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

[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

 

[Shraggs]

Your question went unanswered because it was addressed early in this long thread.

You have not read this and you’re arguing a false belief you think (not know) is being advocated.

you’ve been given generous advice from at least half dozen members. I hope you take it, no matter how much you know this is an amazing place to learn all kinds of things about gear.

 

[Billy Goat]

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.

If you think this thread is actually about the 223 you just really missed it.

This thread was started about 1 bullet, a few other bullets have shown to have close to similar performance, but this whole thread has revolved around 1 bullet.


The title makes it click bait, and some just can't get past it.

 

[mtnwrunner]

10E.......Yes, you are correct with the circle analogy.
Look, no one is trying to convince you or anyone else to use a 223. It is CLEARLY evident you have your mindset as to what to use. Great, use it.
You joined Rokslide today and all you have contributed to our site is posting on this thread. As I stated before, I'm not sure why you are here other than to stir the pot and I suspect other alternative reasons. This thread has been very informative to ALOT of members and it certainly is very educational, like it or not.
I can't speak for everyone else but it's obvious to me what you believe.
That being said, if you have any additional information OTHER than what's already been said, then include it. If you don't, well then don't.

Randy

 

[robtattoo]

[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

Jesus Christ dude! They both look like they were killed with a flying lawnmower!

Pretty sure the lower wound is from an alien. Did you kill it on LV426???

 

[10E]

10E.......Yes, you are correct with the circle analogy.
Look, no one is trying to convince you or anyone else to use a 223. It is CLEARLY evident you have your mindset as to what to use. Great, use it.
You joined Rokslide today and all you have contributed to our site is posting on this thread. As I stated before, I'm not sure why you are here other than to stir the pot and I suspect other alternative reasons. This thread has been very informative to ALOT of members and it certainly is very educational, like it or not.
I can't speak for everyone else but it's obvious to me what you believe.
That being said, if you have any additional information OTHER than what's already been said, then include it. If you don't, well then don't.

Randy

I appreciate this response and this will be my last post on this thread. It’s interesting that my motives have been questioned multiple times by multiple people. If I agreed with everything in the posts and bashed the opposition would my motives be questioned the same? in my defense the title of this thread is kinda geared to “stir the pot” and buck the conventional/traditional wisdom (some of which is I agree 100% very wrong) and get people to open their minds to new ideas and evidence. I apologize if I took the check/opposition on some of those points made too far. I don’t mean to offend anyone one with my posts. just felt a little one sided is all. Merry Christmas to everyone! Happy to be here!

 

[Jake Leibke]

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.

This and your previous post about a heavy Barnes bullet in a 223 seems to point to you seemingly do get idea…. Bullet construction matters A LOT. A small caliber highly frangible bullet will create a larger wound then a large caliber traditional hunting bullet therefore killing faster.
As I said before apples to apples in bullets the larger caliber will make a larger wound. I don’t think this is because of energy though but merely you have more mass to fragment.

Like I tried to highlight in my last post comparing the energy of a 300 prc to a 223. Both ended in kills but from what your saying the 300 should have killed much faster and created a much larger wound being it had over twice as much energy. Should have even exited the animal, which it didn’t. Like I stated earlier it was caught under offside hide. 89 grains left over. It did not kill any faster, maybe even a second or 2 slower even though both animals died in under 10 seconds. Both wounds were very similar with the internal wound from the 300 being slightly smaller. It seems both bullets used full amount of energy because neither exited however the 77 used it all up in the vitals fragmenting completely while the 205 didn’t use up all the potential in the vitals. It could be I’m thinking about that wrong.

We killed 7 deer with that gun last fall all with similar results. It was an eye opener for me. I have shot plenty of deer with a 243 and 75 gr VMax with great results. I expected this 300 prc to leave significantly larger wound channels and have complete pass throughs being significantly more energy. What I got was similar wound channels, a louder gun and more recoil so we couldn’t keep the animal on the scope at the shot. When someone pulls the trigger and doesn’t know where their shot hit cause they lost sight picture, that’s a problem.

This year we killed 7 deer with the 22 cal 77 tmk. 223 and 22 cm. Wounds the same as larger calibers only less recoil, less noise, being able to maintain sight picture through scope and a more enjoyable experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Islander]

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.

You're just obtuse. That's the source of the push back...trying to move you back on track. You're muddying waters that took hundreds of pages to clear, and for no useful reason.

Additionally, dick moves like mocking and calling folks "cool kids" makes you unwelcome, and it's all based on your rude and silly actions. Good thing you're not in a country bar.

This doesn't mean you aren't welcome to Rokslide.com, just what you are saying here has been hashed out over and over and at this point doesn't add anything useful to this thread.

 

[wirehead]

while the 205 didn’t use up all the potential in the vitals.

could you expand on this a bit more? What made you think this happened?

 

[id_jon]

Obviously a 77tmk vs a magnum barnes is not apples to apples, but neither is the shooting experience of the delivery system, and that is one of the main points of this thread.