Thread: A question for the doubters

I mean why does anyone jump into any discussion on the internet, really? including the "I've never used .223 with heavy bullets but I don't think it will work" crowd. Why share the opinion

Whether a .223 is a legitimate cartridge for taking deer in my opinion depends on the individual hunter and the specific hunting situation. I agree that the .223 with "heavy for calibre" bullets is adequate for taking deer, BUT chuck in a few variables which make the shot less than ideal such as the bullet contacting some grass or twigs on the way to the target, a less than perfect bullet placement, an angled shot into the vitals which requires greater bullet penetration. In these type of situations a heavier larger calibre bullet must give an advantage, including the greater chance of a blood trail to track. Sectional density (momentum) becomes an important part of the bullets performance. Generally spea
I know the bullet energy factor has been criticized as not as relevant as we are led to believe, and to a point I agree after seeing the damage a 73gn ELDM will do to the chest cavity of a deer at longer (300m) range. But picture for a moment the result of impact on a ballistic gel block of say a .22 rimfire projectile and then a 165gn .308 projectile. The difference in impact energy is obvious. To my way of thinking there must be some advantage as impact energy increases. The other thing I would be interested in getting some feedback on is bullet frontal area in relation to terminal performance. I think this becomes more important as the range increases and the velocity decreases, as this happens the bullet deformation and fragmentation reduces, So at this point how important is frontal area which is dictated by calibre in relation to the wound channel and tissue damage.

If you consider that the EBRG/twoforfree/.243 is considered minimum for deer in much of Europe and that your heavy for calibre .223 loads are now not hell of a lot different to said .243 if given a 100-150 yard head start....to equal out velocity advantage of bigger case,it becomes a moot point. If .243 is enough then so must the .223

This discussion has more value than polarising shooters opinion of the 223.

It could be useful for anyone considering their next mountain rifle, tahr cartridge, moose killer etc. It has definitely made me re evaluate shootability of a rifle over raw horsepower.

Originally Posted by gimp

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.

As soon as any person you're trying to have a serious conversation with (especially politicians) say words to the effect "I believe/its my understanding/my belief etc etc" you're fucked, they are not listening and their rationality and logic is absent.

Originally Posted by gimp

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.

Thats an excuse. I don't recall seeing any of that in this discussion. And too an extent I think you are hiding behind the evidence based line. How big is your evidence pool? so far you have used other peoples photos and vids and told me you didnt do an autopsy.

If you wish to preclude me or anyone else because we havnt used the exact projectiles you have. But have a wealth of experience with enough projectiles of varying weights, cals, structure etc, then so be it.

This and your next post are the reasons I get the feeling that there is more frustration and less give from the small cal users than the bigger. It comes across as pouty. Its ben an interesting discussion, but this type of turn wrecks things.

Right, I spent a bit of time doing further autopsy on the boar, for interest and relevance too this topic. Disregard it as you please.

I slightly stuffed up the autopsy as the cut I made with reciprocating saw turned out not to be the projectile entry but a tusk wound from another boar. This put my cut at an angle through the projectile path and made things a little unclear in photos.

First up is the recovered projectile. It is a 130gr speer Hotcore, Muzzle velocity was around 3150. Generic online energy calculator says muzzle energy of 2865 Ft/lbs. From accounts so far, its of similar construction technique too the 223 ones being discussed.
recovery weight is 48gr and it was recovered 75mm inside the far shoulder in muscle after passing through off side chest cavity ribs. Total penetration minimum approx. 405mm
Remember this is an angled shot so though skin ect might be 50mm, path through such was longer.



Exit through ribs, below spine.



The projectile hit and destroyed the shoulder knuckle before entering chest. Most of the permanent cavity was in this area. Between skin contact and rib cage was 210mm of skin, muscle and bone with ( i forgot to measure) approx 10mm of bone and meat etc on ribs before entry to chest cavity.



Finally the shield near point of projectile penetration.

Originally Posted by Tentman

As soon as any person you're trying to have a serious conversation with (especially politicians) say words to the effect "I believe/its my understanding/my belief etc etc" you're fucked, they are not listening and their rationality and logic is absent.

Can you think of a less derogatory reason for such language use?

I can.

Ill tell you later, but first I wish to see if you can.

Originally Posted by Gibo

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

It wasn’t a latte, Neanderthal, it was a mochaccino

I'm just sitting here thinking about my next deer hunting trip with my trusty 223

Good Luck.

Just surfing Youtube and this song came up. I immediately thought of the 223 crowd in this thread for some reason.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex1SayqtclM

Not trying to convince anyone. Just say'n. .223 250 yds last evening. 60 grn Hammer bullet. 3270fps (20" barrel)



In shot, tucked in behind shoulder.


Exit

Originally Posted by SPEARONZ

This discussion has more value than polarising shooters opinion of the 223.

It could be useful for anyone considering their next mountain rifle, tahr cartridge, moose killer etc. It has definitely made me re evaluate shootability of a rifle over raw horsepower.

Yeah look at the ground we've covered and where we have got to.

We have moved far past saying things like "[x] doesn't have enough energy, it's no good"

We have agreed that specific bullet construction/behaviour and placement are much better indicators of good performance than calculated energy figures. We've differentiated incapacitation and death.

We are discussing the specific characteristics of wounds caused by bullets, using the generally accepted terminology in the field of study, and we are looking at the mechanisms by which specific wounds in animals can cause incapacitation and/or death.

Any discussion on the forum on the subject in future is likely to look somewhat different to those in the past.

We haven't yet resolved a difference of opinion on whether the temporary cavity (or the hypothetical "shockwave" theory) is a significant additional factor in incapacitation or mortality. If it is, we haven't resolved whether the difference between a .223 w/good bullets vs anything else is actually a significant difference.

Originally Posted by gimp

I mean why does anyone jump into any discussion on the internet, really? including the "I've never used .223 with heavy bullets but I don't think it will work" crowd. Why share the opinion

It's genuine speculation, aside from the snark. Really interesting to examine why we get into these things. Aside from the fact that this thread literally asks for it.