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

[Macintosh]

Am I correct that the poll was supposed to be "would you CHANGE your decision about what to bring on a hunt if you paid a lot of $$$$$ for it"? As written it's the same weekly question, are you a big gun guy or a little gun guy.

I have always been a "use enough, but no more than enough" guy. 20ga shotguns, short action standard calibers. I dont own a 6mm and I dont have a 223 hunting rifle, but for sure a smaller cartridge guy. But my wife and I got invited on a elk hunt to a private 30,000 acre ranch in colorado that belonged to one of her board members family, all we had to do was pay for our airfare, the guest house food plan, and tags. It still ended up being the most expensive hunt I've ever been on due to the cost of the food, but had a great trip and shot a bull in one of the more picturesque places I've ever laid eyes on this side of grindelwald. Anyway, the hosts' stipulation was that if we wanted to bring a smaller cartridge he was going to see to it that we jumped through all these hoops, limited to excessively short shots (100 yards and in), etc, and made it very clear that he would be a lot happier if we just brought a bigger gun. I tried explaining, and to no avail, it was 30-06 or bigger. So we each brought a 30-06. It absolutely wasnt necessary, but it made the situation much more happier.

That's the only situation I'd CHANGE what I was going to bring. I've never been guided hunting unless that ^^ counts, but if I had a situation where a host or a guide demanded something, if I thought they were at all legit I'd just bring the bigger gun if it was really that big a deal to them (bigger becasue I have yet to meet anyone in that position who advocates for smaller...although i suspect we'd see eye to eye already and no change would be necesary). My choice of smaller guns doesnt mean I have a problem with bigger guns, they just arent my choice, so as long as I have a gun I can use or borrow there it's really not that big a deal in a situation like that. A $$$$$ DIY hunt I'm bringing my gun no question, the price definitely does not change it--if anything it's additonal motivation to have "my" gun there.

 

[Formidilosus]

My experience has no bearing on the question asked. I am comfortable with my "lack" of experience in all matters 223, hell, I am quite comfortable with pretty much anything I don't have experience with, which is a lot, but I don't get all butt hurt when someone disagrees with me. I bought a "Rokslide Special" just so I can get the experience with a Tikka 223.

You said that think someone that would use a 223 is a “fool”, I asked “based on what?” Saying you wouldn’t use one is one thing, but saying someone is a fool to do so, while having no experience with it- is what I am asking about.

No one needs to prove me wrong, besides, you can only prove me wrong by doing exactly what you claim you would do.

Correct? I don’t care to convince you that I would do anything.

FTR, no one needs to believe you simply because you say so.

I have never said that anyone should believe me- quite the opposite.

I have nothing to prove, the question was asked "if" and I responded no I wouldn't and I responded that regardless of what someone says, they aren't getting on a plane to go on a once in a lifetime hunt with a 223.

Then you would be wrong.

 

[PaulDogs]

Using a 223 on a once in a lifetime hunt makes total sense to me and is what I would bring.

But I do have questions for those who would do it:

Would you tell the outfitter that’s the cartridge you’re choosing? What happens if they say you’re not allowed to use it on their hunt?

Would you inform them 223 is your choice cartridge before booking with them?

Or would you try not to bring up the subject at all and hope they don’t ask to see your rifle and cartridges?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

To me, this comes down to a discussion that we had on a different thread, basically how much loss in precision do you get with increasing recoil, and how does that trade against the increase in wind performance you get for that recoil. Because it's hard to quantify the loss in precision due to recoil in suboptimal field positions, it's hard to conclusively answer this question.

It’s not really hard- shoot timed measured drills that have relevancy from different positions. Do this repeatedly with a heavy recoiling cartridge and with a light recoiling cartridge. Compare.

In a different different thread, we also discussed the FACT that given a well constructed bullet, a larger bullet will do more terminal damage than a smaller one. It's not necessarily about energy, but just more mass going into the animal in fragmentation and doing more cutting and bleeding. I think Form himself has said the larger well constructed bullets are "overkill" for most game, which must imply that they do more damage.

Open mixed bullets do more tissue damage as the caliber and weight goes up. The difference in killing and time to incapacitation is not nearly what people believe it is, however.

To me, more damage means more tolerance for error in shot placement.

Sure- but it also results in worse shots on animals. Go back to shooting timed and measured drills.

Higher BC bullet going faster means more tolerance for wind error, which is one of the largest sources of error.

Yea, but that doesn’t require a larger caliber. A 22 cm with 88gr ELD-M’s is an extremely shootable combo that has excellent wind performance. So too do 6mm’s.

Practice and recoil management are very important, and any gun you plan to hunt with should be a gun you practice with. But IF you can provably shoot a higher recoiling cartridge well, then I don't see why it's doing anything but helping you increase the likelihood of killing an animal.

What does shooting well mean?

 

[ElPollo]

I like how anyone defends anything and then discounts someone from Texas simply because they are from Texas.

Another good one I hear about Texans from Texans is “He might have the land to own cattle, but bless his heart if he doesn’t know which end of them eats and which shits.” It’s funny how lots of those same landowners will call other people fools for stuff they don’t understand and haven’t bothered to investigate.

 

[ElPollo]

I like how anyone defends anything and then discounts someone from Texas simply because they are from Texas.

And one more for good measure. “Bless his heart, but he wouldn’t know how to pour piss out of a boot even if you told him the directions were written on the sole.”

 

[Marbles]

To me, this comes down to a discussion that we had on a different thread, basically how much loss in precision do you get with increasing recoil, and how does that trade against the increase in wind performance you get for that recoil. Because it's hard to quantify the loss in precision due to recoil in suboptimal field positions, it's hard to conclusively answer this question.

In a different different thread, we also discussed the FACT that given a well constructed bullet, a larger bullet will do more terminal damage than a smaller one. It's not necessarily about energy, but just more mass going into the animal in fragmentation and doing more cutting and bleeding. I think Form himself has said the larger well constructed bullets are "overkill" for most game, which must imply that they do more damage.

To me, more damage means more tolerance for error in shot placement. Higher BC bullet going faster means more tolerance for wind error, which is one of the largest sources of error. Practice and recoil management are very important, and any gun you plan to hunt with should be a gun you practice with. But IF you can provably shoot a higher recoiling cartridge well, then I don't see why it's doing anything but helping you increase the likelihood of killing an animal.

Disclaimer, I don't shoot a big magnum, and I just built a 6CM which is quickly becoming my favorite gun. But I also don't hunt beyond 600yds and I don't pay 5-6 figures for hunts.

For most larger rounds that people actually use, you might gain 2 inches in wound cavity diameter, so you can miss by one inch more. That is based on memory, could be wrong.

My own experience says simply moving from 223 to 308 shooting 178 gr bullets decrease my accuracy by more than that. I've not timed speed, but I also bet that is slower, two 77 gr TMK wounded channels give significantly more room for error than one 30 call TMK wound channel, my best guess.

 

[Formidilosus]

Would you tell the outfitter that’s the cartridge you’re choosing?

Not unless they asked because that is not what I am paying them for. It’s a non factor for me.

What happens if they say you’re not allowed to use it on their hunt?

I would have a logical discussion with them and be sure that they understand that I know I am on the hook for what happens. If the answer is still no, then I would find someone else. I am not paying a guide for there thoughts on cartridge or shooting ability. I am paying them for their knowledge of the terrain and animal. My job is the shooting once the animal is located.

Would you inform them 223 is your choice cartridge before booking with them?

No- because it is immaterial.

Or would you try not to bring up the subject at all and hope they don’t ask to see your rifle and cartridges?

Not a hope- I don’t care. I wouldn’t have the conversation if I were using a 338 either.

 

[yeti12]

Using a 223 on a once in a lifetime hunt makes total sense to me and is what I would bring.

But I do have questions for those who would do it:

Would you tell the outfitter that’s the cartridge you’re choosing? What happens if they say you’re not allowed to use it on their hunt?

Would you inform them 223 is your choice cartridge before booking with them?

Or would you try not to bring up the subject at all and hope they don’t ask to see your rifle and cartridges?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd choose a outfitter that has decided to open their eyes/ears in the last 20 years.

If none were available I'd tell em the same thing I told the last/only guide ive ever had. If I wound it I'll claim it. Had a "guide" tell me he seen a hog take a 45-70 straight to the head, no penetration and just shake it off and he didn't want me using my rifle. I told him that's proof that I should use mine and the hog I shot facing me, the bullet passed through the hog head to ass. Granted it wasn't a once in a lifetime hunt but that doesn't change anything. If I shoot one gun often and shoot it well, like very well why should I change cause a guy that knows less than me told me to?

A guide having a caliber requirement but not a shooting requirement is pure ignorance.

 

[justinspicher]

A guide having a caliber requirement but not a shooting requirement is pure ignorance.

^^^this should be for anyone who hunts with a rifle.

If I were to book a once in a lifetime hunt, I would absolutely use my 223 rifle. If the outfitter didn’t like that, he wouldn’t get my money. In most cases, a once in a lifetime hunt for me would involve physically challenging terrain, therefore, my physical fitness would be a priority to me over caliber selection, which wouldn’t matter because it would still be my 223. I can’t shoot anything if I cant get to where the critter I am after is in the first place.

 

[270quest]

My question would be - assume you have a 223 and say a 6.5 creed that both meet your accuracy needs, both are the same as far as shootability, reliability, weight, etc, same optics....Basically the only difference is one shoots a 77 at 2750 and the other shoots a 139/140 at 2800....

Then what one are you taking?

 

[solarshooter]

It’s not really hard- shoot timed measured drills that have relevancy from different positions. Do this repeatedly with a heavy recoiling cartridge and with a light recoiling cartridge. Compare.






Open mixed bullets do more tissue damage as the caliber and weight goes up. The difference in killing and time to incapacitation is not nearly what people believe it is, however.





Sure- but it also results in worse shots on animals. Go back to shooting timed and measured drills.





Yea, but that doesn’t require a larger caliber. A 22 cm with 88gr ELD-M’s is an extremely shootable combo that has excellent wind performance. So too do 6mm’s.






What does shooting well mean?

For most larger rounds that people actually use, you might gain 2 inches in wound cavity diameter, so you can miss by one inch more. That is based on memory, could be wrong.

My own experience says simply moving from 223 to 308 shooting 178 gr bullets decrease my accuracy by more than that. I've not timed speed, but I also bet that is slower, two 77 gr TMK wounded channels give significantly more room for error than one 30 call TMK wound channel, my best guess.

I think what we're missing here is that recoil effects on accuracy are much less important than performance in wind. Form has another popular thread where he discusses precision necessary for certain hit rates, and specifically shows how increases in group accuracy don't significantly improve hit rates. Wind performance however does. So if your groups are twice as big, but your windage error is half, your overall hit rates will be much higher, especially at longer range.

And again, massive disclaimer, I do think excessive recoil has deleterious effects on hit rate, likelihood to practice, flinch habits, etc etc. Really I'm just advocating for like a 6.5PRC over a .223. Not an unbraked 7RM or 300WM. But when I say shoot "well", I mean can you score the same or comparable to a 223 or 22lr in the Kraft drill, and can you spot your impacts, and if so use the biggest/highest performing caliber that allows you to do that.

 

[Formidilosus]

My question would be - assume you have a 223 and say a 6.5 creed that both meet your accuracy needs, both are the same as far as shootability, reliability, weight, etc, same optics....Basically the only difference is one shoots a 77 at 2750 and the other shoots a 139/140 at 2800....

Then what one are you taking?

But those aren’t the same in shootability. So that is a contrived situation that isn’t reality.

Can a 6.5cm be shot well- of course. In same/same base performance is it shot as well as 223- no.

I have seen a lot of people shoot multiple different drills back to back using those exact combinations, from the same exact rifle setup- they have less hits/longer times with the 6.5 than they do the 223; and then I have seen those same exact people take those same rifles into the field and logged the differences in hit, follow up shots, wounds and losses. Again, up to about 450-500 yards, the 223 with good bullets has a higher success rate.

 

[Formidilosus]

I think what we're missing here is that recoil effects on accuracy are much less important than performance in wind.

No. Everything I have seen, and there a quite a few people on this board who have seen it with me with can say is- recoil effects shooting well outsized to what people believe.

Form has another popular thread where he discusses precision necessary for certain hit rates, and specifically shows how increases in group accuracy don't significantly improve hit rates.

That is base mechanical precision- not field on demand precision and accuracy.

Wind performance however does. So if your groups are twice as big, but your windage error is half, your overall hit rates will be much higher, especially at longer range.

Again no. When those WEZ calcs are ran be me, they are generally in the 1.5 MOA or less precision zone. That is not the same thing as actual field accuracy ability.

The reasons me miss in order:

1). We suck (put recoil, base ability, etc here).




2). Scope/rifle system lost zero
3). Never had a zero.
4). Had a less than optimum zero.


5). Wind.



At about that separation level. “We suck” is way more than any other factor.

And again, massive disclaimer, I do think excessive recoil has deleterious effects on hit rate, likelihood to practice, flinch habits, etc etc. Really I'm just advocating for like a 6.5PRC over a .223. Not an unbraked 7RM or 300WM. But when I say shoot "well", I mean can you score the same or comparable to a 223 or 22lr in the Kraft drill, and can you spot your impacts, and if so use the biggest/highest performing caliber that allows you to do that.

The issue with the Kraft drill is it is extremely unstressful, and even the timed version does not stress the system as animals and field shooting do.

 

[ddowning]

I think what we're missing here is that recoil effects on accuracy are much less important than performance in wind. Form has another popular thread where he discusses precision necessary for certain hit rates, and specifically shows how increases in group accuracy don't significantly improve hit rates. Wind performance however does. So if your groups are twice as big, but your windage error is half, your overall hit rates will be much higher, especially at longer range.

And again, massive disclaimer, I do think excessive recoil has deleterious effects on hit rate, likelihood to practice, flinch habits, etc etc. Really I'm just advocating for like a 6.5PRC over a .223. Not an unbraked 7RM or 300WM. But when I say shoot "well", I mean can you score the same or comparable to a 223 or 22lr in the Kraft drill, and can you spot your impacts, and if so use the biggest/highest performing caliber that allows you to do that.

Yes^^^^this...but you need to shoot a lot and analyze the results carefully. When I was shooting 300+ shots per week plus matches I could tell the difference in recoil between a 105 going 3150 from my 243AI and a 115 going 3000 fps in a 15# crossover rifle. The difference is not nothing when you move from 223 to 6 creed to 6um to 25 prc, etc. That is why it is smart to figure out what the max range you need to shoot is and use the rifle/cartridge with the least recoil that will accomplish that. Also, gun weight matters too, so trending with a heavier gun as the recoil goes up can cancel some of that out. Obviously, at the detriment of carrying around the heavier gun.

 

[Timberline001]

It seems fairly popular opinion and accepted here that velocity is what kills and a smaller caliber with correctly paired bullet (223/77 TMK) is just as effective as a larger magnum of some flavor. It also appears most folks using the smaller caliber combos have ready access to public land hunting, so their total hunt cost is “minimal” compared to a guided hunt.

What I’m curious to know is, would the folks that shoot the 223 and 6mm type combos still elect that caliber if they had to shell out five figures for the hunt? For the sake of conversation let’s just assume the following.
- Your chosen cartridge is legal for this hunt.
- You are paying the bill (not a gift and you didn’t win the lottery).
- Target animals are a Marco Polo Sheep in Tajikistan ($40k) and a Mountain Nyala in Ethiopia ($70k).
- If you hit an animal and don’t recover it, you pay the full hunt cost and your tag is considered filled.

None of the supporters on here of these rounds would using them if we thought there was any chance of ever losing an animal due to the performance of our weapon of choice. Not to mention there’s always a chance of that once in a lifetime 200 inch deer on any hunt and that’s worth more to me than any monetary value.

 

[solarshooter]

No. Everything I have seen, and there a quite a few people on this board who have seen it with me with can say is- recoil effects shooting well outsized to what people believe.









That is base mechanical precision- not field on demand precision and accuracy.







Again no. When those WEZ calcs are ran be me, they are generally in the 1.5 MOA or less precision zone. That is not the same thing as actual field accuracy ability.

The reasons me miss in order:

1). We suck (put recoil, base ability, etc here).




2). Scope/rifle system lost zero
3). Never had a zero.
4). Had a less than optimum zero.


5). Wind.



At about that separation level. “We suck” is way more than any other factor.






The issue with the Kraft drill is it is extremely unstressful, and even the timed version does not stress the system as animals and field shooting do.

Copy that, I can only share my experience, which is that I shoot the Kraft drill with my 9.25lb 284 as well as my 9.25lb 6CM and 8.5lb 22lr, all Tikkas with identical ergos. I typically score 13-17/20, just depending on the day/rep. When it comes to shooting at range, I'm not taking a shot over 2-300 in anything other than prone. The Kraft drill has shown me that my wobble and achieved precision from other positions is too bad to go further.

So when it comes to prone, I shoot essentially minimum group size with all rifles, and I can spot impacts. Now it happens that the 6CM has the same wind number as the 284 (7mph), so the difference at 600 is really pretty minimal. Maybe a 22CM can get to 5-6mph, in which case yes I agree it's not a bad choice and may result in similar hit rates (haven't tried it). But a 223 is a ~4mph gun, and that is a nearly 100% difference to a 284/6.5PRC (7-8mph guns and similar recoil). So in my view of the universe, if I'm taking a prone shot at 4-600yds, I'm taking the 284/6.5PRC all day over the .223.

 

[ddowning]

No. Everything I have seen, and there a quite a few people on this board who have seen it with me with can say is- recoil effects shooting well outsized to what people believe.

I'm not sure why people are so resistant to this fact. I've always hated recoil, but yet was asked by my friends to zero their heavy recoiling slug guns and rifles because they couldn't get them to "group."

The more volume I shoot, the more this reveals itself as fact. Recoil, even in small amounts, matters A LOT. Many people believe if it doesn't hurt it doesn't matter, but in my experience it matters at levels FAR below where the pain starts.

 

[solarshooter]

Yes^^^^this...but you need to shoot a lot and analyze the results carefully. When I was shooting 300+ shots per week plus matches I could tell the difference in recoil between a 105 going 3150 from my 243AI and a 115 going 3000 fps in a 15# crossover rifle. The difference is not nothing when you move from 223 to 6 creed to 6um to 25 prc, etc. That is why it is smart to figure out what the max range you need to shoot is and use the rifle/cartridge with the least recoil that will accomplish that. Also, gun weight matters too, so trending with a heavier gun as the recoil goes up can cancel some of that out. Obviously, at the detriment of carrying around the heavier gun.

Yes, and in situations where you are shooting huge volume I agree that less recoil is much better. But hunting is not a huge volume scenario. Practicing can be bigger volume, but even 40rds in a day at range and running the Kraft drill is a good amount of practice. Do that once a month, and we're up to maybe 500rds a year on the hunting rig (a very high estimate really). The best thing is to supplement with a trainer gun, like a 22lr or 223, to get even more practice. But when it comes to hunting, I'm not convinced I need to follow the same design principles as a PRS rig.

 

[Southern Lights]

Here in New Zealand we can hunt deer all year round. I know plenty of people that use .223 for deer and it's one of my favorite calibres as well. But if I'm a serious hunt, especially for things like Tahr or Wapiti, I'm bringing a larger calibre. I use the .223 for culls along with most other people I know.

The main reason isn't that the .223 doesn't kill well, because it does. More that beyond about 300m it drops off in effectiveness and has much more wind effect. If your only shot on an animal is 400m away I like knowing I can make the shot with less chance for error.