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

[clperry]

I’m still new at this as this is the first forum I’ve ever joined…my goal is not to try and take away from the thread and as my public introduction does not deal with the thread I apologize to the original poster. I ’ve Worked in the firearms industry for about 10 years. Always been passionate about long range shooting/firearms , and hunting. I’ve built quite a few of my own rifles chambering bedding, tuning hand loads etc., and have hunted for enough years to gather a working knowledge of it. I really want to become a better mule deer hunter and hope I can learn from some of the best on here.

Now dealing with this thread about 223 effectiveness on big game. We should be allowed to argue/debate why it could not be effective or some potential draw backs to using a small cartridge on game. Or warn against straying from the narrow bullet (I’m speaking specifically of the bullets with lots of animals killed not just anything you can find at the local hardware store )selection tested in this thread. Since the beginning of this thread there have been quite a few pics of animals killed with bullets other than the TMK not all are ideal for elk. Some If it is not allowed then I will try to figure out how to delete my posts. I think more than a few people could leave this thread thinking that the 223 rem and 77 gr TMK s are the next best thing to the elk killing world since the 300 rum (just random cartridge not attached to it) .Im not arguing that the 223 will not kill a big game animal. But like I said there is some definite fine print details about doing it successfully.

Firearms are like musical instruments the masters can make anything sound good.

Dude… what’s been recommended and tested,why, how, its limitations, etc., have all been covered ad nauseam in this thread, of which it is very hard to believe you have read in its entirety judging by your comments. It very much seems like you’ve taken upon yourself to police the idea that only qualified folks should be using certain things and that we should all be very careful in what we do and say regarding small cartridges. Go back, re read. It’s been covered by folks who have been, currently are, and will continue to test in the real world in statistically significant quantities. Or better yet, try it. Get a gun and some ammo and see for yourself. That’s what I did before I started pontificating on what I thought or felt. I went out and got hard data on actual animals. Turns out what I thought I knew wasn’t reality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[10E]

The welcome is serious.

No one is saying you can’t question or debate, but the method of delivery is making it sound like you haven’t read the whole thread. Reading it in its entirety doesn’t mean that you will agree with the premise(s). But if you want to resurrect an argument or point that has been made and addressed in the past, it would (IMHO) be a bit better to respond to a post in which such a point had been raised. Then you can try to refine the argument in a better or different way.

I honestly have read the entire thread! It took me a few days to do it before I joined. The issue is “hashed out” has been the cool kids jumping the people who have a different perspective/experience and making blanket statements that are not entirely true. There has also been a fair bit of name calling etc. to people who might have some valid points for the mass of the hunting public not just the guys who gets to shoot a lot and often. I understand that it’s not what everyone wants to hear. The goal is to add my perspective/observation/opinion to the thread and hopefully everyone can decide which side of the fence they want to fall on.

 

[PNWGATOR]

I’m still new at this as this is the first forum I’ve ever joined…my goal is not to try and take away from the thread and as my public introduction does not deal with the thread I apologize to the original poster. I ’ve Worked in the firearms industry for about 10 years. Always been passionate about long range shooting/firearms , and hunting. I’ve built quite a few of my own rifles chambering bedding, tuning hand loads etc., and have hunted for enough years to gather a working knowledge of it. I really want to become a better mule deer hunter and hope I can learn from some of the best on here.

Now dealing with this thread about 223 effectiveness on big game. We should be allowed to argue/debate why it could not be effective or some potential draw backs to using a small cartridge on game. Or warn against straying from the narrow bullet (I’m speaking specifically of the bullets with lots of animals killed not just anything you can find at the local hardware store )selection tested in this thread. Since the beginning of this thread there have been quite a few pics of animals killed with bullets other than the TMK not all are ideal for elk. Some If it is not allowed then I will try to figure out how to delete my posts. I think more than a few people could leave this thread thinking that the 223 rem and 77 gr TMK s are the next best thing to the elk killing world since the 300 rum (just random cartridge not attached to it) .Im not arguing that the 223 will not kill a big game animal. But like I said there is some definite fine print details about doing it successfully.

Firearms are like musical instruments the masters can make anything sound good.

I would encourage you to read more and type less.

 

[eoperator]

For example, a 165gr Accubond hitting at 2500fps will penetrate further than the same impacting at 2000fps.

I thought I would further polute this thread with off topic crap.

In my experience an Accubond at 2k fps barely expands nearly "penciling". I would bet an Accubond at 2k fps penetrates as much if not more than one at 2.5k fps

 

[10E]

I would encourage you to read more and type less.

 

[fwafwow]

I honestly have read the entire thread! It took me a few days to do it before I joined.

Excellent to know this

The issue is “hashed out” has been the cool kids jumping the people who have a different perspective/experience and making blanket statements that are not entirely true.

Can you be more specific? Which blanket statements, to what extent are they untrue, and based on what contrary information?

There has also been a fair bit of name calling etc. to people who might have some valid points for the mass of the hunting public not just the guys who gets to shoot a lot and often.

Same question - which valid points, and based on what data?

I understand that it’s not what everyone wants to hear.

Everyone wants more data and info, but not to hear something again without any new information

The goal is to add my perspective/observation/opinion to the thread and hopefully everyone can decide which side of the fence they want to fall on.

The goal is laudable. So far, and IMHO, the delivery is falling short in tone and lack of specificity.

 

[BjornF16]

 

[IBen]

I joined the 223 club. Shot steel at 500 yards with the tmk

 

[sneaky]

“Energy is useless as a metric for terminal ballistics” is too generic a statement. That is a surefire “fudd trap” and a way to get some of the older guys fired up It is not useless. I would argue that The cartridge with more energy will have a wider desired terminal performance range across the spectrum of bullets available for a given caliber.

This is especially important when you begin to reduce velocity and bullet mass (energy). The spectrum of bullets suitable begins to shrink with the reduction in energy. For example thinking of your 223 rem as a 300 win mag can get you into trouble when selecting a bullet. The bullet has to be optimized to use every bit of the reduced energy (velocity/mass) to produce the quick clean death we are wanting . Venturing out away from the somewhat narrow bullet selection can lead to less than stellar terminal performance on game (ie smaller wound channels, slow death, slow bleeding, long runs, unrecovered game in the cases of poor shot placement etc.)

For example In the 300 win mag you could honestly use just about any factory loaded hunting bullet out there inside of 400 yards and get the desired results . (Assuming similar shot placement) Very Broad wound channels with quick bleeding and fast death. With a 223 it’s a very specific few.

In an apples to apples comparison the higher energy cartridge with a bullet optimized for the increased impact energy WILL ALWAYS create more wounding/larger wound, trauma, bleeding ,and in other words greater terminal performance. They are too connected to totally exclude one from the other.

I think the more accurate statement is energy is nearly useless metric for killing a big game animal. Which this thread has clearly shown by a ton of dead critters shot with a 223 rem. Many of which died pretty darn quick.

Energy (bullet mass and velocity) can however have a significant effect on the speed at which an animal dies. That I think is the biggest fine print statement with using small cartridges. They are absolutely lethal but the speed at which they kill can vary greatly if the shot is not perfect or the bullet selection is not optimized.

You're so far over your head trying to correct someone who shoots more rounds in a week than you'll shoot in your lifetime it's actually pretty comical. Reading comprehension isn't your forte and you're just repeating the same old trite information that's wrongly been passed down for decades. Stuck in Fuddville and just digging your hole deeper.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[Jake Leibke]

[mention]10E [/mention] welcome the aboard.

You do make some valid points. Apples to apples the larger caliber will create a larger wound, also at a cost others have chimed in with, more recoil etc. At some point though how big is too big for a wound? I also disagree with your statement about a larger caliber has more room for error with shot placement with folks using off the shelf hunting ammo. You will have a bigger margin for error with a smaller caliber match type bullet vs a larger caliber traditional hunting bullet. FT LBS of energy really don’t have much to with “killing power” The following pictures are examples of such.

300 PRC
205 Berger Elite Hunter
2950 fps 3980 ft lbs at impact
40 yard shot
Deer went 80 yards zero blood on ground

Entrance

Insides

Exit - bullet did not exit completely. Bullet was caught under hide.

223
77 TMK
2650 fps 1200 ft lbs at impact
75 yard shot
Deer went 50 yards with a blood trail

Pointing at impact bullet did not exit

Insides

Point being more energy from a larger caliber doesn’t equal more margin for error. Both these shots were close range. I wouldn’t consider these bullets equals but do consider the Berger more frangible then a traditional hunting bullets. I would consider wound channels very similar in damage probably with the 223 being a bit more destructive even. The other benefit is A LOT less recoil with the 223 and actually being able to keep animal in scope after the shot.

Also shot a few deer with a 6.5 cm and a 130 tmk this season. Wound channel better than pictured 300prc and again significantly less recoil. Less ft lbs of energy as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

10E.......so, why exactly did you join Rokslde?

Randy

I think he may have come over from the Campfire or HT to correct us lol

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

In an apples to apples comparison for bullet construction matched to energy…. absolutely energy creates a larger wound and faster bleeding/ death.

I have considered that and just like the 77 gr TMK and 20”-ish 223 rem velocities. If the bullet is properly matched to the available energy. More energy will create a larger wound and faster bleeding.

Energy = potential for wounding
It cannot be removed from the terminal performance metric.

Yes it can. People have killed animals with extremely low energy stick and strings for millennia. Energy numbers that people today would say wouldn't work. You going to rewrite the history of settling the American West and say there's zero chance of them killing grizzlies with 25-20 lever actions? Happened thousands of times, but "energy " right?

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

The welcome is serious.

I honestly have read the entire thread! It took me a few days to do it before I joined. The issue is “hashed out” has been the cool kids jumping the people who have a different perspective/experience and making blanket statements that are not entirely true. There has also been a fair bit of name calling etc. to people who might have some valid points for the mass of the hunting public not just the guys who gets to shoot a lot and often. I understand that it’s not what everyone wants to hear. The goal is to add my perspective/observation/opinion to the thread and hopefully everyone can decide which side of the fence they want to fall on.

Have you listened to the Shoot2Hunt podcasts on this? With the people you're trying to correct?

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[10E]

Excellent to know this

Can you be more specific? Which blanket statements, to what extent are they untrue, and based on what contrary information?

Same question - which valid points, and based on what data?

Everyone wants more data and info, but not to hear something again without any new information

The goal is laudable. So far, and IMHO, the delivery is falling short in tone and lack of

[mention]10E [/mention] welcome the aboard.

You do make some valid points. Apples to apples the larger caliber will create a larger wound, also at a cost others have chimed in with, more recoil etc. At some point though how big is too big for a wound? I also disagree with your statement about a larger caliber has more room for error with shot placement with folks using off the shelf hunting ammo. You will have a bigger margin for error with a smaller caliber match type bullet vs a larger caliber traditional hunting bullet. FT LBS of energy really don’t have much to with “killing power” The following pictures are examples of such.

300 PRC
205 Berger Elite Hunter
2950 fps 3980 ft lbs at impact
40 yard shot
Deer went 80 yards zero blood on ground

Entrance

Insides

Exit - bullet did not exit completely. Bullet was caught under hide.

223
77 TMK
2650 fps 1200 ft lbs at impact
75 yard shot
Deer went 50 yards with a blood trail

Pointing at impact bullet did not exit

Insides

Point being more energy from a larger caliber doesn’t equal more margin for error. Both these shots were close range. I wouldn’t consider these bullets equals but do consider the Berger more frangible then a traditional hunting bullets. I would consider wound channels very similar in damage probably with the 223 being a bit more destructive even. The other benefit is A LOT less recoil with the 223 and actually being able to keep animal in scope after the shot.

Also shot a few deer with a 6.5 cm and a 130 tmk this season. Wound channel better than pictured 300prc and again significantly less recoil. Less ft lbs of energy as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I

[mention]10E [/mention] welcome the aboard.

You do make some valid points. Apples to apples the larger caliber will create a larger wound, also at a cost others have chimed in with, more recoil etc. At some point though how big is too big for a wound? I also disagree with your statement about a larger caliber has more room for error with shot placement with folks using off the shelf hunting ammo. You will have a bigger margin for error with a smaller caliber match type bullet vs a larger caliber traditional hunting bullet. FT LBS of energy really don’t have much to with “killing power” The following pictures are examples of such.

300 PRC
205 Berger Elite Hunter
2950 fps 3980 ft lbs at impact
40 yard shot
Deer went 80 yards zero blood on ground

Entrance

Insides

Exit - bullet did not exit completely. Bullet was caught under hide.

223
77 TMK
2650 fps 1200 ft lbs at impact
75 yard shot
Deer went 50 yards with a blood trail

Pointing at impact bullet did not exit

Insides

Point being more energy from a larger caliber doesn’t equal more margin for error. Both these shots were close range. I wouldn’t consider these bullets equals but do consider the Berger more frangible then a traditional hunting bullets. I would consider wound channels very similar in damage probably with the 223 being a bit more destructive even. The other benefit is A LOT less recoil with the 223 and actually being able to keep animal in scope after the shot.

Also shot a few deer with a 6.5 cm and a 130 tmk this season. Wound channel better than pictured 300prc and again significantly less recoil. Less ft lbs of energy as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have you listened to the Shoot2Hunt podcasts on this? With the people you're trying to correct?

Sent from my SM-S918U using

So if I’m understanding this correctly you guys are saying more velocity and mass (energy) has no effect on how a bullet acts when it hits an animal or in other words terminal performance?

I would like to keep this on the 223 rem for big game. So let use an apples to oranges comparison for a 223 rem that seems to be the popular thing to do to “boost the performance comparison” and sell people on this idea. Let’s say a heavy for caliber TTSX at 223 velocity’s. Is it going to be effective on elk at 400 yards? If “ it’s dead” is the definition of effective then I will admit defeat on the matter. Because if that’s the metric no bullet or velocity combo really matters as long as it has enough energy to poke a hole in a vital organ. Sharpened stick kills them just as dead example.

 

[mt terry d]

Re: Margin for error

Logic, data and personal experience all point to the shooter being the greatest
factor in error, agreed?

Eliminate or greatly reduce that factor and we're golden, regardless of 223 w/tmk or 300 mag, agreed?

Logic, data and personal experience all point to the fact that all hunters will shoot the 223 more often and more accurately than the 300 mag.

Some hunters (a very very small % at that) will be able to shoot the 300 mag practically as well as they shoot the 223.

The vast majority of hunters cannot. Not even close. To the extent that their error is so large as to far offset any difference in terminal performance between the two being compared.

Tripping over $$$ to pick up pennies.

 

[sveltri]

Energy is nothing more than an output from data entered into an equation. Please explain precisely how energy kills. Velocity is real, projectiles are real, projectile performance at given velocities is real.

 

[fwafwow]

I



So if I’m understanding this correctly you guys are saying more velocity and mass (energy) has no effect on how a bullet acts when it hits an animal or in other words terminal performance?

I would like to keep this on the 223 rem for big game. So let use an apples to oranges comparison for a 223 rem that seems to be the popular thing to do to “boost the performance comparison” and sell people on this idea. Let’s say a heavy for caliber TTSX at 223 velocity’s. Is it going to be effective on elk at 400 yards? If “ it’s dead” is the definition of effective then I will admit defeat on the matter. Because if that’s the metric no bullet or velocity combo really matters as long as it has enough energy to poke a hole in a vital organ. Sharpened stick kills them just as dead example.

So you want to discuss something but you won’t answer any questions and fail to provide any basis for your apparent disagreement on the premises? Trying to work with you, but this is more like a series of troll posts.

 

[Billy Goat]

So if I’m understanding this correctly you guys are saying more velocity and mass (energy) has no effect on how a bullet acts when it hits an animal or in other words terminal performance?

What has been said over and over is that it's bullet construction. Different types of bullets react differently at impact, and are designed to work within velocity windows.


The way a bullet acts when it hits an animal is going to be a reflection of construction and velocity. The bullet is either going to open up or it isn't.

If it was energy that made terminal performance, then every bullet would have the same terminal performance in the same weight and impact velocity.

 

[Shraggs]

Agreed troll.

If had actually read this he would not have asked his last question.

I like type less read more from the OP

 

[10E]

What has been said over and over is that it's bullet construction. Different types of bullets react differently at impact, and are designed to work within velocity windows.


The way a bullet acts when it hits an animal is going to be a reflection of construction and velocity. The bullet is either going to open up or it isn't.

If it was energy that made terminal performance, then every bullet would have the same terminal performance in the same weight and impact velocity.

A few memes and already called a troll for having a different opinion. Energy is connected to terminal performance , and bullet construction can give a smaller cartridge a larger than typical cartridge wounding performance on game it likewise can give a larger cartridge smaller than potential wounding. We are going around in circles here. I give up. Re-read my posts. I can’t argue points I have not made.

Got real quiet with the 223 rem example I gave though. I feel like most people inside know that this is a bad idea. I’ve read it on a post years ago. You may get a mouse to nearly the speed of a cat, but at the end of the day the cat still eats.

The same applies to the 223. You may get a 223 Rem to nearly the wounding potential of a big magnum, but at the end of the day the more energy (mass/velocity) is going to create a bigger wound WITH an equally/appropriately match bullet construction to that increased mass/ velocity. The 223 can be extremely lethal killing very quickly in some cases (proven countless times by now on this thread), however if you wander too far out of the velocity/ mass and bullet construction, or shot placement parameters you may experience slower kills or unrecovered game.

This is the fine print on using a small cartridge with low energy and the wrong bullet construction. It frankly doesn’t get mentioned enough. If you think a big magnum can be slow killing with a mismatched bullet try it with a 223 and it can get way worse. It should be stated over and over because at the end of the day you are not on the receiving end of it. There is a living breathing animal that is going to die and your decisions greatly affect how quick, clean, and painless that experience is.

Like it or not the mass, velocity, and narrow bullet selection for this type of construction is a limiting factor in the 223 Rem. And it’s effectiveness at quickly killing game.

Agreed troll.

If had actually read this he would not have asked his last question.

I like type less read more from the OP