Thread: A question for the doubters

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Im buggered if I can find the energy figures quoted by @BRADS for the 22CM

Anyone help me out?

88ELDM 22CM 3,200fps Hornady Ballistic Calculator (G1 bc .545)

300 1397 ft/lb
400 1233
500 1084
600 949

1000. 538

150 Corlokt 308 2800 mv, G1 .314

300 1325
400 1033
500 799
600 618

1000. 301

By comparison a .260 120 grn SST @2,850fps has 1186 at 600 yards.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Im buggered if I can find the energy figures quoted by @BRADS for the 22CM

Anyone help me out?

Hey mate the figures I was looking at last night on yank website were bung obviously I just did it on my phone and only got 22% more energy for the cm@ 500.
But half the drop and half wind is accurate. Sorry for the bad details there



Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BRADS

Hey mate the figures I was looking at last night on yank website were bung obviously I just did it on my phone and only got 22% more energy for the cm@ 500.
But half the drop and half wind is accurate. Sorry for the bad details there



Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

I know. I was just setting you up so I can reply with..........


Probably not the best person to judge what belongs in a museum!

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I know. I was just setting you up so I can reply with..........


Probably not the best person to judge what belongs in a museum!

Well played

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Stocky

I'm a fan of the 22 cal bit I don't think it's accurate.
I just don't value energy that much. It does however hold sufficient velocity to make the bullet work way further.

Hit probability of the .22cm is way better all round, all else being equal.

Taurarua Phil is sitting back laughing at us Johny come latelies to using the .224s I seem to recall he used 22-243 for many years....now that's fair honking along but it gave it a 80 grn projectile you almost back to much simpler off the shelf numbers lol

162grain eldm @ 2550 7mm08 has 1220 Ftlb at 600 yards too. Very mild and light on recoil. There are lots of ways to skin this cat.

Originally Posted by Mararoa

162grain eldm @ 2550 7mm08 has 1220 Ftlb at 600 yards too. Very mild and light on recoil. There are lots of ways to skin this cat.

You pulled your lips off your latte to say 'that'?

Originally Posted by Gibo

You pulled your lips off your latte to say 'that'?

This from the first post: 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?

I think the case is well proven but some people will never accept it.

Originally Posted by Tahr

This from the first post: 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?

I think the case is well proven but some people will never accept it.

I'm sold, my daughter got her first with a 55 grain so it was certainly legitimate

The question of recoil is interesting. There is only 1 paper I've become aware of quantifying this.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ful...18720817700537

Competent shooters with .223 M4, 6.8 M4, .308 AR10. Shooting from unsupported offhand positions. Hit percentage declines markedly proportionally with increased recoil (~60% 'centre hit' down to ~30%) - even though the .308 in question is quite heavy and muzzle braked which reduces the recoil energy significantly

It is not a perfect study but it makes sense and is the only evidence available for the effect (or otherwise) of recoil on shooter performance.


Interestingly in the thread someone started with attempts at 10 shot 1moa groups, almost every successful contribution is a .223 and I think only a couple of "magnum" sized cartridges have been contributed - which appeared, on the whole, to produce worse precision - but it's a very limited sample. Of course, shooting groups from a rest on a flat range is easier than in the real world - you'd expect any difference to be amplified given the POI shift effects of inconsistent position etc.

Originally Posted by gimp

The question of recoil is interesting. There is only 1 paper I've become aware of quantifying this.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ful...18720817700537

Competent shooters with .223 M4, 6.8 M4, .308 AR10. Shooting from unsupported offhand positions. Hit percentage declines markedly proportionally with increased recoil (~60% 'centre hit' down to ~30%) - even though the .308 in question is quite heavy and muzzle braked which reduces the recoil energy significantly

It is not a perfect study but it makes sense and is the only evidence available for the effect (or otherwise) of recoil on shooter performance.


Interestingly in the thread someone started with attempts at 10 shot 1moa groups, almost every successful contribution is a .223 and I think only a couple of "magnum" sized cartridges have been contributed - which appeared, on the whole, to produce worse precision - but it's a very limited sample. Of course, shooting groups from a rest on a flat range is easier than in the real world - you'd expect any difference to be amplified given the POI shift effects of inconsistent position etc.

A heavy rifle of any calibre would also reduce hit percentage off hand

Originally Posted by Gibo

A heavy rifle of any calibre would also reduce hit percentage of hand

Yeah weight is an unassessed independent variable. It's not a perfect study. Mind you, some people claim a heavier rifle is easier to hold steady offhand - and the weight difference is probably something like 6-7lb for the m4 and 8-9lb for the 308 - probably not in the realm of "too heavy"


That's something we can test easily enough ourselves

Originally Posted by Tahr

This from the first post: 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?

I think the case is well proven but some people will never accept it.

Of course I see if differently. What ive seen from the thread is that most of us do recognise the 223 as legitimate, and If I havnt made that clear enough before, I do now.

But its not for me! and regardless of it being capable of doing the job. I want something more and feel comfortable with my choice of more energy and momentum at the ranges I, and most people, I think, shoot at.

I sense more frustration from the small cal users, at us stating we wouldn't use a 223 in some circumstances, than I do from those of us with similar opinions of those using small cals.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I sense more frustration from the small cal users, at us stating we wouldn't use a 223 in some circumstances, than I do from those of us with similar opinions of those using small cals.

For me - there is a lot of terribly bad advice given and nonsense repeated on forums - e.g. "nothing less than a WSM or -06 case will do for killing red deer"

The sufficiency of .223 is a useful proxy to expose the ridiculousness of such positions. I would like to feel that I'm contributing to the community taking an evidence-based approach to beliefs.