Smallest and biggest game with AR15

[MCgunner]

So far, I've taken a deer with mine, 62 grain Barnes TSX handload. I would take hog with that load, too, but I have an SKS set up for hogs.

I've got it in the bedroom with a green LED spotlight mounted. I have a motion detector on my cabbage patch in the garden. If any rabbit helps himself to my cabbage, I intend to blast him to hell with a 55 grain FMJ. I expect there'll be plenty of meat left on him, especially if I can get a clear head shot.

 

[MCgunner]

BTW, I've killed dozens of deer in my lifetime, mulies and whitetail, with other calibers as well as hogs. I will still use my .308 bolt gun as my fave choice, but when I thought Hillary was going to be elected, I got this M4. Now, what's a new rifle if you can't hunt with it? So, I worked up a viable handload and took a deer with it this season. It worked, deer died just as dead as any I've shot with my 7mm Remington Magnum, my .257 Roberts, or my .308. That 62 grain Barnes TSX gets the job done. I'm satisfied and ain't lookin' for any .450 Bushmaster upper. I'm not THAT into my AR. I have other rifles I mentioned above.

I'm glad I got this M4 considering the current political environment in DC. It's kind of a political statement for me, but it's a lot of fun to shoot, also.

If the ATF wants it, all I can say is...."from my cold, dead hands".

 

[Choctaw]

Relates directly to choice of the caliber of AR-15 on deer. It isn't the best choice for all, and both FL-NC and I were explaining our reasoning to a doubter.

I know. I wasn't talking about you. It's just unfortunate my post followed yours.

 

[tarosean]

If you go deer or hog hunting with an AR you can tell yourself how ethical and responsible of a hunter you are as much as you want, but at the end of the day, you're shooting big game with a varmint round...

Not sure where you live... round here our lil deer are not much bigger than the yotes.

 

[MCgunner]

Well, the buck I took with my M4 this year went about 120 lbs dressed and that's a good sized deer for Texas. I know they run 800-1000 lbs up north somewhere, probably run the moose out of the woods during the rut, but they ain't that big down here. A hot climate makes for smaller deer. When global warming gets to Saskatchewan, the deer up there will be the size of coues deer.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

With a .223 going 3000+ fps at 100 yards and under, the time between when the hammer starts to move and the bullet arrives where it's going to is measured in milliseconds;.

By milliseconds, you mean hundreds of milliseconds, don't you? In other words, tenths of seconds?

A .223 64. gr. Winchester Super-X leaving the muzzle at 3020 fps and a BC of 0.251 will take 0.110 seconds to arrive on target. That does not include the hammer travel time. It also does not include the 1/10th of a second or so for the shooter to initiate the trigger pull (signal to brain to reach finger to get the trigger pull accomplished). Plus, there is the hammer travel time. So you could be looking at 1/3 of a second or more.

a deer is not going to move very far in that time.

Well, let's see. A movement of just 1 mph speed translates into 17.6" per second. If there is a 1/3 second between the time when the brain sends the signal to pull the trigger (and this will actually take longer with some people and gun mechanisms) with the 3020 fps .223 bullet (see above), you are looking at the deer moving nearly 6" by the time the bullet impacts. That can easily take you out of the steriotypical 9" or 10" kill-zone. A 1 mph move would be a slow move on the part of the deer, a mere shifting of the body while grazing.

 

[Bigmike79]

Not sure where you live... round here our lil deer are not much bigger than the yotes.

250lb isn't uncommon in my neck of the woods. A shoulder shot on a buck that size is is bad news even with a legit deer round like 243 or 30-30. This is why it's against the law to hunt large game with a 22 caliber and my state.

 

[MCgunner]

I killed a 300 lb mulie at over 300 yards across a New Mexico canyon. Shoulder shot, DRT. Gun was a 7 mag.

 

[Bigmike79]

I killed a 300 lb mulie at over 300 yards across a New Mexico canyon. Shoulder shot, DRT. Gun was a 7 mag.

7mm Mag ain't no joke. Even at 300 yards it's still packing quite a bit of thump. I had a buddy that shot a feral pig in Texas with a 7mm mag from about 30 feet away, and all the meet for about 4-5 inches around the wound Chanel was black. The difference between the wound it inflicted and the wound on his dad's hog that came from a 308 from not much further away was like night and day.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

7mm Mag ain't no joke. Even at 300 yards it's still packing quite a bit of thump. I had a buddy that shot a feral pig in Texas with a 7mm mag from about 30 feet away, and all the meet for about 4-5 inches around the wound Chanel was black. The difference between the wound it inflicted and the wound on his dad's hog that came from a 308 from not much further away was like night and day.

I am not familiar with any means by which an 8-10" diameter of meat would mysteriously turn black. Something isn't right about that story.

 

[mcb]

I have used allot of different weapons to hunt deer but I have never hunted them with 223/556. I did spend several years hunting deer with a 410 slug-gun. If I can kill deer with a 410 slug, I suspect 223/556 with a quality bullet and a deliberate hunter would have success.

As with any cartridge that starts to push the bottom of the accepted performance envelope, for a given hunted species, the hunter has less margin for error and thus must be discipline enough to only take shots within the limited capability of their chosen weapon/cartridge and their own skills with said same.

One of these days I might try it myself, but I currently have at least four other guns (2 ARs in other calibers) that I bought under the guise of a deer gun that I have not yet taken a deer with...

 

[Bigmike79]

I am not familiar with any means by which an 8-10" diameter of meat would mysteriously turn black. Something isn't right about that story.

A black wound is more of a play on words. The coloring is more of a dark purple from extreme bruising. You see it with magnum hunting rounds sometimes depending on shot placement and the type of animal. It's more prominent on hogs because of their lighter colored meat. You can sorta see it in this pic I found online, but I couldn't find a good example of a large wound with a halo on a hog . All the blood and tissue will be badly discolored surrounding the wound.

 

[MCgunner]

7mm Mag ain't no joke. Even at 300 yards it's still packing quite a bit of thump. I had a buddy that shot a feral pig in Texas with a 7mm mag from about 30 feet away, and all the meet for about 4-5 inches around the wound Chanel was black. The difference between the wound it inflicted and the wound on his dad's hog that came from a 308 from not much further away was like night and day.

Well, that deer was about 350 yards. At that range, that 7 had 1900 ft lbs remaining. A .30-30 at the 30 yards I took that deer with the AR this season, is making around 1800 ft lbs. Well, 1800 ft lbs at the muzzle, I'm guessing it'll loose perhaps 100 ft lbs at 30 yards. Not a lot of difference. This might be the reason most of my .30-30 kills, even with my Contender pistol, have been bang flops and I don't see a 30 yard shot with a .30-30 rifle not killing just as quick as a 7 mag at 350 yards.

Every tool has its use. If you can't see more'n 100 yards through the woods for a clear shot, you don't have to use a 7 mag. Now days, mine's a safe queen. If I went back out to New Mexico for mulie or especially elk, I could use my .308, a lot lighter to tote in rough country, but the 7 packs more punch at longer ranges and shoots a might flatter. I would neither choose a .30-30 nor a .223, though. Every tool has its use.

I don't know that I'll ever shoot another deer with the M4, but I'll surely whack some hogs.

 

[FL-NC]

MOST deer are killed at 150 yards and closer. From what i have seen at various civilian rifle ranges, many hunters have no business shooting at anything more than 100 yards, based on the marksmanship and groups (really, lack of) I have observed. There are many successful hunters out there who are not very proficient marksmen- being able to hit a 8-10" target at 100 yards or closer isn't what I call proficiency. Personally, I wouldn't shoot a deer at over 200 yards with 223- not even remotely a problem most places I hunt. There is just too much energy lost, even though I can hit them a lot further than 200, I don't. With my 2 hunting rifles that are 223 (an AR and a MVP) I have no issues taking CNS shots at 100 meters and closer. In fact, I prefer to do this in the late afternoon, as no one wants to try and track a deer in the dark. The round that I hunt with I chose based on the performance I observed overseas. As far as the ability of a round like this to take down a white tail, I have as much confidence in the round, my rifles, and my ability as I do in my 243 or my 308's- within my self-imposed 200 yard limit.
Many naysayers from the lands where the deer are so big they get mistook for elk or whatever, always cite our smaller deer as the reason we can "get away" with using the 223 and even the 243, and other rounds that don't start with the number 3- depending on who is doing the talking. Consider this- a typical Southern deer, weighing 130 pounds on the hoof. A 250 pound "not uncommon" big deer from not in the South. 120 pounds of disparity. How is this weight distributed? It will be more or less evenly distributed over the larger body. Its NOT 120 pounds of additional material, gathered around the animal's vitals that a bullet must penetrate in order to achieve an ethical and efficient kill by reaching the internal plumbing. The plumbing? Identical and equally important for the deer's survival- whether its a South Texas dwarf or a Minnesota juggernaut. Put a hole in something important, and survival is off the table. Shot placement is king. Wild animals are nothing like people- they are generally all proportioned similarly. A 250 pound man who outweighs a 120 pound man may just weigh more because he is obese, and the little fella is anorexic. He may be a 7 foot tall basketball player with a medium build, or he may be a 5'9" football player built like a barrel.
223 is no good for deer. I've even heard that its no good for people. I've been hearing both most of my life. I think most people saying it are just repeating what they have heard over and over, which doesn't make it true. They probably haven't even tried it themselves, for whatever reason(s). But I have disproven these legends over and over again myself, as well as seeing others disprove them. Also, remember that the quality of ammunition in both accuracy and terminal performance has advanced by leaps and bounds since the 223 was released in the 60's.

 

[MCgunner]

Ever notice the folks who claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly, never actually tried one on deer? I used to squawk this fallacy and believed it. Then, I got an M4, loaded it with a 62 grain Barnes TSX handload, shot a deer purposely in the shoulder rather than make an easy head shot from 30 yards, and guess what, it died. It did run about 25 yards before it keeled over, but keel over it did.

I kind of know better now. But, I do have bigger calibers with which to hunt and I'm not that enamored with the AR platform, LIKE it I do, just ain't that in love with it. It is a really nifty little rifle, though, accurate, and reliable. I've taken to keeping it in the bedroom with the green light on it for critters in the night or 2 legged predators if that ever happened which, out here, is doubtful, BUT possible. I have a 30 round mag of FMJ in the gun and a 10 round mag ready to switch to with my Barnes hog loads in it should I be invaded in the night, yet again, with pigs.

You know, I distinctly remember back in the 60s, conversations that the .257 Roberts wasn't enough gun for deer. Then, the .243 came along in the late 50s, early 60s and it was illegal in Texas to hunt with it, had to be at least 25 caliber. That law got changed real quick as the .243 got REALLY popular. But, even today, some folks seem to think a belted magnum is needed for deer and hogs. That's their choice. I know better. A large number of deer I've shot in my life, most, were killed by the .257 Roberts. My favorite bullet for it is a 100 grain Sierra Game King. All, but one I ever shot with that rifle were bang flops. I've killed deer out to 200 yards with it, most were inside 100. But, nobody now days thinks the .257 ain't enough, well, not that many. I'm sure there are some knuckle dragger hold outs.

 

[DeepSouth]

Ever notice the folks who claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly, never actually tried one on deer? I used to squawk this fallacy and believed it. Then, I got an M4, loaded it with a 62 grain Barnes TSX handload, shot a deer purposely in the shoulder rather than make an easy head shot from 30 yards, and guess what, it died. It did run about 25 yards before it keeled over, but keel over it did

This is a fair argument, and I’m in the category of wouldn’t hunt with a 223 unless it was the largest caliber I owned, and if it was I’d be saving to upgrade to a more efficient deer caliber.

But here is the the thing,
First very, very few people “claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly” we simply suggest it is just one of the the more inefficient rounds available for deer hunting. A .22 magnum can kill a deer cleanly but it certainly easier, and more likely to occur (cleanly)
with larger calibers.

Secondly, your correct, I’ve never even shot at a deer with a 223, and likely never will. I have however killed more deer with a .243 Winchester shot out of Remington model 788 than I have every other caliber combined. And to be honest the mediocrity of the 243 is what convinces nothing smaller would be advisable, I don’t even really advise the 243 for experienced shooters. I view it as a bare minimum, and if your grown and can handle mild recoil their is no reason not to go to a more effective caliber.
For what it’s worth, I do still hunt with my 243 but it’s because I love the gun and the family history that comes with it.

Also, others have brought up distance, I’ll just say some of use hunt power lines and pipelines where you can see hundreds of yards, much further than we can shoot. I’ve personally killed at least a few deer that I saw hundreds of yards away and got in the edge of the woods and worked up to 250-300 yards away before taking the shot, it’s not uncommon at all on those power lines and pipelines.

 

[Bigmike79]

Ever notice the folks who claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly, never actually tried one on deer? I used to squawk this fallacy and believed it. Then, I got an M4, loaded it with a 62 grain Barnes TSX handload, shot a deer purposely in the shoulder rather than make an easy head shot from 30 yards, and guess what, it died. It did run about 25 yards before it keeled over, but keel over it did.

I kind of know better now. But, I do have bigger calibers with which to hunt and I'm not that enamored with the AR platform, LIKE it I do, just ain't that in love with it. It is a really nifty little rifle, though, accurate, and reliable. I've taken to keeping it in the bedroom with the green light on it for critters in the night or 2 legged predators if that ever happened which, out here, is doubtful, BUT possible. I have a 30 round mag of FMJ in the gun and a 10 round mag ready to switch to with my Barnes hog loads in it should I be invaded in the night, yet again, with pigs.

You know, I distinctly remember back in the 60s, conversations that the .257 Roberts wasn't enough gun for deer. Then, the .243 came along in the late 50s, early 60s and it was illegal in Texas to hunt with it, had to be at least 25 caliber. That law got changed real quick as the .243 got REALLY popular. But, even today, some folks seem to think a belted magnum is needed for deer and hogs. That's their choice. I know better. A large number of deer I've shot in my life, most, were killed by the .257 Roberts. My favorite bullet for it is a 100 grain Sierra Game King. All, but one I ever shot with that rifle were bang flops. I've killed deer out to 200 yards with it, most were inside 100. But, nobody now days thinks the .257 ain't enough, well, not that many. I'm sure there are some knuckle dragger hold outs.

I don't think anybody would say that a 223 won't kill a deer. I think the argument is that large game rounds are better for killing large game than varmint rounds are. Nothing more, nothing less.

For what it's worth, we used to kill pigs with my Ruger single six 22 revolver when I was a kid and not just with headshots. It's not something I would recommend, but you'd be surprised how many died within a reasonable amount of time.

 

[FL-NC]

I love my 243, and I don't even know how many deer I have killed with it. Most were killed with classic broadside shots. About half of those ran some distance out of sight (never more than 100 yards, and usually 50 or less). Since I started hunting deer with 223 a couple of years ago, I have killed 4 deer with the round that I use. 2 broadside chest shots, 2 CNS shots. The only one that ran was a broadside, which piled up after less than 50 yards. Unless someone considers the bang/flop the ONLY acceptable performance on a deer, most people would say that in all 4 cases the 223 was more than "efficient", and that when using it within the limits of the shooter and the round, it is "very likely" that the deer will be cleanly killed and successfully recovered. FWIW, the worst performing round I have used for deer, based solely on my experiences- is the 7.62 x 39 soft point. Most of my runners were shot with that, and effects on the carcass were less than stellar. In fact, I never even got exit wounds, which does no one any favors when it comes to finding a wounded deer.

You also mentioned the "mediocrity" of the 243. As I previously stated, I have had 100% success with it too. While I agree that the "mediocre" 243 and the "inefficient" 223 are both sometimes chosen as a preferred caliber for children, women, (youth rifles, anyone?) or those who just can't handle mild recoil, maybe we should reflect on that whole concept. Usually (but not always) children, women, and those who are recoil-averse are generally less experienced, less proficient shooters. How do these 2 ideas square with each other? I know for a fact that the deer that go into the vicinity of the ladies and kids- often to be successfully harvested- are the same ones in the same woods with the men carrying the "more efficient calibers" (or, who SHOULD be carrying these other rounds). I know this for a fact, as I have seen youngsters and ladies be the only one during an outing that successfully harvested trophy bucks. Just some more stuff to ponder.

First very, very few people “claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly” we simply suggest it is just one of the the more inefficient rounds available for deer hunting. A .22 magnum can kill a deer cleanly but it certainly easier, and more likely to occur (cleanly)
with larger calibers

And to be honest the mediocrity of the 243 is what convinces nothing smaller would be advisable, I don’t even really advise the 243 for experienced shooters. I view it as a bare minimum, and if your grown and can handle mild recoil their is no reason not to go to a more effective caliber.

 

[tarosean]

You see it with magnum hunting rounds sometimes depending on shot placement and the type of animal.

Bloodshot is also caused by bullet fragments and or bone fragments.. Its not just magnums that can do this.

 

[Bigmike79]

Bloodshot is also caused by bullet fragments and or bone fragments.. Its not just magnums that can do this.

Yeah, I'm sure bullet design has a lot to do with it too.

 

[MCgunner]

Also, others have brought up distance, I’ll just say some of use hunt power lines and pipelines where you can see hundreds of yards, much further than we can shoot. I’ve personally killed at least a few deer that I saw hundreds of yards away and got in the edge of the woods and worked up to 250-300 yards away before taking the shot, it’s not uncommon at all on those power lines and pipelines.

We call those "Senderos". 30 years ago, Remington came out with the "Sendero" rifle. Popular caliber for it around here was .25-06, which shoots flat and carries energy a long way. These rifles had 26" fluted barrels and shot well. I never got one, didn't hunt a sendero, and my .257 pushes a 100 grain bullet to 3150 fps which is hot enough for me, danged close to a typical .25-06 factory load.

 

[jmorris]

When I was a kid I hunted squirrels once with an 8mm Mauser, a .223 would have been a better choice. Back before that day I had watched a couple butchers behind an East Tx grocery store kill cows with an old at the time Winchester .22 short pump action, they always dropped instantly but I can’t imagine a .223 not doing the job just as good, most were in the 1,500 lb range in weight.

 

[entropy]

Ever notice the folks who claim the .223 can't kill deer cleanly, never actually tried one on deer? I used to squawk this fallacy and believed it.

Me too, and until about five years ago. My son bought a .223 Axis for coyotes, and liked the accuracy he was getting with Hornady Superformance, so he took it deer hunting. He got 11 deer with it, at ranges from 10 to 225 yards. I had loaded up some rounds with similar ballistics for him, using the same bullet, 55gr. V-Max, and some of those deer were taken with the reloads. None of those 11 deer went more than 50 yards. Granted, he is an excellent shot. I taught him well. (Both in 4-H and outside of it.) He will pass up a shot that he believes will not result in a quick, ethical kill. (Again, I taught him well.)
He then bought a DPMS Sportical, and the next year, with those same loads, took four deer. Ranges were 20 to 80 yards. Three DRT's and one went @ 50 yards. He decided he wanted a Axis again (He'd sold his to buy the AR), and I had one I'd bought after seeing his handiwork with his. So we traded. (I had to throw in his old 870)
This year I'm taking that AR out and hoping to add to the 4 deer it's taken.

Back before that day I had watched a couple butchers behind an East Tx grocery store kill cows with an old at the time Winchester .22 short pump action

I killed a cow that was down with milk fever on the farm I rented at with a .22 Mag. at about 20 yards. If you hit a certain spot on the forehead they drop like a ton of bricks.
Knowledge of anatomy plus precise bullet placement will kill very reliably. Would I use a .22 on lion? No.

 

[DeepSouth]

I killed a cow that was down with milk fever on the farm I rented at with a .22 Mag. at about 20 yards. If you hit a certain spot on the forehead they drop like a ton of bricks.
Knowledge of anatomy plus precise bullet placement will kill very reliably.

IIRC, the old Greener Cattle Killers were chambered .32 S&W short.

 

[jmorris]

Knowledge of anatomy plus precise bullet placement will kill very reliably. Would I use a .22 on lion? No.

Even out of an SBR a 55 gn FMJ is good for east TX lion...you just have to stay up too late to get them.