.223 for Whitetail

[WVHunter]

Hey, just wondering what some of your thoughts were about using a .223 semi automatic Ruger Mini on deer. Of course shot placement is crucial but is a 62gr bullet enough to get the job done?

Thanks for your time
Gavin

[DC72]

They use .223 in some states so i guess they work in some situations but here in alberta they are'nt legal to use

[BackPackHunter]

243 and up on big game in Alberta

[Big Daddy Badger]

They work great on deer...so do 22-250's but like the others have said...not in Alberta.

[AMisler]

Can't use any .22 caliber bullet on big game, regardless of the grain.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by BackPackHunter

243 and up on big game in Alberta

Nope. .23 is the legal minimum.


Anyone looking for a .230/30-06 Ackley Improved Magnum?

[orionab1]

As already stated it is not legal to pursue big game with a cal less then .23.

But that said it appears that this law is one of many in the Alberta game laws that needs to be carefully reviewed. If you consider the ballistics, effectivness of bullet construction, and the accuracy of a rifle I would suggest that the .223 or the .22-250 would be far superior to something like a 35 Rem, or a 357Mag in a lever gun. I don't know that the 22-250 or 223 should be brought in to what is legal, but perhaps some of the others should be excluded too. Just because it is over .23 cal does not mean it is acceptable.

Just my two cents

[deadeye]

Walking buff - ".243 and up" and ".23 is the legal minimum" means the same thing.

[Eze]

amazing how F&W can use them fron helicopters to kill CWD deer back afew years ago as in reports on the slaughter

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Eze

amazing how F&W can use them fron helicopters to kill CWD deer back afew years ago as in reports on the slaughter

Not anymore amzing than the pistols they carry.
What law Enforcement or F&W does is different form civillian law and rules for recreation.
Cat

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by deadeye

Walking buff - ".243 and up" and ".23 is the legal minimum" means the same thing.

there ARE wildcats out there in 23 calibre...

[7mm08]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

there ARE wildcats out there in 23 calibre...

Not trying to start anything, so dont take it the wrong way....can you name one? I am always curious about wildcat chamberings?

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by 7mm08

Not trying to start anything, so dont take it the wrong way....can you name one? I am always curious about wildcat chamberings?

230 ackley short is the one i remember for sure. a few guys got into it when the .22 minimum was instituted in a few US states.

[kevpack]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Nope. .23 is the legal minimum.


Anyone looking for a .230/30-06 Ackley Improved Magnum?

230 /300H&H work for ya...I'm guessin 4500fps with a 35 grain bullet

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by kevpack

230 /300H&H work for ya...I'm guessin 4500fps with a 35 grain bullet

that sounds dangerous.....

i just did a google search and came up with 5 different .230 wildcats. seems to be no commercial makers building bullet anymore though, so guys that have them are swaging their own.

[gopher]

22 savage.

[TangoKilo]

Originally Posted by 7mm08

Not trying to start anything, so dont take it the wrong way....can you name one? I am always curious about wildcat chamberings?

How about:

6X45mm (.223 case necked up to hold a .243 bullet)
or
6X47mm (222 Rem mag case necked up to hold a .243 bullet)
or
7mm TCU (.223 case necked up to hold a .284 bullet)

[1899b]

Originally Posted by orionab1

As already stated it is not legal to pursue big game with a cal less then .23.

But that said it appears that this law is one of many in the Alberta game laws that needs to be carefully reviewed. If you consider the ballistics, effectivness of bullet construction, and the accuracy of a rifle I would suggest that the .223 or the .22-250 would be far superior to something like a 35 Rem, or a 357Mag in a lever gun. I don't know that the 22-250 or 223 should be brought in to what is legal, but perhaps some of the others should be excluded too. Just because it is over .23 cal does not mean it is acceptable.

Just my two cents

Do you know anything about the .35 Rem??? Seriously??

[elkhunter11]

But that said it appears that this law is one of many in the Alberta game laws that needs to be carefully reviewed. If you consider the ballistics, effectivness of bullet construction, and the accuracy of a rifle I would suggest that the .223 or the .22-250 would be far superior to something like a 35 Rem, or a 357Mag in a lever gun. I don't know that the 22-250 or 223 should be brought in to what is legal, but perhaps some of the others should be excluded too. Just because it is over .23 cal does not mean it is acceptable.

Given the choice of a 223rem or a 35 rem to shoot a moose or a bear, I for one would choose the 35 rem.

[1899b]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Given the choice of a 223rem or a 35 rem to shoot a moose or a bear, I for one would choose the 35 rem.

X2........ I was able to push a 200 grainer out of my Marlin 336 35 Rem at 2160 fps.

[338Bluff]

Yeehaw! A ballistics-which-calibre-is-adequate-thread.

Legalities aside the ballistics tables don't lie. From Chuck Hawks;

Energy of a 35 Remington shooting a 200 grain bullet at 200 yards = 841 ft. lbs
Energy of a .223 Remintion shooting a 64 grain bullet at 200 yards = 706 ft. lbs
Energy of a 30-30 Winch. shooting a 150 grain bullet at 200 yards = 858 ft. lbs

Energy of a 30-06 Springfield shooting a 165 grain bullet at 200 is twice the above choices at 1909 ft. lbs. Should also mention that some of the new Hornady bullets and loads have pushed the 30-30 over 1000 ft. lbs.

I know what I would use on a deer.....all of them (where legal). The .223 would be my last choice, but that is just me. I like to err on the side of too big than just enough. I would pack the 06.

A 35 Remington is an absolute Bambi Stomper at ranges less than 200 yards.

[orionab1]

Wasn't intending to argue another day away about what I would choose, what would work or anything like that. What I was asking is, why is the 35 rem legal (heck pick on another one of the old cartridges and/or a pistol cartridge in a rifle platform if it makes you happy). And the 22 cal are not. For example. The 35 Rem with a 200 grain lead retains about 1250 ft/lbs at 100yards. The 22-250 with a 60grain retains about 1230 ft/lbs at 100yards. Seriously doubt the deer will notice the difference. This also is the reason I picked on the good old 35 Rem, simply because it is close to the 22-250 in the charts.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by TangoKilo

How about:

6X45mm (.223 case necked up to hold a .243 bullet)
or
6X47mm (222 Rem mag case necked up to hold a .243 bullet)
or
7mm TCU (.223 case necked up to hold a .284 bullet)

dont mean to nitpick, but none of those are 23 cal which was the question.

[1899b]

Originally Posted by orionab1

Wasn't intending to argue another day away about what I would choose, what would work or anything like that. What I was asking is, why is the 35 rem legal (heck pick on another one of the old cartridges and/or a pistol cartridge in a rifle platform if it makes you happy). And the 22 cal are not. For example. The 35 Rem with a 200 grain lead retains about 1250 ft/lbs at 100yards. The 22-250 with a 60grain retains about 1230 ft/lbs at 100yards. Seriously doubt the deer will notice the difference. This also is the reason I picked on the good old 35 Rem, simply because it is close to the 22-250 in the charts.

Have you held a .22 cal bullet and a .35 cal bullet in your hand? Ft lbs may be the same but do yourself a favour and put the magazine or book down and go out in the field and kill some game. Yes the deer will notice the diff as would a moose or elk which are two other ungulates I would never attempt to shoot with a .22......

[orionab1]

[QUOTE=1899b;1523851]Have you held a .22 cal bullet and a .35 cal bullet in your hand? Ft lbs may be the same but do yourself a favour and put the magazine or book down and go out in the field and kill some game. Yes the deer will notice the diff as would a moose or elk which are two other ungulates I would never attempt to shoot with a .22......[/QUOTE

Friend, you know nothing about me. How I spend my time, nor my background. So why insult me? I am in no way trying to insult your choice in firearm. I have re worded my question below without the examples to try and find an answer that rationalizes the governments choice.

How did the Alberta government arrive at the decision that .23 cal is the minimum for big game? What data did they use?

[1899b]

I'm not trying to be insulting. I have pulled the trigger on deer with both a .243 and a .35 Rem. So I do KNOW the diff between how a big game animal reacts to a .243 cal and a .35 cal. Have also reloaded and chronied both calibers. To even compare a measly .22 cal to a .35 Rem in real world practical terms is ridiculous. Paper ballistics will lead you astray without practical in the bush experience. Yes the .22 is legal in some states but the mere size of there animals in a lot of those states are paltry compared to the physical size of our deer......

[orionab1]

Originally Posted by 1899b

I'm not trying to be insulting. I have pulled the trigger on deer with both a .243 and a .35 Rem. So I do KNOW the diff between how a big game animal reacts to a .243 cal and a .35 cal. Have also reloaded and chronied both calibers. To even compare a measly .22 cal to a .35 Rem in real world practical terms is ridiculous. Paper ballistics will lead you astray without practical in the bush experience. Yes the .22 is legal in some states but the mere size of there animals in a lot of those states are paltry compared to the physical size of our deer......

Fair enough. I get what you are trying to say. Perhaps picking on the 35 Rem was a poor choice to illustrate my question.

[1899b]

Originally Posted by orionab1

Fair enough. I get what you are trying to say. Perhaps picking on the 35 Rem was a poor choice to illustrate my question.

Ironically these laws are made by suits with no real world field experience .....

[Jordan Smith]

Originally Posted by 1899b

I'm not trying to be insulting. I have pulled the trigger on deer with both a .243 and a .35 Rem. So I do KNOW the diff between how a big game animal reacts to a .243 cal and a .35 cal. Have also reloaded and chronied both calibers. To even compare a measly .22 cal to a .35 Rem in real world practical terms is ridiculous. Paper ballistics will lead you astray without practical in the bush experience. Yes the .22 is legal in some states but the mere size of there animals in a lot of those states are paltry compared to the physical size of our deer......

I know some fellas in AK who do just fine with .223's and .223AI's. Bullet construction, shot placement, and bullet performance are far more important than calibre or cartridge.

I could happily hunt deer the rest of my life by loading a 50gr TTSX or 75gr AM in a .223, and then shoot for bone.

But I agree with you 100% that energy figures only tell a small fraction of the story, if even that much.

[sunsetrider2011]

A person has to look at it this way, in reality A .224 bullet in comparison to a 243 to a .350 calibre bullet are like night and day, A 224 bullet will more than likely disintegrate on impact, you would not get a pass through with minimal penitration other than fragmentation, or much for deep penetration and lots of bullet activity in the ways of mess, the 243, 9 times out of 10 you wont get a pass through but you get very good pentetration,ive dug bullets out of the offside under the hide , more definate wound channel, In a 35 calibre bullet you are going to get a heavier Smack with some thor hammer action behind it,, with some body ripple on entering and definately some heavy penetration with carried foot pounds to the off side. definate increase in shock load to the animal and faster experation, with a larger wound channel. In my opinion if i were to chose a cartridge for deer moose or elk i would choose the 35 over the other 2.