Does the 223/6mm for everything change when hunt cost $$$

[omicron1792]

They got a bunch of good 300wm ammo on the shelves in Ethiopia or Tajikistan if someone finds a way to get a rifle there but not the ammo?

That’s question is asked alot and is a little bit misleading.

If you had spent time loading and tuning a round for Africa and your ammo didn’t show up, you would be better served using camp rifle and ammo that you can bet shoots well. I’d say that’s what most do on African hunts anyways.

I used camp rifle on my first. I now rake my own rifle but it’s more for a nostalgia thing wanting to have memories of hunting with it. The animals fall just as easily with the camp rifles.

 

[Castmaster]

That’s question is asked alot and is a little bit misleading.

If you had spent time loading and tuning a round for Africa and your ammo didn’t show up, you would be better served using camp rifle and ammo that you can bet shoots well. I’d say that’s what most do on African hunts anyways.

I used camp rifle on my first. I now rake my own rifle but it’s more for a nostalgia thing wanting to have memories of hunting with it. The animals fall just as easily with the camp rifles.

Well said. The camp rifle is there for a reason but I still think it is a wise choice to bring a more world wide available cartridge just for the extra insurance after traveling for such a long distance on foreign hunts.

 

[Formidilosus]

@solarshooter

Let me back up and clarify. What I wrote in the last few reply’s about making decisions based on the totality of all shots and situations, is how I do it, and what results in the best outcomes overall from what I see from myself and others in total, over lots of animals and extreme conditions at times.
When people I hunt and shoot with use using equipment that is specialized, tailored, or chosen for on specific aspect, inevitably as soon as they are in a situation that isn’t that specific one, the failure rate is high.


Here are a couple of screen shots during a partner and I killing elk in over 60mph winds and blowing snow- mine at 560 yards, and his at 408y and 288y IIRC-






After the shot when it started to clear up a bit-



I was shooting a 6mph wind gun, and 100% would not have traded it for an 8mph, 7mm or 300 mag of any type. Shootability matters.


Same here of a buddy right after he shot an elk at 860 yards (might have been 862y), in 12 mph gusting, cross canyon winds with a 7mph gun- a 6.5cm. He neither would would have traded it for his 300 WM he also has. Shootability matters.






If someone wants to make caliber/cartridge/bullet/rifle choices on some unlikely outlier of a situation- that they themselves would probably never even attempt to begin with, and ignore the cost of that choice in other situations- ok. People can do what they want. However, that is a sub par way to do it when looked at broadly across time and space. I use what I use in each situation because it results in the highest chance of success across the board in all scenarios that are legitimate.

 

[solarshooter]

Correct. People want to make decisions based on one single factor- in a vacuum. Just because something has better wind numbers does not, in and of itself mean that success rates will go up.
The number one reason that we miss is due to us- not wind. We suck, and the more shootable a rifle is, the less our sucking effects where the bullet goes, and the quicker and more consistently we can observe and recover from errors.


The whole thing should be looked at holistically- which item or technique results in the most success from muzzle to as far as one will legitimately shoot an animal?


Item “A” results in two more opportunities at 700 plus yards, every 30 animals; but costs 5 opportunities every 30 animals from muzzle to 700y: for a total of 27 successes for every 30 opportunities.

Item “B” costs two opportunities at 600 plus yards every 30 animals due to cross canyon and heavy winds; but results in 5 more opportunities every 30 animals: for a total of 28 successes for every 30 opportunities.


Item “B” is the better choice in this example overall.
That’s how it should be. Not, “well in this most extreme contrived situation “this” item will result in a 2% better hit rate, even though that situation almost never happens or is unrealistic, and I’ll ignore the cost in every other area to get that small advantage for a situation that doesn’t happen anyways”.

Humans are bad at making probabilistic decisions, and instead generally make them on emotion from very small data sets, or from no data at all. The amount of hunters that have been able to use cartridges and calibers from .224-.338, and bullets from frangible to monos in very large sample sizes for both- is very small. Of that tiny fraction of a percent of hunters that have, those who are objective enough or even care enough to log what happens without emotional bias, are a fraction of a percent of that. If that fraction of a fraction, the amount that have a legitimate understanding of factual terminal ballistics is even smaller.

This is a great explanation. And I think it's even more of a clear win if you constrain to ranges that most people should be hunting, let's say where they have an 80% or greater expected hit rate on a vitals sized targets, 350-450 yards. Maybe the conversation should really be focused on, you shouldn't be shooting at 600, and if you constrain range then lower calibers are a better fit.

I think there are some pretty stark cases, say an un-braked 300WM vs a 6CM, where this is obvious and you will not encounter any critical thinkers who will disagree with you.

Where it gets tougher is if you start comparing cartridges that most people would consider shootable, like 6.5CM, against say .223. Then the advantage of lower recoil becomes less intuitively obvious, and the advantages of wind performance become more appealing.

One could argue the real answer is we should all be carrying heavier rifles, so that we can shoot higher performance cartridges with lower felt recoil.

In the future, I would suggest presenting this level of nuance up front. You have a tendency to state just the punchline, often in a "spicy" way, that shunts the discussion down this familiar path.

 

[solarshooter]

@solarshooter

Let me back up and clarify. What I wrote in the last few reply’s about making decisions based on the totality of all shots and situations, is how I do it, and what results in the best outcomes overall from what I see from myself and others in total, over lots of animals and extreme conditions at times.
When people I hunt and shoot with use using equipment that is specialized, tailored, or chosen for on specific aspect, inevitably as soon as they are in a situation that isn’t that specific one, the failure rate is high.


Here are a couple of screen shots during a partner and I killing elk in over 60mph winds and blowing snow- mine at 560 yards, and his at 408y and 288y IIRC-

View attachment 715887

View attachment 715888


After the shot when it started to clear up a bit-
View attachment 715889


I was shooting a 6mph wind gun, and 100% would not have traded it for an 8mph, 7mm or 300 mag of any type. Shootability matters.


Same here of a buddy right after he shot an elk at 860 yards (might have been 862y), in 12 mph gusting, cross canyon winds with a 7mph gun- a 6.5cm. He neither would would have traded it for his 300 WM he also has. Shootability matters.

View attachment 715894




If someone wants to make caliber/cartridge/bullet/rifle choices on some unlikely outlier of a situation- that they themselves would probably never even attempt to begin with, and ignore the cost of that choice in other situations- ok. People can do what they want. However, that is a sub par way to do it when looked at broadly across time and space. I use what I use in each situation because it results in the highest chance of success across the board in all scenarios that are legitimate.

I have to ask, were those shots successful? Did you take sighters?

 

[wind gypsy]

I highly doubt you would be getting any ammo in Tajikistan besides your own, but me suggesting that caliber had to do with Ethiopia it’s a fact that things get lost in travel and the chance of your PH having something along the lines of 30-06, 300 win mag, rifle or ammunition in camp would be a heck of a lot more likely than something wild like a 6.5 Sherman. These are things you should think off when traveling a long way to a foreign country.

That’s question is asked alot and is a little bit misleading.

If you had spent time loading and tuning a round for Africa and your ammo didn’t show up, you would be better served using camp rifle and ammo that you can bet shoots well. I’d say that’s what most do on African hunts anyways.

I used camp rifle on my first. I now rake my own rifle but it’s more for a nostalgia thing wanting to have memories of hunting with it. The animals fall just as easily with the camp rifles.

I’ve never been but my impression was along those lines. Shoot your gun/ammo and if for some reason the gun or ammo doesn’t make it you hunt with the outfitters. It seems like the “what if you lose your ammo and need to buy more in bumfuk nowhere” consideration is infinitely more common in cartridge discussions than playing out in real life.

 

[omicron1792]

I’ve never been but my impression was along those lines. Shoot your gun/ammo and if for some reason the gun or ammo doesn’t make it you hunt with the outfitters. It seems like the “what if you lose your ammo and need to buy more in bumfuk nowhere” consideration is infinitely more common in cartridge discussions than playing out in real life.

That’s been my experience wind. There is definitely a chance of your ammo and/or gun getting lost, but seems to happen much less than you would think. And, every single outfitters knows it can happens and has many rifles in camp that shoot well

To add to this specific thread I shot many elk size animals with 308 and they all DRT. I used the 375hh a couple of times and they stood there or ran for a bit. The 308 was using federal fusion and the 375 a monometal. Bullets matter and I have become a believer in trauma/fragmenting bullets.

For Africa I hedge and use CEB raptors or Maximus. I get the explosion but it has a deep penetrating shank following it. I guess they don’t get the talk here as much because slightly lower BC, but I use tipped versions with BC between 4-5. Also, shots in Africa are rarely over 300 yards.

 

[solarshooter]

I’ve never been but my impression was along those lines. Shoot your gun/ammo and if for some reason the gun or ammo doesn’t make it you hunt with the outfitters. It seems like the “what if you lose your ammo and need to buy more in bumfuk nowhere” consideration is infinitely more common in cartridge discussions than playing out in real life.

You guys don't always keep one spare round you know where?? I thought that's why you all were arguing for the smaller cartridges!

 

[Formidilosus]

I have to ask, were those shots successful?

Yes. And there are RS members that were there for those shots as well.

Mine at 560y, bullet hit .2 mils off of hold-




408y I believe, was quartering-



860 yard-






Don’t have picture handy of the 288 yard one.

Did you take sighters?

No.


This is why the whole thing is ridiculous to me and others- we actually kill animals (with a very high success rate) in these extreme off the wall scenarios that the people arguing for have never even shot in, let alone taken the shot on an animal.
The skill of the shooter, rock solid reliability in the rifle system, and rifle shootability are by far the most important factors. The more you get away from the middle (or realistic), towards the edge of possible, the more those three things matter. There is a cutoff point where due to impact velocity or wind drift a shot does not have a high probability of success, and then the answer is move closer, pass, or choose a different tool. However, it is much farther than people think it is.


In any case, the size of the wound channel and killing ability is not primarily determined by caliber.

 

[omicron1792]

Yes. And there are RS members that were there for those shots as well.

Mine at 560y, bullet hit .2 mils off of hold-
View attachment 715896



408y I believe, was quartering-
View attachment 715897


860 yard-
View attachment 715898





Don’t have picture handy of the 288 yard one.





No.


This is why the whole thing is ridiculous to me and others- we actually kill animals (with a very high success rate) in these extreme off the wall scenarios that the people arguing for have never even shot in, let alone taken the shot on an animal.
The skill of the shooter, rock solid reliability in the rifle system, and rifle shootability are by far the most important factors. The more you get away from the middle (or realistic), towards the edge of possible, the more those three things matter.


In any case, the size of the wound channel and killing ability is not primarily determined by caliber.

You’re a machine.

Please answer my post yesterday on adding a 22 caliber barrel for my Blaser r8.

 

[Formidilosus]

Please answer my post yesterday on adding a 22 caliber barrel for my Blaser r8.

Missed it.

I use a blaser r8 and I’m going to get a 22 barrel for it (have lots of the large calibers already for my Africa hunting).

Would you just get a 223 barrel, or would you get a 22-250 or 22 creed to increase the velocity a bit.

Thanks in advance.

Yes. I would do both. But, if only one- what is the intended and realistic use of it?

 

[omicron1792]

Missed it.




Yes. I would do both. But, if only one- what is the intended and realistic use of it?

1. I have boys 7 and 10. They hunt with me a lot and shoot the 223 AR extremely well.

2. Most of my hunting is Deep South. Coyotes. Deer. Hogs. Bobcats in that order. I have harvested over 30 in last year.

3. Shots are 50-300 yards.

4. Lots of shots are with thermal, and even though I have lrf, distances and holdovers are more challenging. I often take coyote at 150-200 yards.

 

[Formidilosus]

1. I have boys 7 and 10. They hunt with me a lot and shoot the 223 AR extremely well.

2. Most of my hunting is Deep South. Coyotes. Deer. Hogs. Bobcats in that order. I have harvested over 30 in last year.

3. Shots are 50-300 yards.

4. Lots of shots are with thermal, and even though I have lrf, distances and holdovers are more challenging. I often take coyote at 150-200 yards.

I’d be in fast twist 223 mode for that.

 

[omicron1792]

I’d be in fast twist 223 mode for that.

That’s what I have in my AR. 1:7” twist shooting 77TMK. It does make sense to just get a 223 barrel and be able to use same ammo.

Thanks.

 

[Formidilosus]

That’s what I have in my AR. 1:7” twist shooting 77TMK. It does make sense to just get a 223 barrel and be able to use same ammo.

Thanks.

Yes sir.

 

[solarshooter]

Yes. And there are RS members that were there for those shots as well.

Mine at 560y, bullet hit .2 mils off of hold-
View attachment 715896



408y I believe, was quartering-
View attachment 715897


860 yard-
View attachment 715898





Don’t have picture handy of the 288 yard one.





No.


This is why the whole thing is ridiculous to me and others- we actually kill animals (with a very high success rate) in these extreme off the wall scenarios that the people arguing for have never even shot in, let alone taken the shot on an animal.
The skill of the shooter, rock solid reliability in the rifle system, and rifle shootability are by far the most important factors. The more you get away from the middle (or realistic), towards the edge of possible, the more those three things matter. There is a cutoff point where due to impact velocity or wind drift a shot does not have a high probability of success, and then the answer is move closer, pass, or choose a different tool. However, it is much farther than people think it is.


In any case, the size of the wound channel and killing ability is not primarily determined by caliber.

Gnarly! I genuinely don't know how you get comfortable with a shot like that ever. Did you measure the wind? I'm not sure I could gauge a 30 vs 40mph wind by feel. But either way, very impressive.

That being said, I don't think you are advocating for anyone taking that kind of shot, 223 or otherwise. That is way beyond what any math says is a shot that should be taken.

 

[Formidilosus]

Gnarly! I genuinely don't know how you get comfortable with a shot like that ever.

Comfortable is relative, but shooting 10,000 plus rounds a year in extremely heavy winds and broken terrain. The 60mph shots had enough blowing snow to watch direction across the valley, plus the wind in the elks fur.

Did you measure the wind? I'm not sure I could gauge a 30 vs 40mph wind by feel. But either way, very impressive.

A wind meter- no one can guess it at those speeds without one correctly.

That being said, I don't think you are advocating for anyone taking that kind of shot, 223 or otherwise. That is way beyond what any math says is a shot that should be taken.

Not even remotely am I advocating people take those shots- quite the opposite. People and advertising acting as if shots past even 300 yards are easy is a serious problem. If someone isn’t shooting hundreds to thousands of rounds from a specific range, position, terrain, and scenario- don’t do it on an animal.
From everything I see the vast, vast majority should be keeping their shots even prone to sub 200 yards, and the dedicated hunters that actually shoot and practice should be staying inside about 400 to 450 yards.
If you are looking at a 600 yard shot and you haven’t shot hundreds of rounds from an identical, or extremely close scenario in practice (not from a bench on a range), you shouldn’t be taking that shot, and your success probability is low.

 

[TaperPin]

Oh no doubt you are much better at shooting magnums than I- I only shoot a few thousands rounds of them a year, and only see a couple dozen shooters shoot a few thousand as well.

Even if someone isn’t shooting anything bigger than a 223 they should know how flinching is effecting their stability to hit things, wouldn’t you agree? Flinching can obvious, or just tightening up anticipating the shot - everyone should try having their partner load the rifle and not tell them if the chamber is empty or not. Likewise, making up 10 dummy rounds is common for many of us to mix in when practicing - not only increases dry firing, but points out any subconscious tenseness or outright flinching.

If someone’s gun physically hurts to shoot, a simple 1/2” recoil shield works better than any recoil pad. All my stocks have a length of pull 1/2” short just to allow for the shield - works just fine with hunting pack shoulder straps as well, but a proper length stock is important.

Same for cheek piece - a shape and height that allows consistency is important.

Everyone has a caliber they shoot without problems and it’s helpful to trade off between lower and higher recoil.

Guys with a real stubborn flinch can also benefit from visualization - just like an athlete visualizing all the steps and sensations of a perfect pole vault - every visualized shot is almost as good as the real thing and can be done anywhere at any time.

Shooting is a sport and like any sport shooters benefit from identifying issues and working to overcome them. Simply telling someone they are the victim of recoil and nothing can be done about it, doesn’t help them.

As for who shoots more - the old dude at Napa auntoparts helps more people than anyone, and half his parts don’t fit, so you might rethink that metric.

Anyway, this isn’t for the hard headed experts that have already learned it all, but for the younger guys trying to make sense out it and hoping to find a way to get over a few yips.

 

[KHntr]

I think it would be interesting to see the answers divided into two groups.

A. Answers from those that have taken a large number of game animals with a 223 and also a large number of game animals with significantly larger cartridges. ("large number" being somewhat subjective, but say 30 at a bare minimum).

and

B. Those that have not done the above.

I'm currently in group B, so my answer would be somewhat irrelevant, I think.

I fall in Group A.

And for me, I fully expect heartbeats to stop via 88 ELD M and 223AI Montana this year, including black bears, stone sheep, elk, moose, and deer. To the tune that it will be the only rifle carried this year. (Well, maybe my Faux Ti 223AI might get carried once or twice)

 

[TaperPin]

Yeah. It's kinda like a crackhead explaining to you that his spaceship is in a cardboard box behind the gas station. I know he's wrong, I'm just responding to see his thought process play out. Then I pay for my items and go on my way. I'll be on my way very soon....

Put your junior high school math cap on if you want the equation.

300 PRC
Bullet 200 gr x 22” length of travel in barrel = 4400
90 gr of powder that has moved it’s center of mass 1/2 the 24” barrel length = 1080

Those together have to equal 8-1/2 lb (59,500 gr) x distance rifle moves.

(4400 +1080)/59,500 = .092”

6.5 creedmoor
(140 x 22.5 + 44 x 12)/59,500 = .062”

223
(77 x 22.5 + 25 x 12)/59,500 = .034”

When I remember something wrong I don’t have any problem admitting it - the distance is much less than 1/4” - the Creedmoor is right at 1/16”, the 300 PRC is 3/32” and the 223 is about 1/32”. Old age is a bitch. Lol