minimum caliber? why?

[moooose102]

what is it about this / why are so many people wanting to know what is the SMALLEST caliber for hunting something? it really does not cost any apreciable amout more to shoot a deer with a 270 than it does with a 223, and the results are so much better. same goes for elk, or wild bores, or lions, or elephants. USE ENOUGH GUN! it makes no sense to me to try to hunt something with an underpowed caliber. there are no world record for this, no rewards, and really, not even bragging rights. if a guy tells me he shot a deer with a 223, i dont think, "wow, what a man". i think,"gesh, it is a good thing he has luck on his side". yes, i suppose you can kill an elephant with a 22 short. but it is going to be a long, miserable, die from lead poisoning or infection type of death. not the quick, clean, humane kill that i was taught was part of being a sportsman. so what gives. why do people want to kill a brown bear with a 218 bee, or something else just as underpowered.

 

[K3]

Meh, you're just jealous of others ability to place shots correctly. Learn to shoot better.

Seriously though, I generally use more than the minimum. Hell, I plan to try 375H&H on deer this year. I'm kinda curious to see how a 300gr round nose will do on a West Texas whitetail or muley. Usually my goto deer cartridge is the .300WinMag. That's only because it's the rifle I've owned the longest and when I shoot, it feels like a part of me.

 

[oronocova]

Hello,
New here, but I hear ya. I've heard the stories before "shot him with my 22 dropped him like a ton of bricks." Well, ok? I don't get it either. You -do- run the risk or injuring or wasting game, no doubt in my mind. If I'm killing hogs in a pen give me a 22. But if I am in the woods with the mindset of taking a deer for meat give me something I know will get the job done even with a less than perfect shot.

 

[B Man]

It's not for bragging rights when someone says they shoot a smaller caliber than the next guy b/c for most part men want to show there big guns off..... LOL
When i came up it was always like a challenge to see who hunted with the largest caliber. IMO you can go to large for certain sized game and ruin what your sopose to be really taking game for, "The meat". I'm pretty sure the guy that started that thread was just curious what other opinions were. I've had & seen more game suffer from a bad shot with a large caliber (magnums) than i have with small calibers. People sometimes get over anxious and careless when shooting a big 300 Win. Mag. than they do with a .223 or .243 b/c they remeber that they have to have a great shot to harvest what they are hunting.

 

[saddlebum]

i think it has to do with wanting to use thier AR's for more than actin tacticool at the range

 

[Cypress]

I've pondered this since I first joined The High Road. I guess I always thought caliber choice and uh "member" size had some correlation. Me, I always tote enough gun. Hear that ladies!!!!!

 

[MCgunner]

i think it has to do with wanting to use thier AR's for more than actin tacticool at the range

I think that's a big part of the .223 thing. Gotta justify having the thing, so why not shoot a deer with it? Or, they've never hunted, only played army at the range and it's all they have. Mostly youngsters, too, in my observation. Few older guys trying to hunt with pistol gripped anything, though there's always exceptions and I'm sure some 70 year old mall ninja will speak up.

Too, in the past, it's been guys starting their kids off. I can understand that. A kid ain't gonna wanna shoot a .30-06. Me, I started with grandpa's .257 Roberts. I handled it fine at age 11. I always tell folks, if the kid can't handle a .243, he don't need to be deer hunting, yet. Let him chase squirrels until he's older.

Sometimes it's women not wanting a heavy recoiling gun or it's men who just don't like recoil.

Ya know, when I was a kid it was all about who had the biggest or most powerful caliber. LOL Size mattered. Now, I get the impression it's all about who has the most picatinny rails.

 

[.38 Special]

Some of us just don't like recoil. Or our wives/girlfriends/kids don't.

I think the question is a natural outgrowth of the magnum fad. You'll get folks seriously asking if the latest .300 magnum is really necessary for whitetail -- that's what the guy at the gunshop told him, anyway. And while I think "Use enough gun" is excellent advice, it is all too often used by the ".300 Magnum is the minimum for whitetail" crowd.

So while I'm not convinced the .223/AR-15 is a good idea for deer, I do understand the desire to find a pleasant gun for routine hunting chores.

 

[Shawnee]

+1 for having seem more deer wounded and lost because the shooter had "too much gun" and apparently thought the noise is what killed the deer.

The advice to "use enough gun" - meaning to use a gun with sufficient power to take the quarry under hunting conditions is good advice.

HOWEVER...

There is definitely such a thing as "too much gun"... meaning the gun/caliber produces more blast and recoil than a given shooter can deal with and still shoot accurately. That's to say it may be "enough gun" to take the quarry but it is "too much" gun for the shooter.

But of course some people have too much misguided ego to admit they would do much better with lighter calibers - and these are usually thy people who are using calibers to hunt deer that arfe powerful enough to hunt Moose - and, like it or not, that is just plain old nonsense. The shame is they keep on wounding and losing deer year after year rather than trading their cannons for a sensible caliber.

 

[.38 Special]

FWIW, my grandfather had Parker Ackley build him a .228 Magnum. He, and later my father, hunted with this gun extensively and never lost a big game animal. Granted, a 90 grain .22 bullet is a bit different than a 52 grain .22 bullet -- but comparing the bullets of the 1940s to the bullets of today, maybe not as much as we might think.

I personally have found the hotrodded .45 Colt to do everything I want on the game I hunt -- and the .44 Special and .357 Magnum to be nearly as good. So I generally feel like just about any rifle is the hammer of Thor. I like the 7x57, m'self...

 

[Bartkowski]

One advantage the smaller calibers have is meat damage. With a .30-06, you can really waste a lot of meat. With a .223 or a .243 you damage a lot less meat.

 

[.38 Special]

One advantage the smaller calibers have is meat damage. With a .30-06, you can really waste a lot of meat. With a .223 or a .243 you damage a lot less meat.

Hornady's 220 grain roundnose is a great solution to that problem, although it runs afoul of the second half of the magnum men's diad: sniping at game from the next county over.

For those of us who still enjoy hunting, though, the 220 can be a good bullet.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I don't remember what poster said it but this quote comes to mind.

Those who say .223 isn't powerful enough for deer aren't good enough shots to use a .223

Hunting and self defense shooting comes down to just three variables

shot placement, shot placement, shot placement

 

[MCgunner]

If you can't shoot what you're trying to hunt with, you need range time before going hunting. If you can't shoot a 7 mag, you'll be pretty poor with a .223 IMHO. You just don't know how to shoot. The key to recoil is not anticipating it. Guess what, concentration on sights and trigger squeeze is the key. The old saying, the trigger should surprise you, is true for just pure marksmanship with any caliber, not just heavy recoil guns. If you can't shoot that 7 mag, you need practice, period. You need to learn marksmanship principles.

Of course, there are the arthritic, the young and small, the meek and the weak. But, I'm 6 ft and 210 lbs. If I couldn't shoot a .30-06 or a 7 mag, I'd not hunt until I could. Recoil isn't an excuse for a healthy man IMHO.

 

[B Man]

"Recoil isn't an excuse for a healthy man IMHO"

This is not 100% true IMO. As stated above, you should have an adequate gun for whatever you are hunting. Do you hunt squirrels or rabbits with a .243? No thats nonsense. Just like to much gun for other sized game animals. You can deer hunt with a Barret .50 cal. but it wouldn't be practical.

My father has hunted his whole life just as he brought me up doing, and has owned many magnum sized calibers for deer. In the end he now has a 25-06. Plenty enough gun for whitetail & the recoil of a .243 winchester. He's shot it now for 6 years and says he will never have another caliber.

For Elk or Moose small calibers are not the brightest things to use & thats where recoil comes into play b/c you need the better suited magnums to make a humane kill in most situations. B/C for the most part a 22lr would barley pentrate the hide when on a deer sized game it would get into the vitals within 50-75yds. The white-tail deer seems to be the most over gunned game that walks. Every game animal requires a different caliber.

 

[bradm]

I recently was considering going on a hunt that included caribou and bear. I asked around about minimum caliber to see if what I already owned was enough gun, since I originally bought my gun for small pigs and deer. I wanted to make sure that I wouldn't become bear food by pissing it off with too little gun, and I didn't want to chance causing unnecessary suffering by using too small a bullet or too little gun.

Sometimes people just need reassurance to offset their lack of knowledge.

brad

 

[.38 Special]

I'm 6'1" and I don't care for the recoil of the .30-06. I mean, I can deal with it, but I'd rather not if I don't have to. And I don't: the 6.5 Swede, .25 Bob, and 7x57 are all capable of taking boar and whitetail cleanly if pointed right. Granted, they are not 500 yard cartridges, but I am not a 500 yard hunter.

 

[MCgunner]

This is not 100% true IMO. As stated above, you should have an adequate gun for whatever you are hunting. Do you hunt squirrels or rabbits with a .243? No thats nonsense. Just like to much gun for other sized game animals. You can deer hunt with a Barret .50 cal. but it wouldn't be practical.

That's not what I meant. I'm sayin', well, ya wanna use a .243 on elk cause you think you can't handle the recoil of a 7. It causes you to flinch. If you're a normal, healthy man, the 7 is not causing you to flinch. Poor marksmanship is causing you to flinch. Stay home if you can't handle an adequate caliber. JMHO, though.

I've killed more deer with a .257 Roberts than anything else I own. I've killed 'em with a 7 mag, with a .308, with the 7.62x39, with a .30-30 both in a pistol and a rifle, with a .357 in both a pistol and a rifle, and with a 7x57, I hunted almost exclusively with the .257 from my first deer in 1963 to about the early 90s. I killed one deer in that time with a .30-30 rifle, all the rest with a .257 Roberts. Then, I started buying guns and expanding my experiences. I've never ever wanted to use a .22 on deer. If I thought I needed to because the .257 Roberts made me flinch, well, I'd burn some more powder at the range until I could handle it.

I don't know anyone in his right mind that doesn't think the 6.5 Swede isn't enough for whitetail. Most figure it's adequate if not great for elk, let alone whitetail. My minimum is .243. But, I see a lot of ".223 on deer" threads. WHY?

 

[mudslinger]

The key to using any calibre rifle is knowing where the bullet drop is at a given distance. My wife is sensitive to recoil, so she uses a remington model 700adl in 222 mag. the last 4 seasons she fired 8 shots total and killed 8 deer, dead in thier tracks! She is a really good shot. I use a 25-06 with the same results. Last year we had all 4 of our tags filled within 1 1/2 hours and could see all of them lying dead in the field at 100 to 250 yards from the rock where we sit. You just have to practice at different ranges to know bullet drop.

 

[R.W.Dale]

But, I see a lot of ".223 on deer" threads. WHY?

Because it works. Our forefathers used cartridges that were positively underpowered when compared to .223rem. A lot of people are content to either use what they have or buy what they like in terms of deer rifles and if legal it's really not any of our business what caliber they choose.

've killed more deer with a .257 Roberts than anything else I own. I've killed 'em with a 7 mag, with a .308, with the 7.62x39, with a .30-30 both in a pistol and a rifle, with a .357 in both a pistol and a rifle,

the 357 from a handgun worked just fine for you. A .223 firing a modern hunting bullet is on a another level of effectiveness beyond the best .357 mag loads. So what makes it a bad choice?

This argument is all about preconceived notions.

 

[MCgunner]

the 357 from a handgun worked just fine for you. A .223 firing a modern hunting bullet is on a another level of effectiveness beyond the best .357 mag loads. So what makes it a bad choice?

Absolutely. The .357 shoots a 158 or 180 grain bullet of .36 caliber. It holes the deer through and through. I also limit my ranges to under 75 yards with the caliber in a handgun, preferably 50. AND, I've yet to find a .223 revolver. I mean, it's a HANDGUN, apples and oranges. I hunt with a handgun just because. I guess I could sell my .30-30 contender barrel for a .223, but why? Is the .223 a superior big game round? I think not.

But, I'm not a girly man. I see no reason to shoot a .22 when I can quite handle up to .375 H and H in a rifle, let alone a .243. If a .223 is adequate, a .257 Roberts is a lot better. I'm shooting a 100 grain bullet to 3150 fps for about 2200 ft lbs and it carries adequate energy to about 300 yards. Shoot the .223 if you think it's so blasted great, but I know there are about a bazillion BETTER deer calibers, so why would I choose a .22? Stupid, Ridiculous. I don't think the .223 is any cheaper and I KNOW it ain't if it's in an AR.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Shoot the .223 if you think it's so blasted great, but I know there are about a bazillion BETTER deer calibers, so why would I choose a .22? Stupid, Ridiculous.

and theres a bizillion better calibers than 257 Roberts what makes it so special......... You like it that's why, that's reason enough. The same applies to someone who uses .223 within it's limits

There is only one kind of DEAD. Your 257 don't kill em any deader than a well constructed .223 bullet in the vitals just like my 35 whelen doesn't kill em any deader than your 257

But, I'm not a girly man. I see no reason to shoot a .22 when I can quite handle up to .375 H and H in a rifle, let alone a .243.

Bingo!!!!!!! You just touched real the real reason some people are so down on smaller calibers. They're worried about what other people think. This is the same reason why people buy 1 ton trucks when all they tow is a bass boat.

Is the .223 a superior big game round? I think not.

when .223 rifle is compared to a .357 handgun it is, every day of the week and twice on Sunday

 

[HB]

Because it works. Our forefathers used cartridges that were positively underpowered when compared to .223rem. A lot of people are content to either use what they have or buy what they like in terms of deer rifles and if legal it's really not any of our business what caliber they choose.

True, but the muzzle loaders of the day were the most powerful weapons available to them at the time. Also, all of us hunt because we like to for any number of reasons, not because we will go hungry if we don't kill a deer. In this day and age, we should try to put the deer on the ground as quickly as possible, which generally means using something bigger than a .223. But to a certain extent, this is a hypocritical statement because I enjoy bowhunting, which ultimately provides a very bloody way to end a deer's life. People need to find what works for them, and as long as the are proficient with their method, I respect them. I can put arrow onto a hardball out to 30 yards, so if I do it right, the deer sill have a 1 1/4'' hole through his heart, which will drop him quickly.

Ethics are a very subjective thing which stem from the roots of a person's environment and upbringing. I'm currently having an internal struggle with the issue of trapping this fall. I've bought a few traps and done quite a bit of reading on the topic, but I'm still undecided. The trapping "lifestyle" is very appealing for me, but I don't know if it is right to hold an animal in a trap for a few hours only to whack him on the head?

Hell, maybe I'll write a book

HB

 

[Okiecruffler]

Well, then there's the other side of the coin. I ran into a fella a few weeks back. He was sighting in his new 300 win mag. He confided in me that he had bought it because he had shot 4 deer with his 270 and all of them ran off.
Now would I use a 223 for deer? Nope, but I feel pretty confident in my 6tcu, mainly because it will shoot 1/2MOA.
Another thing I've noticed from listening to people talk around gun shops and shows. Something terrible has happened to the 30-30. It's gone from a great little deer round to barely adaquate for bunny hunting in a petting zoo. Go figure, maybe if we put a belt on it...

 

[Defensory]

It's illegal in many states to hunt deer with .223.

.243 is usually fine for whitetail, but often iffy for the larger specimens of mule deer.

.270 is your best bet for mule deer, IMHO.