Great addition JJH...now we can add hunting with pistol rounds to the mix.

Might as well stretch this thing our as far as we can. Is there a record we are reaching for?

No, because of the heavier bullet weight and energy needed to maintain a killing velocity at longer distances, we can conclude a 44 Mag is far less capable than the .223 at creating reliable kill shots at 200 yards.

OK here's my take on pistol rounds for deer:


J/K. Smoke 'em if ya got 'em. I'm playing with my new Brittany.

I would agree with that, Dan. But using your logic, if KE is the only measure of "capability", then we would have to also conclude that not only is the 44 less capable at 200 yards, it is less capable at 1 foot, than the 223 is at 200 yards.

And, anyone care to guess the KE of an arrow??

Just where is this going?
Tell all manufacturers that "Modern Sporting Rifles can not be used" for hunting deer.
Or maybe, all sellers of this must ask the buyer "Are you going to hunt DEER with this, if so you can't buy one".

Foul! Arrow doesn't kill by KE.

Dan gets two free throws.

A good and brief read on the subject.

Note the author making it a point to mention the .223 as being a caliber for use when multiple shots are likely available. That alone disqualifies it as a reliable deer rifle.

Link

I see that the old Jim Zumbo attitude is alive and well.

A bullet doesn't kill by KE either. A FMJ of a given mass and velocity that pencils through, has the same KE as a bullet of the same mass and velocity that is designed for hunting. A bullet made for varmints could also have the same KE, but it might disintegrate in surface tissue without reaching the vitals. But the hunting bullet (designed for deer sized game) will be much more effective. A bullet kills by penetrating into the vitals and expanding to disrupt vital tissue.

Yes, KE has long been used to compare the "take down power" (whatever that means) of different cartridges, but it is, in reality, a poor indicator. as evidenced by the article that Dan provided. A hockey puck, baseball, etc can have the same KE as a small caliber pistol, but I'd much rather be hit with a baseball!

My point is that the bullet, and it's design, are far more important that the headstamp on the cartridge. And to categorically state that the 223 in not adequate for deer is not universally correct. Nor is the assertion that math is math, so the 243 is better at long distance than the 223 at the muzzle, based on only KE and without consideration of bullet construction.

OK, Dan. Take your free shots!

Dan,
what rifle, scope, and bullet do you use to hunt deer?

Not arguing. I don't think anyone being honest would say a .223 is not an adequate cartridge for deer "universally"/in every scenario. Sure, if you're at limited range using the right bullet, it can kill a deer cleanly and effectively.

That's not the same as saying it's a good cartridge for deer hunting. Not even close. Those that conflate the two concepts either don't understand the question or are being just plain stubborn. It is very limited. By range, size, and the need for exact shot placement. It is a very limited round for deer killing. Thus, it is not a good choice for deer hunting - if one is really seeking to give oneself a decent opportunity to cleanly kill deer in the majority of scenarios where that opportunity might arise.

I'm hunting to kill an animal. (In my case, a big animal.) It would be silly to limit myself with the marginal cartridge that the .223 is when even a .243 would expand my killing horizons exponentially. Even a kid or a lady wouldn't think a thing about the recoil of a .243 if someone wasn't telling them any different.

Simply put, it would be folly for anyone to have a .223 in their hands when a deer they would like to take steps out at 250-350 yards. And there is absolutely no valid reason for it I can see. Unless folks just like to limit themselves for the sake of limiting themselves by using the round - and I doubt describes 1% of those using it.

The smallest is a Browning A-bolt .243 with a Leupold scope.

Not asking smallest, more interested in what you is your usual go to choice.

Whether 223/5.56 is an appropriate deer round is a different issue than whether using a semi-auto is ok.

AR's and variants come chambered in rounds other than 223/5.56.

Is a 308 in semi-auto ok to use?

As already mentioned, AR's are not my thing, but I use a bolt rifle in 308 which takes 10 round mags. On two occasions I can think of off hand, I have gone through more than one mag shooting pigs, and done it once shooting does for a rancher trying to meet his MLD 3 plan numbers.

What are you thoughts in that regard?

NP: I think we are pretty much on the same page. Comes down to semantics. When you said "either the 223 is or is not an effective deer cartridge", to me sounded pretty universal, or all encompassing. I seldom choose a 22CF for my deer hunting (I'm a 257R/25/06 kind of guy ). But under certain conditions, the 223 can do a fine job, as we both agree.

Cheers.

How many times have you been "charged"?

BTW, The best way to stop a hog from charging is to take away her credit card.

Those also rifles shot 7.62 or 30-06 ammo.

Looks like this has been forgotten in the last few pages and it has turned into a .223 for deer debate, again.

However long Keep It Going was.

A Remington Model 700 chambered for the Winchester .270 with a Nikon scope. A Winchester Model 70 chambered for the Remington 25-06 with a Nikon scope is a very close second.

I'm aware of that, but that's not a distinction that was being made in the post I quoted, it was about the concept of bringing a combat rifle to deer camp. Have to keep it in the context in which it occurred.

Fortunately Friday evening this 250lber didn't know a .223 wasn't adequate for killing big game.

I'd say that you weren't trained to shoot in the military. More like hordes of enemy soldiers in massive attacks needing to be put down. Not to mention; More ammo can be carried on any given mission. Round that is accurate to 300 yards with sufficient energy to deliver significant damage at minimum recoil allowing faster and more accurate follow up shots.

Okay everyone, time to agree to disagree and move on. Let's pretend this thread never happened.