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

[180ls1]

Why’s that?

It's a hunch based on human nature. Do you think 57% will actually take a .223 on that type of hunt?

Will line out in logical, objective points- what a 223/77gr TMK is lacking inside its terminal range?

No, that is tangential.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

If you were a Marco Polo sheep or Mountain Nyala and knew a person who wanted you dead had a magic wand that could turn a 4”diameter by 14” deep section of your body into mush, how would you like your chances?

If it’s the wound shape you want, take the 77’s. If you want a different wound channel, take something else.

 

[CMP70306]

Pretty sure the point he is trying to make is are you confident enough in the combination to take it on a hunt where having to take a less than ideal shot could be the difference between getting your trophy or pissing away tens of thousands of dollars on a once in a lifetime hunt?

It’s the same reason I took both my Sharps and my .300 Win Mag on my bison hunt, ideally I wanted to shoot it with the Sharps but I wasn’t going to risk the hunt by not bringing a back up I was 100% confident in. If I could have only chosen one I would have taken the .300 to ensure I was successful.

If I was stump hunting whitetails on my own property where I had all the time in the world to wait for an ideal broadside shot then yeah I could make a .223 work. It’s the same reason I carried my 1873 in .45 colt on the last day of rifle season, it can kill within its performance envelope however it leaves a lot of shot options off the table. Not much of a concern when I’ve already punched my buck tag and I’m more or less just taking my rifle for a walk in the woods.

However if I’m forking over a bunch of money to go on a hunt where my only shot opportunity may be a heavily quartering away shot at range in low light where a blood trail could be required to find the animal then I’m going to choose something larger to ensure it is capable of reaching the vitals and exiting for a good blood trail. Outside of shootability there is almost no downsides to choosing a larger cartridge assuming you can shoot them with similar accuracy.

 

[Darryle]

It makes more sense to take a rifle you're not as familiar with (assuming .223 is their main gun)?

A person who's main rifle is a 223, probably isn't booking a hunt in Tajikistan or Central Asia for anything.

To answer your question, yes, you pay if you hit the animal, recovered or not, 8000ft to 12000ft on mountain tops and valleys.

So, you are saying you would take a 223 regardless?

I looks at several outfitter websites, some say 600yd LR rifle, some say minimum 270 caliber, some say minimum 7mm caliber.

Only a fool would consider the 223 for that level of hunt, in those conditions and at that price point, no matter what bullet they normally use in their 223.

I am not discounting the majority of the members abilities, their evidence in the thread or the bullets capability, but you are adding a huge factor to the equation, money and a lot of it.

 

[TaperPin]

The claimed advantages of the small calibers go away if the person shoots a larger gun well. It’s ridiculous to believe humans are incapable of accurately shooting anything larger than a 6mm.

My 110 lb 5’2” first wife had no problem accurately shooting a 7 mag, killed everything it was pointed at, and she would say a lot of guys scared of recoil should wipe the sand out their *cat emoji*. Lol

I kill prairie dogs and rock chucks just as easily with a 7 mag as a 243 or 22-250. No amount of autopsy photos will ever convince me my normal 7 mag wouldn’t be the best choice.

 

[Machingeaneer]

However if I’m forking over a bunch of money to go on a hunt where my only shot opportunity may be a heavily quartering away shot at range in low light where a blood trail could be required to find the animal then I’m going to choose something larger to ensure it is capable of reaching the vitals and exiting for a good blood trail.

I think this brings up a new question, does spending a bunch of money on a hunt make you more likely to take a poor shot opportunity that you wouldn't consider otherwise? Suddenly the discussion is less about gear choice.

 

[Formidilosus]

If I was stump hunting whitetails on my own property where I had all the time in the world to wait for an ideal broadside shot then yeah I could make a .223 work. It’s the same reason I carried my 1873 in .45 colt on the last day of rifle season, it can kill within its performance envelope however it leaves a lot of shot options off the table.

No it doesn’t.

Not much of a concern when I’ve already punched my buck tag and I’m more or less just taking my rifle for a walk in the woods.

However if I’m forking over a bunch of money to go on a hunt where my only shot opportunity may be a heavily quartering away shot at range in low light where a blood trail could be required to find the animal then I’m going to choose something larger to ensure it is capable of reaching the vitals and exiting for a good blood trail. Outside of shootability there is almost no downsides to choosing a larger cartridge assuming you can shoot them with similar accuracy.

Can you logically walk us through what shot angle you believe a 223/77gr TMK isn’t suitable for, and why it isn’t- in objective terms?

 

[JohnJohnson]

So, you are saying you would take a 223 regardless?

I don't even own a .223 but if I did and it was the main rifle I hunted everything else with, yes. It apparently can kill elk with the right bullets so why play mental games with myself and trick myself into switching to a rifle I'm less familiar with?

I looks at several outfitter websites, some say 600yd LR rifle, some say minimum 270 caliber, some say minimum 7mm caliber.

I'm not going to lie man, I trust outfitters to be good at finding the animals and not much else. And the fact that you looked it up and got a bunch of different requirements from them implies they're probably guessing as much as you are.

Only a fool would consider the 223 for that level of hunt, in those conditions and at that price point, no matter what bullet they normally use in their 223.

I looked up those two animals and the larger one is about the size of an elk. Does it have thicker bones than elk or some other defining anatomical feature that would indicate bullets that work on elk won't work on it?

I am not discounting the majority of the members abilities, their evidence in the thread or the bullets capability, but you are adding a huge factor to the equation, money and a lot of it.

The factor you're talking about doesn't change how bullets work or how they perform in animals. Is it a nerves factor that might make someone pull their shot or something?

 

[Formidilosus]

A person who's main rifle is a 223, probably isn't booking a hunt in Tajikistan or Central Asia for anything.

To answer your question, yes, you pay if you hit the animal, recovered or not, 8000ft to 12000ft on mountain tops and valleys.

So, you are saying you would take a 223 regardless?

I looks at several outfitter websites, some say 600yd LR rifle, some say minimum 270 caliber, some say minimum 7mm caliber.

Outfitters are no more knowledgeable about terminal ballistics or bullets than any average hunter- a lot of times, the opposite.

Only a fool would consider the 223 for that level of hunt, in those conditions and at that price point, no matter what bullet they normally use in their 223.

A fool? Why? Can you please relate you experience killing big game animals with a 223 and 77gr TMK’s?

I am not discounting the majority of the members abilities, their evidence in the thread or the bullets capability, but you are adding a huge factor to the equation, money and a lot of it.

Again- how does some other cartridge in increase your probability of killing an animal- regardless of price, within the 223/77gr terminal range?

 

[Formidilosus]

It's a hunch based on human nature. Do you think 57% will actually take a .223 on that type of hunt?

57% of people are ignorant of which end the bullet comes out. (since we’re making up numbers)

No, that is tangential.

No it’s not. It’s the core of the discussion- either you make choices in life based on emotion and ignorance, or you choose to make choices based on reality, and logic.

 

[Zork]

I like how it's all Texans paying huge cash to hunt and needing bigger guns.

 

[180ls1]

57% of people are ignorant of which end the bullet comes out. (since we’re making up numbers)

That was poll numbers.

No it’s not. It’s the core of the discussion- either you make choices in life based on emotion and ignorance, or you choose to make choices based on reality, and logic.

This is completely inaccurate. People use logic and emotion to make choices. Not exclusively one or the other.

Please provide data showing the contrary.

 

[Reburn]

I would take a high horsepower 6mm all day long on a marco polo hunt and plan on it. You wont find a QUALITY marco polo anymore for less then 90-100k. Getting minimum expasion velocity at 1000 yards is more of a concern then anything. I wouldnt take a 223 as most run out of juice pretty fast between 500-1000 yards.

 

[Formidilosus]

That was poll numbers.



This is completely inaccurate. People use logic and emotion to make choices. Not exclusively one or the other.

You can use emotion to say “well it’s more money, so the thing that does the came thing- but it looks smaller won’t work”. But that isn’t logic or reality.

What is your direct experience with the 77gr TMK or heavy ELD-M’s on game animals?

 

[Firth]

Hunting on my own I would go the 223/6mm route. However, big $$$ hunts implies you will be using a guide. In that case, I'd use whatever they were comfortable with. Not because I think they have better understanding of ballistics and wound channels, etc., but they will treat you differently if they don't have confidence in you as a hunter and I'd rather not fight that battle an expensive hunt.

 

[Marbles]

Just to be clear, you`re saying that you would use a .223 to hunt grizzly or Alaskan brown bear?

Just to be clear, last time I wondered around Cooper Landing looking for a black bear, but would have been happy to find a costal brown, I had my 223 Tikka.

In fairness, once I have my 243 barrel back, I would prefer that. Though, my 223 will probably still go for more walks with me.

Other than Rokslide, I don't tell people the above, not worth the argument and bore/powder column size is very much tied to manhood for many up here. I just gave my balls to my wife and stopped worrying about it.

 

[ElPollo]

Does anyone else get weary of these statistically improbable scenarios that are designed to justify a predetermined opinion that is based on a lack of data or understanding of math?

 

[JohnJohnson]

Does anyone else get weary of these statistically improbable scenarios that are designed to justify a predetermined opinion that is based on a lack of data or understanding of math?

Scenario: a Mountain Nyala is 1000 yards away and you've paid $500,000 to hunt it. This resulted in your wife leaving you and taking the kids with her. It's last light on your last day and you NEED to take the shot. But it's facing away quartering hard. The only shot you have is to put one through its back leg and hoping that bullet makes it into the vitals. WHAT DO YOU DO .223 MAN?

 

[Reburn]

Hunting on my own I would go the 223/6mm route. However, big $$$ hunts implies you will be using a guide. In that case, I'd use whatever they were comfortable with. Not because I think they have better understanding of ballistics and wound channels, etc., but they will treat you differently if they don't have confidence in you as a hunter and I'd rather not fight that battle an expensive hunt.

There is some truth to this.

Does anyone else get weary of these statistically improbable scenarios that are designed to justify a predetermined opinion that is based on a lack of data or understanding of math?

A bad shot is a bad shot no matter the caliber. A 30 cal gut shot is the same as a 223 gut shot.

 

[Darryle]

Whether I have fired one TMK or 100 is not the discussion and it doesn't apply. In my opinion, if you choose a 223 to travel to Central Asia to hunt Ibex or Sheep, I think you are a fool.

Y'all can defend the 223/77gr TMK combination, but I will bet damn good money, regardless of what you say here, you aren't getting on a plane and heading there with that combination. You are free to prove me wrong, takes anywhere from $27k to $57k and some time.