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

[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.

 

[Drenalin]

Maybe change .223 in the thread title to 77 TMK? Then we can get back to the gory pics?

I still think we should do this.

 

[fwafwow]

View attachment 647146

* 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.

Well done. Especially the umlauts.

 

[Shraggs]

10E

Your remarkable turnaround is odd. Trying to contribute is also odd. Given your stated goals and inexperience. This thread you haven’t read and 15 others is a much better way to contribute.

Read more, learn more. Asking questions about what you might not get or understand or have different actual OBSERVATIONS is the way…. Not trying to teach without the background to support it.

 

[MEdude]

.223 / 77 TMK is the sweet spot.
Tweek here… 22CM / 22-250 etc = same difference
Tweek there….Close weight TMK / ELD-M etc = same difference

Big mass / Big energy = completely different formula.

Seems that often gets the Rok throwing started…

 

[10E]

I’m confused. I thought you were first weighing in with a view contrary to the consensus on this thread. (I concede that the consensus view isn’t always a correct one.) Now you are posting 11 min videos in support and surprised at the reaction, or lack thereof? If you don’t answer specific questions, don’t

10E

Your remarkable turnaround is odd. Trying to contribute is also odd. Given your stated goals and inexperience. This thread you haven’t read and 15 others is a much better way to contribute.

Read more, learn more. Asking questions about what you might not get or understand or have different actual OBSERVATIONS is the way…. Not trying to teach without the background to support it.

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.

thank you!

 

[roosiebull]

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.

I think everyone is pretty much on the same page… if a small TMK makes a big wound at 223 velocities, a big tmk in a 30 cal is going to make a bigger wound at similar velocity.

As far as energy, if you take 2 bullets out of the same gun at the same velocity, but different construction, the same amount of energy is present, one bullet will pencil through, one will leave a softball sized exit… energy tells you nothing relative to the wound.

Or, you could take a small match bullet with very low energy, create a massive wound, and compare that to a large fmj, or even something like a swift a frame with 4x the energy and have a small narrow wound, hence energy is a fairly useless metric when it comes to performance on game

If we maximize small cartridges, we can get desired effects on critters (quick clean kills that are anything but marginal) rather than choking down larger cartridges to get the same result.

If we can get very reliable good results from a small cartridge, what is the point of dealing with heavy recoil and expensive cartridges? (I know you are on the same page)

At the same time, people should always use what they are confident in, but it certainly doesn’t hurt to understand the broader picture.

 

[Pharmseller]

I still think we should do this.

75 ELDM is skookum.



P

 

[10E]

I think everyone is pretty much on the same page… if a small TMK makes a big wound at 223 velocities, a big tmk in a 30 cal is going to make a bigger wound at similar velocity.

As far as energy, if you take 2 bullets out of the same gun at the same velocity, but different construction, the same amount of energy is present, one bullet will pencil through, one will leave a softball sized exit… energy tells you nothing relative to the wound.

Or, you could take a small match bullet with very low energy, create a massive wound, and compare that to a large fmj, or even something like a swift a frame with 4x the energy and have a small narrow wound, hence energy is a fairly useless metric when it comes to performance on game

If we maximize small cartridges, we can get desired effects on critters (quick clean kills that are anything but marginal) rather than choking down larger cartridges to get the same result.

If we can get very reliable good results from a small cartridge, what is the point of dealing with heavy recoil and expensive cartridges? (I know you are on the same page)

At the same time, people should always use what they are confident in, but it certainly doesn’t hurt to understand the broader picture.

We are on the same page. I appreciate that we have moved from “useless” to “fairly useless”. This is a more factually correct statement.

Bullet profile, construction ,mass, velocity (the infamous E word), bullet diameter, sectional density, and the target/test medium are all connected to each other. We cannot throw variables or potential variables completely out the window when talking about terminal performance.

I am specifically talking about how a bullet interacts with the target or in other words terminal performance, and not the most common side affect of this exchange (death of the animal).

Bullet construction, should absolutely be ranked near the top in the priority list. When hunting with any caliber/cartridge.

while anyone of these listed variables may be heavily dependent on another listed variable. If it has the potential to affect terminal performance it by definition cannot be “useless”.

 

[Axlrod]

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.

I don't need anymore reports on it's performance, or pictures of what it does to the inside of a deer. Just like I don't need Form to drop another ATACR. But it seems like people still like to post pics and others like to look at them. And there are new people on here all the time, some that might not be convinced until they see the 257th animal killed with a 223.
An old gamblers mantra: If red comes up 3 times you either bet red or you go home.

 

[Anschutz]

75 ELDM is skookum.



P

I really like it for my "long line" loads for service rifle. Not as cheap as the A-Max was but still cheaper than Sierra 80gr SMKs or Bergers, and they shoot plenty accurately for my purposes. I'd put one in a deers lungs, but I'm not toting a 14lb AR into the woods.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[bnsafe]

well I got a box of BH 77 tmk for christmas, so next year I will be seeing for myself how this works in real life. I would be lying if I didnt say I wasnt apprehensive, not in the ability to kill something, but how fast it anchors them in place. But, the evidence presented here at least deserves a real life test.
I will be using my match grade AR 15 so will lose some ballistics, but I can count on one hand the number of times Ive shot deer over a hundred where I hunt so shouldnt be a issue.