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

[Billy Goat]

I have said this a few times in this thread, but this is the most educational compilation I’ve seen on the internet, and I will take what billy goat said a step further… it’s not even really about one bullet, it’s about terminal performance in general, all of the information isn’t limited to one 77gr bullet, or the .223, it can be applied to any cartridge to get whatever outcome you desire, even if that means losing 40% of the meat to kill deader.

What is cool, is that the little .223 with no consequences when you pull the trigger is so capable with a few choice projectiles… that’s where the cartridge and TMK come in, and creates more tissue damage than most of the larger cartridges I’ve shot game with paired with the traditional hunting bullets I have always used.

I avoided match bullets for a long time, I knew they worked, but those who touted them couldn’t tell me how they worked, and my traditional hunting bullets worked, so why change to something that I don’t understand from something that works?

This thread alone (plenty of other resources since) explained to me how they work and why they are a legit option

Now I need to find a reply of 10E’s to quote, because I feel like the only one in this thread that hasn’t

It's the domino effect of when you think in the critical parts.


If this, wait what?

 

[roosiebull]

I honestly would like to learn something if I am wrong.

If you are seeking knowledge, there is an episode of the shoot2hunt podcast called “bullet ballistics: a hunters guide” that goes into all of your points in this thread, and goes over it all very thoroughly.

I’m certainly not going to try to convince anyone of anything, and the majority of rifle hunting has been in the Fudd mindset with bullets and cartridges, but I like good logical information, especially when it bucks status quo’s with real world data, but that’s irrelevant

If you truly are trying to understand just to know, and/or utilize, that podcast goes through everything you have brought up in this thread. It directly relates to your points in this thread

 

[Billy Goat]

If you are seeking knowledge, there is an episode of the shoot2hunt podcast called “bullet ballistics: a hunters guide” that goes into all of your points in this thread, and goes over it all very thoroughly.

I’m certainly not going to try to convince anyone of anything, and the majority of rifle hunting has been in the Fudd mindset with bullets and cartridges, but I like good logical information, especially when it bucks status quo’s with real world data, but that’s irrelevant

If you truly are trying to understand just to know, and/or utilize, that podcast goes through everything you have brought up in this thread. It directly relates to your points in this thread

Damnit Roosie, you don't learn nothing from podcasts.

It's pictures with words where it's instructional. All my books in higher education were that.

 

[ThatDUDE]

If you are seeking knowledge, there is an episode of the shoot2hunt podcast called “bullet ballistics: a hunters guide” that goes into all of your points in this thread, and goes over it all very thoroughly.

I’m certainly not going to try to convince anyone of anything, and the majority of rifle hunting has been in the Fudd mindset with bullets and cartridges, but I like good logical information, especially when it bucks status quo’s with real world data, but that’s irrelevant

If you truly are trying to understand just to know, and/or utilize, that podcast goes through everything you have brought up in this thread. It directly relates to your points in this thread

Said Podcast

 

[10E]

Not sure if the link will work.
If not the title is “ballistics gel hunting vs Match bullets episode 22” on “Long range hunting group” YouTube channel.

This is a good video on the TMK bullet. Unfortunately a 69 gr was tested (not a 77 gr) 224 at 2,837 fps impact velocity/1,233 foot pounds of potential energy side by side compared to a 175 gr .30 cal. at an impact velocity 2,580 fps/ 2,585 foot pounds of potential energy. I feel it adds to the thread and illustrates in a little more controlled setting what you guys are seeing on game as far as larger than what would normally be expected wounding from the smaller caliber/cartridge.

 

[BjornF16]

Not sure if the link will work.
If not the title is “ballistics gel hunting vs Match bullets episode 22” on “Long range hunting group” YouTube channel.

This is a good video on the TMK bullet. Unfortunately a 69 gr was tested (not a 77 gr) 224 at 2,837 fps impact velocity/1,233 foot pounds of potential energy side by side compared to a 175 gr .30 cal. at an impact velocity 2,580 fps/ 2,585 foot pounds of potential energy. I feel it adds to the thread and illustrates in a little more controlled setting what you guys are seeing on game as far as larger than what would normally be expected wounding from the smaller caliber/cartridge.

Give it up dude. That video is 2 years old and has already been discussed.

For the umpteenth time, start your own thread detailing how energy kills…maybe you’ll convince someone who hasn’t participated in this thread

 

[Tartan]

Not sure if the link will work.
If not the title is “ballistics gel hunting vs Match bullets episode 22” on “Long range hunting group” YouTube channel.

This is a good video on the TMK bullet. Unfortunately a 69 gr was tested (not a 77 gr) 224 at 2,837 fps impact velocity/1,233 foot pounds of potential energy side by side compared to a 175 gr .30 cal. at an impact velocity 2,580 fps/ 2,585 foot pounds of potential energy. I feel it adds to the thread and illustrates in a little more controlled setting what you guys are seeing on game as far as larger than what would normally be expected wounding from the smaller caliber/cartridge.

For the most part I think 10E gets it. But not having been around for the 3+ years of this threads existence causes some error in translation.

The video is great and entirely supports what this thread discusses. Nobody is arguing that a larger (175gr) tmk isn’t going to do more damage than a smaller tmk (77gr) at the same velocity.

But what is being argued against is that the energy at impact has any bearing when predicting wound size and shape. This 10E is where I think you’re getting all the pushback.

We don’t have an equation to calculated energy dump AND the mechanism (fragments, mushroom, tumble, etc) that would be required to predict the outcome.

Therefore when evaluating different bullet construction, KE is useless. Even with the same construction it doesn’t tell you anything measurable. How much more? And how is the wound cavity different?

The whole point here is that bullets matter more than headstamps and a consistent trend of terminal results are better than fudd math.

 

[roosiebull]

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.

I don’t think anyone wouldn’t agree with you here, though it has been very thoroughly discussed in this thread… as you go down in caliber/cartridge, bullet construction becomes more important for desirable results.

Years ago when I got an AR for calling cats, I used my present understanding of bullets to see what shot well in that rifle, my top choice didn’t shoot well at all TTSX, and that bummed me out, but in hindsight I got lucky. I figured the smaller the bullet, the more important it was that it held together… I just didn’t know what I didn’t know. I ended up settling on the 77gr smk, which is also not a great choice, but surely better than a baby mono

I only used that rifle one season and killed a nice Tom lion I called in and my wife killed her first blacktail buck with it. I got a glimpse of why a 223 can be so effective, and I was able to shoot that cat 4 times before he could get out of dodge… scope never left target

My wife, who at the time was very inexperienced, was able to get 2 shots on target on that buck… neither needed a follow up, but it’s certainly a good option/habit since the shooter doesn’t see the path of a bullet

 

[Tartan]

To add. The group here that has followed this thread with an open mind and made the change and seen the results for themselves has also had years of FNGs and others come in with same arguments over and over and refuse to acknowledge the actual results.

There’s a short leash for those not willing to bring evidence.

In the last 2 years I’ve killed 7 animals with the 108 eldm and the 77 tmk. Prior to that, probably 50 myself with a 30-06 and ttsx plus numerous others from friends shooting 270win to 300 weatherby.

I’ve seen all the personal evidence that I need to see now. To think 5 years ago I was wanting to get a 338 and now my 6 creed is my “big” gun.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

To add. The group here that has followed this thread with an open mind and made the change and seen the results for themselves has also had years of FNGs and others come in with same arguments over and over and refuse to acknowledge the actual results.

There’s a short leash for those not willing to bring evidence.

In the last 2 years I’ve killed 7 animals with the 108 eldm and the 77 tmk. Prior to that, probably 50 myself with a 30-06 and ttsx plus numerous others from friends shooting 270win to 300 weatherby.

I’ve seen all the personal evidence that I need to see now. To think 5 years ago I was wanting to get a 338 and now my 6 creed is my “big” gun.

I will be posting my .35 Whelen and reloading components this week to prep for a 2024 6 CM build.

 

[Chris_in_Idaho]

I will be posting my .35 Whelen and reloading components this week to prep for a 2024 6 CM build.

Likewise my 300wsm will soon fund an RSS.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Likewise my 300wsm will soon fund an RSS.

Its amazing how many .300 WSM and .300 Mag barrels are available in the classifieds here and on Ebay.

 

[Chris_in_Idaho]

Its amazing how many .300 WSM and .300 Mag barrels are available in the classifieds here and on Ebay.

Please nobody explain it to my local classifieds until after someone buys it...

 

[Anschutz]

Please nobody explain it to my local classifieds until after someone buys it...

I think you'll always have folks who want to use medium bore rifles for hunting. I've seen the results here and acknowledge the effectiveness of the "RSS," but I'm going to continue to hunt with what I currently use for what little hunting I do with a rifle.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[10E]

Give it up dude. That video is 2 years old and has already been discussed.

For the umpteenth time, start your own thread detailing how energy kills…maybe you’ll convince someone who hasn’t participated in this

Give it up dude. That video is 2 years old and has already been discussed.

For the umpteenth time, start your own thread detailing how energy kills…maybe you’ll convince someone who hasn’t participated

To add. The group here that has followed this thread with an open mind and made the change and seen the results for themselves has also had years of FNGs and others come in with same arguments over and over and refuse to acknowledge the actual results.

There’s a short leash for those not willing to bring evidence.

In the last 2 years I’ve killed 7 animals with the 108 eldm and the 77 tmk. Prior to that, probably 50 myself with a 30-06 and ttsx plus numerous others from friends shooting 270win to 300 weatherby.

I’ve seen all the personal evidence that I need to see now. To think 5 years ago I was wanting to get a 338 and now my 6 creed is my “big” gun.

The video shows a 69 gr TMK fired into ballistics gel at 223 Remington velocities, this bullet has been used in this thread on game, it has great lighting, video, and audio, the guy communicating the information is knowledgeable and clear, there is a clear view of the permanent wound track (not a bloody mess of a field autopsy / no offense meant by this killing is always dirty buisness) , it has the added benefit of a second bullet tested to give us an idea of scale and comparison. I don’t understand what the problem is? Is this video posted on this thread? (If it is I don’t recall seeing it/ I will take it down ), it adds further evidence to this thread about a 223 rem and the TMK bullet and what kind of wound they can create in a big game animal.

I have killed all but one game animal with plastic tipped or open tipped match bullets. The smallest cartridge I have tested on deer and elk was a 243 Ackley improved with the 105 amax. I don’t need to be convinced (nor have I ever questioned) that heavy for caliber rapidly fragmenting bullets are the bees knees when it comes to killing stuff in any caliber.

 

[Thegman]

The video shows a 69 gr TMK fired into ballistics gel at 223 Remington velocities, this bullet has been used in this thread on game, it has great lighting, video, and audio, the guy communicating the information is knowledgeable and clear, there is a clear view of the permanent wound track (not a bloody mess of a field autopsy / no offense meant by this killing is always dirty buisness) , it has the added benefit of a second bullet tested to give us an idea of scale and comparison. I don’t understand what the problem is? Is this video posted on this thread? (If it is I don’t recall seeing it/ I will take it down ), it adds further evidence to this thread about a 223 rem and the TMK bullet and what kind of wound they can create in a big game animal.

I have killed all but one game animal with plastic tipped or open tipped match bullets. The smallest cartridge I have tested on deer and elk was a 243 Ackley improved with the 105 amax. I don’t need to be convinced (nor have I ever questioned) that heavy for caliber rapidly fragmenting bullets are the bees knees when it comes to killing stuff in any caliber.

Sure, it's neat and all that, and there's nothing wrong with it, but the literally hundreds of "bloody mess of a field autopsy" pictures in this thread are real world results and trump any ballistic gel estimations. Just like they trump KE performance estimations. Posting ballistic gel pics at this point and saying "hey look, this could work according to his results" is kind of missing the whole point of the thread, maybe. The results posted in this thread are light years beyond the gel testing stage.

 

[10E]

Sure, it's neat and all that, and there's nothing wrong with it, but the literally hundreds of "bloody mess of a field autopsy" pictures in this thread are real world results and trump any ballistic gel estimations. Just like they trump KE performance estimations. Posting ballistic gel pics at this point and saying "hey look, this could work according to his results" is kind of missing the whole point of the thread, maybe. The results posted in this thread are light years beyond the gel testing

Sure, it's neat and all that, and there's nothing wrong with it, but the literally hundreds of "bloody mess of a field autopsy" pictures in this thread are real world results and trump any ballistic gel estimations. Just like they trump KE performance estimations. Posting ballistic gel pics at this point and saying "hey look, this could work according to his results" is kind of missing the whole point of the thread, maybe. The results posted in this thread are light years beyond the gel testing stage.

Well you could look at it that way, but you could also look at it as more information on WHY it’s working. If you watch the video all the way through he specifically mentions ballistic gel not being a perfect match and some of the variables that can affect the shape and size of the wound like bones etc, and that generally speaking the wound will be larger in a live target because of the variable medium.

By your logic there is no need to post anymore reports on its performance in the field period. Close the thread and We will make a tab somewhere in rokslide that says “223 rem 77gr TMK for deer, elk, bear, moose… It works” No further data points or evidence needed/wanted.

 

[BjornF16]

The video shows a 69 gr TMK fired into ballistics gel at 223 Remington velocities, this bullet has been used in this thread on game, it has great lighting, video, and audio, the guy communicating the information is knowledgeable and clear, there is a clear view of the permanent wound track (not a bloody mess of a field autopsy / no offense meant by this killing is always dirty buisness) , it has the added benefit of a second bullet tested to give us an idea of scale and comparison. I don’t understand what the problem is? Is this video posted on this thread? (If it is I don’t recall seeing it/ I will take it down ), it adds further evidence to this thread about a 223 rem and the TMK bullet and what kind of wound they can create in a big game animal.

You’re way behind. Spend some time reading on the forum; search tool is your friend.

Why Match/Target Bullets For Hunting

My belief has always been that wind would cause more misses than any other factor, but I don't have the experience to state that definitively. Just too many variables with the wind. Learning to read it, especially over mixed terrain, would take a crapton of experience. Wind is by far the...

rokslide.com

 

[MEdude]

* EFFECTIVE TERMINAL PERFORMANCE TO 400+ YARDS
MOST shots are taken well inside this range.
Ethical efficacy has been clearly demonstrated with hundreds of photos.
BUT BUT BUT…. A .789 Über Mag has more energy, therefore with an apples to apples fragmenting type bullet, it kills better and provides a margin for error!
ANSWER: Unneeded, Unwanted, Wrong.
Unneeded - See photos, can they get more deaderer?
Unwanted - Some comment on excessive meat loss already.
Wrong - More energy on target = more recoil = bad shooting habits = Greater shot error.
Mitigate effects of error, by introducing greater initial error??? What are we missing?

* MINIMAL RECOIL
Facilitates good shooting form, Ability to self spot impacts, stay on target for quick follow up, and enables extensive practice to improve skill set and know personal shooting limits.
This = Ethical hunting.
BUT BUT BUT…. I’m a real man & can shoot my .789 Über Mag without flinching… EVER!
ANSWER: Cool, you are a rare shooter indeed. Extensive research shows this to be very uncommon. MOST demonstrate a direct correlation between greater inaccuracy and increased recoil.
Next, can you self spot impacts with a .789 Über Mag?
Next, can you quickly get back on target for accurate / adjusted follow up?
Next, Are you able to practice extensively to improve skill with this combo and know your limitations?
If “No” to any of these questions, does this lean toward ethical or unethical hunting?

* RELATIVE LOW COST PER ROUND
The ubiquity of .223 components and ammo make this one of, if not THE least expensive centerfire rifle cartridge to shoot. This allows shooting many multiples of any Über Mag for = $$$. It’s not even close.

So before you, BUT BUT BUT…. go straight to the chart. Does your recommendation check ALL the boxes? If not, it doesn’t meet the objective of this thread. Maybe start a new thread with a different goal.

 

[Drenalin]

I think the only point of contention @10E had was in regards to energy's role in this whole thing. He's been pretty clear that he agrees smaller calibers work with the right bullets (right = match, by and large, but not exclusively). I could be off, I'm not going back through the last few days to check, but at this point it feels like everybody just needs something to shoot at and he happens to be standing in the open.