Thread: 223 on deer

Originally Posted by JohnDuxbury

I have got 55 grain Hornadys going 3300fps from my CZ527, and shooting under an inch, around .75. Is this too fast for this bullet on deer do you think or should I stick with 70 grain Speers at 2950fps.

I think they will be ok. They shed velocity quite quickly. In the 80's I used them in a 22.250 on deer quite a bit and they worked just fine.

Originally Posted by woods223

Shoot one and find out for yourself, simple really. Hornady 55SP work for me from 2800 to a shade under 2300fps. 72 deer down in last year so they work for me.

Should have proof read before posting. Should read 2800 to shade under 3300 FPS.

Originally Posted by Tahr

One in full flight coming down towards me at about 100. One half speed going up hill at same distance. All the rest still or slow hopping. All of my Wally hunting is glassing and shooting. Mostly prone or sitting over a rigid pack. Not much walking them up. So if you can shoot and your gun is well sighted in it’s not overly difficult.

Back in the day it was mainly shooting at roos in full flight on all outings,you certainly learnt quick or down the road lol.
Yes we..all three of us that is ran five dogs each between us hence 90% on the run. We were allowed three rounds per kill.
I'm sure I've bleated on about the South Canterbury Wallaby Board a long ways back. Knocking roos over at sometimes long distances in full flight become relatively easy after day in day out as to speak..like flogging the pool table as such and becomming good at it.
We did however shoot many your way ..sitting and sniping down into gullies etc but most kills on the job were full flight jobs.
The wallabys will be still cruising about long after we are all gone fi sure...long live the roo lol.

Around 300 yards. 74 grn Targex. Quite a hole.

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

Originally Posted by Peeaye

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

Mate this is a thread on how cool and effective the 223 is. Go and start another thread if you wish to start something around why people shoot x amount of deer.

Originally Posted by Peeaye

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

unless... unless what?

Originally Posted by 300wsm for life

Mate this is a thread on how cool and effective the 223 is. Go and start another thread if you wish to start something around why people shoot x amount of deer.

It is called having the proper life priority. What a crack up. LOL. That deserves an 8 twist. Comment of the century.

Originally Posted by Peeaye

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

Unless we step back in time Peeaye..72 dead deer in a year would most likely see you down around the bottom of the list Peeaye,,I kid you not lol.
The .223 loaded with most any 55grain soft points will put down a big animal every time with the right chap behind the bolt. Those chaps usually know everything there is to know about ..wind, distance, how much lead, how much drop etc..
having that knowledge and a tad more can be very very lethal. Big thick skinned animals may require two or in some cases three to put them down for good ..at the right distance.

I shoot 20 deer in a weekend sometimes or 15 in a night, and I mention to people.. they tell me yeah right your full of it... I just say, yeah hahahah I am and laugh.... 72 in a year is nothing in this day and age.. and good on that man, deer really are a problem so well done 👍...

Anyway good opportunity to use post 1000 as an ode to the 70 speer... The legendary old school pill that does the job everytime. My favorite pill launched at 2950.. the flying brick, she never never fails me..

Originally Posted by Peeaye

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

‘Unless’ what? 72 deer in a year isn’t particularly hard to achieve but 100% meat recovery, apart from shot damage, does take a lot of effort. Foodbank and other people who receive free meat appreciate it. Around here there’s no shortage of animals and the potential to shoot hundreds is there, which is what I will possibly be doing over the next few months. Game processor isn’t processing large numbers and farmers want animals gone. Shooting to waste isn’t ideal but that’s the reality sometimes. There’s areas around here where animals are lighter than normal, probably because of overpopulation. Short story is they’re a ‘pest’ in some areas and need sorting out.

Originally Posted by Peeaye

Why would any "Hunter" shoot 72 deer in a year? That's one every 5 days...... that's a hell of a lot of walking, butchering, carrying, unless........

because our dearly beloved leaders will want to nuke them with 1080.

Originally Posted by SmokeyJason

because our dearly beloved leaders will want to nuke them with 1080.

1080 is not used for deer management. Please don't spread misinformation.

1080 kills every thing No Management involved.

Originally Posted by SmokeyJason

because our dearly beloved leaders will want to nuke them with 1080.

Its not registered to be used on deer as a targeted primary poison. Simply, it is illegal. That though does not dismiss by-kill of deer which of course does occur. The use of repellent greatly reduces deer by-kill. There are lots of examples, e.g. the number of deer in the Haurangis. We should lobby for repellent on every occasion. @flock thats why we ought to all belong to NZDA or an affiliated organisation. And yay for the Game Council. They are interested in deer management.

The greatest danger to the deer populations is the .223. There would be mayhem on the deer population if .223 ammo was subsidised. I was half expecting to see it in the budget