.223 for bear, mountain goat, deer, elk, and moose.

[Shō[t]gun]

Heck yea! I skinned a moose this fall that had 3 223 rounds in it.

Did they mushroom or break up at all? Or was it some jack wagon poking holes with FMJ's?

 

[TW907]

Did they mushroom or break up at all? Or was it some jack wagon poking holes with FMJ's?

They was mushroomed

 

[Formidilosus]

Did they mushroom or break up at all? Or was it some jack wagon poking holes with FMJ's?

Why don’t you actually read the entire thread- every post. There is no place on the internet that has as much actual discussion of how bullets kill- with pictures, in animals, than this thread. Every “got ya” you are stating has been discussed at length. You are not only incorrect with your assertions, you are ignorant of the subject.

 

[BigNate]

The latest stuck in the rut has some pretty exciting footage. Three good shots from a 338 rum, Then five more from a 454.

Do you know what bullets were used in the 338 RUM?

This sounds to me like poor bullet performance. My first guess would be a heavier mono of some flavor, most likely a Barnes.

 

[Billogna]

Do you know what bullets were used in the 338 RUM?

This sounds to me like poor bullet performance. My first guess would be a heavier mono of some flavor, most likely a Barnes.

225 gr. Accubonds were used in the rifle.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Did they mushroom or break up at all? Or was it some jack wagon poking holes with FMJ's?

Why don’t you actually read the entire thread- every post. There is no place on the internet that has as much actual discussion of how bullets kill- with pictures, in animals, than this thread. Every “got ya” you are stating has been discussed at length. You are not only incorrect with your assertions, you are ignorant of the subject.

I asked a simple question. No need to be so militant about details that may go against your theory. It's not a very scientific conversation if competing info is immediately dismissed.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Post #2975 which I believe references the discussion at hand, says they are 225 gr Accubonds. Whether a guy chooses the small calibers, standard bores or medium bores, good hunting to them.

My question about the video is at that distance (400 yds?) did they truly know they were good hits. The proof is in the bear still being alive. The bear was not broken down and it was not hit vitally. It would've expired because the lungs and heart wouldn't provide blood to the brain. I take nothing away from that video, except engaging a bear at that distance they got a story of a lifetime that is unfortunate for that animal.

 

[Formidilosus]

I asked a simple question. No need to be so militant about details that may go against your theory. It's not a very scientific conversation if competing info is immediately dismissed.

You can not have an intellectual conversation between multiple parties if one party is ignorant of facts. Ignorant does not mean stupid- it means lacking education or knowledge of a particular subject. The questions you are asking about point to the fact that you are missing quite a bit of information.
You have not used the combo in question, and lack an understanding of how and why it is doing in tissue what it is. As for “details”- no. It is very likely that there is no human alive that has killed more game animals with the 77gr TMK than I (maybe @chamois has) and almost certainly no person that has seen more killed with it; and that experience is directly compared to thousands of game animals killed with calibers from .224 to .50BMG with an understanding of terminal ballistics.


There’s no “theory”. There are measured, observable and replicable terminal Ballistics facts. That the hunting and/or gun community at large haven’t let go of myth and lore, does not change that. You have provided no competing info- only conjecture and misbeliefs.

I am suggesting that you read the entire thread, as nearly everything you could ask has been addressed already. If you do that, then a real discussion about certain aspects can be had. If you don’t, it’s just noise.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

You can not have an intellectual conversation between multiple parties if one party is ignorant of facts. Ignorant does not mean stupid- it means lacking education or knowledge of a particular subject. The questions you are asking about point to the fact that you are missing quite a bit of information.
You have not used the combo in question, and lack an understanding of how and why it is doing in tissue what it is. As for “details”- no. It is very likely that there is no human alive that has killed more game animals with the 77gr TMK than I (maybe @chamois has) and almost certainly no person that has seen more killed with it; and that experience is directly compared to thousands of game animals killed with calibers from .224 to .50BMG with an understanding of terminal ballistics.


There’s no “theory”. There are measured, observable and replicable terminal Ballistics facts. That the hunting and/or gun community at large haven’t let go of myth and lore, does not change that. You have provided no competing info- only conjecture and misbeliefs.

I am suggesting that you read the entire thread, as nearly everything you could ask has been addressed already. If you do that, then a real discussion about certain aspects can be had. If you don’t, it’s just noise.

So do you have any videos posted of a bull elk being taken with one? I'm honestly interested in seeing one without committing to something I personally don't believe is the best option for me. Evidence and facts in your head alone are anecdotal, just as others have said about any other unscientific uncontrolled experiments. Documenting the experience legitimizes it for everyone, and pictures tell very little of a story.

 

[ID_Matt]

This may have been mentioned before, but I have read maybe 50-60% of the thread and can't recall seeing a ton of discussion about it. I have no doubts about the terminal ballistics of the 223 with the right bullet. I am a firm believer that certain bullets just flat out do well, regardless of size. Give me a 6.5 creed with 140 bergers over a 338 WM and barnes/accubonds any day.

However, what is the main reason for guys going out and buying the 223's over say a 6.5 creed or other 6mm? I understand the 77 TMK does massive damage with almost 0 recoil and most average shooters will definitely shoot better with less recoil. However, after 400 yards or so, the wind deflection of the 223 appears to really start to be an issue compared to the higher BC 6's and 6.5's. I shoot quite a bit more than the average person I would guess, and I am positive that in almost all field conditions, I am going to shoot a 6 or 6.5 better just because of the wind factor being more predictable.

 

[Formidilosus]

So do you have any videos posted of a bull elk being taken with one? I'm honestly interested in seeing one without committing to something I personally don't believe is the best option for me. Evidence and facts in your head alone are anecdotal, just as others have said about any other unscientific uncontrolled experiments. Documenting the experience legitimizes it for everyone, and pictures tell very little of a story.

Can you explain what a video is going to show you? And, what do you think the difference is between a bull elk and cow elk, or a bull moose? There have been bull elk killed with the combo and they died just like every other has.

Again- if you would read the thread, your questions have already been answered multiple times.

 

[Formidilosus]

However, what is the main reason for guys going out and buying the 223's over say a 6.5 creed or other 6mm?

Absolute hit rate on animals. I and those I hunt and shoot with track hits and misses as well as the results of shots from every animal killed or shot at. From muzzle to somewhere around 450 yards, the 223/77TMK has the highest success rate- that is animals desired to be killed, that actually end up dead; and the lowest miss or wound rate of any combo seen- that is across hundreds of animals with nearly every caliber from .224-.338. This is from beginner to world class shooters, and from first animal for that person to the thousandth animal for that person.

It’s not a “I like, I think, I feel” thing. 15 years ago I would have not guessed the results in any way, though I should have.

However, after 400 yards or so, the wind deflection of the 223 appears to really start to be an issue compared to the higher BC 6's and 6.5's. I shoot quite a bit more than the average person I would guess, and I am positive that in almost all field conditions, I am going to shoot a 6 or 6.5 better just because of the wind factor being more predictable.

From 0-450’ish yards in moderate wind conditions (broken terrain and 10’ish MPH wind) the 223/77gr TMK rules. There is nearly an identical hit rate for a 22CM or 22-250 level cartridge with a TMK or heavy ELD-M at sub 450y, but most people don’t practice enough with them to gain the ballistic advantage. However, past 450’ish to around 700-800 yards the 22CM/88gr ELD-M wins in hit rate- with a mid size 6mm using 105-115gr bullets being nearly neck and neck for it. The 6.5 is below all the aforementioned combos, however it still has a relatively high hit rate and is readily available.

 

[Billy Goat]

So do you have any videos posted of a bull elk being taken with one? I'm honestly interested in seeing one without committing to something I personally don't believe is the best option for me. Evidence and facts in your head alone are anecdotal, just as others have said about any other unscientific uncontrolled experiments. Documenting the experience legitimizes it for everyone, and pictures tell very little of a story.

How does a video show you something that pictures of shredded lungs don't?


I'm just saying, that's what makes dead animals.

Plenty of video of gun fights that had less than desired results with big guns.

 

[JBradley500]

Since I can't replenish the 77 tmks at the moment, I'm going to see if I these 175s will impress out of 308, 06, and WM.

 

[Formidilosus]

Since I can't replenish the 77 tmks at the moment, I'm going to see if I these 175s will impress out of 308, 06, and WM.

They very much do.

 

[ID_Matt]

Absolute hit rate on animals. I and those I hunt and shoot with track hits and misses as well as the results of shots from every animal killed or shot at. From muzzle to somewhere around 450 yards, the 223/77TMK has the highest success rate- that is animals desired to be killed, that actually end up dead; and the lowest miss or wound rate of any combo seen- that is across hundreds of animals with nearly every caliber from .224-.338. This is from beginner to world class shooters, and from first animal for that person to the thousandth animal for that person.

It’s not a “I like, I think, I feel” thing. 15 years ago I would have not guessed the results in any way, though I should have.




From 0-450’ish yards in moderate wind conditions (broken terrain and 10’ish MPH wind) the 223/77gr TMK rules. There is nearly an identical hit rate for a 22CM or 22-250 level cartridge with a TMK or heavy ELD-M at sub 450y, but most people don’t practice enough with them to gain the ballistic advantage. However, past 450’ish to around 700-800 yards the 22CM/88gr ELD-M wins in hit rate- with a mid size 6mm using 105-115gr bullets being nearly neck and neck for it. The 6.5 is below all the aforementioned combos, however it still has a relatively high hit rate and is readily available.

What makes the hit rate so high for the 223 under 450 you think? It has to be recoil right? Do nerves play a big part in the hit rate? Past 450, I definitely won't argue on the 22CM and 6mm.

 

[Alder_]

how do hammer hunters in 50-60ish grains work out of these .22 cal rifles?
I know a controlled expansion mono is different than an explosive tmk.
Does anyone have experience with something like that on say coyote and up to deer/elk/bear?

 

[Formidilosus]

What makes the hit rate so high for the 223 under 450 you think? It has to be recoil right? Do nerves play a big part in the hit rate? Past 450, I definitely won't argue on the 22CM and 6mm.

Because even people who shoot a lot shoot with less concern subconsciously with a 22LR than anything else partly due to the lack of movement in the rifle equates to seeing every round impact without even trying- there is no effort expended trying to spot impacts/misses. Once you factor in unstable field positions, heavy or irregular breathing, muscle fatigue, mental and emotional stress, potentially vision narrowing (tunnel vision) caused by all of those factors; it becomes measurably more mental load to align and mount the rifle perfectly- the less recoil, less noise, less muzzle blast, and less movement of the rifle; the less effort is expended consciously or subconsciously to watch what happens during recoil.
Subconsciously our brain is fighting the desire to get away from the movement: regardless of how good of a shooter you are- it is forcing itself to accept the gun going off. The 223 bolt action, like the 22LR, is at such a level (especially suppressed) of movement that consciously or subconsciously you expend less “effort” during the shot.

 

[ID_Matt]

Because even people who shoot a lot shoot with less concern subconsciously with a 22LR than anything else partly due to the lack of movement in the rifle equates to seeing every round impact without even trying- there is no effort expended trying to spot impacts/misses. Once you factor in unstable field positions, heavy or irregular breathing, muscle fatigue, mental and emotional stress, potentially vision narrowing (tunnel vision) caused by all of those factors; it becomes measurably more mental load to align and mount the rifle perfectly- the less recoil, less noise, less muzzle blast, and less movement of the rifle; the less effort is expended consciously or subconsciously to watch what happens during recoil.
Subconsciously our brain is fighting the desire to get away from the movement: regardless of how good of a shooter you are- it is forcing itself to accept the gun going off. The 223 bolt action, like the 22LR, is at such a level (especially suppressed) of movement that consciously or subconsciously you expend less “effort” during the shot.

Makes complete sense. What about on steel, where a person doesn't deal with as much heavy breathing, stress, etc.? Does the hit rate only show up on game? I was thinking it would be fairly easy to test on steel, but I am about 90% sure I would shoot my 6mm better with any sort of wind. However that test would be in unstable positions on vital sized targets. The stressors you mentioned wouldn't be so much in play.

 

[Formidilosus]

Makes complete sense. What about on steel, where a person doesn't deal with as much heavy breathing, stress, etc.? Does the hit rate only show up on game? I was thinking it would be fairly easy to test on steel, but I am about 90% sure I would shoot my 6mm better with any sort of wind. However that test would be in unstable positions on vital sized targets. The stressors you mentioned wouldn't be so much in play.

Measured anyway it will show. Given someone that is actually practicing from field positions, and shooting thousands of rounds a year from those conditions, the difference between a 223 and 6mm such as the 6cm will be small.