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

[mtnwrunner]

Out at our annual week long rockchuck safari. Confirmed shots so far from 230 to 516 yards.
The 77 tmks are wrecking havoc.......

Randy

 

[Nomosendero]

Sure looks like fun!
It is amazing that the 77TMK has great expansion for Varmints yet good penetration for Big Game, a do it all bullet!

 

[Unclecroc]

As well, you can certainly kill deer with 45-55gr varmint bullets. Put them in the ribs and they die without fuss.

I shoot a 53 vmax on groundhogs with my 22-250. Rarely do they exit 8-10 pound pigs under 250 yards with a muzzle velocity of 3650fps.
I’m not discrediting what youre saying but I would like to see pictures of carcasses and internals when hit with 45-55gr class varmint bullets in the ribs.
Does anyone here have on game experience with this?

 

[S-3 ranch]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

 

[ResearchinStuff]

No.

 

[eric1115]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

Because (and this is why everyone says to read the thread) it's been demonstrated over and over and over to produce consistently better wound channels than the .223 "hunting bullets"

 

[Axlrod]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

You are probably not serious, but I will humor you. The Barnes will work, but produce a much smaller wound cavity. Have you used both the 62 TSX and the 77 TMK on game? Why do you say the TSX is better?

The finest killing bullet I have ever seen is a Berger 215 Hybrid Target, that the manufacturer doesn't recommend for hunting.

How are bullets designed for hunting? Berger didn't "design" any hunting bullets. They took their target bullets and started putting them in boxes marked "hunting". This according to Berger, was from the many reports from hunters using their target bullets with great success hunting.

 

[ElPollo]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

At least you started out by stating that you were sharing an opinion without bothering to consult the information presented and were honest about thinking it wasn’t worth your time to do so. It seems there is a steady stream of people who express similar sentiments. Those who take some time to do some reading generally learn something and their opinions tend to change.

 

[S-3 ranch]

At least you started out by stating that you were sharing an opinion without bothering to consult the information presented and were honest about thinking it wasn’t worth your time to do so. It seems there is a steady stream of people who express similar sentiments. Those who take some time to do some reading generally learn something and their opinions tend to change.

No I have read various parts of the post , but the sheer volume makes it difficult to ring out useful information, it really doesn’t help that my .223 is a old
1:12 twist and can’t stabilize a oversized heavy for caliber bullets
But I have tried to glean from this one

 

[Shō[t]gun]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

And what about a bullet that loses effective velocity at 300y is better? (3k fps, 2k min expansion velocity, .223 rem)

 

[Thegman]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

 

[ElPollo]

No I have read various parts of the post , but the sheer volume makes it difficult to ring out useful information, it really doesn’t help that my .223 is a old
1:12 twist and can’t stabilize a oversized heavy for caliber bullets
But I have tried to glean from this one

Agree that this thread is prohibitively long. I’d suggest using the guide at the beginning and high grading. You would get most of what you need from reading the first few pages and then searching through and looking at the wound channel pics. The heavy TMKs and ELDMs out of a fast twist really are a different critter. You can get wound channels that are pint glass diameter or better that still have 12-18” of penetration. I’ve shot a lot of Barnes monos on game in much larger calibers and I never saw that kind of damage.

 

[PistolPete]

I’m not gonna read the whole book here the post is just to long

But I would say that a Barnes 62 tsx would be better than a tmk
“
When everything goes right a 223 or a bow works. When things go wrong is where there problem comes in. Using a bullet that the manufacturer doesn't even recommend as a bullet to hunt with, well I think that just might be another thing that could go wrong. There are lots of bullets designed to hunt with, why depend on one that isn't.””

 

[roymunson]

Agree that this thread is prohibitively long. I’d suggest using the guide at the beginning and high grading. You would get most of what you need from reading the first few pages and then searching through and looking at the wound channel pics. The heavy TMKs and ELDMs out of a fast twist really are a different critter. You can get wound channels that are pint glass diameter or better that still have 12-18” of penetration. I’ve shot a lot of Barnes monos on game in much larger calibers and I never saw that kind of damage.

I'd love 2 things from this thread.
1. A bit more of a teacher's mentality from the "believers", rather than the bullying if you are skeptical/unsure

2. A hot link straight to the wound channels. I am interested in hunting accuracy and seeing what the bullets do on flesh and blood. I hop around the thread trying to find posts from September to December, but there's a lot of fluff in between. It's worth finding them, but I like seeing dead stuff and would love to see a higher density of obliterated lungs per post.

good thread! Wish Ohio wasn't a straightwall state. So many different ways I wanna kill things, but can't.

 

[Castle Rock]

I'd love 2 things from this thread.
1. A bit more of a teacher's mentality from the "believers", rather than the bullying if you are skeptical/unsure

2. A hot link straight to the wound channels. I am interested in hunting accuracy and seeing what the bullets do on flesh and blood. I hop around the thread trying to find posts from September to December, but there's a lot of fluff in between. It's worth finding them, but I like seeing dead stuff and would love to see a higher density of obliterated lungs per post.

good thread! Wish Ohio wasn't a straightwall state. So many different ways I wanna kill things, but can't.

1,Sorry that you are so sensitive
2, The posters that have provided this information have invested a huge amount of time, effort and money to provide this data, and it won’t hurt you or cost you anything to spend a little bit of time to read through it all and draw your own conclusions

 

[roymunson]

1,Sorry that you are so sensitive
2, The posters that have provided this information have invested a huge amount of time, effort and money to provide this data, and it won’t hurt you or cost you anything to spend a little bit of time to read through it all and draw your own conclusions

Not sensitive at all. But you're proving my point. I've seen form's other posts, he's been more of a teacher and explained why it works. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Or in pizz if you wanna take a look at some of the other responses.

Just my observations. By all means, keep doing what you're doing, don't let a guy who legitimately wants to understand the why of something inconvenience you.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Just my observations. By all means, keep doing what you're doing, don't let a guy who legitimately wants to understand the why of something inconvenience you.

Nothing about that post suggested a “teach me” attitude.

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

I'd love 2 things from this thread.
1. A bit more of a teacher's mentality from the "believers", rather than the bullying if you are skeptical/unsure

2. A hot link straight to the wound channels. I am interested in hunting accuracy and seeing what the bullets do on flesh and blood. I hop around the thread trying to find posts from September to December, but there's a lot of fluff in between. It's worth finding them, but I like seeing dead stuff and would love to see a higher density of obliterated lungs per post.

good thread! Wish Ohio wasn't a straightwall state. So many different ways I wanna kill things, but can't.

1. The hostile responses tend to come when people come in and say, "didn't read the thread but .223 is not a capable big game cartridge." Come into the thread indicating a willingness to learn and you'll get a more welcoming response.

2. Hot link to the hot links https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/page-161#post-2961500

 

[roymunson]

Nothing about that post suggested a “teach me” attitude.

Did the "legitimately wants to understand they why of something" not come across? Whatever, its an interesting thread. Its funny to see the defensive fangs come out when someone questions or asks about it. I'll go back into my hole and leave you to it now.

 

[rackcity24]

@roymunson I don't think the intent to be bitter about it. The issue is that many of the questions that people have asked about the 77 tmk has been answered many times with real world experience including photos. There is a cheat sheet at the beginning of the thread if you would like to look at photos or certain topics in the thread.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk