deer hunting: .223 vs 12 gauge slug

Either one. A .223 with a well placed shot and a good bullet will drop any deer that ever lived out to at least 200 yards. The 12 gauge slug will do the same thing out to about 100 yards or so (emphasis on 'well placed shot' here). Take your pick.
 
(emphasis on 'well placed shot' here).
Click to expand...

And this is why the 223 wins here in my opinion. With the right slugs and barrels they are much better than they used to be, but no where in the same league as any rifle.

Most people don't understand that precision shooting is MORE important in close range brush shooting. Look at Jack O'Connor's photo. That is very typical of my hunting. A high quality scope with a tackdriving, flat shooting rifle allows you to place your bullets through those small openings in the brush. A deer may have a rather large kill zone that is easier to hit out in the open at 400 yards than at 40 yards in brush because only a small portion of it is visible. A rifle with an arched trajectory is less of a problem in the open because you can always aim high and lob it in. In the brush a bullet that does not shoot laser flat will be impossible to thread through those openings.

You gotta also consider a 223 has around 4 ft lbs of recoil vs a 12 slug with around 30 ft lbs of recoil. That and the cost of practice ammo and almost anyone will be a much better shot with the 223.

Either is more than adequate, but precise shot placement is far more likely with the rifle round.
 
I agree.

My distaste for 12ga slugs isn't lack of power, it's excess. They are ridiculous overkill for whitetail deer and serve only to bruise shoulders and teach young hunters to flinch.

The guns are bulky and heavy, good shells are more expensive than good rifle rounds, accuracy is marginal beyond rock throwing distance... Need I go on?

Use the 12ga for what it was made for, it's a SHOTgun. Shoot SHOT out of it. Kill deer with a deer gun.
Click to expand...

Not very often I disagree with Brian but as someone who strictly hunts a shotgun only state I've have to make some comments. IMO, 12ga isn't over kill for deer. As a matter of fact I can be amazed at the lack of meat damage and penetration a standard 12ga foster slug can do. I've seen more meat damage to a deer from .357 handguns than I do from slugs. As for the better slugs costing more money that is true. But it doesn't take a fancy expensive slug to kill a deer. I use good old federal 2 3/4" (3" are no no's and painful) 1 oz slugs, $3.50 for 5, and if I do my part the gun and slugs are capable to 100 yards. While I'd prefer to hunt with a good carbine length rifle my shotguns aren't any heavier than most bolt action rifles. A little thicker yes, but not any longer or heavier.

The answer is not a simple "use this" or use that". If the 1100 is just a good ol' bird gun with a long barrel and a bead sight then I wouldn't use it. Short barrels and rifles sights or scopes is where it's at. But then again you can't just grab the Mini and shove any old load in it and go deer hunting either. You're gonna need a "game" bullet in that gun while most of whats on the shelf are military, target or varmint oriented. All 3 of which are very poor choices.

If you have a smoothbore slug barrel for that shotgun it's the best choice IMO. If legal the .223 will work given you get some good game specific ammo to shoot in it and pick you're shots.
 
I only hunted a couple of years with fancy slugs, killing many deer before that with $5/15 Winchesters.

As to meat damage, so far as I can tell, if you shoot meat, you damage it, if you don't you don't. From handguns, rifles, archery equipment and shotguns, I see no appreciable difference in "blood shot" meat if you shoot the meat.

Shotguns certainly have penetration in spades. I've seen a regular 1oz slug hit a full grown deer in the left ham and end up just in side the right front shoulder. That's a solid 2 1/2-3 feet of penetration. Which is about 1 foot and a half more than you need.

As to the weight of the guns, you've either got some heavy freaking rifles or some very light (and horrendously recoiling) shotguns. I've hunted with or used a number of different brands over the years, Savage, Ithaca, Browning, multiple Remington pumps and Autos and probably some I don't remember, most of them, with a sling and scope, weigh very near 10 pounds. I don't think I've had a rifle that weighs over 7.5.

I'm not telling anyone not to use a shotgun. If that's what you like, go for it, but I'd take just about any rifle between 223 to 30-06 before I'd take a 12ga.
 
I vote with Farmerboy. Thick woods means heavy slugs can bust thru more than the 223 round. Open pasture or grassland between wood make the longer reach of the 223 the choice. I often use a Saiga 12 with slugs here in Indiana, Although a Ruger 44 mag carbine is a good compromise for our Whitetail.
 
"Brush busting" slugs are a myth.

No projectile can hit things and remain on target.

If the target is literally INCHES past the obstacle, maybe. If it's measured in feet, forget it.

I recall an Outdoor Life article from some years ago, wish I still had it, wherein they tested the "brush busting" capabilities of various guns. They had a target that was roughly deer vital zone sized and placed it various distances past the brush. At 18 inches, there was a very low chance of hitting the vital zone area, though I don't remember the exact number.

Anyway, brush busting is a myth and I would guess its responsible for more wounded animals that being undergunned ever has.
 
I'd have to go against your brush busting comment. I used a 30-30 for years in thick woods. If I seen a deer behind some thick brush and the deer was moving I'd wait but if deer was holed up or seen me and you didn't have a shot. You just took shot into thick youpam and all and I once shot a 5 inch youpam and nailed it perfectly then went another 10 yards and killed deer deader than dead! Alot of statistics are for people to make them believe theyre smarter than everyone else sometimes. Go by what really happens instead of some statistic that you read about!
 
Of the three, with which is there the most familiarity? With which can desired hits most easily be made?

From a killing-deer standpoint, any of the three will work. To me, the issue is which one is most likely to give a kill-hit. Plenty of good slugs; plenty of good bullets in .223 which will work well on deer.
 
Perceptions of what a Deer Hunter ought to look like or what kind of gun he ought to be carrying have changed a lot. 30+ years ago I did some hunting with an SKS and my friends threw a fit, said I was some kind of Rambo. That gun never failed me and I took at least 7 deer with it. 20 years ago I took my HK 91 hunting and didn't get so many stares, I guess the scope and bi-pod made it look more a hit'm way out there gun. I just bought an AR. Likely I'll take my .38-55 lever action hunting this year but the AR might go with me one day. The AR is a reliable, accurate, light rifle. It will take Deer with the right bullet and with a hit to the vital area. Times are changing, or maybe have already changed.
 
Agree that all will work well at the 70-75 yd range the OP is talking about.

Also the fact that we are discussing 'deer hunting' accuracy versus busting golf balls at the OP's hunting distance, I'd think the shotgun would work as well in the wooded setting.

If considering more tissue damage done by the larger slug equaling faster blood lose versus the smaller .223, wouldn't the larger slug be better? And knowing shot placement is paramount with anything we use and knowing we are all capable of pulling a shot or mis-judging distance etc. wouldn't the larger,heavier slug be more forgiving?
Example: the shotgun slug hitting bone in the shoulder which results in a kill versus the lighter .223 hitting the same bone and not having the impact or penetration to create a kill?

Again, we're talking deer hunting accuracy here and at 75yds. with a .223, we may be able to bust golf balls but with a shotgun we should be able to bust grapefruits. Which is deer hunting accuracy.
 
"[Brush busting" slugs are a myth]"

That's a Load if I ever head one :rolleyes: Slugs bust through gawberries & palmettos bushes & HIT there mark ; )
Y/D
 
A 223 with a proper deer bullet won't have any trouble penetrating a deer leg/hip/shoulder bones.

Blood loss kills, lack of oxygen incapacitates. The deer will be on the ground in 5-15 seconds if you make a double lung shot. If you don't, blood loss will likely take several minutes to kill it. Even 60 seconds at 20-30mph is a LOOONG blood trail.

No, the slug is not "more forgiving" except that it has approximately 1/3 of an inch wider path. In other words, if you make a bad shot and miss the vitals by 1/3 of an inch, the slug woud graze the vitals where the 223 would miss. In other words, you're adding 1/3 of an inch of error around a 9 inch kill zone.

Misjudging distance at 75 yards? If you think it's 25 or 150, it's like an inch and a 1/2 difference impact. You have a 7,8,9 inch kill zone.

You can't compensate for bad shooting by using a bigger gun. You have to make a good shot. A bad shot with a 223 doesn't become a good shot with a 12ga. People need to get that idea out of their heads.

The 12ga is likely to contribute to bad shooting. Recoil is bad enough that most people will sight in (maybe!) and never shoot it again until a deer is standing there. Most people flinch like hell shooting shotguns. Of course, nobody is ever "that guy" but I can't believe how many guys I've seen jump out of their skin when the gun goes "click" instead of BOOM!

I used a 12ga on deer for many years. I did fine. I only wounded two. It will kill deer, yes it will. That doesn't mean it's first or second or third choice, if there's a choice. It's not ideal. Deer slugs are a compromise by design. Why compromise on purpose? Almost any properly loaded rifle is better.

I've had my say, no minds are changing, the conversations been had 1000 times before and will be again.
 
"Why compromise on purpose? Almost any properly loaded rifle is better."
If that "logic" were extended, no one would use black powder, or muzzle loaders, or handguns,or bows, or spears for hunting. Your points are well taken, but everything is a compromise, and bow hunters compromise on purpose. I have great respect for bow hunters and especially for hog hunters who use spears. That is one big compromise. Since the O/P asked for opinions your recommendation and opinions make sense, but the "compromise" comment makes no sense to me. Some people like a challenge and some people love shotguns. Big slow bullets/slugs make sense to me.
 
Make sure the .223 is legal in your state.
Click to expand...

Not much to worry about. Last time I counted it was legal in 37 or 38 states. Most of the places where it is not legal are shotgun only. If rifles are legal in your state chances are good the 223 is legal.

Most of the places where it is not legal, and larger rifles are, also have game much larger than deer. Wyoming is a good example. You can also shoot elk, and moose and some very large bear there. While a properly loaded 223 is more than adequte for deer, it is not a moose round.

It still seem odd to me that it is legal to shoot a 1500 lb moose with a 243, but a 200 lb deer is illegal there with a 223.

"[Brush busting" slugs are a myth]"

That's a Load if I ever head one Slugs bust through gawberries & palmettos bushes & HIT there mark ; )
Click to expand...

You must still believe in Santa Clause, that myth was busted 40-50 years ago. The best way to shoot through brush is with a highly accurate gun with good optics so you can avoid hitting it. At these ranges either will kill a deer. The 223 greatly improves the odds of hitting the vitals.
 
Thanks for all of the input. Im going to use what ive been leaning towards all along, the Mini 14. I believe, as many of the posters do that shot placement is the most important thing. For me personally its not the AR, its the post 580 Mini 14. If you have not tried the post 580 model I dont want to hear a bunch of whining. There is NO problem with the accuracy of this rifle I assure you.
 
BTW, its not the AR platform that I have accuracy problems with, its the open sights on my particular AR. Besides, as I said before, I would feel like a complete dumb ass hunting with it.
 
Another aspect, and maybe more important in this case, is which one do you feel more comfortable with. If you are in tune to the weapon that you have, your performance with it will be alot better. Doesn't matter what caliber it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top