whats the difference?
#11
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 218
RE: whats the difference?
You can kill any deer built with a 22 rimfire or a sharp stick, the trick is to be effective with your method. A 222 will kill a whitetail quite effectively, but don't expect an exit wound. A gut shot will probably be a lost deer. There will be very little blood to track with. A shot on the point of the shoulder that has to go through bone might not be as effective as you would like. Light bullet construction means you will have to shoot appropriotly.
All that being said, shoot the 222 like you were shooting a bow, right behind the shoulder he will die, now you will have to make the call of can you find him or not. Same with 223.
My theory is shoot the biggest gun available, that you can shoot comfortably. Too dead has never been a problem for me, but not dead enough has. The reason that some states do not allow smaller calibers is the simple fact that many people are not responsible enough to pick there shot and game is wasted when they wound and loose the animal.
The question is not will the 222 kill a deer cleanly, but do you feel comfortable going the extra mile to make it happen.
All that being said, shoot the 222 like you were shooting a bow, right behind the shoulder he will die, now you will have to make the call of can you find him or not. Same with 223.
My theory is shoot the biggest gun available, that you can shoot comfortably. Too dead has never been a problem for me, but not dead enough has. The reason that some states do not allow smaller calibers is the simple fact that many people are not responsible enough to pick there shot and game is wasted when they wound and loose the animal.
The question is not will the 222 kill a deer cleanly, but do you feel comfortable going the extra mile to make it happen.
#12
RE: whats the difference?
ORIGINAL: trailer
The .223 is about as potent at 100 yards as the .222 is at the muzzle.
Someone is under estimating the 222...
The .223 is about as potent at 100 yards as the .222 is at the muzzle.
Here are ballistics for Winchester's factory loads:
.222, 50 gr.
Muzzle 100 200 300
3140 2602 2123 1700 feet per second
1094 752 500 321 foot-pounds
.223, 55 gr.
Muzzle 100 200 300
3240 2871 2531 2215 feet per second
1282 1006 782 599 foot-pounds
Muzzle 100 200 300
3140 2602 2123 1700 feet per second
1094 752 500 321 foot-pounds
.223, 55 gr.
Muzzle 100 200 300
3240 2871 2531 2215 feet per second
1282 1006 782 599 foot-pounds
Sounds to me like the biased opinion of someone trying to justify his purchase of a .222...
#13
RE: whats the difference?
ipscshooter
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MB.
Posts: 2,984
RE: whats the difference?
To be honest, I didn’t do my homework. I saw approx. 200 f.p.s. difference between the 2 in my reloading manual and I just couldn’t see it. I’m going to check into it some more. I will admit I have a 222, but I would never use a 222 or 223 for deer hunting. I have rifles chambered in cartridges better suited for that...
I purchased my 222 for my use and I don’t have to justify anything...[8D]
Sounds to me like the biased opinion of someone trying to justify his purchase of a .222...
#15
RE: whats the difference?
ORIGINAL: Beware_of_Dawg
I've heard a couple people here say that a .223 is a capable rifle for deer hunting... What's the difference between a .222 (which I own one of) and a .223?
I've heard a couple people here say that a .223 is a capable rifle for deer hunting... What's the difference between a .222 (which I own one of) and a .223?
ipscshooter
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
I'd like to remind everyone that the Inuit hunters in Alaska, anyway, used to kill their polar bears with the .22 Hornet. Most of them have now up-gunned to the .223!
#16
RE: whats the difference?
ORIGINAL: eldeguello
This "foot-pound" business is basically BS. It is NOT how many foot-pounds a bullet carries, but how that energy is applied to the animal that determines whether the varmint is gonna bite the dust. I would much rather hit an elk, for example,with a .58-caliber round ball at 1200 ft/sec or more than any 17-caliber bullet, even if the .17 is showing higher Ft/Lb numbers......
ipscshooter
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
Keep in mind that a generally accepted rule of thumb for deer rifles is that they have a minimum of 1000 ft. lbs of energy at impact.
#17
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 321
RE: whats the difference?
JMO
But I hunt in Pennsylvania and I know of people that did hunt at one time with a .222 Remington because their kids were small and couldn't handle the recoil of a larger firearm.
Did it make it right? NO
Was it any good for hunting white tails where I live? NO
Why did they do it? Probably because they were too cheap to go out and spend the money for a first gun for a kid that in a couple of years they would out grow and then it would just sit in the gun cabinet or get pawned off on some one else.
I will agree with anyone that says that you shouldn't use anything smaller than a .243 Winchester and go one step further to say that a .243 shouldn't be used as a kids gun because you have to be selective in where you shoot to make a ethical shot on a large whitetail deer.
But I hunt in Pennsylvania and I know of people that did hunt at one time with a .222 Remington because their kids were small and couldn't handle the recoil of a larger firearm.
Did it make it right? NO
Was it any good for hunting white tails where I live? NO
Why did they do it? Probably because they were too cheap to go out and spend the money for a first gun for a kid that in a couple of years they would out grow and then it would just sit in the gun cabinet or get pawned off on some one else.
I will agree with anyone that says that you shouldn't use anything smaller than a .243 Winchester and go one step further to say that a .243 shouldn't be used as a kids gun because you have to be selective in where you shoot to make a ethical shot on a large whitetail deer.
#18
RE: whats the difference?
ORIGINAL: The Rifleman
I will agree with anyone that says that you shouldn't use anything smaller than a .243 Winchester and go one step further to say that a .243 shouldn't be used as a kids gun because you have to be selective in where you shoot to make a ethical shot on a large whitetail deer.
I will agree with anyone that says that you shouldn't use anything smaller than a .243 Winchester and go one step further to say that a .243 shouldn't be used as a kids gun because you have to be selective in where you shoot to make a ethical shot on a large whitetail deer.
The .243 seems to work fine for him.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
RE: whats the difference?
I will agree with anyone that says that you shouldn't use anything smaller than a .243 Winchester and go one step further to say that a .243 shouldn't be used as a kids gun because you have to be selective in where you shoot to make a ethical shot on a large whitetail deer.
I also have to say i love the .222 Rem. cartridge... I have a 12ga. .222 combogun that i've harvested a ton of meat with, but to me a wolf is the biggest thing i'd shoot with a .222... (or .223 for that matter)
I've also had other .222's including bench rest rifles that were amazing accurate!
DM