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

[HighUintas]

Is the frontier 75gr bthp actually a 5.56? What's the best price commonly available on these? I'm only seeing about 0.90-1.00/round

 

[Lawnboi]

The best sub 400 practice ammo is by far adi 55sbk. Stuff just shoots in everything

 

[wind gypsy]

Does temp stability cause any concern?
First time loading 223 and just had varget and reloader 15 around
Any other stick powders that have less case fill than varget? With better temp stability than some of the ball powders?

H4895, xbr, benchmark. I’m not sure on case fill with Viht powders, n540 is supposed to be a velocity beast but not temp stable.

 

[Lawnboi]

For powder and mag length you want something around xbr or faster. Unless you like crunching powder.

I couldn’t fit enough varget to make pressure in 223 factory chambers.

 

[SamsonMan22]

Does temp stability cause any concern?
First time loading 223 and just had varget and reloader 15 around
Any other stick powders that have less case fill than varget? With better temp stability than some of the ball powders?

I can’t say for sure as I have not used it in super hot temps. I will say at 223 ranges I don’t worry much about velocity variations. I shoot in certain temp ranges and record drops, normally it’s add/ subtract a click or 2 based on a certain temp range and roll. My only concern is not ending up over pressure, in that case just back off a touch and it should be good. LVR being a slow burning powder in the 223 case will likely not show crazy spikes if it’s loaded within reason.

H4895 is really good but as hard or harder to get than xbr, benchmark did well for me with both the 73eld and 75bthp, my only VV powder experience is with n135. It shoots well but it’s a little on the slow side and it too fills the case a lot. At 23g I am getting a light crunch with the 75bthp at mag length, 23.5 is giving a pronounced crunch I have gone to 24 with no pressure signs but 23 or 23.5 has been much more accurate.

I wanted to try the staball match but after the recent price hike I gave that thought up and just went after LVR and TAC.

 

[Castle Rock]

For powder and mag length you want something around xbr or faster. Unless you like crunching powder.

I couldn’t fit enough varget to make pressure in 223 factory chambers.

Don’t worry about the crunch that stuff loves compression, just make sure your neck tension is adequate, I’m using 24.5 with the80 ELDM with great results in my tikka

 

[Pharmseller]

What is Stand 1?





P

 

[Juan_ID]

What is Stand 1?





P

Stand1

 

[Lawnboi]

Don’t worry about the crunch that stuff loves compression, just make sure your neck tension is adequate, I’m using 24.5 with the80 ELDM with great results in my tikka

That’s why I went away from varget, too much crunch causing seating depth issues. I was crunching a lot though.

Xbr meters way better as well, even in a chargemaster/AutoTrickler.

 

[roosiebull]

I also got good results with the 75gr Frontier while zeroing for the first time. Here's 20.

 

[BLJ]

^^^^^^^^^^^

That’s exactly what came to my mind when I saw the group.

 

[treydfoster]

Pat Sinclair? You mean the guy who helped design the Bushnell LRHS, GAP 6.5 4S, and uses an S&B PMII 10x40mm scope?







So you’ve shot and lost elk with a 223?


No, it’s nothing like your analogy at all, and no one has said anything about using an SMK on elk.

So tell me what the ACTUAL difference in tissue damage is between whatever “30cal” you use and the 77gr TMK?







People had no idea, and this thread shows that most people still have no idea what ACTUAL tissue damage is caused by bullets.

“Recommended minimums” are generally not based on reality, but folk lore, gun shop myths, and ol’ Elmer Keith. The fact that you would “be afraid that at 400yds the 77gr TMK will either expand and penetrate 5-8" or it will pencil in” shows that you have no knowledge of that bullet in the least. It didn’t exist 10 years ago. There is no recommended minimum for it, because no one knows.

Straight question- is a 180gr Barnes TSX from a 308 win at 400 yards enough for elk?






The real question is- is there a 22 cal centerfire bullet that can penetrate deep enough and create enough tissue damage to reliably kill elk? If yes, then why wouldn’t someone use it?


Why use smaller calibers/cartridges? Easy- hit rates. Every single person alive shoots a 223 better than a 243 in the same gun. Every person shoots a 243 better than a 308, and 308 better than a 338 mag. Full stop.


I use a 223 as the main deer rifle because it’s already causing more damage than I want inside of 400 yards. What would I gain by going to a bigger round? I have killed hundreds of big game animals with magnums. We all choose bullets that tone down those bigger rounds to an accrepable level. If you maximize 308 and bigger rounds for actual damage it’s quite frankly disgusting. Like throw out half the animal.

You want to see what a 30cal maximized does, ok-



That’s a full sized deer. That exit wound is 9.5 inches wide, 18 inches long. Yes. That’s what I want.


How about this-

220lb weighed buck-




It can get worse than that as well. So we take bigger rounds and use bullets that are designed to minimize tissue damage because we don’t want the above. That’s is equivalent to buying a V8 and then because it’s too fast, start yanking spark plugs out to tone it down. NO ONE does that. Why not drop down in calibers until when maximized the damage/effects are what we want? Then we can also gain less recoil, weight, cost, muzzle blast, length, while having more fun and the ability to spot your own impacts. That’s leads to higher hit rates, and more success.







See above. You are taking your bigger calibers/cartridges and yanking spark plugs without even knowing it. What the OP is doing is moving down and MAXIMIZING the smaller cartridge to get to the same spot. He’s just doing it with less recoil, muzzle blast, cost, and gaining more rounds, fun, and the ability to spot his own impacts.

That's just bad shooting

No, I’m not saying that at all. I am saying that our belief of what minimum is, is due for an update. I am also not saying that I believe that the 223 is awesome for elk- it is incredibly effective on deer and bear sized animals, to the point where I have chosen to use LESS destructive bullets on anything I’m going to eat, but I haven’t seen enough results from elk to say it’s “great”. But I will.

The 223 with the best bullets is more effective than muzzle loaders or any arrow.

Put that into perspective. If Colorado came up and said during archery or muzzle loader seasons hunters may use 22 cal centerfires as well- the whole world explode. Not because it ‘s a 223, but because it’s a rifle and when viewed in that vain we intuitively know it’s more effective. The most cursory thought comes to the conclusion that many more elk would be killed, and the wounding rate wouldn’t go up any, and in fact would most likely go down.

If you think the wounding rate would go down with everybody packing a .223 and taking shots at distances they'd never dream of taking with a bow, we do not think the same thing.

 

[Wapiti151]

That's just bad shooting

If you think the wounding rate would go down with everybody packing a .223 and taking shots at distances they'd never dream of taking with a bow, we do not think the same thing.

I don't normally engage in this type of stuff....but you need to expand your knowledge of wound rates with archery tackle if you don't think wound rates would go down by a MASSIVE amount if using any centerfire compared to a bow.

Personally, I'd never dream of shooting anything at 100 yards with a bow. So, based on your thought process, my wound rate would NOT go down by shooting a critter at 100 (or even 200) yds with a 223 when compared to me shooting same critter with a bow at say...60-70 yds? That is asinine.

 

[Luke S]

For the sake of arguement... at what distance does a .223 create a wound equivalent to an arrow wound, assuming an appropriate bullet is used? I doubt I could shoot that far reliably.

 

[roosiebull]

That's just bad shooting

If you think the wounding rate would go down with everybody packing a .223 and taking shots at distances they'd never dream of taking with a bow, we do not think the same thing.

What aspect of the 223/77gr tmk is marginal? They break onside bone, create large wounds and penetrate deep enough reliably… what more are you looking for?

 

[Antares]

What aspect of the 223/77gr tmk is marginal? They break onside bone, create large wounds and penetrate deep enough reliably… what more are you looking for?

KNOCKDOWN POWER™

 

[roosiebull]

For the sake of arguement... at what distance does a .223 create a wound equivalent to an arrow wound, assuming an appropriate bullet is used? I doubt I could shoot that far reliably.

I don’t think anyone will have an accurate answer for that because nobody knows what reliably happens outside 600-ish yds I assume. Firm mentioned one just beyond 800yds that was bigger than any broadhead wound, but I don’t think he’s seen a high enough number at that range to know what is expected reliably

Sounds like pretty far though

 

[roosiebull]

KNOCKDOWN POWER™

You weren’t supposed to give the answer so fast, but I guess he would have guessed that pretty quick

 

[Deadspace]

For the sake of arguement... at what distance does a .223 create a wound equivalent to an arrow wound, assuming an appropriate bullet is used? I doubt I could shoot that far reliably.

I think a more accurate number would be impact velocity. 1800FPS is a lot different at sea level verse 10k feet. I think 1300 was mentioned somewhere but don’t quote me on that.

 

[cowdisciple]

^^^^^^^^^^^

That’s exactly what came to my mind when I saw the group.

All I can say is that the physical properties of the gun must have changed for a split second and then changed back, because there's no way I could've jerked one.