Thread: 223 on deer

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

Go direct to Waters themselves. It’s an easy process, Dave is great to deal with. Not cheap though…. Best to buy more than one mag.

That’s what I did , but only bought one mag .

Originally Posted by Ground Control

That’s good information
Interesting that you couldn’t get the 80 eldm to work .
To be honest that is half of the reason why I’ve fronted up for the Waters mag , I want to give them a run after seeing the results achieved by gimp and his “ wonder beast “ of a .223

I've been trying the 80 ELDM in my Tikka as well without much luck.
They shoot ok but nothing like the 80grn Targex or the 77tmk.
If you want to try them I have at least half a box here.

Sent from my CPH2145 using Tapatalk

I know a few people that shoot deer with a 223 but its not a caliber I would recommend any new shooters using on deer unless you are confident you can get a good kill shot to the head.
I think the main reason they use 223 is the cheap ammo cost and low recoil.

Originally Posted by Old_School

I know a few people that shoot deer with a 223 but its not a caliber I would recommend any new shooters using on deer unless you are confident you can get a good kill shot to the head.
I think the main reason they use 223 is the cheap ammo cost and low recoil.

thats part of the problem.....a headshot ISNT the easiest or best shot to take...the neck is just as quick of killer and allows more room for error..a quartering away shot in the crease....tight in behind nearside leg angling forwards is by far and away the most CERTAIN killing shot with most room for error...yes animal may move off a small distance..but with no oil in the engine it wont be going far.

@Old_School back about 10 years ago NZ Hunter put out a chapter in thier magazine titled calibres for under 16s find it and have a good read,sit on it for a week then read it again...really down to earth no bullshit look at what is a tricky balancing act
off top of head/from memory
the top options were in no particular order as my memory isnt perfect
243
223
7.62x39mm
22-250 got a mention as did a down loaded .308
the creedmores and grendals werent readily avialable then but the gist of article was well worth getting head around
I own a very accurate .223 but bought a 7.62x39mm for our Son to learn with.... considering we keep ranges below 150yards either kills well but the x39mm gave more room for error....didnt help us when I misjudged range resulting in the only deer Ive ever had wounded and not recovered...not for lack of trying...a flatter shooting 243 would have cancelled my error
suppressors have made many previously unsuitable cartridges entirely OK for young folks..look at how many 6-7-8-9 year olds are shooting first deer with Dads .308-270-30/06 etc etc prior to suppressors it just wouldnt happen as recoil is no good for learner thus the 222-223 was often used under strict supervision and for short range..100yards n under.... it works as this whole thread shows IF YOU DO YOUR BIT..get in close enough and place pill well enough.

Originally Posted by Old_School

I know a few people that shoot deer with a 223 but its not a caliber I would recommend any new shooters using on deer unless you are confident you can get a good kill shot to the head.
I think the main reason they use 223 is the cheap ammo cost and low recoil.

I would like to respectfully disagree with you there. Not sure if you have looked at all of the posts in this thread, but there is plenty of hard evidence that a .223 (especially using heavy for caliber bullets) is more than adequate for deer.

By your logic would you prefer a new shooters to use a long action or magnum cartridge instead? If getting a bullets in the vitals is the objective, I’ll put my salary on a newbie having a far higher hit rate with the .223…

I taught my two boys to shoot with 222 & 223. Both are excellent shots & have humanely killed deer with the 223 & 6x45. Had I given them a heavy recoiling rifle to learn on I doubt I would have had the same result, their confidence could well have been affected.
I agree with your comments Nick.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Old_School

I know a few people that shoot deer with a 223 but its not a caliber I would recommend any new shooters using on deer unless you are confident you can get a good kill shot to the head.
I think the main reason they use 223 is the cheap ammo cost and low recoil.

Have you read the whole thread I wonder??

The wound channel and penetration of the 77 tipped match king is devastating and could easily be mistaken for a 243 or larger caliber. In fact Im using 74 and 80 grn Targex at present to tone the mess down a bit. Not quite the wound channel but great penetration and killing still.

Must try the 64g gamechanger again soon

Working my way through 50 and 60g V-Max at the moment for bulk shooting

Have 55g gameking and 60g NBT for the special stuff

Originally Posted by Old_School

I know a few people that shoot deer with a 223 but its not a caliber I would recommend any new shooters using on deer unless you are confident you can get a good kill shot to the head.
I think the main reason they use 223 is the cheap ammo cost and low recoil.

Bullshit

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

I would like to respectfully disagree with you there. Not sure if you have looked at all of the posts in this thread, but there is plenty of hard evidence that a .223 (especially using heavy for caliber bullets) is more than adequate for deer.

By your logic would you prefer a new shooters to use a long action or magnum cartridge instead? If getting a bullets in the vitals is the objective, I’ll put my salary on a newbie having a far higher hit rate with the .223…

Look, you probably have a point, there is alot ive been going through in this thread.
When I was looking at rifles at H&F, the guy there steered me away from .223 which i was inquiring about since my friends recommended i go that way.
He told me they wont easily take down a deer unless you hit in the right spot, in saying that, my friends mostly go for head/neck shots most of the time, he does also use 7mm08 a fair bit too.
Perhaps the shopkeeper felt since i was an adult, and not a 16yo that it would be more suitable for me to go for something larger?
Im not saying that a younger shooter should not jump in with a .308/303 or any other heavy caliber either, but there are other options.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

@Old_School back about 10 years ago NZ Hunter put out a chapter in thier magazine titled calibres for under 16s find it and have a good read,sit on it for a week then read it again...really down to earth no bullshit look at what is a tricky balancing act
off top of head/from memory
the top options were in no particular order as my memory isnt perfect
243
223
7.62x39mm
22-250 got a mention as did a down loaded .308
the creedmores and grendals werent readily avialable then but the gist of article was well worth getting head around
I own a very accurate .223 but bought a 7.62x39mm for our Son to learn with.... considering we keep ranges below 150yards either kills well but the x39mm gave more room for error....didnt help us when I misjudged range resulting in the only deer Ive ever had wounded and not recovered...not for lack of trying...a flatter shooting 243 would have cancelled my error
suppressors have made many previously unsuitable cartridges entirely OK for young folks..look at how many 6-7-8-9 year olds are shooting first deer with Dads .308-270-30/06 etc etc prior to suppressors it just wouldnt happen as recoil is no good for learner thus the 222-223 was often used under strict supervision and for short range..100yards n under.... it works as this whole thread shows IF YOU DO YOUR BIT..get in close enough and place pill well enough.

Yes good advice, one of my friends had a 7.62x39 and was a great rifle, not much recoil, but still had plenty of punch at your target.
But most shops ive spoken too have recommended .308 to me, I think price and availability of ammo was also one factor in all of this.

Regarding .223 ammo, i also assume there is quite a variety to choose from and correct ammo selection would be critical.

oldschool....whats happened here,is in your ignorance/quest for information ,you have insulted a LOT of people by implying they are risking wounding animals....
your last line above...has nobody ever told you that assumption is the mother of all fuckups????
if you dont know,you dont know...thats part of the reason this thread is here..so you can read it and learn.
the guy in sport shop is correct..you would be better off with a .308 to shoot deer...NOBODY will deny that...but by same token if your recoil shy you would possibly be better off with .223 you still have to follow the rules,get in close enough and put right TYPE of projectile in right place...
you have two options with .222--223 etc either use fragile and go for head neck or crease and hope it blows a big enough area of damage to knock out animal /disable enough vitals to put it down quickly..or something harder and poke it through vital bits and hopefully break a shoulder if not two.... the heavy weights can do that with ease as can monos BUT you still got to put that tiny wee bit of metal in the right place.
I know people who regularly shoot deer with .22 magnum and others who use a 17 to do the same.... would I recomend it??? hell NO but they are surpurb markmen and are in range of undisturbed animals or animals are in spotlight or thermal scope.... do they occasionally have a cock up??? yip but will be into the follow up shots to disable animal bloody quick as can use semiauto in those tiny cartridges..private land pest control...
the thing with .308 etc is you CAN load them down to lower levels..eg turn your 308 into a 7.62x39mm or 30/30 for all intents and purposes... lower recoil by lowering projectile weight and/or speed. you cant make a 7.62x39mm into a .308..you can try but cant do it...wont get it fast enough.

Update: just got my 2nd buck with the same 70 grain blunt boys, approx 40 yards neck shot and it had quite an interesting wound channel turned a corner and blew out just above the opposite shoulder, he immediately collapsed like one of those wooden push puppet toys. I will always trust these rounds to do the job as long as I'm not cheeky enough to push past 150 yards or so.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

thats part of the problem.....a headshot ISNT the easiest or best shot to take...the neck is just as quick of killer and allows more room for error..a quartering away shot in the crease....tight in behind nearside leg angling forwards is by far and away the most CERTAIN killing shot with most room for error...yes animal may move off a small distance..but with no oil in the engine it wont be going far.

The only time I've ever shot a deer in the neck was wish a 243 from 150 yards the bullet penciled through about 3 to 5 mm away from the spine and it did nothing. It penciled through and the deer just stood there shaking its head in pain and I had to shoot it in the head after that . So I've never taken another neck shot since it's either a headshot or a heart and lungs shot .

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

strangley enough a mate did it on red hind with .30/06..she staggered and stood there after turning around so I shot with .270..same effect,she then fell over..both our shots missed bone.2" apart in and out hole on both sides of her neck. base of neck better option but Im usually a take out he front wheels type of guy. the only time I can recal head shooting a deer..yearling red,son had just shot its mate and another mate was also nearby,If I missed it had 2x 308s ready to drop it,I was sitting with my zastava in hands so head shot it.