Cartridge for deer in the forest.

[people]

Let us bottom line this for you. If you are a slob 223 is not enough. Neither is a 300WM. If you are not going to take clean shots anything but HE rounds are not enough.

 

[TC260]

Would you use a 223 for such hunting?

If your woods are like my woods, no. That doesn't mean it can't take a deer though. It's just that tracking and dragging are difficult enough in my area that I don't see enough upside to a small round to use one. If the next guy does see the upside to it, it's his hunt to do as he pleases. Was talking to a guy last weekend that hunts the same area I do and won't use anything less than a 300 Win mag and a shoulder shot. To me that's a little much for the sub-50 yrd shots we typically get in that area but to him it's perfect. Bottom line is, as long as we're all enjoying our time in the woods that's all that really matters.

 

[JeffG]

As has been said, deer have been killed with every caliber gun, including arrows and probably pea shooters...but is it sensible to be at the very bottom edge of killing capacity with any prey/caliber combo?

We wouldn't consider hunting dangerous game with a pea shooter. Why risk wounding ANY prey when more effective weapons are readily available?

This seems more of a hunting ethic question than a ballistic question to me.

 

[timeout]

An ethics question to some degree, perhaps. A question of proficiency with your weapon, including knowing the target animal distance and your rifles trajectories? A question of knowing when to shoot and when not to shoot? I have seen many times more problems with deer hunters using larger caliber rifles that have not put sufficient time in behind the trigger, than what can be expected when a knowledgable marksman deer hunts with a .223. Unquestionably, there are better rounds available. As has been stated, some like a bow, some like a muzzle loader. Probably many bow hunters on this forum and I don't have any problem with bow hunting. I have in fact, done some bow hunting myself. I have spent most of my free time throughout my life in the outdoors and there certainly are some bow kills that don't go as planned. To each his own. If the .223 is needed for low recoil or it's lightness to pack around, or it is all that you have, use it. I have seen many one shot, drop in their tracks, .223 whitetail kills. By the way, the .243 has been my favorite deer cartridge for many years!

 

[jrm850]

There was an article many years ago in one of the magazines where the author tried to find out which bullet was the best for shooting through brush. Suprisingly I think the .220 Swift was the best of the bunch in his test and the higher velocity rounds had less deflection than the the rounds we commonly associate with good brush guns like the 30-30. I thought it was interesting.

On a more germane note, the biggest whitetail I ever shot dropped on his hooves with a Winchester 53gr hollow point .223. I popped it right in the pupil at 60 yards with a great shooting Kimber. No exit wound and the antlers were still solidly attached. I only took the .223 because a deer was rubbing in granny's garden right next to her house and she wanted it gone. I just assumed it was a young spike but was caught off guard when a 7 1/2 year old buck that weighed 209 dressed walked out. (I know that's small for most of you but it's pretty big for Florida)

 

[fredhorace77]

Personally, I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm just telling of actual experiences with the .223 and others. I have other rifles for deer, including a 25-06, but I would not hesitate to take deer to 200 yards with the .223.

+1 Ive actually had better one shot success with my. 223 than with my 30-06. Of course my shots are always under 200 yards. The 30-06 always punches a hole in and an exit hole out and almost always the deer run off and takes up to 120 yards before the lay down. 223 usually has hole in no hole going out...and deer laying within 40 yards or less of where I shot it. I use sierra 60gr. HP Varminters in 223 and and 150gr. noslers BT's In 30-06

 

[Coleridge]

there certainly are some bow kills that don't go as planned.

Anyone who has ever shot many deer with a bow know exactly what you mean.


On that note; If anyone would ever THINK of shooting a deer in the "forest" with a bow, they should try it with a 223. Light years better weapon than a stick & string. Most guys that cram the ethics thing down your throat obviously have never tried it. With the proper bullet, the 223 is a fine choice for deer. I've seen many fall to one.

Yes there are better options out there for situations that aren't just right, but make & take good shots; nut'n rong with using the 223 for bow style shots. It works a heck of a lot better than a bow.

 

[wyoming .260]

I grew up hunting in North East PA. Thick brushy forests and 40 yd. shots were the norm, I have used a few different guns to harvest deer. Muzzle loaders, bows and various rifles. The best was a severe case of over gun. The least effective was a Bow, in my hands. Hence I quit bow hunting. I believe a .223 was designed to be used on deer sized targets(people) in brushy terrain (Vietnam). And when used properly can be quite effective.
I happen to like a boom flop aspect of rifles so tend to use more then enuff gun , most times.

 

[markr]

There is not one justifiable reason to quit using your 358 for Whitetail Deer or black bear for that matter, especially in the circumstances in which you hunt!
Remember this, people that say this or that on the internet are not responsible for their intentional or unintentional bad information...
Now..........if you just want to buy another firearm......good on ya! But keep using the 358 for your deer hunting!
Mark

 

[Lapua40X]

...

Would you use a 223 for such hunting?

I bring this up because in another forum someone said the 223 was good for deer and that anyone saying it was not was commenting on their own marksmanship!

I wouldn't use a .223 for hunting anything larger than varmints. There is too great a likelihood of wounding the animal and having it run off to die a suffering and lingering death.
I realize that you'll find some hunters who will tell you that they've killed lots of deer with a .223. Some of their stories will tell you that the bullet went clear through the deer and killed it instantly. I concur that such a shot is possible. But misplaced shots with small caliber firearms on large game, regardless of the velocity of the bullet, are responsible for more wounded animals than some might imagine.
If you like it, stick with your Savage .358 Winchester. IMO, it's the better choice in this instance.

 

[jonbearman]

What the heck is wrong with the .358 you have,its a dandy at taking deer or any animal down in the 48 states other than grizzly.As a side note,I wouldnt use a .223 myself,just not enough power for the job if you hit bone in my opinion.Maybe a 22-250 on up.But any ofthe .308 family should work real well.The .358 was very popular with maine moose hunters as was the old .303 savage as that was the go to cartridge back around the early part of the 20th century.That is documented and the savage 99 was extremely popular with guides as it was a rugged light weight lever gun to use on follow up shots.

 

[Kermit in Va.]

I think it has everything with the person behing the trigger.
And I don't think that theres more that get away with the smaller cals. Most that hunt with a small cal. does it because they know their limits and are going to make a good shot.
Watch at the range when people line their guns up before season and see which cal. most shoot better.
When I worked at the local pawn shop, we had a guy come in one day and was all tore up over a turkey getting away. He knowed he hit it good and said he wanted to trade his gun in for one that would kill a turkey. I asked what he had used and he said a 30-06.....Yep, it wouldn't kill a turkey. LOL He then asked if we had any 7mm Mags, Yep...we did and he worked up the trade and went out the door a happy camper.
Boy, do I go hunting way underguned...LOL


Kermit

 

[wboggs]

Have an old M99 .303 that will shoot 190 gr bullets at 2100fps and close to 1 1/4" grps at 100 using a scope. The 99 is one major reason the old timers used those cartridges. it is joy to use, so far superior to a Winchester there isn't even a comparison.
Bill

 

[timeout]

I think it has everything with the person behing the trigger.
And I don't think that theres more that get away with the smaller cals. Most that hunt with a small cal. does it because they know their limits and are going to make a good shot.
Watch at the range when people line their guns up before season and see which cal. most shoot better.
When I worked at the local pawn shop, we had a guy come in one day and was all tore up over a turkey getting away. He knowed he hit it good and said he wanted to trade his gun in for one that would kill a turkey. I asked what he had used and he said a 30-06.....Yep, it wouldn't kill a turkey. LOL He then asked if we had any 7mm Mags, Yep...we did and he worked up the trade and went out the door a happy camper.
Boy, do I go hunting way underguned...LOL




Kermit

Plus one on everything you said. A trip to the range, especially the weekend before deer season is extremely telling. I am not saying to go out and purchase a .223 expressly for deer hunting. I am not the experienced competition shooter that most on this site are. I have been a hunter all my long life. To all the naysayers that will not shoot a deer with a .223, I would politely ask how many deer have you seen shot and get away or die a horrible death with the .223? I have killed a bunch with a .223 and only one wounded to get away. If not for private land, I don't believe that one would have got away. I have shot deer with slug guns, .223's, .243's and 25-06's. Slug guns are the worst of the lot in crippled and wounded deer. I have more one shot, drop in their tracks dead, with the .223 than any of the above guns I've used.

 

[TC260]

I have shot deer with slug guns, .223's, .243's and 25-06's. Slug guns are the worst of the lot in crippled and wounded deer. I have more one shot, drop in their tracks dead, with the .223 than any of the above guns I've used.

In the interest of an apples to apples comparison, were the animals generally all shot more or less in the same place? I'm not asking to dispute what you're saying. I've never deer hunted with a 223 but the 22 cal (222 mag, 223, 22-250) deer hunters I know are all head and neck shooters. So to me the question becomes, is the stellar performance of small calibers do to the devastating damage of small calibers or a function of where they're hitting?

 

[kyreloader]

I killed a Kentucky whitetail with a .223 Rem shooting 40g HS Custom bullets(all copper bullet) at 3800 fps. I shot it quartering away slightly about 25-30 yards in the thick woods. It took two hops after the shot, looked around to see where the shot had come from, then teetered and fell down dead about 6 yards from where he was shot. The bullet entered the onside lung(turning it to soup), took the top of the heart off and exited out through the off-side shoulder.

Picture of hunting area.

Picture of the heart and onside lung(red liquid).

Picture of said deer:

It will be my argument that those that argue against using a .223 for hunting deer have not used it or did not place the bullet in the right place, or used the wrong bullet for the job(varmint/target bullet).

Flame suit on.

 

[timeout]

I have shot deer with slug guns, .223's, .243's and 25-06's. Slug guns are the worst of the lot in crippled and wounded deer. I have more one shot, drop in their tracks dead, with the .223 than any of the above guns I've used.

In the interest of an apples to apples comparison, were the animals generally all shot more or less in the same place? I'm not asking to dispute what you're saying. I've never deer hunted with a 223 but the 22 cal (222 mag, 223, 22-250) deer hunters I know are all head and neck shooters. So to me the question becomes, is the stellar performance of small calibers do to the devastating damage of small calibers or a function of where they're hitting?

I'm mostly a neck shooter with a .223. I have however killed some clean and fast with boiler room shots, depends on the situation. As far as the slugs, I rarely felt condident enough with their accuracy and trajectories to take a neck shot. So basically, no not genereally in the same area as with a .223. I have just seen a lot od deer going a long way when shot with a slug. Also a lot of misses and a lot of poor hits due to slugs. This is not just me, but others I hunt with. I don't know what the books say, but in my opinion projectile speed has a lot to do with quick kills. Not really part of the equation, but I learned the hard way with muzzle loaders and round balls also. I progressed to "Buffalo" bullets in a muzzle loader. They penetrate and expand, where the round balls I recovered could nearly have been reinserted and fired again. IMHO if we are talking ethics and clean kills, I would rate a .223 FAR higher than muzzle loaders, shotgun slugs, and bows. I would never question or try to take those away from anyone though. There is room for all of us in the great outdoors and we need to stick together. The antis will do enough to tear us apart, we don't need to hurt ourselves.

 

[Coleridge]

IMHO if we are talking ethics and clean kills, I would rate a .223 FAR higher than muzzle loaders, shotgun slugs, and bows. I would never question or try to take those away from anyone though. There is room for all of us in the great outdoors and we need to stick together. The antis will do enough to tear us apart, we don't need to hurt ourselves.

+1!!! Very well said. I've never understood why ethics are so questioned with a 223 & then glorified with a bow. Not taking anything away from the bow or bow hunters; but the 223 is capable of anything a bow can do; exponentially.

 

[Lazydays]

I have had good success hunting bucks in the VT forests.

This was hard hunting. The hunter success rate was less than 10%. The requirement was that a legal deer have at least one 3" spike.

I would take any safe shot I could get at a deer. My choice of rifle was and is the 99 Savage in .358 Winchester. All loads were handloads with the 200 Winchester Silvertip and when that was discontinued the Speer 180 gr.

I practiced at running deer shoots and could hit running deer when necessary.

I would not use a 223 for this hunting? It's just not powerful enough. i would have to pass up some shots.

Would you use a 223 for such hunting?

I bring this up because in another forum someone said the 223 was good for deer and that anyone saying it was not was commenting on their own marksmanship!

No I would not use a .223 in anything. I like the .257 Roberts a lot for deer, but that's kinda personal. In the woods it would be hard to beat a plain jane .444 Marlin (doubt you'll shoot past 200 yards anyway). The round is surprisingly accurate, and the buck ain't going anywhere after you hit him! But the newer .338 Marlin would probably be just as good if not better.
gary

 

[Hopkins]

I remember well any number of arguments in the 80's in my LGS here in S.C. about wether a Ruger Mini 14 was appropriate for a deer rifle. The individuals initiating the arguments in favor of that choice weren't hand loaders and back then there were no factory loads that in my view would be suitable for it. At that time you couldn't sell a Colt AR15 for cost. It was well known at that time the preferred rifle of poachers was .22LR. I heard that as a justification of the .223's superiority to a poacher's tool.
Yes, a .223 with the right load and marksman is capable of taking a white tail "in the forest". I'm still glad however I lost a few gun sales back then by insisting that a Mini 14 wasn't appropriate for deer hunting.