.223
 

I talked with my cousin who is a avid hunter.
He said that the 30-06, 7mm-08 or .270 is overkill.
Although thier nice guns, there just way more gun then you want for Florida.
He said that he killed all his deer and hogs 250lb+ with a .5mm or his .222

Anyway it looks like the .222 is phasing out(?)

I was thinking on the .223 any thoughts on this caliber?

Edited by - Xcommercial fisherman on 01/10/2003 20:05:19

RE: .223
 

I would rather have too much than not enough.
IMO the 7mm-08 or .270 would be great.

RE: .223
 

I've dropped deer with just about everything from .222 to .375 H&H and I've seen friends drop a heck of a lot more....

The best performers in my opinion are .243 Win, 6MM Rem, .257 Roberts, .25-06. I consider the .260 Remington an equal in this group although I know no one that has one yet.

I agree that the .270-.30-06 group is far more powerful than truly needed, but they'll still do a good job.

The .223 might be a real winner for you.....personally, I'd step up to the next group. Trailing a wounded deer without snow and no exit hole can be very frustrating indeed!!

RE: .223
 

I went looking at a gun store today and the guy there said I should go with a .308
He said a .223 or a .243 would not humanely kill a deer.
I really don't want a moose killer, I just want something in between that will get the job done.

They had a used Winchester model 70 .308 for $370

RE: .223
 

the 243 gets such a bad rap for use on deer.the sad fact is its the shooter thats the problem not the cartridge. if the bullet is put where it should be(as it should be with any round) it will drop a deer in short order.just had to get that off my chest,sorry.

RE: .223
 

Unlike everyone else I will vote against the 223 as a deer round. A 223 will do the job under the right conditions. The problem is that unless you have alot of experiance and self-control the right conditions will be few and far between. Do yourself a favor and use at least a 243. If you're concerned with recoil the 243 and 7mm-08 are proven performers and are still easy on the shoulder. The 308 is a great deer caliber. It's ALWAYS better to be overgunned.

RE: .223
 

You can tell that guy that told you a .243 isn't adequate for deer that the last 11 whitetails that I have shot didn't agree with him. I stopped using my 7mm mag because it didn't kill any faster than my 243 and the 243 was lighter, and more accurate. I don't think you could go wrong with the .243, you could still use the lighter weight 55-60gr bullets.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: .223
 

Misinformed DG? Misinformation and experience are two different things.
Just because he prefers a smaller caliber over an elk killer does not make him misinformed. He has 5 deer mounts on his wall and a dozen pics.
Remember were talking about Florida here. A 200lb deer is a monster. Deer and hog are the largest game down here.

Anyway I talked with 3 other hunters around here and they all agree with what Josh has said.

Edited by - Xcommercial fisherman on 01/12/2003 09:22:34

RE: .223
 

Hey friend....that .308 would not have been a bad buy.....

There's two things.....the cartridge and the shooter. If the shooter does his thing well, the cartridge don't mean too much at all. If the shooter does just a good job.....a little extra cartridge helps to compensate. However, there comes a time when the cartridge can't compensate because the shooter messed up too badly. Missing a deer with a .222 is exactly the same as missing it with a .460 Weatherby magnum!!!

If you didn't drop that deer in it's tracks with a .243, you wouldn't have done so with a .30-06 either!!!!

In all sincerity, I'd be buying a .260 Remington.....It's one helluva cartridge!!! But any of the cartridges listed on this thread will get the job done!!!!!