.223 as minimum legal caliber for big game? - Page 3

#61 03-06-2008, 07:23 AM

Quote:

I believe that most folks who are venturing out in the woods would probably have a tendency to be overgunned rather than undergunned (bigger is better, don't you know ).
18 Minutes Ago 07:00 AM

so true "I think they are compensating for something."

albertadave · #62 03-06-2008, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Why? Well, by shooting a more 'user friendly' gun, the time I spend at the range isn't a painful experience and I've become a better shooter for it.

Slight hijack here, and not directed solely at you treeguy, but I don't buy the whole "I don't practice shootting my gun as much as I should because it hurts when I shoot it" argument. Might possibly be a convenient cop-out for some, but I still don't buy it. Either you have the dedication, time and dollars to practice properly, or you don't, but I highly doubt anyone conciously makes the decision "I'm not going to the range today because my gun hurts my shoulder", sorry, I just don't believe it. IMO Most would either buy a sissy pad for practicing, or a smaller gun if they can't handle the recoil.

roger · #63 03-06-2008, 07:38 AM

its not for everyone, but should be available,
a 22-243, 22-250, 220 swift, 223 short fat, would be more than enough

Pioneer2 · #64 03-06-2008, 07:50 AM

In my opinion most people are overgunned.IE: intimidated by their own gun Usually brought on by shooting without muffs and from unsteady rests.Every real MAN needs a Magnum. Nothing wrong with any Magnum if you learn to master standard calibers first.I've seen cavemen at the range actually bend a front sight back and forth till it broke off with a ball peen hammer.On a NIB Win 94.After offering assistance and being turned down I moved over two benches.Then there's the SNIPERS that can't tell 100 yards from 300yards and they're passing all their "knowledge" to some poor fellow that came along for the ride to sight in his gun.If you spent any time at the range I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.It's funny to see people flinch from expected recoil on a misfire and then wonder how they missed that big buck.Must be the scope,mounts or gun.................................Harold

Pathfinder76 · #65 03-06-2008, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Whats the weight retention of your small game bullet after having to break bone to get to the motor on that w/t at 400 yds.

An 85gr TSX will outweigh a 100gr partition under thos circumstances and I've seen that bullet go lengthways through a 180 class big bodied prairie Mule Deer buck without problem.

snetzer · #66 03-06-2008, 08:32 AM

Personally, I think the .23 caliber law is fine where it is. Do we not owe it to the animal to dispatch it as quickly and humanely as possible? I will agree that shot placement is critical, but everyone is human. We make mistakes. We also miss. I would sooner shoot a deer a little too far back with a .30 caliber bullet with all that kinetic energy than a .22 caliber.

lazy ike · #67 03-06-2008, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick284

Here is the rub with sub .23 cal calibers.
It takes an individual who knows the bullet choices, knows the caliber limitations, and knows how to pick and choose their shots. It also takes and individual who is an experienced and compitent shot to give consistant results with sub .23" calibers.
Outside of a small percentage of folks who frequent places such as this forum, how many fall outside of these requirements. 75 to 80% of all hunters I'd suspect.
How many know they need a 1 in 9 twist to stabilize a 64 gr. .224" bullet, how many are out hunting with 1 in 14 twist rifles getting irratic accuracy, and still hunting with 64's because they saw it on some video clip.
How any is too many, we can debate the finer points, but to the grave majority of hunter they dont know or care or what ever.
Most hunters dont even know the bullet weight they hunted with last year, so I rest.

And in a world where people are constntly trying to find the cheapest way to go hunting, the piles of cheap miilsurp ammo for the 223(in this case) would not help either.

Redfrog · #68 03-06-2008, 11:19 AM

I'd use the 223 if it were legal. I have no doubt it will kill deer. I wouldn't use it on moose or elk or bears, but then I'm not a knuckle dragging neanderthal redneck idiot that a lot of guys in this thread seem to be seeing in the wilds.

There are lots of posts here that are concerned about all the "idiots", "most of the hunters" that don't/ can't shoot, or who shoot guns too big, for them, or compensate for poor skill with larger calibers. Like someone said you can't make laws against stupid.

I didn't realize there were so many unskilled morons out in the field hunting. It almost appears as if the only skilled , responsible hunters are right here on this board.

C'mon guys do you really believe that "Most" hunters are idiots, unskilled shooters, unethical slobs, and downright dangerous?

Of course I've seen a few over the years that shouldn't be hunting, but if it really is as bad as this thread makes it, it is no wonder we have an uphill battle to keep firearms and continue to hunt. This thread makes it look like there are only a select few capable of shooting with skill and ethics.

Depending on the bullets, there isn't a lot of difference between my 220 swift and a 243.

I may have a little more faith in hunters than some others do.

bowchaser · #69 03-06-2008, 03:23 PM

Dick, best summation of the group. Yes it can cleanly take game, but for most run of the mill weekend warriors, larger calibers make sense. Therefore larger calibers dictate.

snetzer · #70 03-06-2008, 03:43 PM

This past season, I shot my biggest mule buck to date. He had an estimated weight of approximately 400 pounds. I shoot a .300 Weatherby and shot him twice at a distance of less than 100 yards. Both of my shots could have been covered by a loonie, yet he still went about 300 yards before piling up. What would have happened if I had been shooting a .223? I don't know...

A .223 makes a fine dog gun...why don't we leave it at that.

nekred · #71 03-06-2008, 03:50 PM

At that distance I would have taken one shot with a 243 to the brainpan...

Dead Deer!....

the 300 weatherby at that distance probably did a through and through and expended all the energy outside the animal!....

two shots covered by a loonie.... you neglect to say where.... in the guts?

Just yankin your chain!....

I like the current limit!....

snetzer · #72 03-06-2008, 04:02 PM

You're right, they did go through but left a hole big enough to throw a tennis ball through on the other side...I was shooting great bullets, 165gr. Barnes Triple Shocks.

Didn't want to shoot him in the head though...he grossed 216-6/8" and netted 197 typical. Didn't really want the adjustable inside spread thing!

nekred · #73 03-06-2008, 04:10 PM

Nice deer,

With that controlled expansion bullet it probably was not opening up until the far side of the cage. Energy expended outside of animal. Be very similar to an arrow kill. Hemorage death vs. hydrostatic shockwave death. It still is dead.

7 REM MAG · #74 03-06-2008, 05:36 PM

was just reading the cwd thread and it says that the f&w were shooting deer out of helicopters with semi auto 223's. I find it hard to believe that a 223 from a heli would be more lethal than an experienced hunter with said gun at 100-150 yds. If the government can do it then why can't we? Oh thats right their the government and they dont have to worry about getting charged.

mountainman elkohalic · #75 03-06-2008, 06:43 PM

The Co's Are Using Them To Cull The Deer Polulation Which Is Total Bullsh#@ So Why Can't We Or Are The Co's Above The Law Once Again

7 REM MAG · #76 03-06-2008, 10:53 PM

i bet these so called semi auto 223's were in an ar, restricted, no hunting allowed platform aswell

raised by wolves · #77 03-09-2008, 12:58 PM

Stopping power is the reason that the US military is stepping up from the .223 to the 6.8MM. As hunters we should pay attention to the battlefield research. Granted, some individuals know their bullets, rifles, and wait for the right shot, but the light calibre is going to result in many lost and wounded animals.

I swear by my 6MM, for deer or smaller game. I have been very successful with it and for over 20 years most animals being taken with a single shot. Despite this success with a light gun, I was dissappointed when I tried the
Nosler Partition bullets. I wasn't happy with what I saw this past season when I tried these bullets. A lost animal due to the bullet completely shattering on the outside of a rib. The front half of the bullet shattered and the base obviously did not have the weight or velocity to continue its job. I am not a proficient reloader, but to my understanding the sealed base on the partition bullet should be approximately the same weight as the 22 centre-fires. Not enough stopping power.

The light bullets such as the 22-250, 222, and the 223 (aside from its military application) were intended for varmints and paper.

sbtennex · #78 03-09-2008, 01:14 PM

Too American a concept. A .22-250 with 60 gr NP's will do in a deer just fine, but I still don't like the idea. You owe it the animals you hunt to kill them as quickly as possible, unless your idea of sport is pulling off flies' wings, drowning gophers or lighting cats on fire

twofifty · #79 03-09-2008, 07:55 PM

Interesting discussion we have going on here.

When it comes to ill-informed hunters who do not shoot their rigs frequently enough to know their rifle's and their own limitations, that was me in my 20s.

Fortunately, I used a middle-of-the-road .30 cal, and instinctively knew that 100yds would be the max effective range. Open sights too.

My idea of practice for the Fall hunt was to burn 2 boxes of 150 or 180gr soft points in late August, over the hood of my car with sandbags at a paced 100yds... I was your typical big-city-slicker weekend warrior 'hunter'.

But that was in Ontario, and cover was sooo tight that 50yds was considered a long shot! So the habitat I hunted in protected me and the critters from my ignorance about rifles, ballistics, bullet construction & performance, etc.

Fast forward 30 years. Now I live out West, where the habitat dictates that marksmanship matters. There are Rod&Gun club ranges in every valley. Plus, internet hunting forums abound. So I'm in the process of learning what I should have learned years ago. This new environment challenges me to do so. I now burn thousands of rounds each year. Also attend matches - steel and paper. The West sure is a whole 'nuther culture when it comes to hunting and shooting.

I wish new hunter training involved hands-on rifle range training, followed by a basic marksmanship proficiency test. The test would require the applicant hunter, using his/her own rifle, to place 3 rounds in the vitals of a deer silhouette (paper) at 100 yds from a position of his/her choice (bench and frt. rest only allowed), and 3 rounds in the vitals at 50 yds from standing. Also, to demonstrate understanding of his/her caliber's MPBR.

As to hunting deer with high velocity .224" bullets, one fellow hereabouts (in B.C. so it was legal) did that years ago at a time when he and his buds were in their 'minimalist' phase. Said it worked very well. Thing is this guy rings a 7" gong at 300yds with a 100yd-zeroed .30-06, from standing... Not your average big-city-slicker weekend warrior....

SouthAltaHunter · #80 03-09-2008, 08:20 PM

Kinda like shooting a elephant with a crossbow.

Pathfinder76 · #81 03-09-2008, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Kinda like shooting a elephant with a crossbow.

I would say it's nothing like it. At all.

Okotokian · #82 03-10-2008, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 220swifty

: Here is a proposal, for anyone wanting to shoot sub 23 on deer and antelope, they must go to a pre-season qualifier and qualify with the rifle they plan on hunting with. At that point, they get some sort of stamp certifying them with that rifle for a set period of time. Only proficient marksmen will be using the 223's

Ahhhh more government regulation, testing, certification and licencing... and have to do it every year....

I LIKE IT!!!!! GIMME MORE!

aulrich · #83 03-10-2008, 04:29 PM

I am not compelled to lower it,No doubt it could work, but there are too many other better options.

If I was to use lobbing capital on any rule it would be electronic callers.

Rusty P. Bucket · #84 03-10-2008, 04:31 PM

I agree that the 223 will kill deer like lightning if one shoots and loads it responsibly.

The question arises though - why would you want to? If you are recoil sensitive one of those slick 7-08's or 243's hardly kick at all, and you get far better ballistics out of them to boot.

I am surprised that this issue is so controversial.

capthook · #85 03-11-2008, 12:39 AM

Hello all...

Personally, I think that using smaller calibers is just fine... after all, we allow bow hunters to go out and stick pins into all sorts of game, large or small, teeth and claws or not...

A number of repliers have commented about the appropriateness of small caliber rifles, but I for one beleive it's the large calibers that generate the majority of wounded animals. Many modern hunters compensate for lack of riflemanship and poor hunting skill by buying the biggest penis (opps, I meant to type rifle) that money can buy but then find that it is too much for them to comfortably shoot more than a couple of boxes of ammo a year... So off they go into the field with a gun that in the hands of skilled marksman could reach out to 600, 700 or enven a 1000 meters and they start shooting at ranges that are impossible for thier low skill level... The result is many animals wounded but not put down... to die slowly or at least far enough away that they are not recovered...

I watched this happen too many times in the YahaTinda country, in the NWT and out near Manyberries to have any doubts... Hell, I think instead of fussing about the legality and appropriateness of small calibers lets have a discussion about outlawing calibers larger than, lets say, 30 caliber... Anything larger is unnecessary and only demonstrates a lack of skill... While we are at it, let's outlaw any rifle that can handle more than a single round... Now that would separate the wheat from the chaff... and result in far fewer wounded animals...

Hook

capthook · #86 03-11-2008, 12:45 AM

Oh, and I forgot to mention that maybe we should legalize spears or clubs... now that would be a true sporting challenge... to harvest your game with a spear... Up close and personal... Maybe get a little gore splashed on you or a few defensive wounds as your game gives it last gasp of life... Definitely no issue with the ability for a clean humane kill.. A spear will put them down just fine...

By the by, has anyone on the forum actually harvest legal game with a spear?

Hook

catnthehat · #87 03-11-2008, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capthook

Oh, and I forgot to mention that maybe we should legalize spears or clubs... now that would be a true sporting challenge... to harvest your game with a spear... Up close and personal... Maybe get a little gore splashed on you or a few defensive wounds as your game gives it last gasp of life... Definitely no issue with the ability for a clean humane kill.. A spear will put them down just fine...

By the by, has anyone on the forum actually harvest legal game with a spear?

Hook

I have a friend who killed a boar in New Zealand with a spear.
They do it there all the time for fun.
Cat

russ · #88 03-11-2008, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capthook

Hello all...

Personally, I think that using smaller calibers is just fine... after all, we allow bow hunters to go out and stick pins into all sorts of game, large or small, teeth and claws or not...

Now there's an apple & oranges comparison.

tikkat69 · #89 03-11-2008, 07:08 AM

You guys make me laugh!!!! Most the cry babys cant take the recoil of a .270 so they must shot at deer with .223!!!! ( oh i hit the deer a little back now i have to look for it for hours.) Cant find it so i will shot at a different deer now..
No one should be shooting at deer with a .223.. Not even me and I can out shoot most of the mouth peices on here..Sorry but its true..
It will not make you a bigger man to kill a deer with a little bullet..

Now i'm going to go club a seal.. WITH A SMALL CLUB!!!!!

russ · #90 03-11-2008, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikkat69

You guys make me laugh!!!! Most the cry babys cant take the recoil of a .270 so they must shot at deer with .223!!!! ( oh i hit the deer a little back now i have to look for it for hours.) Cant find it so i will shot at a different deer now..

Too true, 10 or 15 shots with the .270 and I'm done, but I still use the .270.