Using a .223 for a meat gun. A question.
- Thread starter CoalTrain49
- Start date
- Status
Jason_W
Member
The belief that a .223 should never be used on deer is based on decades old information.
It will never be a versatile deer round, but if ranges are kept reasonable and a proper load selected, it's fine for deer as long as the hunter puts in the practice time and is willing to pass on iffy shots.
It never ceases to amaze me how many hunters are fine with the use of long and recurve bows for deer as well as traditional style muzzleloaders loaded up with traditional style roundballs, but will decry the .223 as ineffective and unethical for deer.
It will never be a versatile deer round, but if ranges are kept reasonable and a proper load selected, it's fine for deer as long as the hunter puts in the practice time and is willing to pass on iffy shots.
It never ceases to amaze me how many hunters are fine with the use of long and recurve bows for deer as well as traditional style muzzleloaders loaded up with traditional style roundballs, but will decry the .223 as ineffective and unethical for deer.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,416
If the OP doesn't understand the difference between fragmenting bullets, and expanding bullets that retain mass he should not be hunting regardless of caliber. Using the .223 requires that you understand what bullets to use, and that you are a good hunter and a good shot to place your shots carefully, pretty much like any other caliber. If the .223 is not legal in your state or you lack skills and knowledge you should not use it. You can be less picky about range and shot angles with a 30-06 for sure.
watergun
Member
.223
I have killed 6 deer with my .223, all one-shot kills through the lungs at distances from 50 to 150 yards. Shot placement is paramount as is distance (I will not shoot a deer over 200 yards with a .223). I use Federal 55 grain Bearclaw ammo. None ran more than 40 yards. The .223 is plenty adequate for deer with premium bullets and good judgment.
I have killed 6 deer with my .223, all one-shot kills through the lungs at distances from 50 to 150 yards. Shot placement is paramount as is distance (I will not shoot a deer over 200 yards with a .223). I use Federal 55 grain Bearclaw ammo. None ran more than 40 yards. The .223 is plenty adequate for deer with premium bullets and good judgment.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
R&D in bullet technology has made a world of difference throughout the calibers. The .223 size has probably seen the most benefit.
Approximately, prior to the year 2000, it was primarily a varmint round. Technology--and good judgement--has made it a useful hunting round for deer.
Approximately, prior to the year 2000, it was primarily a varmint round. Technology--and good judgement--has made it a useful hunting round for deer.
up 2 snuff
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 40
Shot placement is critical regardless of caliber. A sportsman always wants to make a clean and humane kill. I prefer not to have to consider the limitations of a weapon while trying to make a shot on a game animal. There are situations where a .223 might not be as effective as a larger caliber, in situations where other variables are at play such as distance, obstructions (brush, small tree limbs, etc.), and animal position (quartering). For myself I choose to have a more powerful gun to minimize those variables, and just focus on shot selection and execution.
CountryUgly
Member
I used to be of the opinion that the .224 dia bullet was subpar for med game simply because my state didn't allow its use for such hunting. However they lifted that restriction several years ago. I've found that any quality .224 dia bullet (whether it be from the .223 or 22-250) at any reasonable distance (inside 350 yards) put through the lungs, heart or spine has killed deer/pigs just as dead as the old 30-06 i used for many years would.
Elkins45
Member
Yeah, but I imagine most people who use those weapons don't do so because they consider them killing machines. They probably use them because it allows them access to longer seasons and/or restricted hunting areas.
While I don't dispute that .223 can be an effective deer round with proper shot placement and correct bullet selection, I would never voluntarily choose it during a season that allowed centerfire rifle cartridges unless somehow I lost access to all my other rifles. Why give up the margin of error that something like a 270 or 308 provides?
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,667
Would you take a quartering away shot with a .223 at a 200 lb buck that had 12" of penetration through guts and a stomach stuffed with wet grass just to get through and into the vitals? Those are the kind of shots that I wouldn't make with a .223 that I wouldn't have a second thought about making with a 30-06, .270, .308, .243 even.
Where I'm at, that very well might be the only shot you get all season. Three years ago, that WAS the only shot I saw all season, and a 30-06 got the job done, with over 18" of penetration...in just in front of the right hip, through the gut cavity, through the diaphragm, took out pretty much an entire lung, then exited just behind the left front leg.
I'm with Elkins45. Even if .223 was legal to hunt deer with here, which it isn't, (Same state as the OP) I would never consider using a .223 over my 30-06, .270, .308. Nothing gained for much capability lost IMO.
Where I'm at, that very well might be the only shot you get all season. Three years ago, that WAS the only shot I saw all season, and a 30-06 got the job done, with over 18" of penetration...in just in front of the right hip, through the gut cavity, through the diaphragm, took out pretty much an entire lung, then exited just behind the left front leg.
I'm with Elkins45. Even if .223 was legal to hunt deer with here, which it isn't, (Same state as the OP) I would never consider using a .223 over my 30-06, .270, .308. Nothing gained for much capability lost IMO.
Last edited:
You'd never use a .223, but claim a deer can "easily" be killed at 100 yards with a 22 LR? I'm sorry if that doesn't make a bit of sense to me(nor is it true n my experience). Again, real world experience tells me volumes more than random people's conjectures do. To each their own, but I have no qualms whatsoever using a .223 (but think anyone suggesting a .22 rimfire for 100 yard shots on deer is at the very least unethical)
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,667
Of course a deer can be easily killed at 100 yards by a .22lr. Just aim 4" high and hit it in the head. However, my reasons for not using .22lr is the same as my reasons for not using the .223...aside from legality.
There is not enough "leeway" for either caliber. Both require precise placement of bullets for a humane kill that the real world often does not present...the .223 not as much so, but is still handicapped by its capabilities, and both are limited in range as compared to the larger calibers I mentioned.
Argue all you want that a .223 is a great deer caliber, and I will pass it by all day long in preference for larger calibers for deer. This is all irrelevant anyways,as the .223 is not legal for game in the OP's state....so I don't know what the OP means by "meat gun".
The only meat legal for a .223 to harvest in Washington state is also legal to be harvested with a .22lr.
I think its interesting that the same people that are aghast at the idea of a .22lr used on deer are using the same arguments I'm using, for their .223...shot placement, range restrictions, realizing the limitations, then go on to quote bowhunting energy as sufficient, in order to justify the energy comparison of the .223 vs larger calibers. Now you go on to compare the energy of .22lr against .223....when the .22lr has as much energy if not more than most bows. All that doesn't justify .22lr to you any more than arguments for the .223 justifies it as a better choice than other, larger calibers to me.
Unless or when current laws change, when a .223 is a legal choice for deer here there will be several reasons why it won't be on my list of meat cartridges. It doesn't do anything a .22lr will at under 75 yards with a head shot on a deer except make more noise, and if I need something other than a .22lr to get meat I'll step up to a caliber that offers much more performance for the noise and powder burned than a .223
The only way a .223 is currently a viable choice for anything other than varmints for me is if its TEOTWAWKI and it's all I had.
There is not enough "leeway" for either caliber. Both require precise placement of bullets for a humane kill that the real world often does not present...the .223 not as much so, but is still handicapped by its capabilities, and both are limited in range as compared to the larger calibers I mentioned.
Argue all you want that a .223 is a great deer caliber, and I will pass it by all day long in preference for larger calibers for deer. This is all irrelevant anyways,as the .223 is not legal for game in the OP's state....so I don't know what the OP means by "meat gun".
The only meat legal for a .223 to harvest in Washington state is also legal to be harvested with a .22lr.
I think its interesting that the same people that are aghast at the idea of a .22lr used on deer are using the same arguments I'm using, for their .223...shot placement, range restrictions, realizing the limitations, then go on to quote bowhunting energy as sufficient, in order to justify the energy comparison of the .223 vs larger calibers. Now you go on to compare the energy of .22lr against .223....when the .22lr has as much energy if not more than most bows. All that doesn't justify .22lr to you any more than arguments for the .223 justifies it as a better choice than other, larger calibers to me.
Unless or when current laws change, when a .223 is a legal choice for deer here there will be several reasons why it won't be on my list of meat cartridges. It doesn't do anything a .22lr will at under 75 yards with a head shot on a deer except make more noise, and if I need something other than a .22lr to get meat I'll step up to a caliber that offers much more performance for the noise and powder burned than a .223
The only way a .223 is currently a viable choice for anything other than varmints for me is if its TEOTWAWKI and it's all I had.
Last edited:
I'm telling you, a headshot at 100 (or even 75) yards is far from a gurantee of a dead deer. Did you fail to read my experiences of shooting cows at point blank range in the "sweet spot" and failing to kill them? I've also shot numerous deer in the head with a .22 LR pistol, as a "finishing shot" and THAT has failed to kill them on numerous occasions. That's why I typically slit the throat instead anymore. Argue all you want shooting deer with a .22 is the same as shooting a deer with a .223 or a bow, but its not comparable. Both a bow and a .223 offer projectiles that can penetrate to the vital organs, whereas a .22 LR simply doesn't have that power in a good many cases. Like I said, at ranges of 3ft, a .22 pistol will often fail to kill deer, so I'm not sure what makes you think they'd die any better being shot at 300 ft. I'm not arguing the fact everyone should use a .223 to hunt with...that comes down to a personal choice and the law, depending on location. I do take serious issues with your claims that a 22 LR would be JUST as effective, when theres absolutely no basis whatsoever for that claim, and anyone who has shot enough critters with a .22 and a .223 knows there's a world of difference between them. When a .22LR fails to kill prairie dogs with head shots at 100 yards consistently, how do you think it'll fare any better on deer? I think its silly to keep making the claim. Sure, you can HIT a deer at 100 yards with a .22, but you are FAR from guaranteeing a ethical kill with even headshots at that range.
As far as I see it the OP wasn't planning his next hunt around the .223. In fact he has stated that past deer have been taken with nothing smaller than 7mm. He was simply seeking knowledge about the subject.
I too am of the thought that a .243, .270, .308, 30-06 etc. would be a better choice. But a .223 is capable of killing deer sized game with correct bullet choice and shot placement.
Silicosys4, I feel like I should better explain myself from my last post. I was attempting an apples to oranges comparison, a situation where I would feel uncomfortable taking a shot with a cartridge more than capable of killing deer vs a shot I'd feel fine taking with a round some think is under-powered.
For the record, I use a scoped .308 for hunting even though I own several .223 rifles (which are legal for deer hunting in GA).
I too am of the thought that a .243, .270, .308, 30-06 etc. would be a better choice. But a .223 is capable of killing deer sized game with correct bullet choice and shot placement.
Silicosys4, I feel like I should better explain myself from my last post. I was attempting an apples to oranges comparison, a situation where I would feel uncomfortable taking a shot with a cartridge more than capable of killing deer vs a shot I'd feel fine taking with a round some think is under-powered.
For the record, I use a scoped .308 for hunting even though I own several .223 rifles (which are legal for deer hunting in GA).
Not sure how many deer I've killed with my 22-250 and Barnes bullets... But it's quite a few. Just have to get close. Plus I've shot prairie dogs with this rifle past 500 yards. A deer at 200 broadside is a chip shot.
Past 250 I start stalking in closer or waiting. Lose too much juice.
Just bought my first AR and it will probably take a deer or two, antelope maybe?!
But them Barnes are a miracle bullet. They hold together and cause massive damage. The blood trails do suck. But the deer usually drop inside 50 yards.
Past 250 I start stalking in closer or waiting. Lose too much juice.
Just bought my first AR and it will probably take a deer or two, antelope maybe?!
But them Barnes are a miracle bullet. They hold together and cause massive damage. The blood trails do suck. But the deer usually drop inside 50 yards.
M1GarandDeerHunter
Member
Ref post 15, our hunting conditions are very different. I might get one deer I might get five. But more likely to get one shot under less than ideal conditions. So I hunt with what gives me confidence. So I use a bigger caliber that I handle well, and can still place my shots with. Its reliable and works.
Your choice does the same, it works well with the conditions your afforded, with the numbers of animals you have to choose from and the ranges, whatever they are, you shoot at. Its reliable for you and works. Its cool.
Those guys I told you about aren't average guys as far as shooting goes. They are all distinguished riflemen and use AR platforms regularly. They are exceptional shooters, and the AR allowed them to do it.
The reason why the debate persists is because awesome .223 bullets for deer hunting didnt always exist, and there are still reservations about using it for such.
Your choice does the same, it works well with the conditions your afforded, with the numbers of animals you have to choose from and the ranges, whatever they are, you shoot at. Its reliable for you and works. Its cool.
Those guys I told you about aren't average guys as far as shooting goes. They are all distinguished riflemen and use AR platforms regularly. They are exceptional shooters, and the AR allowed them to do it.
The reason why the debate persists is because awesome .223 bullets for deer hunting didnt always exist, and there are still reservations about using it for such.
I agree completely M1. As long as the ammo/gun combo achieves the desired results with near 100% consistency(fwiw, I AM @ 100% with the .223, but things happen, regardless of caliber....I've lost deer hit well with a 7mm before, but I didnt retire it as a contender because of it), I don't think its anyone else's place to label it as inefficient or unethical. While there are exceptions, many of the people disparaging the .223 as a deer round have never used it as such. Another class of people who disparage it are those who HAVE used it, but well beyond its effective range(thats an issue I DO have with "rookies" using the .223....you can make hits at ranges far beyond what will ethically kill) , or with poorly constructed varmint bullets....yet they blame the caliber, not their poor choice of shot or bullet selection. Heck, i had reservations about using it too.....until I took that first shot, anyway, and dropped a 5x5 whitetail with it. I've shot deer with the 7mm Mag (my typical go-to deer rifle) 30-30, 7.62x39, .243, and .223. In the end, no deer was any "deader" than another, and very few traveled feet, let alone yards, from point of impact.
To the OP, with proper technique and close proximity, almost all bullets have a lethal capability
But......
Its sounds like you havent purchased a gun yet.
As a hunter, I am not only looking to something to kill with, I am looking for a caliber/rifle that produces a quick and humane kill.
There are many people that only have a 223, and want to use it for hunting as well.
In those cases, there are some good bullets that will increase the chances of a humane kill. (FMJ is not a humane hunting bullet)
The 223 CAN do the job, but....... if you are selectine a rifle on hunting midsize animals, its not the best choice, IMHO.
Your margin for error is much less with a tiny bullet. But there are people that are harvesting wild boar with the 223 here in Texas.
My favorite caliber for Pig/deer is in an AR15, but its the 6.8. I use a 120G Hornady SST that is my DRT bullet (Dead right there)
Good luck on your choice
But......
Its sounds like you havent purchased a gun yet.
As a hunter, I am not only looking to something to kill with, I am looking for a caliber/rifle that produces a quick and humane kill.
There are many people that only have a 223, and want to use it for hunting as well.
In those cases, there are some good bullets that will increase the chances of a humane kill. (FMJ is not a humane hunting bullet)
The 223 CAN do the job, but....... if you are selectine a rifle on hunting midsize animals, its not the best choice, IMHO.
Your margin for error is much less with a tiny bullet. But there are people that are harvesting wild boar with the 223 here in Texas.
My favorite caliber for Pig/deer is in an AR15, but its the 6.8. I use a 120G Hornady SST that is my DRT bullet (Dead right there)
Good luck on your choice
Ok, the op only asked about the bullet selection someone might use. That was answered a long time ago...
- Status
