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

[fightthenoise]

Dang. We were on such a good run. Well guys pack it up. It was fun while it lasted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

We're reading about what was recovered, not those that weren't. Can a .223 kill a deer, bear or elk? Of course. How many are shot and not recovered, that is my concern.
In 2008 my daughter shot a decent whitetail in the vitals with a .223 and that deer ran 600 yards deep into four foot high grass and was consumed by predators before we could find it the next morning. It was a good shot, I watched it happen.
You can believe that or not, it makes no difference to me.

Using a .223 on a mature elk is patently irresponsible. Would be interesting to know the elk that are lost with that round. Many guides likely wouldn't even allow it.

That’s a straw man argument and logical fallacy. I don’t doubt that you shot a deer with a 223. Did you shoot it in the front half with a 77gr TMK and it ran 600 yards afterwards?

Do you believe that anything other than blood loss or oxygen deprivation causes death?

I’ve killed, or seen killed with me directly behind the glass, several hundred medium to big game with 223’s. 100%- that is every single one, that had blood drawn was recovered. There have been no rodeos, and only two that did not die immediately- neither of which were the fault of projectile or chambering. No gut shots, no lost game. In that same time, I have been involved in a dozen plus animals where poor shooting resulted in extremely long days and nights, and all of them- that is every single one, has been with people shooting “elk rifles”. All of those people shoot a lot, and there isn’t anyone, anywhere that would say those people aren’t skilled with a rifle.
Thing is, the total animals killed with big guns over that time is less than 25% of the amount killed with small ones, and yet have nearly all of the poor shooting and wounded animals in that entire time frame.

 

[Haney]

We're reading about what was recovered, not those that weren't. Can a .223 kill a deer, bear or elk? Of course. How many are shot and not recovered, that is my concern.
In 2008 my daughter shot a decent whitetail in the vitals with a .223 and that deer ran 600 yards deep into four foot high grass and was consumed by predators before we could find it the next morning. It was a good shot, I watched it happen.
You can believe that or not, it makes no difference to me.

Using a .223 on a mature elk is patently irresponsible. Would be interesting to know the elk that are lost with that round. Many guides likely wouldn't even allow it.

Sweet story bro... you seem to be trolling, bored ?

 

[Broomd]

Meh, looks like I hurt some 'bro' feelers around here.

Tough sh t. Use enough gun for the game involved or stay the hell home.

 

[fightthenoise]

Meh, looks like I hurt some 'bro' feelers around here.

Tough sh t. Use enough gun for the game involved or stay the hell home.

Ok broomer.

 

[echampion8]

I had no clue that using a 223 was legal for larger game. Here in Texas the deer are more like dogs (super small). I am on the side of bullet construction being more important than size. I see many shooters always reaching for larger calibers rather than something they can be more accurate with. A 62 grain soft point in the neck of a whitetail will drop it like a sack of potatoes.

 

[ozyclint]

Haven't read all this thread but I'd wager that more deer in Australia get shot with a .223 than any other cartridge. Standard 55gr soft points
We have a pet food and human consumption meat industry here. Plenty of deer including sambar (almost as big as elk) get shot at night under light. All head shots.

If you can shoot a ground hog you can head shoot a deer.

0% meat wasted too.

 

[jfs82]

Meh, looks like I hurt some 'bro' feelers around here.

Tough sh t. Use enough gun for the game involved or stay the hell home.

I don't have a dog in this fight as I can't use this round where I live (don't even own a 223 right now), but isn't the whole point of this thread that this particular round in this particular chamber is, indeed, enough gun for the game involved?

 

[PNWGATOR]

Broomd,
I’ve always respected and valued your posts and opinions as I believe they’re based on well earned experience.

I assure you, I did not start this journey or this thread whimsically.

There is merit in the projectile(s), the delivery system, the shootability and without question the terminal performance of a properly placed, properly designed projectile on deer, bear, elk and moose.

I’d encourage you to find some of the Black Hills 77TMKs and put them to work. If you’re not willing to try them on spring bear, perhaps consider an extra doe tag next fall?

In my limited first hand experience, I can tell you that the wound channels are beyond impressive and often almost too much. Plus, they’re a heck of a lot of fun to shoot!

 

[Ryan Avery]

That old saying comes to mind... “I can only explain it to you.... I can’t understand it for you.”

 

[Haney]

Meh, looks like I hurt some 'bro' feelers around here.

Tough sh t. Use enough gun for the game involved or stay the hell home.

Enough gun ? .223 is plenty if you know how to shoot. Some folks like you have no confidence, either due to lack of experience or just can't shoot for sh!t anyways.

 

[5MilesBack]

Sweet story bro... you seem to be trolling, bored ?

I haven't seen all your posts, but in the last few days every post of yours that I have seen has been a troll post. So now I'm wondering if your other ~four dozen posts are also troll posts.

 

[Lawnboi]

It was hard for me to believe as well. I grew up where it was expected to shoot a 30 something magnum, so they don’t run at all, this is deer mind you.
After the 4 I shot with the 77 tmk, there isn’t a shot I wouldn’t take with it, that I would with a 30 cal magnum inside 300 yards.

 

[Broomd]

Broomd,
I’ve always respected and valued your posts and opinions as I believe they’re based on well earned experience.

I assure you, I did not start this journey or this thread whimsically.

There is merit in the projectile(s), the delivery system, the shootability and without question the terminal performance of a properly placed, properly designed projectile on deer, bear, elk and moose.

I’d encourage you to find some of the Black Hills 77TMKs and put them to work. If you’re not willing to try them on spring bear, perhaps consider an extra doe tag next fall?

In my limited first hand experience, I can tell you that the wound channels are beyond impressive and often almost too much. Plus, they’re a heck of a lot of fun to shoot!

Gator, thanks for the direct response and fair comments.
Ya know, I've killed several moose, my last in '18, I lived i Alaska for a long time; they are tough animals. And I know that some natives will shoot them (and 'bou) with the .223, but far and away the rounds of choice are *usually* .30 caliber and magnum to boot. There's a reason for that, DRT animals, less suffering, less tracking....
I don't get why anyone, short of someone with serious recoil/shoulder issues would settle for shooting a mature moose, or elk with a .223. The .223 (77TMK notwithstanding) to the shoulder on a mature bull in either moose or elk seems like a disaster waiting to happen. Double lung? Hey, a .204 would probably suffice, but why?
The shot placement needs to be perfect, no issues, no possible brush or grass deflections. It just seems irresponsible with more ethical choices out there.

These things said, I will shoot the round and keep an open mind going forward. For deer-sized game, maybe they are the thing now.

 

[jfs82]

"Could be. Anyone that shoots a moose with a .223 is batch t"
"Double lung? Hey, a .204 would probably suffice, but why?
The shot placement needs to be perfect, no issues, no possible brush or grass deflections. It jsut seems irresponsible with more ethical choices out there."

I think this leads to the real discussion regarding 223 for larger game... Do you have the discipline to only take the shot when it's a layup and within it's limitations?

 

[Haney]

I haven't seen all your posts, but in the last few days every post of yours that I have seen has been a troll post. So now I'm wondering if your other ~four dozen posts are also troll posts.

Put me on ignore if you can't handle someone speaking their mind . Funny, I took a quick look at your history, you seem to have some troll blood in you and a real keyboard tough guy . FO

 

[Formidilosus]

I don't get why anyone, short of someone with serious recoil/shoulder issues would settle for shooting a mature moose, or elk with a .223. The .223 (77TMK notwithstanding) to the shoulder on a mature bull in either moose or elk seems like a disaster waiting to happen. Double lung? Hey, a .204 would probably suffice, but why?
The shot placement needs to be perfect, no issues, no possible brush or grass deflections. It just seems irresponsible with more ethical choices out there.

There’s a mature bull moose three pages back that Gator’s wife killed, with a 3 inch wide wound channel that went through scapula spine. Also one that utterly destroyed the thickest part of the humerus before going through ribs and then heart. Can you state what is not good enough about the wound for you? What would you rather see?

I think this leads to the real discussion regarding 223 for larger game... Do you have the discipline to only take the shot when it's a layup and within it's limitations?

Same as I asked Broomd. What are the limitations of the 77gr TMK from a 223?

 

[jfs82]

There’s a mature bull moose three pages back that Gator’s wife killed, with a 3 inch wide wound channel that went through scapula spine. Also one that utterly destroyed the thickest part of the humerus before going through ribs and then heart. Can you state what is not good enough about the wound for you? What would you rather see?



Same as I asked Broomd. What are the limitations of the 77gr TMK from a 223?

Like I mentioned in another post, I can't say for sure as I've never shot it and have no dog in this fight. But I'm always for exploring/expanding knowledge base and challenging perceived limitations. Based on the rest of this thread... I'd assume distance.

 

[Formidilosus]

Like I mentioned in another post, I can't say for sure as I've never shot it and have no dog in this fight. But I'm always for exploring/expanding knowledge base and challenging perceived limitations. Based on the rest of this thread... I'd assume distance.

Unless someone is shooting regularly past 450’ish, not really. The lower the impact velocity, the less expansion/fragmentation occurs, and the deeper the penetration. My biggest concern with shooting bone with the TMK is the how much meat loss results, not whether it will make it through it.

 

[Broomd]

"Could be. Anyone that shoots a moose with a .223 is batch t"
"Double lung? Hey, a .204 would probably suffice, but why?
The shot placement needs to be perfect, no issues, no possible brush or grass deflections. It jsut seems irresponsible with more ethical choices out there."

I think this leads to the real discussion regarding 223 for larger game... Do you have the discipline to only take the shot when it's a layup and within it's limitations?

Thanks for wording far better than I did, Jfs... and my keyboard battery is low and it's killing me with my posting.. But well stated.

An aside...I can only imagine how this thread would be received on the 24hrcampfire, --don't flame me! --A guy can wonder....