.223 for bear, deer, elk and moose.

Wolf_trapper

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 8, 2021
Messages
168
I'd be willing to bet anybody who's actually killed griz or coastal browns wouldnt recommend a .223.
Elk, black bear, moose sure. Griz no. Would it kill one? Yes. Would you be tracking it through the brush, most likely. They are substantially thicker skinned/muscled than species listed above.

I really like/agree with this thread but disagree with this idea. Based on personal first hand experience. I can shoot a suppressed .30 cal comfortably which would turn it to a bang flop ordeal instead of, let's see what happens.
 
OP
P

PNWGATOR

WKR
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
2,613
Location
USA
I'd be willing to bet anybody who's actually killed griz or coastal browns wouldnt recommend a .223.
Elk, black bear, moose sure. Griz no. Would it kill one? Yes. Would you be tracking it through the brush, most likely. They are substantially thicker skinned/muscled than species listed above.

I really like/agree with this thread but disagree with this idea. Based on personal first hand experience. I can shoot a suppressed .30 cal comfortably which would turn it to a bang flop ordeal instead of, let's see what happens.
Simply due to ignorance reference your first sentence.

I didn’t make my statement without experience.

I assure you, there would be no “let’s see what happens” as I know the answer.
 

fwafwow

WKR
Classified Approved
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
4,880
"Nathan has taken over 7500 head of game testing the performance of a wide range of cartridges and projectiles and is a worldwide expert in the field of terminal ballistics.
Sounds like 7500 anecdotes. My post was not saying anecdotes aren’t worth considering, but that there are no studies (in the true sense of the word) because it’s probably impossible. That book is a longer version of this thread of anecdotes, but without reading it I don’t know if it comes to a different conclusion.
 

LoggerDan

WKR
Joined
Jan 8, 2023
Messages
507
Location
AK
Sure , it may kill one, but how badly will you hurt waiting for the bear to realize it’s dead. The latest stuck in the rut has some pretty exciting footage. Three good shots from a 338 rum, Then five more from a 454.
 

mtnwrunner

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
3,890
Location
Lowman, Idaho
Jeez, some people still believe the world is flat. How does one really know??
All one can really do is educate themselves by either their own experiences or reading and seeing what others are doing or have done. Then they can decide. If you want to use a .375, go ahead.
Fwiw......I've personally been down the 300 win mag, 338 edge, 340 weatherby and 300 rum road......all I have now is 6, 6.5's and 223. (and a 308 just because.) I would and do use ANY of those for big game. And out of all those, the most dead bang flops are from the 6.5's and a 140 berger.

P.s....the most fun ones to shoot are the 6 creed and the 223. What a hoot.

Randy
 

Wolf_trapper

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 8, 2021
Messages
168
Simply due to ignorance reference your first sentence.

I didn’t make my statement without experience.

I assure you, there would be no “let’s see what happens” as I know the answer.
So how many have you killed and with what caliber and bullet?
 

ljalberta

WKR
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
1,439
Sure , it may kill one, but how badly will you hurt waiting for the bear to realize it’s dead. The latest stuck in the rut has some pretty exciting footage. Three good shots from a 338 rum, Then five more from a 454.

Three good shots from a 338 rum, and it still took 5 more from a 454?!? Sounds like maybe the shots weren’t so good, or maybe it’s really enforcing the idea of this thread, that bullets, not head stamps matter?

I suppose I’ll have to watch.
 
Joined
Nov 28, 2022
Messages
465
It seems a lot of the arguing is over the concept of "adequate" vs "ideal" for killing the larger of the N.A. big game species. Ideal would be an asteroid, and apparently the low end of adequate would be the 223 based on this thread. Limited by the obvious constraints of wanting to keep the animal in one piece, saving the meat, and carrying the means to deliver the payload, the ideal projectile will be the one that you personally can deliver the most damage with accurately. It's been well-established that a high SD bullet of medium toughness at a moderate velocity, and a high enough BC to maintain that velocity for a long window is a fantastic choice (many TMK bullets follow this outline). So now the only constraint for bullet weight is recoil tolerance which is different for everyone, but I have a hard time understanding why the recoil of anything larger than a 223 is being so exaggerated here.

It has definitely moved the goal post further down the bullet weight spectrum for what is openly considered viable, but ideal is a stretch. Pick whatever data you want (personal experience, friends experiences, videos, books, magazines, whatever), there is enough evidence out there that large animals have taken great hits from great bullets that caused plenty of damage and worked as intended, only for that animal to take a long sprint anyway. It's hard to imagine how a step down in wound potential would inspire more confidence.
 
Joined
Nov 28, 2022
Messages
465
Sounds like 7500 anecdotes. My post was not saying anecdotes aren’t worth considering, but that there are no studies (in the true sense of the word) because it’s probably impossible. That book is a longer version of this thread of anecdotes, but without reading it I don’t know if it comes to a different conclusion.
True, too many variables in the field to recreate accurately. But 7500+ kills in one brain is a pretty good start. He is a big fan of tipped match bullets and describes the benefits/limitations of each one at each weight. He's definitely no Fudd.
 

LoggerDan

WKR
Joined
Jan 8, 2023
Messages
507
Location
AK
@ljalberta -

watch the flick. Shows it nicely. Yes, they were good hits. Regardless of the debate, it was good watching.

bullets were 225 accubonds. A decent bullet, but not one of my faves.
 

Shraggs

WKR
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
1,508
Location
Zeeland, MI
Is it me, or every few months we have new members jump to the end of this and comment about the inferior choice of a 223/77TMK with what appears not fully reading every single page, the photo evidence and other early non believers who purchased and have since killed with it and commented.

But to come across as an authority (maybe you are, maybe not), recent comments are void of any first hand eye witness of what this bullet does first hand, just references.
Sorry but you can’t legitimately dismiss something you don’t know.

My 77 tmk in my 223 will flat do more tissue damage at 300 yards than my 308 using 165 accubonds at similar ranges. Significantly. Next year photos.
 

chamois

FNG
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Messages
61
As much as this post opened my eyes and as much as my experience on 20ish deer killed with the 77TMK goes, if I were to shoot an animal that can bite back, I would choose a similar bullet, with similar wounding capabilities, but with a heavier weight and a larger diameter.

I am sure it can be done gently with my 5,6x50R and the 77TMK, it is just that I would choose something larger.
 
Joined
Nov 28, 2022
Messages
465
But to come across as an authority (maybe you are, maybe not), recent comments are void of any first hand eye witness of what this bullet does first hand, just references.
Sorry but you can’t legitimately dismiss something you don’t know.
That isn't anywhere near what was said. Referring to actual authority figures on the subject is different than projecting as one.
My 77 tmk in my 223 will flat do more tissue damage at 300 yards than my 308 using 165 accubonds at similar ranges. Significantly. Next year photos.
Using what metric to measure damage? And apples to oranges anyway using a different bullet. My question is what makes 77 such a magic number that is more effective than other heavy-for-caliber TMK's in heavier weights at the same velocity?
 
Last edited:

fmyth

WKR
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
1,582
Location
Arizona
Sure , it may kill one, but how badly will you hurt waiting for the bear to realize it’s dead. The latest stuck in the rut has some pretty exciting footage. Three good shots from a 338 rum, Then five more from a 454.
I saw that video. What are your thoughts on the 3 shots from the .338 RUM? I wonder if the shots were too far forward and simply missed the heart/lungs completely.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
895
Location
South Dakota
I saw that video. What are your thoughts on the 3 shots from the .338 RUM? I wonder if the shots were too far forward and simply missed the heart/lungs completely.

I saw the video as well. On my opinion the 3 shots from the 338 were not good shots. Seems to me like it was not a good angle with the bear being down on the snow. Was kinda hard to tell. The 1 shot from the pistol that was caught on video appeared good and the bear seemed to die pretty quickly after that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gbflyer

WKR
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
1,577
I’d like to see that video. If anyone here is my kin within the second degree, let’s go. I’ll bring the backup (won’t be a 77gr TMK) and some good fast tennis shoes.
 

BjornF16

WKR
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
2,519
Location
Texas
I saw the video as well. On my opinion the 3 shots from the 338 were not good shots. Seems to me like it was not a good angle with the bear being down on the snow. Was kinda hard to tell. The 1 shot from the pistol that was caught on video appeared good and the bear seemed to die pretty quickly after that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Soooooo...

3 large, poorly placed, rifle rounds didn't kill/slow down the bear; but a single, well placed pistol shot appears to have killed the bear?

Is that a good summary?
 
Top