.223 enough for deer?
08-02-2006, 12:46 PM
#22
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Conway, Arkansas
Posts: 184
RE: .223 enough for deer?
I have no doubt that the .223 can harvest deer cleanly. However I do not think it is a caliber that should be used to hunt deer on a regular basis. There are so many calibers out there that are better on deer and can be found just as cheap and economical. Just my Opionion. which with 50 cents you can buy a cup of coffee.
08-02-2006, 01:13 PM
#23
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 581
RE: .223 enough for deer?
Can a .223 work on deer? Yes, it can and it has. More importantly, though; is it a good choice to use on deer? No. Not in my opinion. I realize plenty of people have used it and had success with it time and again. I still don't believe it's a good choice. Even stepping up to a .220 Swift or a 22-250 gives you a lot more powder behind that little pill.
I really didn't have much of an issue with it until last year when my buddy lost two really nice bucks in a span of two days with his 223. He was using 60gr Nosler Partitions and he's a good shot. He did everything by the book, too; broadside shots, standing still, under 150 yards. Zero blood trail. We looked for hours on both deer.With the first one,our group kind of wrote it off as possibly being a bad hit or just bad luck.But the 2nd one he tookhis time, made surehe was putting them inthe vitals.It wasn't a heavily wooded area, but there were plenty of trees and cover.
He could probably go out and get the next 10 deer in arow withhis .223 and have absolutely no problems. But is it worth the risk? Whychance it when there are so many better tools (calibers) out there? IMO, you owe it to the deer to use something better, just as you owe it to them to be proficient enough with whatever tool you're using to make a quick, clean kill.
I really didn't have much of an issue with it until last year when my buddy lost two really nice bucks in a span of two days with his 223. He was using 60gr Nosler Partitions and he's a good shot. He did everything by the book, too; broadside shots, standing still, under 150 yards. Zero blood trail. We looked for hours on both deer.With the first one,our group kind of wrote it off as possibly being a bad hit or just bad luck.But the 2nd one he tookhis time, made surehe was putting them inthe vitals.It wasn't a heavily wooded area, but there were plenty of trees and cover.
He could probably go out and get the next 10 deer in arow withhis .223 and have absolutely no problems. But is it worth the risk? Whychance it when there are so many better tools (calibers) out there? IMO, you owe it to the deer to use something better, just as you owe it to them to be proficient enough with whatever tool you're using to make a quick, clean kill.
08-02-2006, 01:18 PM
#24
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,429
RE: .223 enough for deer?
I've never been accused of being "politcally corect" so why start now? HELL NO!!!!!! Any 22 caliber isn't sufficient to hunt deer. Why do you think they are illegal in many states. A 6mm/243 caliber cartridge is the minimum. I don't believe any 22 can consistantly provide clean ethical kills.
08-02-2006, 02:41 PM
#26
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 116
RE: .223 enough for deer?
It is possible to take down a deer with a .223 and it has been done.One fack is that not every time you are going to pull the trigger everything is going to go right and your bullet is going to hit where you whould like it too.If you dont hit the deer in a major kill spot (Loungs,Heart,Neck,Head)and hit a spot other than a major kill spotyou are 85% more likely to loose a deer than you would be shooting a .270+ caliber.Smaller calibers such as a .223 dont open up a big hole and it will leave you with a small wond and the anamal will not bleed right.So in the end yes you can use a .223 but I dont recomend it.
08-02-2006, 11:30 PM
#27
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 781
RE: .223 enough for deer?
That's another thing, the lack of a good blood trail left by a .22 cal. I'm 100% against a 22 for deer. Just my opinion. If thats all I had I'd sell it and get a 6mm at least. You can have the best of both worlds with that rifle: varmints and deer. I use a 30-06 or a 7mm, just me. I like to make sure I have a clean kill, no use in bragging about being the best shot around. I could kill a deer with a 22cal but who would want to?Taking a chance on wasting a god given gift is not on my "to do " list.
08-03-2006, 08:15 AM
#28
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Texas - BUT NOW in Madison County, NY
Posts: 6,270
RE: .223 enough for deer?
"- Personally I do not feel that it is an ideal caliber for average white tail sized game but it is capable of making a humane kill."
While far from ideal, the .223 is "adequate" for whitetail deer at limited ranges, provided you use the right bullets and place the bullet precisely in a vital area.
I once compared the wound channel in two whitetails of about the same weight, field dressed +- 150 pounds. One had been shot with a .223 with the Nosler Partition 60-grain bullet, and one with a 130-grain Nosler Partiton from a .270 Win. Both were broadside shots thru the ribs and both lungs, both exited the off side ribcage. Range under 100 yards for each animal.
From visual examoination, it seemed that the .270 had done about 4 times the amount of damage done bythe .223.
However, neither animal moved over 5' from where it had been standing whne shot. Hmmm......
BTW, the .22/250 (and .220 SWIFT) is an entirely different proposition. If used with controlled expansion bullets, its' much higher impact velocity does things to larger animals that the .223 is just too slow to duplicate!
While far from ideal, the .223 is "adequate" for whitetail deer at limited ranges, provided you use the right bullets and place the bullet precisely in a vital area.
I once compared the wound channel in two whitetails of about the same weight, field dressed +- 150 pounds. One had been shot with a .223 with the Nosler Partition 60-grain bullet, and one with a 130-grain Nosler Partiton from a .270 Win. Both were broadside shots thru the ribs and both lungs, both exited the off side ribcage. Range under 100 yards for each animal.
From visual examoination, it seemed that the .270 had done about 4 times the amount of damage done bythe .223.
However, neither animal moved over 5' from where it had been standing whne shot. Hmmm......
BTW, the .22/250 (and .220 SWIFT) is an entirely different proposition. If used with controlled expansion bullets, its' much higher impact velocity does things to larger animals that the .223 is just too slow to duplicate!
08-03-2006, 09:52 AM
#30
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 896
RE: .223 enough for deer?
Whether or not the .223 is an adequate calibre for deer, do not try it in California. Here it is illegal to use any calibre less than 6mm to hunt big game of any kind. As far as I know there is no maximum size. I use a .300 Weatherby Magnum for big game and have found it more than adequate.
Caldoc
Caldoc