Thread: 223 on deer

Originally Posted by Tahr

https://www.firearmsnews.com/editori.../504072#replay

Grizzly with .223

@whanahuia

Interesting article.

Bruce do you think the author is referring to this thread at the beginning of his article, or is it another one?

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Interesting article.

Bruce do you think the author is referring to this thread at the beginning of his article, or is it another one?

@Flyblown There's a big one on the US Rockslide forum that attracts a lot of attention.

You used the 64 Nosler Bonded, eh? Do you recall what powder you used? Ive got a hundred and might as well use them up, even on wallaby. They have not shot very well for me. Penetrate like mad though and slightly slow killers. But deer always end seem to end up dead after that sort of experience.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Interesting article.

Bruce do you think the author is referring to this thread at the beginning of his article, or is it another one?

I believe he has also shot a walrus with his .223. If not him, someone on that forum has…..

Ok, so Ive been thinking about this all day.
My very brief reply earlier was indicative of being not really sure, 1- of if the message I am trying to get across in the relevant threads, has been understood.

2- not wishing as stated in the past, to bring conflict too this thread.

So I've gone about my days work thinking over a suitable reply, and given that the tag was singularly directed at me, I will respond with some explanation of what I think and why. Very plainly and openly, and at some length. With some introspection on why I think what I do.

First on the grizzly. The guy was shooting over a bait and had the opportunity for perfection on an animal that was not upset, stressed or aware of his presence. That counts for a lot.

I also got tones of pushing a barrow that made me feel he's far from impartial on this topic.

Explanation and introspection time.

The shankspony of 10 years ago was a different person too today's Whanahuia. In those days you would have found most of my reports and info revolved around hunting with a longbow. It was also before I entered a long term relationship and also before a period of time where a perfect storm of events meant I had to all most completely start again in a Kilpling- esque- If, kind of way.

Why is all that relevant? well for both reasons I no longer had the time to hunt as I freely used too, or the money to devote too my hunting in the same way. Looking back I was incredibly fortunate in the first half of my life and probably didn't realise the advantage I had.

Trad Bowhunting taught me an INCREDIBLY important lesson. To not loose an arrow unless I was ultimately sure it would go where I intended, and that I should not hunt with the bow unless I had the time to practice so that I could be that confident.
Ultimately I came to the conclusion that I wasn't happy with killing an animal unless I had behaved 100% ethically and morally in my behaviour in regards too knowing I could kill it too my best ability.Pre shot.

You wont see a bowhunt report from me until I again have the time to practice and gain the level of skill required to achieve that.

Having a permanent significant other gave me a much better understanding of what most peoples situation is, where time for hunting, practice etc is limited, and the rest of my situation gave me a better understanding of the costs constraints most people face in weighting up time and seeking perfection. Ive shot less animals in the last 7 years, than in any given yeah previous due too these factors.

I might have put aside the bow, but I have carried through too my rifle hunting now, a lack of desire to push any boundary as far as killing an animal gos. Distance, velocity, weight etc Including calibre. If you don't think pushing boundaries is relevant with the .223 cal, then Id say go too .17 ???
If you will not, then you are on the boundary, surely.

Now none of that, or anything Ive said in the past means that I'm saying you should not do what you enjoy. Id be a fucking hypocrite if I did. But my reticence is based on knowing fairly well that, at least most of you fit in too the time/income level and also experience and access too animals, that puts you in a different league too the average guy, or the new hunter. Best rifles and scopes, reloading time and energy and expense, ability to depart from the norm and create a rifle etc.

You can afford to practice. You can afford the best. You can afford to reload and most of all....... You can afford to not take a shot if you desire or think it unwise.

I suspect the guy with the grizzly and or Walrus is in the same boat.

To prove your point, Im off to find a country that will let me shoot an elephant with a 77gr SMK. I have no doubt I can. But does can equal should unequivocally?


My opinion could equally be seen as part devils advocate, and part concern that the impression represented is not the best information or conclusion many hunters should come too.

I genuinely feel there are better choices for most people.

But I do enjoy seeing what you guys are achieving.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Ok, so Ive been thinking about this all day.
My very brief reply earlier was indicative of being not really sure, 1- of if the message I am trying to get across in the relevant threads, has been understood.

2- not wishing as stated in the past, to bring conflict too this thread.

So I've gone about my days work thinking over a suitable reply, and given that the tag was singularly directed at me, I will respond with some explanation of what I think and why. Very plainly and openly, and at some length. With some introspection on why I think what I do.

First on the grizzly. The guy was shooting over a bait and had the opportunity for perfection on an animal that was not upset, stressed or aware of his presence. That counts for a lot.

I also got tones of pushing a barrow that made me feel he's far from impartial on this topic.

Explanation and introspection time.

The shankspony of 10 years ago was a different person too today's Whanahuia. In those days you would have found most of my reports and info revolved around hunting with a longbow. It was also before I entered a long term relationship and also before a period of time where a perfect storm of events meant I had to all most completely start again in a Kilpling- esque- If, kind of way.

Why is all that relevant? well for both reasons I no longer had the time to hunt as I freely used too, or the money to devote too my hunting in the same way. Looking back I was incredibly fortunate in the first half of my life and probably didn't realise the advantage I had.

Trad Bowhunting taught me an INCREDIBLY important lesson. To not loose an arrow unless I was ultimately sure it would go where I intended, and that I should not hunt with the bow unless I had the time to practice so that I could be that confident.
Ultimately I came to the conclusion that I wasn't happy with killing an animal unless I had behaved 100% ethically and morally in my behaviour in regards too knowing I could kill it too my best ability.Pre shot.

You wont see a bowhunt report from me until I again have the time to practice and gain the level of skill required to achieve that.

Having a permanent significant other gave me a much better understanding of what most peoples situation is, where time for hunting, practice etc is limited, and the rest of my situation gave me a better understanding of the costs constraints most people face in weighting up time and seeking perfection. Ive shot less animals in the last 7 years, than in any given yeah previous due too these factors.

I might have put aside the bow, but I have carried through too my rifle hunting now, a lack of desire to push any boundary as far as killing an animal gos. Distance, velocity, weight etc Including calibre. If you don't think pushing boundaries is relevant with the .223 cal, then Id say go too .17 ???
If you will not, then you are on the boundary, surely.

Now none of that, or anything Ive said in the past means that I'm saying you should not do what you enjoy. Id be a fucking hypocrite if I did. But my reticence is based on knowing fairly well that, at least most of you fit in too the time/income level and also experience and access too animals, that puts you in a different league too the average guy, or the new hunter. Best rifles and scopes, reloading time and energy and expense, ability to depart from the norm and create a rifle etc.

You can afford to practice. You can afford the best. You can afford to reload and most of all....... You can afford to not take a shot if you desire or think it unwise.

I suspect the guy with the grizzly and or Walrus is in the same boat.

To prove your point, Im off to find a country that will let me shoot an elephant with a 77gr SMK. I have no doubt I can. But does can equal should unequivocally?


My opinion could equally be seen as part devils advocate, and part concern that the impression represented is not the best information or conclusion many hunters should come too.

I genuinely feel there are better choices for most people.

But I do enjoy seeing what you guys are achieving.

No not singularly directed at you; for those interested in this thread. But obviously I thought you would be interested in seeing it and perhaps commenting on it. So I tagged you in.

I beleive the 223 is used to cull camels in Ausralia and is very effective.

I remember reading article in magazine over thirty years ago with fella using a hot .17 fired from 30/06 case.shot all sorts up to zebra. Our projectiles have come a loooong way since then. Funnily enough if you use Philip Holden's closing statements about the 222 the controversial one.... They still stack up today,it's just the line/ boundary has moved further out. The wee Centre fired still best in cool hands who pick the shot or walk away. I honestly don't believe that will ever change.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

I remember reading article in magazine over thirty years ago with fella using a hot .17 fired from 30/06 case.shot all sorts up to zebra. Our projectiles have come a loooong way since then. Funnily enough if you use Philip Holden's closing statements about the 222 the controversial one.... They still stack up today,it's just the line/ boundary has moved further out. The wee Centre fired still best in cool hands who pick the shot or walk away. I honestly don't believe that will ever change.

Holden reported years ago about a local fron Te Anau sneaking into the wapiti block and nailing trophies with a...triple two. LOL.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

I remember reading article in magazine over thirty years ago with fella using a hot .17 fired from 30/06 case.shot all sorts up to zebra. Our projectiles have come a loooong way since then. Funnily enough if you use Philip Holden's closing statements about the 222 the controversial one.... They still stack up today,it's just the line/ boundary has moved further out. The wee Centre fired still best in cool hands who pick the shot or walk away. I honestly don't believe that will ever change.

Nothing about the chambering/cartridge, all about the bullet it fires.

Stick a fast twist barrel on and long mag box and the .222 can use any .224 cal bullet and enjoy the performance benefits.

A .22-250 and .222 shooting the same 50 grain bullet offers little benefit (maybe a few inches less drop and drift in trajectory out to 300m). The 220 Swift even less unless barrel and brass wear is somehow a benefit...

The only advantage that the recent .22 centre fire cases offer is correct case design and barrel/throat dimensions for the modern bullets.

Originally Posted by caberslash

Nothing about the chambering/cartridge, all about the bullet it fires.

Stick a fast twist barrel on and long mag box and the .222 can use any .224 cal bullet and enjoy the performance benefits.

A .22-250 and .222 shooting the same 50 grain bullet offers little benefit (maybe a few inches less drop and drift in trajectory out to 300m). The 220 Swift even less unless barrel and brass wear is somehow a benefit...

The only advantage that the recent .22 centre fire cases offer is correct case design and barrel/throat dimensions for the modern bullets.

Beg to differ. The Fatbum [22-250] and triple deuce are a world apart in performance. The 222 is good to 2 hundy and the Fatbum can sting to 4 hundy. Jon Williams used the Fatbum in the veniuson era and for that reason . He could not guarantee meat on the ground.

Any centrefire is best in cool hands that pick their shot

All this about shooting a brown bear with a 223rem....
I find it similar to doing something like catching a blue marlin on 10kg gear. It can be done, but why would you? Just to prove it can be done I guess, not to suggest it's the best tool for the job.

Originally Posted by Shearer

All this about shooting a brown bear with a 223rem....
I find it similar to doing something like catching a blue marlin on 10kg gear. It can be done, but why would you? Just to prove it can be done I guess, not to suggest it's the best tool for the job.

Some might suggest it's because a tool is doing the job...

And no I'm not referring to the rifle lol

I may have an old rod and rifle in the shed (maybe) from the mid to late 70s. The talking point here is the cover pic and article inside.
It was a stag shot in the bush beside one of the lakes outside rotorua. Can't remember which on.
The guy used a 22 hornet he had bought just before he got on the plane in Sydney.
That's how easy it was back then to bring a firearm in. Must've done whatever the obviously minimal paperwork required when he hit NZ.
Bought it for deer shooting so not a varmint rifle
A good size stag too