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

[kswaterfowl]

I might be missing something, but are you shooting 5.56 in a 223 rifle? No pressure issues with this?

Editing this post as it seems a lot of folks are using 5.56 ammo in factory bolt action 223s. Forgive me if this has been addressed already, but isn't this a "no no"?

My tikka 223 gets a steady diet of 5.56 ammo.

 

[atmat]

I might be missing something, but are you shooting 5.56 in a 223 rifle? No pressure issues with this?

Editing this post as it seems a lot of folks are using 5.56 ammo in factory bolt action 223s. Forgive me if this has been addressed already, but isn't this a "no no"?

It’s fine, at least in a Tikka. I do it all the time.

 

[Drenalin]

It may vary by rifle. I’ve heard it’s not okay in a Ruger 223, but if anyone knows different I’m all ears.

 

[Big_wals]

It may vary by rifle. I’ve heard it’s not okay in a Ruger 223, but if anyone knows different I’m all ears.

Ive shot some out of my Ruger, no problems yet might have a problem with a higher round count tho.

 

[The Guide]

I might be missing something, but are you shooting 5.56 in a 223 rifle? No pressure issues with this?

Editing this post as it seems a lot of folks are using 5.56 ammo in factory bolt action 223s. Forgive me if this has been addressed already, but isn't this a "no no"?

The bolt action rifles with the correct twist to run these heavy for caliber bullets have shown to be able to shoot these rounds without issue. Your mileage may vary but the Howa Mini Action in 223 and the Tikka T3X 223 have been shot extensively with the Black Hills 5.56 77tmk without issue. Use caution always.

Jay

 

[BLJ]

It may vary by rifle. I’ve heard it’s not okay in a Ruger 223, but if anyone knows different I’m all ears.

The Ranch rifles I have are actually chambered for 5.56.

 

[The Guide]

The Ranch rifles I have are actually chambered for 5.56.

My RAR 1st gen is chambered in 5.56 NATO.

Jay

 

[Mark.c]

All due respect, doesn’t your experience actually state “30 years of military experience would indicate that FMJ’s aren’t a good choice for hunting”?

The military is moving away from the 5.56 to larger calibers due the sub standard lethality. They went with the 5.56 due to weight carried by soldiers. Part of that is the FMJ, particularly M855 with the steel penetrator. A 77 grain hunting bullet is a better choice than FMJ (and required by law in most states). A even better choice for big game is a 150 grain hunting bullet, IMO, particularly larger quarry. BTW, thanks for the “all due respect”.

 

[Formidilosus]

The military is moving away from the 5.56 to larger calibers due the sub standard lethality.

No they aren’t. One branch with a poorly thought out idea trying to implement a horrible system for a relatively small subset of forces isn’t the military moving away from anything- and it certainly isn’t due to sub standard lethality.

 

[wesfromky]

My RAR 1st gen is chambered in 5.56 NATO.

Jay

As is my Gen 2.

 

[Dave0317]

No they aren’t. One branch with a poorly thought out idea trying to implement a horrible system for a relatively small subset of forces isn’t the military moving away from anything- and it certainly isn’t due to sub standard lethality.

You referring to the AR-10 size receiver, heavier base weight, more recoiling Sig rifle that the Army infantry is getting?

The round sounds good on paper, but when you apply the above rifle to this latest gen of kids, I don’t think it will go well.

We can’t seem to stop recruiting kids that just want to eat Cheetos and energy drinks and play video games. They don’t need a heavier longer rifle and more recoil. I’d rather them upgrade the issued ammo to a match 77 grain bullet, and upgrade the M4 to the current configurations you see used in high performing tac teams.

 

[Bugger]

You referring to the AR-10 size receiver, heavier base weight, more recoiling Sig rifle that the Army infantry is getting?

The round sounds good on paper, but when you apply the above rifle to this latest gen of kids, I don’t think it will go well.

We can’t seem to stop recruiting kids that just want to eat Cheetos and energy drinks and play video games. They don’t need a heavier longer rifle and more recoil. I’d rather them upgrade the issued ammo to a match 77 grain bullet, and upgrade the M4 to the current configurations you see used in high performing tac teams.

You’re almost there. Keep thinking

 

[Mark.c]

No they aren’t. One branch with a poorly thought out idea trying to implement a horrible system for a relatively small subset of forces isn’t the military moving away from anything- and it certainly isn’t due to sub standard lethality.

“Army's fiscal 2025 budget request, the service has a long-term plan of buying 111,428 XM7 rifles, 13,334 XM250 automatic rifles, and 124,749 XM157 Fire Control devices..”

The Army Has Finally Fielded Its Next Generation Squad Weapons | Military.com

www.military.com

I will agree that non-combat arms units will be using 5.56 for a long while, however historically when the US Army fields a major weapons system, other services and allies tend to follow. The main driver was lethality issues at longer ranges.

Back to hunting, the 77g 5.56 certainly has its place, specifically smaller static animals at shorter ranges. I would not classify 5.56 as an “all around” big game cartridge as indicated by the thread title since there are so many other great options.

 

[Grundy53]

The military is moving away from the 5.56 to larger calibers due the sub standard lethality. They went with the 5.56 due to weight carried by soldiers. Part of that is the FMJ, particularly M855 with the steel penetrator. A 77 grain hunting bullet is a better choice than FMJ (and required by law in most states). A even better choice for big game is a 150 grain hunting bullet, IMO, particularly larger quarry. BTW, thanks for the “all due respect”.

The reasoning isn't lethality. It's body armor. Also, since when do we trust the government to make good decisions?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[omicron1792]

“Army's fiscal 2025 budget request, the service has a long-term plan of buying 111,428 XM7 rifles, 13,334 XM250 automatic rifles, and 124,749 XM157 Fire Control devices..”

The Army Has Finally Fielded Its Next Generation Squad Weapons | Military.com

www.military.com

I will agree that non-combat arms units will be using 5.56 for a long while, however historically when the US Army fields a major weapons system, other services and allies tend to follow. The main driver was lethality issues at longer ranges.

Back to hunting, the 77g 5.56 certainly has its place, specifically smaller static animals at shorter ranges. I would not classify 5.56 as an “all around” big game cartridge as indicated by the thread title since there are so many other great options.

Thanks for your personal opinion. It really stacks up well with all the data in the thread

 

[Big_wals]

I would not classify 5.56 as an “all around” big game cartridge as indicated by the thread title since there are so many other great options.

How about classification based on the actual contents of the thread, not just the title? Have you read past the first page?

 

[atmat]

How about classification based on the actual contents of the thread, not just the title? Have you read past the first page?

You know they never do.

 

[The Guide]

Back to hunting, the 77g 5.56 certainly has its place, specifically smaller static animals at shorter ranges. I would not classify 5.56 as an “all around” big game cartridge as indicated by the thread title since there are so many other great options.

Based on what metric? There has been a pretty substantial amount of in field study done by participants in this thread that show otherwise.

Jay

 

[Dave0317]

Back to hunting, the 77g 5.56 certainly has its place, specifically smaller static animals at shorter ranges. I would not classify 5.56 as an “all around” big game cartridge as indicated by the thread title since there are so many other great options.

I don’t think the title or contents “classify” the 223 in any particular category.
It’s a “discussion” about various animals being shot with 223 bullets. The discussion has resulted in many people sharing pictures and accounts of excellent lethality on various animals. In fact, I’m not sure anyone has shown a 223 to be regularly ineffective on any particular animal. Take the evidence as you will and hunt with what you like and what you are comfortable with.

But just be informed of what you may or may not gain and what you are giving up by going to other cartridges with regard to hit rate, lethality, etc.

 

[Mark.c]

Actually I did follow the thread. I am surprised as to some of the oddly defensive reactions from the 77grain 5.56 crowd when offered other points of view. I have seen lighter caliber shots big game animals go poorly resulting in loss or a drawn out track. Certainly use the legal caliber of your choice. It’s your hunt not mine.