Thread: The ‘controversial.222’

Hey guys,

As the title suggests, this has been a hotly debated subject for probably close to 60 years. Within this online community there are plenty of guys and girls that use one to fill the freezer, and just as many that shake their heads at those doing it. The subject of shooting deer with the .222/.223 comes up all the time here, hunters both fresh and experienced wanting to find out more about the cartridges game taking ability and limitations.

So, I have an idea.....

Use this thread as a ‘database’ of experiences on game with the .222/.223. I say experiences, because I’m talking about wins AND losses. That way those interested can see HOW the successful guys are using them, getting a balanced view of success vs failure.

It will require a bit of detail of each kill (or not) and a if it comes to it a bit of humility to post when it went wrong for you. Photos of internal wounding would be great if you can manage it, because a picture paints a thousand words!

So I’ll use my latest as an example of what I’m thinking


80lb sow, shot with Federal .222 50gr blue box. Range of 30yards, aimpoint slightly behind left leg. Animal slightly quartering away so bullet exited just behind opposite front leg. One rib broken onside, both lungs had 1.5” hole through, and smashed 3 ribs on offside.
She ran full pace for 20-30yards before giving up the ghost.
(I would have added autopsy photos, but I didn’t have this in mind when I shot her)

My experience is limited, but I think a good shot with a 223 or similar will do the job on deer etc. I'm not good enough to bank on calibres like that so I'm quite happy to use something full power (2000-2500 foot pounds of muzzle energy, from memory 223 is roughly 1200). The problem I see is people recommending 223 to beginners thinking the reduced noise and recoil won't put them off or make them flinch, but what they are actually doing is putting a hell of a lot more pressure on the the poor newbie to place his/her shot exactly.
At work I always recommended new hunters start with a 308 (or equivalent), and if they're a pussy in terms of noise and recoil like myself stick a can on it.

This could be fun so I will just sit back, out of sight of course but up close

Originally Posted by doinit

This could be fun so I will just sit back, out of sight of course but up close

You will get a good view of this sitting atop of your pile of thousands of empty NZFS 222 cases you have shot stuff with ...

Originally Posted by Tahr

You will get a good view of this sitting atop of your pile of thousands of empty NZFS 222 cases you have shot stuff with ...

When the deer and the thar became thin on the ground..
And the rather thin looking cullers,wrinkled and brown..
Took time off and were city bound..
Back in the valleys lay old spent brass..
In amongst the rocks and out on the grass...
Old camp sites where billies once hung..
And yarns were told while cleaning guns..
Are the ghosts of cullers when they were young..

Originally Posted by tommygun

My experience is limited, but I think a good shot with a 223 or similar will do the job on deer etc. I'm not good enough to bank on calibres like that so I'm quite happy to use something full power (2000-2500 foot pounds of muzzle energy, from memory 223 is roughly 1200). The problem I see is people recommending 223 to beginners thinking the reduced noise and recoil won't put them off or make them flinch, but what they are actually doing is putting a hell of a lot more pressure on the the poor newbie to place his/her shot exactly.
At work I always recommended new hunters start with a 308 (or equivalent), and if they're a pussy in terms of noise and recoil like myself stick a can on it.

NZ Hunter put out awesome article some 8ish years back..cartridges for under 18s...it was well thought out great read and really summed it up well.
from memory the top 3 were 7.62x39mm 223 and 243 all with terms n condition included...you are dead right a person has to be good at shot placement and stick to range limits.

222 the controversial one.....hmmm???pack n rifle by Philip Holden I believe it was....
223 man myself..BUT I usually load 50grn pills below max so pretty close preformance wise to trebly.
under 150 yards and stationary is my limit...just shot rabbit with my rifle less than hour ago and was contemplating posting about how nice it is to use 223 suppressed,its just ever so polite to use....if thats the right term???deadly accurate and I can rely 100% on putting projectile where its aimed when have a rest.
half dozen deer ,dozen pigs,few goats,countless wallabies and hares and more than a few rabbits....its almost too easy.

I had a big Billy goat take off after my mate shot him through the front shoulder with a 7mm08 from around 30m, later found the bullet had gone from front right shoulder diagonally through and lodged in its left hindquarter. Meanwhile the Billy took off through the bush, when we caught up with him he started to stand up again, so I gave him a quick shot in the neck with the AR and he came come with us for curry. No doubt he would have bled out regardless but I was surprised he got as far as he did after a 7mm08 pill.

Shot a solid fallow buck at 120+ on the run with a 223 a while back, not ideal but accurate rifle and I back my shooting so got it. Owned an old sportco 222 and only shot 1 deer but was with federal blue box 50gr in the neck at 20m~, still one of the hardest hit deer I have ever seen. Very capable cals inside practical ranges and appropriate shot placement

There’s nothing historically controversial about using a .224 calibre bullet in whatever .22 cartridge you like. It’s the advent of internet forums that have stoked up an argument, usually underpinned by a few guys having bad experiences and subsequently deciding that everyone else must “unethical” for continuing to do whatever they cocked up. Some influential writers have steered the conversation and others will just parrot what they say. Bottom line is head shots, neck shots, chest shots, all have their risks with a .224 cal. Same as bowhunting, hunting pigs with dogs, whatever.

If you make a mistake, learn from it, and do it better next time. It happens to all of us.

What makes me laugh is the guys with 7mm or .30 cal magnums getting upset about others using a .223, but then going and shooting at deer 800m+ away.

Neither is wrong, both require discipline, practice, experience, both have their rightful place in hunting, so leave it alone and get on with business!

The last deer I shot with my 223 was a very large Red Hind in Pureora Forest. It was an offhand neck shot at around 70m and the handloaded 55 grain Norma Oryx pulverized her vertebrae. To me the success of the 22 cal CF calibres stems from their mild mannered "shootability". Shooting rabbits and hares with them gives a shooter the confidence to be able to place shots where they need to go.

I shot a Roe Deer straight in the center of the chest front on with a .222 at about 40 meters range,it ran 50 meters full tilt untill it expired.

.222 is still quite a popular round in Scandinavia,it's one of the smallest you can use for Roe Deer in Sweden.

Originally Posted by norsk

I shot a Roe Deer straight in the center of the chest front on with a .222 at about 40 meters range,it ran 50 meters full tilt untill it expired.

.222 is still quite a popular round in Scandinavia,it's one of the smallest you can use for Roe Deer in Sweden.

To balance that: I shot a chamois straight-on through the upper front of the brisket at 20 yards with the Finnwolf.
It’s reaction was to flinch, turn and try to exit stage left left.

A quick flick of the lever and I sent a second bullet through it chest from the side and it slid to an untidy halt.

The first bullet raked from the front of the chest to just under the skin on the back of the right rear leg.

Would a 222 have dropped the chamois any better?
No.
But likely would have been much worse...

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

To balance that: I shot a chamois straight-on through the upper front of the brisket at 20 yards with the Finnwolf.
It’s reaction was to flinch, turn and try to exit stage left left.

A quick flick of the lever and I sent a second bullet through it chest from the side and it slid to an untidy halt.

The first bullet raked from the front of the chest to just under the skin on the back of the right rear leg.

Would a 222 have dropped the chamois any better?
No.
But likely would have been much worse...

Just interested @Finnwolf what was the internal damage from the first bullet? Heart shot? Lungs? Or was it low and missed both?

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

Just interested @Finnwolf what was the internal damage from the first bullet? Heart shot? Lungs? Or was it low and missed both?

From memory it raked (and wrecked ) the inside faces of the two lungs and damaged the top of the heart.

The part that surprised me was it’s relative lack of reaction to the bullets impact - all its energy was used on the animal but it flinched, kind of hunched up a bit and commenced to vacate the area...such lack of respect to the Power of Finnwolf is to be deplored!