.223 for deer?
- Thread starter stanmanplan
- Start date
ActivShootr
New member
Is .223 enough for deer?
Really super-short answer: No
Really super-short answer: No
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Now, now, submoa, relax. I've always found that if you shoot Bambi in the white spot, you don't have to track him at all. He instantly says, "I quit!" It's even better if he's standing in the jeep trail when you bust his neck. Makes it easy to load him up and haul him back to camp.
I'm lazy...
I'm lazy...
.223 is questionable with the small deer in Fla, etc. The bigger northern and midwest deer I think are out of the question. If you love an AR, as I do. Get a 6.8SPC, they will knock it straight down. But the most important part of this is SHOT PLACEMENT. Like other shave said only take good shots, and don't maim or wound the animal, kill it.
I love the AR, but just recently switched to a Savage 30'06 bolt action with the accutrigger and 3x9. The rifle will hit right where I point it and the tracking is down to a minimum.
I love the AR, but just recently switched to a Savage 30'06 bolt action with the accutrigger and 3x9. The rifle will hit right where I point it and the tracking is down to a minimum.
W. C. Quantrill
New member
I can kill a deer with a .22 LR, as far as killing one is concerned. Fortunately, the .223 is not legal for hunting big game in most states. I have no doubt that if I were slipping through the countryside and a shot presented itself that I am skilled enough to take it and kill the animal right there. You as a new hunter? If you have to ask, then I seriously doubt it.
Like everyone else has said, use the proper caliber and make an ethical and humane shot. If I caught you hunting on my property with an AR, you would loose it and never see it again. Depending on how my cousins the sheriff and district judge felt about it, you might not see your vehicle again either.
Our state law says .243 is the least that you will hunt with. Most of us hunt with more. .243 is usually a womans or kids gun. .270 and beyond is the preferred deer calibers.
Like everyone else has said, use the proper caliber and make an ethical and humane shot. If I caught you hunting on my property with an AR, you would loose it and never see it again. Depending on how my cousins the sheriff and district judge felt about it, you might not see your vehicle again either.
Our state law says .243 is the least that you will hunt with. Most of us hunt with more. .243 is usually a womans or kids gun. .270 and beyond is the preferred deer calibers.
redwing 40
New member
The .223 Rem. is not legal here in Wyoming. Some of the states that border us allow the .223 Rem for big game. I think it would be OK in Texas where the deer are very small. I would not want to shoot big Mule Deer with .224 . That said, if its legal where you live its your choice.
How about the dang AR rifles are so expensive (especially after good glass) and someone wants it before the next gun-ban
they can't afford a name your large cartride bolt action so the AR is performing double duty.It will take a deer and yes there is definatly better out there.
I think no matter what you choose to use, this is good advise.
MeekAndMild
New member
I don't think there's enough fudge factor in 68 grains. Now for coyote an expanding .223 works fine, but a coyote is a lot skinner and thinner than a deer. For deer my personal minimum is a .243 bullet weighing 100 grains and my preferred bullet is 6.5mm and 120 grains, both of which work for coyotes as well.
hillbillyshooter
New member
Can use .223 but don't
Just because you can kill it with a .223 doesn't mean you will.I've killed deer with a .223 Mini-14. Possible but don't recommend it, took a shoulder to shoulder heart shot to accomplish that and it still ran approx. 50 yards. Don't think less than a .243 or .270 is advisable. I use a Remington .30-06. and am thinking about another .30-06 Rem. or .270 Savage. Be humane, make sure your bullet puts the deer down. Just because you can kill it with a .223 doesn't mean you will.
Just because you can kill it with a .223 doesn't mean you will.I've killed deer with a .223 Mini-14. Possible but don't recommend it, took a shoulder to shoulder heart shot to accomplish that and it still ran approx. 50 yards. Don't think less than a .243 or .270 is advisable. I use a Remington .30-06. and am thinking about another .30-06 Rem. or .270 Savage. Be humane, make sure your bullet puts the deer down. Just because you can kill it with a .223 doesn't mean you will.
I have a lot of experience at shooting deer with .223's. I'm a Deputy Sheriff in Michigan and frequently have to dispatch wounded deer that are hit by cars. I carry a Bushmaster M-4 with a 14.5" barrel. We are restricted to 55 gr bullets and we've carried SP's and now we carry ballistic tips.
We have really big deer here in southern Michigan, where I live. Deer over 200 lbs are not uncommon at all. If I can get really close to them, I just use my S&W M&P 45 and that does them in real quick as long as they're hit in the head. But what most often is the case is that the deer see you coming and they try to drag themselves away from you and I can't get any closer than 35-40 yds. In those cases I have to use the rifle. I'll just say that the .223 is lousy against deer, especially from the shorter barrel of my M-4. I've had rounds ricochet off of their heads and I've had to walk behind deer while continuously shooting them in the torso area as they continue to try and crawl away. It's hardly ever a one-shot affair.
When we carried Remington 870 12 gauges, I'd pop them with a slug or Buck Shot and it was over very quick.
If I could get away with it, I'd carry my Winchester model 94 Trapper in 30-30 for situations like that.
We have really big deer here in southern Michigan, where I live. Deer over 200 lbs are not uncommon at all. If I can get really close to them, I just use my S&W M&P 45 and that does them in real quick as long as they're hit in the head. But what most often is the case is that the deer see you coming and they try to drag themselves away from you and I can't get any closer than 35-40 yds. In those cases I have to use the rifle. I'll just say that the .223 is lousy against deer, especially from the shorter barrel of my M-4. I've had rounds ricochet off of their heads and I've had to walk behind deer while continuously shooting them in the torso area as they continue to try and crawl away. It's hardly ever a one-shot affair.
When we carried Remington 870 12 gauges, I'd pop them with a slug or Buck Shot and it was over very quick.
If I could get away with it, I'd carry my Winchester model 94 Trapper in 30-30 for situations like that.
Right weapon for the right purpose
I have been hunting for 40 years and rarely do I use more than one bullet a year. I have loads I toss because of the years they have been on the shelf. So when I take exception, I do so because I see something a little different.
As for using an AR-15 or any semi automatic of any caliber for that matter, I am a purest. You wouldn't be allowed on my acreage or my neighbors. Doesn't matter how skilled you are. There should never be the need for that much over kill.
Now for my main concern for writing this piece. I own and have hunted with my 30-06 and 270 for the Columbian Blacktail here in Oregon. The blacktail is on average only slightly larger than the whitetail. But for all practical purposes they are comparable. I found both of these calibers to be far more than what I needed for a 100 to 200 yard shot. And since most of my shots fell between 50 to 100 yards, I went looking. I bought a 243 three years back and have found it to have the ideal power for deer of this size.
I use my 30-30 or 270 when I hunted in Utah as the Mule deer are much larger. I liked the 30-30 over the 270 only for ease of movement in the brush. But for range, the 270 or -06 were better. My father used a 308 Savage.
Now when it comes to elk, the .270 is considered a light load. Especially at 200+ yards. But it will do the job if the shot is right. As will any caliber if you hit the right spot. But most of these blogs were stated because we don't always hit the perfect shot. So then you want the knockdown power of the larger caliber.
But my comment is I am secure enough in my manhood to hunt with a 243. My 92 year old mother-in-law hunts with a 257 Roberts. So we are about equal. ha ha
Okay, we stopped her from hunting four years ago. However, it is loaded and in the gun case should she ever want to use it again. I just wouldn't want to be the revenue man coming onto the property anytime she is out and about with a loaded anything.
P.S. I still have remaining cartridges from the first box I purchased when I bought the .243 three years ago.
I have been hunting for 40 years and rarely do I use more than one bullet a year. I have loads I toss because of the years they have been on the shelf. So when I take exception, I do so because I see something a little different.
As for using an AR-15 or any semi automatic of any caliber for that matter, I am a purest. You wouldn't be allowed on my acreage or my neighbors. Doesn't matter how skilled you are. There should never be the need for that much over kill.
Now for my main concern for writing this piece. I own and have hunted with my 30-06 and 270 for the Columbian Blacktail here in Oregon. The blacktail is on average only slightly larger than the whitetail. But for all practical purposes they are comparable. I found both of these calibers to be far more than what I needed for a 100 to 200 yard shot. And since most of my shots fell between 50 to 100 yards, I went looking. I bought a 243 three years back and have found it to have the ideal power for deer of this size.
I use my 30-30 or 270 when I hunted in Utah as the Mule deer are much larger. I liked the 30-30 over the 270 only for ease of movement in the brush. But for range, the 270 or -06 were better. My father used a 308 Savage.
Now when it comes to elk, the .270 is considered a light load. Especially at 200+ yards. But it will do the job if the shot is right. As will any caliber if you hit the right spot. But most of these blogs were stated because we don't always hit the perfect shot. So then you want the knockdown power of the larger caliber.
But my comment is I am secure enough in my manhood to hunt with a 243. My 92 year old mother-in-law hunts with a 257 Roberts. So we are about equal. ha ha
Okay, we stopped her from hunting four years ago. However, it is loaded and in the gun case should she ever want to use it again. I just wouldn't want to be the revenue man coming onto the property anytime she is out and about with a loaded anything.
P.S. I still have remaining cartridges from the first box I purchased when I bought the .243 three years ago.
fisherman66
New member
Really? 'Round here it's the hunters that trash the place, leave campfires burning after they leave and waste the carcass.
A neck shot is a check mate move. I've helped others trail deer from botched heart/lung shots. I remember on miserable trail with corn, grass and other rumen instead of blood. We never found that deer.
Tell you what; I'll refrain from telling you where to shoot if you'll return the favor.
hillbillyshooter
New member
Never personally heard of intentionally going for the neck shot. Always been taught, by dnr here in west virginia (hunter safety class when i was younger) to go for the heart/lung shot. Never had them go very far as long as you get them in the heart or lungs. My hunting buddies and i usually poke fun at the people that neck shoot them and junk the neck meat and make the whole mess look aweful. You could shoot it in the neck, not hit the spine or any vital blood vessels and cause the deer to live for days before dying.
fisherman66
New member
You can gut shoot a deer with the same results. Meat loss is minimal with the neck shot. Feel free to poke fun. Meanwhile, I'll poke deer in the neck.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
hillbillyshooter, check my post #23. Odds are, 3/4 of the deer I've killed were from neck shots. Tagged bucks, I'm guessing forty-some-odd. Plus some does and then a culling program I did on the old family ranch outside of Austin...
hillbillyshooter
New member
Just saying that i've never heard proponents of the neck shot before, thats all. Yeah, if you gut shoot it it can also live for days. I just consider the heart/lung to be a larger target. Obviously not many intentionally gut shoot deer either. As far as i know, too, there is more meat lost in the neck shot than in a well placed heart/lung. I can understand if you don't want to wait for the animal to quarter before you shoot, but i'm just more comfortable going with the heart/lung. To each there own, i'm not trying to act like my way is better, just my preference. Does i can understand shooting in the neck more, but wouldn't want to ruin the mount on a nice buck by going to far forward. My experiences also come from WV, were the usual shot is approx. 50 yards, almost never 100+ yards, so its a bit easier to make the heart/lung with precision.
fisherman66
New member
I am more apt to make a heart/lung shot early in the day. If the shot is near last light I am more likely to consider the neck shot or just packing myself out of the woods without a prize. There is no tracking involved in a CNS shot. The animal drops dead. I favor the heart/lung shot 3 out of 4 times. I never shoot any shot unless I can call my shot. If I have a steady rest, capable rifle and the deer is giving me a long window when he/she is surveying the landscape I am happy to consider the neck. Meat loss is minimal compared to a shoulder (usually it's the opposite shoulder that's damaged); 7mm hole going in and a golf ball sized exit wound - 3-4 ounces of meat at the most. I've made several H/L shots where a ballistic tip has hit a rib and shattered the bullet. Even a perfectly launced H/L shot has ruptured the stomach. I don't use ballistic tips any more because of that.