7.62 x 39 vs. 223

.223 is fine for prairie dogs - some states prohibit hunting "big" game with it. For large mid-western deer (e.g. Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri) a larger caliber is better. Center-fire in Iowa is limited to southern tier of counties.
 
very true, on that point, however given the topic of hunting for economic necessity, if a person already has a 223, and he is being told to go out and buy one of those walmart specials, in actuality, you can buy a heckuva lot of chicken, pork, and beef, for that. then after you factor in gas, ammo, and such, you'd have to kill several deer, before you're saving money again.

case in point, not that this was my personal situation last year but,

I was hunting with a 9mm, I drove 2.5 miles from my house, walked 15 minutes, shot my deer, dressed it, drove the truck right up to it, threw it in, took it home and 5.5 miles of gas(in that truck we'll say about $1.25 in gas, $.50 ammo, and $12.50 for the tag. I ended up with about 40 pounds of usable meat for about $14.25, or 36 cents a pound(let's see your supermarket match that price). now if I was desperate and that was the only gun I had, I would have done very well that day, but if I had listened to the interweb, and gone out and bought a better suited $400 dollar rifle, I would have spent 414.25 or $10.36 a pound, not hard to beat that price. true, you could say it's an investment that could be used year after year, but you'd have to kill probably 5 deer to equal out. in that time, the money spent on the rifle, could have been invested in clearing debts and after the 5 years, the person would likely be better off financially for not buying it.

just my reasoning, your results may vary.
 
Almost anyone who will be found hunting with the 7.62 will be using an sks rifle.
Click to expand...

THbbbbpt!!!!:D:cool:





now taking another fine bullet selection for the 7.62x39mm, the 150gr hornady interlock, pushed to a theoretical maximum of 2200FPS(again, assuming best powder and 24 inch barrel)
Click to expand...

Hmmm, how about a 123 grain Hornady soft point, pushed to a tad over 2300 FPS, and that coming from an 18" barrel? Just poking holes - I've never used this rifle to harvest deer, but now that I have a weekend day off again and a hunting buddy, maybe I'll give it a "shot".

I am most certainly NOT the worlds greatest shot.


200 yards, iron sights, front rested.

Standing, iron sights.

Compared to most internet shooters, I am the worlds worst shot, but I don't mind letting the world know that. The rifle is far better than I am.
 
I was using heavy bullet weights specified by model12win and the best BCs I could find in order to show the absolute max that they could be safely pushed. 123s can be pushed faster but they also carry less energy and weight retention than the heavies.
 
The real issue with the .223 is the people who use whatever factory ammo is cheapest. That's usually with a varmint bullet when the assorted stores are trying to get rid of 'summer' stock. Use the right bullet in a .223 and it's a different story.
The issue with the 7.62 x 39 is more about the rifles than anything else.
Ontario is one of the 'Any centre fire' jurisdictions. We also have calibre restrictions in some municipalities(some for just small game). As daft as it is, some of 'em say nothing greater than .270 or .275 calibre by the cartridge name. So a .270 Win is ok, but a .276 Pedersen, if you could get it, is not.
Oh an no more than 3 rounds in a shotgun for anything, but a shotgun with a rifled barrel is not a rifle for the shotguns only deer seasons. We pay our civil servants way too much money.
 
You are correct - the x39 is materially-preferable to a .223 of any sort, for anything bigger than a coyote/beaver, terminally-speaking wise. But both are adequate with proper bullet selection matched to proper bullet placement matched to appropriate range, IMO.
 
That's a fun looking gun armedman! I imagine it saves money on ammo too (you can't use it all up as fast as the sks - I used to have an sks till I ran out of ammo which didn't take long...I debated getting more but all I ever used that gun for was plonking and the .22 is still much cheaper and safer, so I sold it)
 
which

We will see more of this as the AR continues to grow in popularity and use on all fronts. My own experience with both calibers is out of bolt rifles though.

My stance it that the .223 is a tad light for deer...particularly if no attention is paid to the type of ammo used. The caliber is at its best on deer with the heavier, controlled expansion/bonded slugs. Those cost the most. What will Bubba use........you tell me?

Bamaboy took his first two whitetails with a bolt .223 and bonded ammo. He was well prepared and closely coached, under ideal conditions. Both deer got very dead, were well hit/double lunged. Both went about 50-75 yds. Range was 75 and 35 yds respectively. We got an exit on one, not the other. The non exit instance yielded zero blood trail. We recovered both. But we moved to an x39 rifle, then a .243, pretty quickly.

The .223's flatter trajectory makes hits easier past 150, but I believe the energy and penetration is just not there with the smaller caliber. An interesting test would be ballistic gel at each calibers respective 150 yd or so velocity.

One of my favorite deer rigs for long walks in, in thick cover, is a dandy little x39 bolt. I figure 30-30 power, in a tidy bolt rifle with excellent trigger and good glass, that likely weighs less than a lever gun.

Nobody questions that the old .30-30 was a good deer cartridge. The x39 is close at the old levergun calibers heels, if not its near equal with respective barrel lengths. If you asked which.....30-30 or .223, how would the answers return?
 
Re: Post No. 21

Iowa's January rifle season for antlerless deer in the southern tier of counties has been eliminated.
 
I'd use a 7.62x39, but there's other options. Either one will work. With a good shot with deer doesn't matter what caliber it is. Some might argue that it's inhumane to use small calibers, why? Yes they can run a good distance but unless you're literally using a cannon they can run a few hundred yards shot in the heart and lungs, or head. I've seen it several times. Around here it's quite popular to hunt with .22lr at night (illegal several ways) but many get several deer doing this. I don't recommend it but it's doable.
After all, with help, David killed Goliath with a slingshot. A deer can be killed with a .223.
 
I noticed a couple posts about "The only gun you have" type situations. You older guys can remember when this was common. That is where the surplus guns really came in. That was a big pitch for reloading: use your deer rifle for ground hogs and small game just by reloading. It is hard for the younger generations to grasp how it was years back. Many a guy had only one rifle, and usually it was passed down. Heck, I tell kidds that the TV used to go off the air at around 11:00 PM and they look at me as if I am from another planet.
 
Gunplummer, when I was a kid in the 60's and 70's the most popular cheap surplus rifles were 7x57 or 8mm Mausers, or old 30.06 Enfields and all were very suitable deer cartridges. I don't remember the SKS's popping up until the 80's which nobody really considered a deer gun until 150gr expanding tip ammo became available later on down the road after the handloaders figured out they could duplicate 30-30 150gr loads.
 
Don't know where you are going with that, but I would say the most popular surplus deer guns in my area were the .303 British, 30-40 Krag, and the 03'. The 7.62x39 and 7.62x54 were almost unheard of because of the import restrictions at the time.
 
I also think it's interesting that we are still in the grips of a great recession ourselves which at it's peak was actually more crippling than the great depression ever was. money is tight for everyone just as it was during the depression. we say it was ok for them to do it out of desperation in the 20s-50s, but we don't have that excuse now because of foodstamps and credit cards, and better bullet options?
Click to expand...
They were doing it from "desperation"
People today are doing it for fun, while filming it on their "smartphones" and posting the pictures on "social media" with their high speed wi-fi internet.
 
The Great Depression was prior to welfare and the "war on poverty". If you had no job, you didn't eat, so you worked or became a criminal if you had no other way to feed your family. Hunting would feed your family and give pelts that could be sold or traded, I would have to assume, looking back from this time.
Nowadays the thug life can live fat and easy on multiple taxpayer funded programs, leaving them only needing to thug out for drugs and fun. Free phones, medical care, food, drugs, (welfare required free medical marijuana in Berkeley, California), etc., all funded by taxpayers, programs that never existed in the Great Depression.
 
Any deer I see in Michigan, I would have no problem shooting with a .223/5.56. I know how well I shoot my AR-15. If I fill my tag with my Marlin .35, I might take my 20" AR15 and try to collect.
 
I guess trying to kill a deer with a .223 would be as silly as trying to kill an elephant with a 7mm Mauser? ;)
 
They were doing it from "desperation"
People today are doing it for fun, while filming it on their "smartphones" and posting the pictures on "social media" with their high speed wi-fi internet.
Click to expand...
so you're saying that there is not one person in the US that fits the description of a person that would hunt out of desperation? who does not have a smart phone? who does not belong to social media websites? I actually have had conversations with several individuals this week who fit at least one of those descriptions. we like to categorize people based on our observations of a few key individuals but there is more than way to skin a cat. wifi hotspots are plentiful, a member of this forum may not necessarily be checking from their home, they may be checking their email from the library, I functioned that way for several months when I first moved out this way, using the library internet to check email and such.

it is actually cheaper for me to own a smart phone than it is a dumbphone, that's how our cellular carriers are moving, to get rid of legacy plans and services they make it more expensive to continue to use them. other people are issued a smartphone for work.

The Great Depression was prior to welfare and the "war on poverty".
Click to expand...
welfare was founded during the great depression.

Nowadays the thug life can live fat and easy on multiple taxpayer funded programs, leaving them only needing to thug out for drugs and fun
Click to expand...
what on earth are you talking about? I feel like this is slipping away from gun related conversation and towards the realm of politics and social commentary. I am talking about people legally hunting out of financial necessity, as in, you live pay check to paycheck and you can either spend $100 on store meat for the family for a month, or $20 to hunt and get the same amount of meat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top