223 rem

[Rock Knocker]

Its dyslexia. For some, words are a terrible puzzle, its not his fault. As long as he's shooting ethically, however he see ethical as being.

Well i guess getting back to the origanal question. i would say you should stick with a 1-8" twist then you can shoot any of the larger bullets you would ever need. 1-9" twist is just a little more versatile but 1-8" will guarantee a great shooting with 75gr and larger bullets.

 

[rph]

ya its dylexia for me sum of it wus just fun and wuzint paing a tention

 

[rph]

ya im just looking for 223 for the cheap ammo and a gud ranch gun prabuby a short barel

 

[Rock Knocker]

The shorter the barrel you get the slower the velocites. im not sure what FPS you would get with, say a 16" barrel and a 75gr bullet but it would be less than what you would find listed anywhere for that bullet size.

What kind of rifle are you looking at? bolt gun or AR15/ mini 14?

 

[rph]

AR15 with a 18 barrel prabubly R15

 

[Eddie Harren]

I have always had respect for good humor. I think the OP has had a great time with all of us. Stirring the pot often results in a good laugh!

 

[itchyTF]

Is shooting fawns legal?

 

[rph]

ya its legal as long as tha dont hav spots

 

[Kenny474]

Is shooting fawns legal?

Legal doesn't always make it right or ethical. But whatever. I'm going to smash my laptop if I continue to read this, so I really need to remember not to come back to this thread.

Fawns, I mean come the F--- on! Get some damn morals and ethics for christ sake! That's just pathetic. Hunting is one thing. Killing a damn fawn is just messed up. Let it live until it has antlers, then put his head on the wall.

Ok, I will try and calm down and go back to my day now.

Good luck with whatever it is that you do, whatever that is.

 

[rph]

ha in northern minnesota its mor ethical to shoot a smol fawn then a big doe becus tha ar leslikly to servive the winter. PS thanks for puting up with my shit

 

[HillbillySniper]

mor ethical to shoot a smol fawn then a big doe becus tha ar leslikly to servive the winter

That doesnt make any sense that would be like shooting all of the button buck in your area as management buck with bad genetics! I understand your winters are probably worse than in my area but deer are very adaptable animals.


Hillbilly

 

[rph]

lets git back on subject 223 rem

 

[HillbillySniper]

That's the kind of thinking that got PA into the predicament it's in. I have neighbors that have a hundred or more "racks" on their wall. Deer that any respectable hunter would pass on in Ohio, but here for most of the last century, if it's got horns, shoot it. Does were for the kids to hunt after the men were done.

Copyright 2010, R. David Berg

I would agree with that to a point yet in the past five years of our PA antler restriction ive seen bigger and more mature bucks in the areas I hunt not to mention this past rifle season I think I only saw one buck in the back of someones truck so no not every buck with horns gits shot if anything more does git shot in PA now than bucks thanks to our games commisions great brainstorms!

Hillbilly

 

[rph]

if its brown its down

 

[zooskie]

You mean to tell me you take head shots on deer? I really hope you're not serious, as I just find that horribly wrong in so many ways that it almost makes me mad. If you can't make a proper shot on a deer in the vitals (ie: heart, lungs, neck and maybe even spine if nothing else is available) than maybe you need another hobby. Coyote are another story, but even then I can only see headshots being viable when you are saving hides, and then it's still not really the best to just go for a headshot unless it's all that's available.

But as for deer, there is no reason to ever take a headshot, there just isn't. If you miss the brain, you then have a deer that can go a long way with a horrible wound, likely farther than you can follow or track it before it expires, if it even dies. A deer will live if you hit it in the jaw, at least until it starves to death or dies from infection. Headshots are just not advisable in any way on deer. They are far from an ideal shot. Not at all what a responsible hunter would do.


Sorry, but some things just hit a nerve with me, and improper hunting practices are one of them.

Sooo smart guy whats improper about it?

 

[15Tango]

Sooo smart guy whats improper about it?

I've never hunted white tail but I've been watching this thread as it's opened up my mind to different opinions on the matter. I can see Kenny's point here. I'm all about harvesting a creature as humanely as possible and Kenny has some valid points on it. The other guys advocating headshots also have some valid points. If it's done right, lights out, which is as humane as it gets, no meat's wrecked and the meat in theory should be better with less adrenaline and lactic acid in it from running.

That being said, it's really poor form for you to come on a forum where - we at least try to be non-confrontational, on a first name basis for the most part and most of us try to offer genuine help to our comrades and - on your second (anonymous) post to the forum, try to pick some fight with a snide comment while calling names. That shit just doesn't belong here.

Wayne

 

[rph]

thank you!. im just tring to git sum advise on the 223 ???

 

[possum1]

I've been reading the thread too. After reading several threads on this subject on several forums I thought I would try the 223 this year on my deer here in the MO. Ozarks. Killed one with a 243 85gr Sierra and killed the other with a 223 60gr Nosler SP. Both killed fine and the same DRT. If the shooter can put the bullet where it needs to be I see no problem. The rifle was Savage 9 twist, love the rifle.

 

[Kenny474]

I have given you plenty of advice on the .223. If you go back a page or two, you will see where I elaborated my thoughts on it.

I still feel there are much better rounds for hunting deer than the .223, and if you plan to use the AR platform, the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC would work well, or the .30 Remington AR which is available in the R-15 would be far better than the .223.

If you plan to use it on deer, you should really have something 6mm or larger. The little .223 calibers just don't pack the wallop that the bigger stuff does, and won't anchor deer nearly as reliably either.

And with the 500yd reach you want for other purposes, you might want to look to an AR-10 and consider a 6.5 Creedmore or a .243, as well as a few other rounds that are similar in ballistics. The AR-!0 will handle the larger rounds that will really hold their own out to 500yds and even beyond. Where as with the AR-15 platform, only the 6.5 Grendel and possibly the 6.8SPc will really have anything left at 500yds. And the .223 is just not nearly ideal nor will it have enough steam left at 500yds to really be much of any use on anything larger than small game. It will also suffer from severe wind drift as well, something that will be much less of an issue if you use a a 6mm or 6.5mm bullet.

Another option is the .243 WSSM. The brass for it is far from the best, but it should be OK for hunting and general target shooting. And it will have plenty of power to reach out as far as you need. Really much better than the .223.

So there you have it, my take on the .223 for hunting. It's good for small and some medium game to a maximum of 250yds. After that, I wouldn't use it on anything larger than a coyote, and I would limit that to 400yds, and only in very good conditions as well.The other options I gave you make a lot more sense and will do the job much better than will a .223.

So as a last note, here are my suggestions: in the AR-15 .243 WSSM, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8SPC, .30 RemAR, 6mmAR, and possibly a 6X45. In the AR-10 .243, 6.5 Creedmore, .260, 7-08, and any similar round with comparable ballistics. They will al do what you need without worry of being underpowered. All very good choices that will suit you far better than a .223.

 

[Rock Knocker]

You can not argue with what Kenny has said...