Why the 223 Rem should be a legal big game round

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by ESOXangler

I see a 12 year old/adult that needs more bench time before committing. Take a gander through the chuck hawk recoil table and you'll see plenty of larger calibers that don't kick as bad as assumed. And that goes without getting complicated and adjusting loads.

And a smaller cartridge promotes more trigger time. That is the point.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by chuck

I don’t know how people make these leaps.

Probably because your OP says “legal big game round”

If it said “legal big game round only for my super special sniper daughter only shooting at deer inside 200 yards and if they weigh less than 200 lbs” I guess that would be different, but then you don’t get special treatment.

Good on ya for teaching the right way, but don’t let it go to your head.

[RickF]

Good on you for investing the time Chuck, and get on the kids too.

The one constant is the more someone actually shoots, the easier a lot of this gets.

[Big Sky]

Originally Posted by chuck

So which is better? A 12 year old kid who has put 200-500 223 rounds on target and can darn well hit a deers lungs with it on command, or a 12 year old kid that shoots a deer in the guts with his 270 cause he’s closing his eyes and jerking the trigger?

Everyone knows that you can only gut shoot a deer with a magnum.

Reduced loads with a 270 (or 308 or 260 .....) would be much more effective than a 223.


A handloader could probably whip some up on their own.

[bucksnbears]

I'd much rather have a kid shooting a deer with a .223 that has had pleny of practice than a nimrod who shoots 5 rounds a year with a magnum.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Probably because your OP says “legal big game round”

If it said “legal big game round only for my super special sniper daughter only shooting at deer inside 200 yards and if they weigh less than 200 lbs” I guess that would be different, but then you don’t get special treatment.

Good on ya for teaching the right way, but don’t let it go to your head.

That a 223 can’t kill a deer? Like I said. I’m not here to promote bowing to the lowest common denominator. That includes dictating cartridge size to save people from their own poor judgment.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by chuck

That a 223 can’t kill a deer? Like I said. I’m not here to promote bowing to the lowest common denominator. That includes dictating cartridge size to save people from their own poor judgment.

So no laws, everyone everywhere should just live up to your standards all the time. Got it.

[fordtruckin]

Originally Posted by bucksnbears

I'd much rather have a kid shooting a deer with a .223 that has had pleny of practice than a nimrod who shoots 5 rounds a year with a magnum.

I agree, like I say in law enforcement, I’d rather have someone that can hit 10/10 with a small caliber handgun then 4/10 with a .40 or .45. We can use a .223 in Montana and guess what? We don’t have a multitude of wounded game running away because of being shot with one. The majority of people are smart enough to only use it for deer or antelope in reasonable range.

[300magman]

Originally Posted by fordtruckin

I agree, like I say in law enforcement, I’d rather have someone that can hit 10/10 with a small caliber handgun then 4/10 with a .40 or .45. We can use a .223 in Montana and guess what? We don’t have a multitude of wounded game running away because of being shot with one. The majority of people are smart enough to only use it for deer or antelope in reasonable range.

Absolutey.....10's of thousands of deer and antelop killed every year with 223's across the US and Canada and none of those places have oodles of wounded deer running around.

[Don_Parsons]

There must be a reason why the system doesn't allow its use here in Alberta.

Not sure why.

Can't a person sub convert the concept of a 223 into the 243 cartrage.

Fit a rifle for a younger person, choose lighter bullet, and lighten the powder charge.

We do this for 308 cartrages.

125 bullets @ 2450 ft per seconds.

They work good on small Deer up close.

And the rifle could under go some modifications to lesson recoil beyond that.

The gals and kids in our family enjoy these plinking loads with the option of shooting small game.

[Sledin]

I don't think this guy (142) knew he was shot with a .22-250, it was a close shot and he went less than 40 yds. I had a buck drop on the spot at 200 yds with a neck shot too.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JTRED]

Here in BC it is legal to use 22 calibre centerfire rifles to hunt big game. For our little blacktail I think they would be an excellent choice especially for younger hunters. With the right bullet within a reasonable range they are an effective deer calibre. I would not use them on anything larger.

[Don_Parsons]

Yes, if they changed the rules, I'd deffinatly return to the 22/08.

Super fast and fun.

[bigblue77]

Very interesting, good ol boy down the road who just passed away told many storys of shooting paddle horn to trophy moose around here with a 25/20 Winchester . Said a head shot or hump shot was the only way to go, I asked him why he didn't use a 30/30 or . 303 his reply was he didnt have one and his neighbours didn't have one either and besides with thr 25/20 i could shoot the ass off a skeeter .. Interesting what we " need now" to kill big/smaller game ... Maybe kuz wild tv suggests you need a .300 to dump a mule deer at 100 yards? Maybe because as hunters the majority have lost their woodsmanship abilitys and rely on the counter guy at basspro to tell him which gun he/she needs that shoots a brick out to 1000 yards..

[Xbolt7mm]

Originally Posted by bucksnbears

I'd much rather have a kid shooting a deer with a .223 that has had pleny of practice than a nimrod who shoots 5 rounds a year with a magnum.

That’s a poor statement, there’s lots of people that shoot their magnums or what ever for a single group to check their rifle before taking it hunting. 223 is too small for deer

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

223 is too small for deer

Not according to those hunters in B.C. And Manitoba that I know ( and many I do not ) that have killed big mule deer, white tails and moose and also elk with the .223
Cat

[boah]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

223 is too small for deer

That’s a poor statement.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by 300magman

Absolutey.....10's of thousands of deer and antelop killed every year with 223's across the US and Canada and none of those places have oodles of wounded deer running around.

..

.. or at least any that we have seen. Wounded critters end up as Coyote or other Scavenger tidbits long before anyone can find, or even see them, let alone do an autopsy.
I suppose a 17 HMR with the right bullet and shot placement at a reasonable distance would be a good choice as well. Minimalism knows no boundaries these days. Wow, it's amazing how we can rationalize when we think we have a cause.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Salavee

..

.. or at least any that we have seen. Wounded critters end up as Coyote or other Scavenger tidbits long before anyone can find, or even see them, let alone do an autopsy.
I suppose a 17 HMR with the right bullet and shot placement at a reasonable distance would be a good choice as well. Minimalism knows no boundaries these days. Wow, it's amazing how we can rationalize when we think we have a cause.

Do you really think that the 17 and 223 are the same?

These days? The 223 has been a legal big game round all over North America for years. And I would suggest it’s a more viable option today than it was 30 years ago.

Im convinced that those poo pooing the 223 as a viable option have actually never shot the round.

[bucksnbears]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

That’s a poor statement, there’s lots of people that shoot their magnums or what ever for a single group to check their rifle before taking it hunting. 223 is too small for deer

Yeah.... Ok

[270person]

Some hunters. Constantly needing to push the limits with the only caveat being they can shoot it better so that'll cover all the bases.

I'm right there with the "putting it where you need it" discussion but I also think a bullets capabilities should be taken into account. Awesome that the kid can hit paper on a regular basis but how about when the target is live, moving, or quartering away, etc? It'd be awesome if deer always stood at full broadside at 80 yards and gave us lots of time but that's rarer than it is the norm.

Is she going to be that one hunter that 100% of the time hits exactly where she's supposed to? Answers no because it's a pipedream.

If she can shoot a 223 she can shoot a 243. A helluva lot better choice. 30-30 also a lovely little caliber and most 12 year olds can shoot those all day. Or like some have suggested drop an acceptable hunting caliber down in pop. Lots of recoil managed loads out there. If she's closing her eyes or jerking the trigger with those options then I guess she has to shoot some more or mature.

As soon as 223 becomes a legal big game option I'd love to see the regs. 223 can be used for antelope and small deer at 150 yards or less, but is forbidden for anything over 125 pounds. .223 must not be used for cervids over 125 lbs, sheep, goats, elk, moose, bison, black and grizzly bear. Caution should be exercised when shooting deer over the age of one year and with antlers extending above the ear.

Some fools would for sure try it in every situation.

[Pathfinder76]

There is a considerable difference in recoil between the 223 and 243. Significantly more so when you weigh 75 lbs

[bucksnbears]

I'd Much rather punch a lung shot with a .223 with a nosler partition at 300 yards than a shoulder shot with a 300 mag with a vmax type bullet!!

Bullet construction is Key! Deer ain't varmints. Sucks when " dad" buys bullets designed for prairiedogs for the kids to hunt deer with then get ****ed because they loose a deer.

Bottom line is, there is plenty enuff energy to very humanely kill a deer at 300 yards with a a 223 but to many folks buy cheap varmint bullets.

[catnthehat]

Everything aside , people have legally, ethically and successfully killing large animals with smaller cartridges using proper bullets for many years .
Cat

[Xbolt7mm]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Not according to those hunters in B.C. And Manitoba that I know ( and many I do not ) that have killed big mule deer, white tails and moose and also elk with the .223
Cat

I’m pretty certain you have known people who shot deer with a .22 long rifle as well and killed them, doesnt make it right

[Xbolt7mm]

Originally Posted by bucksnbears

I'd Much rather punch a lung shot with a .223 with a nosler partition at 300 yards than a shoulder shot with a 300 mag with a vmax type bullet!!

Bullet construction is Key! Deer ain't varmints. Sucks when " dad" buys bullets designed for prairiedogs for the kids to hunt deer with then get ****ed because they loose a deer.

Bottom line is, there is plenty enuff energy to very humanely kill a deer at 300 yards with a a 223 but to many folks buy cheap varmint bullets.

So a 223 and a 22-250 are quite susceptible to issues with barrel twist and the majority of them have difficultys stabilizing the 60 grain partitions unless you have a 9 twist which most dont. So shooting the 60 out of the long twist barrels does certainly have the strong possibility of not stabilizing the longer bullet and especially at the longer distances. The 60 partition is too small and most certainly the 45 grain bullets would also be used if the cartridge was legal as they work better with the longer twist barrels. If you guys think its ok to shoot big game animals with a 45 grain bullet from any cartridge then you have no respect at all for the animal

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

I’m pretty certain you have known people who shot deer with a .22 long rifle as well and killed them, doesnt make it right

This is a silly argument.

Get behind a 223 just once and you will see why.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

So a 223 and a 22-250 are quite susceptible to issues with barrel twist and the majority of them have difficultys stabilizing the 60 grain partitions unless you have a 9 twist which most dont. So shooting the 60 out of the long twist barrels does certainly have the strong possibility of not stabilizing the longer bullet and especially at the longer distances. The 60 partition is too small and most certainly the 45 grain bullets would also be used if the cartridge was legal as they work better with the longer twist barrels. If you guys think its ok to shoot big game animals with a 45 grain bullet from any cartridge then you have no respect at all for the animal

I’ve shot 55 gr 6mm ballistic tips lengthways through antelope.

Once again, people can make informed decisions on their own without big brother interference.

[Xbolt7mm]

Originally Posted by chuck

Do you really think that the 17 and 223 are the same?

These days? The 223 has been a legal big game round all over North America for years. And I would suggest it’s a more viable option today than it was 30 years ago.

Im convinced that those poo pooing the 223 as a viable option have actually never shot the round.

Then you would be wrong! I’m certain that most who are poo pooing them do so because the have used them and have a bit of respect for the animals. Soon someone here will say its a fine round for moose and elk with a well built bullet and proper placement. The same garbage they always say, because they always use the best bullets and put them exactly were they need to every time. I’m also sure that most adults realize that because something is not illegal it doesnt make it correct morally or humanely. If you cant shoot anything bigger than that then keep practicing until you mature enough to use a cartridge that shows enough respect for an animal to humanely kill it.

[Xbolt7mm]

Originally Posted by chuck

I’ve shot 55 gr 6mm ballistic tips lengthways through antelope.

Once again, people can make informed decisions on their own without big brother interference.

Re read my post and try to not compare a 6mm with a 223