.223 for deer how far would you shoot a deer with one ?

[WNYBuckHunter]

6 minutes ago, Pygmy said:

Damn thing looks like something Buck Rogers would use to hunt Lunar Elk....

At least the silly thing has some WOOD  on it, albeit laminate...

How about Storm Trooper style?

[Pygmy]

AAAUUUUUUGH  !!!

I give up....Take it away......I want my MOMMY !!!

[Marion]

I shot one in the antler once. Does that count?...lol.. about an inch above his skull and he died.

Probably from laughter

You Can't Beat My Meat!!!

[chas0218]

My plan was a 90gr. bullet loaded to max pressure. A 90gr. bullet going 2500 fps will have good penetration and great B.C. and would take a deer with no problem in the vitals as a 60gr. would do the same.

[G-Man]

On 3/10/2018 at 6:55 AM, Storm914 said:

Wow I was expecting someone  to say maybe 150 200 yards max 

Not that I am a expert in ballistics or hunt with .223 

But from reading the books they recommend 1000 foot pounds of energy to ethically kill a deer. 

Which is probably 10 times more then what is potentially lethal.

Have you actully shot and recovered a deer at that range ? Or are we speaking hypothetically.

Though this was appropriate here

.

What is thought to be the minimum foot-pounds of energy required to dispatch anything from whitetail deer to moose humanely and ethically?"

The most common figure thrown around when hunters discuss the energy required to ethically kill a whitetail is 1,000 ft.-lb. By this logic, at 1,000 ft.-lb. and above, you're being ethical; your shot becomes questionable when the energy drops below this level. The problem here is that energy isn't what kills an animal, making this line of reasoning nearly irrelevant.

What kills animals is the terminal ballistics of a projectile. This is the tissue disruption and damage to the vital circulatory, neurological, or respiratory system of the animal. As an example, it is more ethical to hit a whitetail with a 225-grain Barnes Expander bullet, which has a mere 600 ft.-lb. of energy at 75 yards, than with a 500-grain solid from a .470 Nitro Express, which has 4,000 ft.-lb. of energy at that range. The superior terminal ballistics of the Barnes bullet will dispatch the whitetail more swiftly than the solid bullet will.

So don't get caught up with trying to achieve a particular level of impact energy with your hunting rounds. Instead, do some research into the terminal ballistics of the round you want to shoot and see whether the impact velocity at the ranges you plan to shoot at will give you the bullet performance you need.

[Hunter007]

11 minutes ago, G-Man said:

Though this was appropriate here

.

What is thought to be the minimum foot-pounds of energy required to dispatch anything from whitetail deer to moose humanely and ethically?"

The most common figure thrown around when hunters discuss the energy required to ethically kill a whitetail is 1,000 ft.-lb. By this logic, at 1,000 ft.-lb. and above, you're being ethical; your shot becomes questionable when the energy drops below this level. The problem here is that energy isn't what kills an animal, making this line of reasoning nearly irrelevant.

What kills animals is the terminal ballistics of a projectile. This is the tissue disruption and damage to the vital circulatory, neurological, or respiratory system of the animal. As an example, it is more ethical to hit a whitetail with a 225-grain Barnes Expander bullet, which has a mere 600 ft.-lb. of energy at 75 yards, than with a 500-grain solid from a .470 Nitro Express, which has 4,000 ft.-lb. of energy at that range. The superior terminal ballistics of the Barnes bullet will dispatch the whitetail more swiftly than the solid bullet will.

So don't get caught up with trying to achieve a particular level of impact energy with your hunting rounds. Instead, do some research into the terminal ballistics of the round you want to shoot and see whether the impact velocity at the ranges you plan to shoot at will give you the bullet performance you need.

I think we need a scientist to answer these questions lol 

I think live animal test is the best way to know for sure . 

Or you could go look at some ballistic gel tests on YouTube to see the tissue damage of a particular round the problem there is usally there done at close range not hunting range . That is going to make a difference. 

I started using  what I use from listening to the old timers older  hunters with more experiece then me .  Father grandfather .

I think that is how a lot of guys find themselfs using what they use .  

[chas0218]

Just to be clear are we talking about using an AR or Bolt? You can fit heavier grain bullets in a Bolt action than an AR.

[G-Man]

Idk if I have to.worry about twist, bullet.type and.weight , terminal velocities, cross wind, temperatures. Snow or no snow.. id rather just use a bigger caliber and eliminate some of the specfics.. 

[moog5050]

1 hour ago, chas0218 said:

Just to be clear are we talking about using an AR or Bolt? You can fit heavier grain bullets in a Bolt action than an AR.

What do you mean by this?  They will all fit as far as I know.  Bolt or AR, faster twist rate helps with heavier bullets.  Everything I read suggests that the 64g Winchesters are good deer bullets, but I too am of the school that I might as well hunt with more knockdown power than less.  With the same POI, a bigger round can't hurt but can help.

[chas0218]

10 minutes ago, moog5050 said:

What do you mean by this?  They will all fit as far as I know.  Bolt or AR, faster twist rate helps with heavier bullets.  Everything I read suggests that the 64g Winchesters are good deer bullets, but I too am of the school that I might as well hunt with more knockdown power than less.  With the same POI, a bigger round can't hurt but can help.

In an AR anything heavier than 75gr. has too long of a C.O.L. (Cartridge Overall Length) to fit in the magazine. This number must be 2.26" or shorter to fit in the mag. I mean if you wanted to single shot the AR you could but talking functionality wise the bullets that are heavier than that 75gr. won't work. If you try to seat the heavier grain bullets deeper into the case you will be changing the amount of free space in the cartridge and increasing the pressures possibly to an unsafe level resulting in an over pressure round.

Edited March 12, 2018 by chas0218

[chas0218]

54 minutes ago, G-Man said:

Idk if I have to.worry about twist, bullet.type and.weight , terminal velocities, cross wind, temperatures. Snow or no snow.. id rather just use a bigger caliber and eliminate some of the specfics.. 

Twist rate acts the same for all guns it's not caliber specific, faster twist rates will result in better stabilization of the heavier bullets but won't stabilize lighter bullets.

Edited March 12, 2018 by chas0218

[moog5050]

24 minutes ago, chas0218 said:

In an AR anything heavier than 75gr. has too long of a C.O.L. (Cartridge Overall Length) to fit in the magazine. This number must be 2.26" or shorter to fit in the mag. I mean if you wanted to single shot the AR you could but talking functionality wise the bullets that are heavier than that 75gr. won't work. If you try to seat the heavier grain bullets deeper into the case you will be changing the amount of free space in the cartridge and increasing the pressures possibly to an unsafe level resulting in an over pressure round.

Interesting, had no idea but 75g is one long 223.  Thanks for the info. 

[moog5050]

22 minutes ago, chas0218 said:

Twist rate acts the same for all guns it's not caliber specific, faster twist rates will result in better stabilization of the heavier bullets but won't stabilize lighter bullets.

I actually just read an article on this yesterday that suggested that faster twist doesn't hurt stabilization of lighter bullets, but definitely helps with heavier.  Much like my arrows, I prefer lobbing in bombs anyways.  lol

[Robhuntandfish]

16 minutes ago, moog5050 said:

I actually just read an article on this yesterday that suggested that faster twist doesn't hurt stabilization of lighter bullets, but definitely helps with heavier.  Much like my arrows, I prefer lobbing in bombs anyways.  lol

im with you - go .50 Beowulf!! 

[moog5050]

39 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

im with you - go .50 Beowulf!! 

Actually with the 458 you can get 600g bullets.  I think the .50 is limited to under 450g - you know, small bullets.  lol

[WNYBuckHunter]

1 hour ago, moog5050 said:

I actually just read an article on this yesterday that suggested that faster twist doesn't hurt stabilization of lighter bullets, but definitely helps with heavier.  Much like my arrows, I prefer lobbing in bombs anyways.  lol

LOL, who wrote that? I remember helping a buddy work up loads for different AR uppers he had. One has a 1:7 twist, we ran some 55 grain through it once and at 100 yards, the bullets literally fragmented before they hit the target. Youd get all of these small pin holes all over, and the others would sometimes be like a side profile of the bullet. I think the best group of tumbling 55grain he got out of that barrel was for all of the shots to be on the 12"x12" target. Heavier bullets would be perfect round holes in nice groups though.

The same 55s he worked up worked pretty well in my bolt gun with a 1:12 twist.

[Hunter007]

52 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

im with you - go .50 Beowulf!! 

My new  deer gun 2 bore 

Do you think it is to small for deer

Edited March 12, 2018 by Storm914

[WNYBuckHunter]

2 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

My new  deer gun 2 bore 

Do you think it is to small for deer

Way too small

[moog5050]

41 minutes ago, WNYBuckHunter said:

LOL, who wrote that? I remember helping a buddy work up loads for different AR uppers he had. One has a 1:7 twist, we ran some 55 grain through it once and at 100 yards, the bullets literally fragmented before they hit the target. Youd get all of these small pin holes all over, and the others would sometimes be like a side profile of the bullet. I think the best group of tumbling 55grain he got out of that barrel was for all of the shots to be on the 12"x12" target. Heavier bullets would be perfect round holes in nice groups though.

The same 55s he worked up worked pretty well in my bolt gun with a 1:12 twist.

Don't remember John but it was an internet search related to twist rates.  I know the majority agree with you.  This author claimed it was hogwash.  I guess your experience  (at least with 223) confirms its not.  I generally try to stick with the rate that is the "do it all" rate for the particular caliber if I can but tend to use heavier bullets anyways.   I was researching the 308 barrel twist rates as my AR is 1/10 vs many that are 1/11.25.  The comment may have been more applicable to larger calibers. 

[Doc]

18 hours ago, ncountry said:

Even with years of practice I havnt mastered the proper lead on a deer. 70 % of the running deer I have shot I shot in the guts.

It is no wonder that you have problems figuring out the lead on a running deer. Consider that no deer runs in a straight line, and there is no such thing as a standard speed for all deer. So not only must you compensate for the fore & aft lead, but the deer is also moving in a significant up and down motion as well. I suspect that most successful running shots are more the result of luck than skill

[Buckmaster7600]

It is no wonder that you have problems figuring out the lead on a running deer. Consider that no deer runs in a straight line, and there is no such thing as a standard speed for all deer. So not only must you compensate for the fore & aft lead, but the deer is also moving in a significant up and down motion as well. I suspect that most successful running shots are more the result of luck than skill

The second someone thinks about lead they’ve already missed their target.

With a gun I’ve shot probably 20% of my deer moving with a bunch of those running and I have never lead one in my life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pygmy]

36 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

The second someone thinks about lead they’ve already missed their target.

With a gun I’ve shot probably 20% of my deer moving with a bunch of those running and I have never lead one in my life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have shot at LOTS of running deer....When I began deer hunting I was a fairly good wing shot, so I tended to lead running deer the same as I would lead a flying bird...I missed a BUNCH of them...

Then I began to aim where I wanted to hit and my  hit percentage went  UP....I think I was shooting IN FRONT of those deer...

I no longer hunt under conditions where  I need to take running shots, but if I did  I would  hold the crosshairs where I wanted the bullet to hit..

[Culvercreek hunt club]

57 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

The second someone thinks about lead they’ve already missed their target.

With a gun I’ve shot probably 20% of my deer moving with a bunch of those running and I have never lead one in my life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless you are talking about really short distances I can't agree with that. in round numbers. a bullet traveling a 3200 fps and a deer at 50 yards broadside at 20 mph will cover about a foot and a half in the time it takes for the bullet to get there. (Take Doc's valid point of the up and down out of it for a minute). So if the cross hairs are on the heart and you squeeze off a perfect shot, that is a gut shot deer. I don't see any way around it. Bring it to 25 yards and it's just under 9" (and that is a constant bullet velocity)

Edited March 12, 2018 by Culvercreek hunt club

[wolc123]

I prefer to kill stationary deer, but with four hungry mouths to feed and limited time to hunt and land access, I don't always have the luxury of waiting for them.   Two years ago was great, with (4) offering me standing "chip-shots".   We ate real good and even had leftovers for friends, extended family, and coworkers. Last year was a lot tougher, and the only two I shot at were moving, one at a fast walk and the other at a medium run.  A third was standing in range, but never got off posted property, so no shot there.

I was comfortable shooting at the two moving deer last fall because I had fired thousands of shots at moving targets over the summer.   Both deer were broadside.  Each took the hit thru the lungs, struck within a couple inches of my point of aim.   A key to making those shots was lots at practice at tougher shots - ie smaller targets.  Thanks to that practice, I was 90 % sure I could make those shots.  I would not have taken them had I been any less sure than that.

All that practice was cheap and certainly helped fill the freezer last year.  I put an adult sized stock on my daughter's Daisy Red Ryder bb-gun and paid about $5 for 5000 bb's.   I used those to cut beer cans in half, as they swung from a tree branch, on a few feet of bailing wire, attached to the clip.  As the can gets cut through, and the lower part of the can starts to separate, the remaining strip of aluminum supporting it gets narrower.   The wind and bb impacts keep the can moving at various speeds.   This is fast shooting, with no running back and setting up cans after nocking them down.   An even greater challenge is dropping the top half of the can by shooting off the clip.   After enough of that, killing running deer is much like taking candy from a baby or shooting ducks in a barrel.  

Back on topic, I would also put the .223 near the bottom as a deer round.   If you want small and light something like a Ruger American in .243 might fill the bill but is still on the low end of what I would be comfortable with.              

Edited March 12, 2018 by wolc123

[Lawdwaz]

16 minutes ago, wolc123 said:

I prefer to kill stationary deer, but with four hungry mouths to feed and limited time to hunt and land access, I don't always have the luxury of waiting for them.   Two years ago was great, with (4) offering me standing "chip-shots".   We ate real good and even had leftovers for friends, extended family, and coworkers. Last year was a lot tougher, and the only two I shot at were moving, one at a fast walk and the other at a medium run.  A third was standing in range, but never got off posted property, so no shot there.

I was comfortable shooting at the two moving deer last fall because I had fired thousands of shots at moving targets over the summer.   Both deer were broadside.  Each took the hit thru the lungs, struck within a couple inches of my point of aim.   A key to making those shots was lots at practice at tougher shots - ie smaller targets.  Thanks to that practice, I was 90 % sure I could make those shots.  I would not have taken them had I been any less sure than that.

All that practice was cheap and certainly helped fill the freezer last year.  I put an adult sized stock on my daughter's Daisy Red Ryder bb-gun and paid about $5 for 5000 bb's.   I used those to cut beer cans in half, as they swung from a tree branch, on a few feet of bailing wire, attached to the clip.  As the can gets cut through, and the lower part of the can starts to separate, the remaining strip of aluminum supporting it gets narrower.   The wind and bb impacts keep the can moving at various speeds.   This is fast shooting, with no running back and setting up cans after nocking them down.   An even greater challenge is dropping the top half of the can by shooting off the clip.   After enough of that, killing running deer is much like taking candy from a baby or shooting ducks in a barrel.  

Back on topic, I would also put the .223 near the bottom as a deer round.   If you want small and light something like a Ruger American in .243 might fill the bill but is still on the low end of what I would be comfortable with.              

You f orgot to mention the PGC Deer Weight Tape....................