want to be shot with a 223 even from 400 yards.

I just don't get it.

Choosing a slightly larger or more powerful round for deer hunting just makes good sense to me from a sportsman perspective. When I was younger, it was all about small fast bullets and shot placement and I prided myself on being good. But I found that everyone makes poor shots from time to time and for that reason alone, one should generally choose a slightly more powerful caliber than 223 for deer hunting. My suggested minimum is 243 Win. The 30-06 or similar calibers are perfectly fine, but I think the 300 Win Mag and larger are un-necessary for deer hunting unless you have special circumstances or reasons where the choice makes a lot of sense.

The other consideration is that you want the animal to go down quickly and not run 100 yds or more where you potentially loose it or it runs across some property line that you do not have permission to hunt on.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

ill put it to you like this. Say your going to executed today and the executioner told you there going to let you run and shoot you between 50 and 300 yards. You have your choise of being shot with a 223 or a 3006 but there going to keep shooting till your dead. PICK ONE In a perfect world where you allways have a perfect 50 yard broadside shot about any gun will do but in my 40 some years of hunting i find that that is the exception not the rule. So why would i want to use some pipsqeak gun and take a chance on a deer suffering just so i can save 4 lbs of hamburger meat or because it tickles my shoulder a little.

 

[batex]

What difference does it make? If others want to use 270s and 30-06s, more power to them. I have no problem with them wanted to be proficient with a larger caliber. A larger caliber will always have a greater margin for error, and that extra degree of stopping power when conditions aren't "average". I'm glad we don't live in a country where others get to decide what you "need".

 

[W L Johnson]

And .223 for deer or other big game are against the law in some states.

rc

Can't speak for all of them but in the ones I know about it's banned because of a blanket min. dia. limit.
BTW: It's legal here in Ky.

 

[jmr40]

The 270 and 30-06 were at one time considered middle of the road cartridges. When I started hunting a 243 was considered marginal. Lots of things have changed in the last 40 years. Better bullets are the biggest difference. Better loadings have become part of it too. A typical 30-06 loading prior to WW-2 was a 150 gr bullet @ 2700 fps. That is 200 fps slower than todays 308 loadings and 400 fps slower than the better 30-06 factory and handloads available today. The 270 isn't any faster, but better bullets have made it a much more effective round on game much larger than deer.

In short, todays 270 and 30-06 aren't your grand daddy's 270 and 30-06. Both are really way more than needed for today's deer hunting. Strictly for deer a 243 is now just about perfect and rounds like 260, 7-08 and 308 are better all around choices with 270 and up best reserved for bigger stuff.

223 is one of those rounds that is controversial. I'm in the camp that believes it is an adequate deer round when shots are kept under 200 yards and good bullets are chosen. I'd use it, but since bear season here overlaps most of deer season I generally carry something bigger. Shots longer than 200 yards are a possibility too. But for someone willing to accept it's limitations, it will work.

And .223 for deer or other big game are against the law in some states.

This is true, but at the last count I had there were only 4-5 states where rifles were legal, and the 223 was not. Most states now recognize that the round is perfectly acceptable. There have been 3-4 states that have changed their laws recently to legalize the round. Don't let the misguided actions of a handful of states influence someones decision as to its abilities.

 

[skoro]

Lots of Texas deer (I know they're kinda small) are taken annually with the 223.

 

[itsa pain]

I live in NE Oklahoma. Our deer population is mainly the whitetail. Most of the hunters here for some reason shoot 270 and 30-06. When you look at the used gun sites on FB and other online gun sales sites here they are loaded down with 270's and 30-06's.

I don't understand why people are buying these large cartridge rifles to hunt here locally. I could see the light if they were big time hunters that go out of state to hunt and may want to go after Mulies or Elk. However, that type of hunter would more than likely have a few rifles to choose from.

I tell people all the time to get a 223 bolt gun. I cant count the times people have told me that 223 wont kill a deer. I am like really, they kill people with them everyday and people are bigger than Whitetails. Why don't you think a 120lb whitetail will go down from a 223? I usually tell them as a person you don't want to be shot with a 223 even from 400 yards.

I just don't get it.

Using your logic would mean using a 243 for elephant hunting