Thread: A question for the doubters

We all know of a thread here that has currently 136 pages of data showing .22 centrefire cartridges (typically .223) taking medium game. I’m on the side of the believers, owning and using a 1-8” twist .223, as well as a 22 creed. I also have a 6.5 creed that doesn’t leave the safe anymore.

I haven’t counted up the number of deer and tahr killed with a .223 on that thread, but there’s many. On my most recent hunt I watched a mate kill a fully mature red hind with a 73gr ELD-M at 385 yards. The impact velocity was 1910 fps and bullet energy was 590 ft/lbs. I saw the damage to the internal organs myself, and the results were not ‘marginal’ as the vast majority would have you believe. P.S I don’t subscribe to the 1000ftlb energy argument myself….

So, to the doubters- What would it take for you to be convinced that a .223 with heavy for caliber (73-88gr) bullets is a LEGITIMATE deer hunting cartridge? How many deer would I (or others) have to kill for the non-sensical arguments to abate? (Bullets blowing up on shoulders, lack of penetration, margin for error with larger calibres etc etc)

Hey, I’m fully aware that caliber debate is one of those never ending things, but I’m just interested to see what objective measure is proposed. I reckon that because none of the people out there doing it with .223s have a name ending with Duley, Spomer, Henry, Boddington, Keith, Taylor or O’Connor, that it’ll never be accepted.

Lay down the challenge lads, let’s have at it!

culling I shot a lot of deer with a .222 which is very close to a .223 really but I would not recommend it - lost a few and thats never good -223 will do the job but really its a damn small cartridge for big reds - ideal head shooting fallow for meat - and perfect medicine for goats - ( goats 22.250 much better ) in the right hands both 222 and 223 will do but

Actual specific bullet function matters much, much more than the 3 digits stamped on the brass.

You cannot compare a 50-55gr basic SP (old .222 fodder) to a more modern heavy-for-calibre bullet that is tipped (or not) - the 73, 75, 80, 88gr ELDM, the 74 and 80 gr Targex, the various heavy Bergers, the 77gr TMK.

The wounds they create are totally different. The size and nature of wounds is what kills a deer.

I think you'll have trouble with an objective test because of lack of data. E.g. does anyone ever put up photos of deer they missed or had to track and finish? Not impugning the skill or honesty of regular posters there, just putting out a known unknown.
Once we had the miss/not-enough-gun-due to-bad-shot-placement data we'd then need the same data for another calibre that is a 'recognised' minimum, e.g. .243.
We can't get it, so my ignorant position is "in the hands of a proficient shooter with good shot placement, the .223 is fine, but not for occassional shooters."

Objective data- I’ve personally lost 4 deer that I have put a bullet into and never found. 2 with 6.5 creed, 1 with a 270/08 and 1 with a .222

It would be hard to tally up, but I think I’ve shot as many animals with ‘marginal’ cartridges than I have ‘proper’ ones.

well I believe we could all at least agree 223 will do the job but is not really ideal not compared to 308 270 7mm08 etc

Originally Posted by gimp

Actual specific bullet function matters much, much more than the 3 digits stamped on the brass.

You cannot compare a 50-55gr basic SP (old .222 fodder) to a more modern heavy-for-calibre bullet that is tipped (or not) - the 73, 75, 80, 88gr ELDM, the 74 and 80 gr Targex, the various heavy Bergers, the 77gr TMK.

The wounds they create are totally different. The size and nature of wounds is what kills a deer.

And you cannot compare deer. The size and nature are totally different.
A yearling fallow or sika is a way different beast to a pumped up rutting stag of any breed.
The stated example of 594 ft/lbs is fine when all goes well. But an animal can recover (enough to get away) from 600 lbs a lot easier than the old fashioned recommendation of 1000ft/lbs.

It’s guntuber theory vs real world observations.

YouTube and US forums are full of ballistic gel ‘penetration’ tests and an obsession with projectiles holding together and exiting the animal with no evidence to show that these are desirable traits in a good killing bullet.

At the same time most people agree that fmj pencilling through was a severe handicap when it came to putting down enemy combatants…go figure

Hit probability with a proven projectile is the only objective measure. With .223 that comes down to wind calling in order to determine the max effective range for a given shooter.

I remain of the view that there is value in using a calibre/projectile that blows big holes out the other side..... has helped me find a number of Sika bush hunting over the years.

Maxx I absolutely agree my old FS Boss Russell Hulme called 222 and 223 squaw guns he carried an 8mm - I hate blood trailing 222 wounded deer

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

And you cannot compare deer. The size and nature are totally different.
A yearling fallow or sika is a way different beast to a pumped up rutting stag of any breed.
The stated example of 594 ft/lbs is fine when all goes well. But an animal can recover (enough to get away) from 600 lbs a lot easier than the old fashioned recommendation of 1000ft/lbs.

Based on? Is a rutting stag a relative of the marvel character Wolverine, that grows adamantium shoulder blades? Last time I cut a stags shoulder blade out, it was flexible and thin enough to see light through.

What does an energy figure actually tell you? A cricket ball thrown by hand has the same energy as a .303 projectile at the same range. Doesn’t kill things though…..

I love my .223 especially with the 75gr eldms, my son shot his first deer with it.
However there is very very little margin for error. Hit a small piece of anything before the animal, animal moves slightly when you pull the trigger, wind is a touch more than anticipated as you are sitting on the sheltered side of the gully (windage once you get over 250, 300 yards is huge) or you simply pull the shot a few inches. That deer is gone, often never to be seen again.
I don't know how many deer I've seen while culling make an exit with a .223 pill in them. Especially when people, I'm guilty too, of pushing them well to and possibly beyond the limit. Many of those deer would often have not made it far at all if a larger caliber had been used.

The simple fact is no matter how good the projectile you are using in the .223, there is simply not as much margin for error and shit does happen.

You could make a similar thread about people shooting deer with a .22lr or magnum and there will be hundreds of success stories, could produce plenty of pages worth that's for sure. What people won't post in the thread is the times it hasn't worked because they pushed the envelope or the animal moved etc. Bit like the .223 thread I suspect.

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

And you cannot compare deer. The size and nature are totally different.
A yearling fallow or sika is a way different beast to a pumped up rutting stag of any breed.
The stated example of 594 ft/lbs is fine when all goes well. But an animal can recover (enough to get away) from 600 lbs a lot easier than the old fashioned recommendation of 1000ft/lbs.

I have shot every stag I've shot in the roar for the past 5 years with a .224" 80gr ELDM at 2700-2800fps mv, and I haven't found any cause for complaint. Ranges to 380 metres.

There is a large body of scientific literature studying "wound ballistics". The information available is much more coherent and informative than the hearsay, speculation and voodoo found in hunting circles. The most prominent person in the field in recent decades was Martin Fackler.

Foot pounds of energy don't kill deer.

Wounds in parts of deer, that the deer needs to not have a hole in it in order to continue living, are what kill deer. Major blood vessels, important organs, central nervous system.

Commonly used "high velocity" rifle bullets create wounds with 2 characteristics:

1. a permanent wound cavity - this is caused by physical destruction of tissue - crushing, tearing and cutting - by direct contact with the projectile or fragments. The permanent wound cavity is the primary cause of tissue destruction that causes loss of CNS function or loss of blood pressure causing death. The larger a bullet is, and the nature of expansion and particularly fragmentation dictates the size - width and depth (penetration) of the permanent wound cavity. A larger bullet by no means can be predicted to cause a larger wound cavity. Specific construction and how that behaves at the impact velocity is the primary determinant of permanent wound cavities. A large bullet that does not fragment at that specific impact velocity creates a smaller wound than a small bullet that does fragment.

2. a temporary wound cavity. this is caused by the "deposit/transfer of energy" and is the dramatically visible temporary deformation or movement of a ballistic gel block for example. There can be some minor to major additional permanent damage as a result of the temporary cavity depending on the elasticity of the relevant tissue. In most tissue we are trying to shoot bullets into (muscle, lungs), the temporary cavity largely rebounds with the expense of energy but minimal wounding effects. Liver, bone or brain tissue is not elastic. However you don't need to rely on a large temporary cavity to destroy sufficient brain tissue or bone when you hit it with a bullet. In elastic tissue, the "energy transfer" is largely wasted.


The size of permanent wound cavity from the use of the bullets that are commonly assessed as effective from cartridges like the .223 (e.g. the heavy ELDM or TMK), at the ranges where those bullets fragment effectively (e.g. above 1800fps impact velocity or so) are sufficiently large to penetrate to the important bits of a deer and destroy sufficient of those bits for it to die quickly and impressively.


This is not my opinion, this is empirically demonstrable. The literature describing how bullets actually kill is not my opinion. Read sections 9.2.1, 9.2.2, and 9.2.3 of this paper for a good summary (which includes citations at the end if you wish to go peer review the source literature).

https://www.scribd.com/document/2307...listics-Karger

Since I started shooting deer exclusively with a .223 I have lost (1) deer, which I shot in the shin at 270 metres, through a defective bullet or operator error - it was wildly inexplicable. A .338 Lapua would not have been any different in results.

I have not wounded and lost any other animals.

I did miss a couple through poor shooting (I am a bad shot)

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

Based on? Is a rutting stag a relative of the marvel character Wolverine, that grows adamantium shoulder blades? Last time I cut a stags shoulder blade out, it was flexible and thin enough to see light through.

What does an energy figure actually tell you? A cricket ball thrown by hand has the same energy as a .303 projectile at the same range. Doesn’t kill things though…..

Based on seeing reasonable number of animals hitting the deck(no wolverines) from various calibers and a wide range of shooting abilities.
Whether you think so or not, adrenaline and testosterone makes stags harder to kill. Some breeds have an absolute desire to live (try Rusa).
If you don't believe adrenaline makes a difference poke a shot though a non vital part of a Cape Buffalo and then try to kill him.
I haven't experienced it, but know people who have and they swear it's not something they wlsh to repeat.