Peterson 's Hunting - Small caliber article

Don't think I have read every single page. Spent a fair amount of time on there. I disagree with most of the conclusions drawn on there, that thread is for the folks that like and agree with the premise, I don't, so I don't post.

I have zero experience with 77 TMK. That said I have shot more critters with .223 than most of the people on this forum even the most ardent .223 folks. Mainly pigs of various sizes. Enough experience to believe its real that you can kill a moose with one, and enough to know its not a good idea.
So what you’re saying is that a 223 IS adequate to kill an elk but maybe it’s not THE ideal choice for it. Honestly, I kill most of my elk with a bow and when I do pick up a rifle to hunt them I don’t shoot a 223 but it’s not because I think it’s inadequate. It’s just not my personal choice for the way I hunt and the type of bullets I like to shoot. More importantly, I don’t think it really matters that much. You can kill em with all kinds of stuff. They’re really not that hard to kill unless you mess up pretty bad.

You’re right that there is a 223 cult, but there’s also the 30 cal cult. There’s a Ford cult and Chevy cult… on and on. Everyone has their reasons for shooting what they shoot and it’s rather pointless to debate it any more than it’s already been debated.
 
This thread proves all the .223 is adequate crowd already knows that there position is indefensible. So they ad hominem and straw man while relying on their clique for support.
I have 8 elk in the last 3 years with the 223/77TMK combo that has proven to me it's definitely adequate.
Optimal? For me and my current ability? Probably.
Optimal for others with more skill? Probably not. But still adequate even for them.
 
It seems pretty simple...

- A "tough" bullet from a large caliber will make a wound channel that is 1-2 inches wide and 30 inches long.
- A bullet like a TMK will make a wound channel 3-5 inches wide and 10-14 inches long

An elk is about 14 inches wide.

Both channels will kill just fine on a perfect broadside shot (and the TMK will probably kill better)

If you miss the lungs by 1-2 inches, the TMK will still probably kill the elk. The "tough" bullet probably will not.

If you come in from the rear, the TMK will probably not reach the lungs.

If you find king kong the elk with 14 inches of meat and bone protecting the lungs, then you will need the "tough" bullet.
 
My 77 tmk experience is limited to three deer my girls shot with a 22 creed.
Grandpa was always killing deer with 222, 223, 22-250. So I was already sold on the idea.

What I saw from the wounds was pretty freaking horrific.

We did try and find a cow for my oldest as a test subject but elk are female dogs

But I can't imagine the results of the wound channel would somehow be smaller or less because the test median got larger.

Hoping this year we have better luck finding elk. Plan to have her take the Creed and I'll take my Rokslide trainer.

My cartridge selection process is simple. Will it cause Fudd tears? If yes, then it must be legit!

The soft fragging bullet idea was actually something I have seen over the years when I tried heavy bonded or mono bullets. How can a deer with a 140 grain accubond hole through both lungs from a Wby fun a quarter mile? Or another just flat run off with no blood

Also had the same issue with Barnes in 22 and 6mm.

My buddy was telling me how tough elk are. How he has to shoot them three times with magnums. He was floored that my 6 UM dumped my bull with one shot. From about three times as far as he usually shoots. 115 DTac.
f67aeac5d05fb3cc666542149e643f8d.jpg

92a1d09798a6f51dde9152f9f8f54c2f.jpg
 
I don't think anything that guy writes is interesting.

He has a bias and this has been his meal ticket lately. Same guy made a video shooting a beef knuckle as his proof. No correlation to killing elk at all.

There are plenty of pictures of small bullets shattering big bones. Fortunately, the biggest bones aren't really in front of the vitals.
😅:LOL::ROFLMAO:
 
Back
Top