22-250 IS good for deer hunting!

[LateNightFlight]

If I were kicking deer off a cliff I might give some credit to that statement. You are clearly missing the message of this post.

I illustrated the scalability of force and effect. The higher the fall, the more deleterious the effect. The bigger the bullet, the more deleterious the effect. Apples to apples. That's not to say some people don't die from a 3 foot fall, but the folks who don't grasp this concept are the ones who are doomed to fail at suicide by diving off a foot stool.

If the discussion is only about what is "adequate," I would have to go the next step and argue that you don't need a blustering cannon like the 22-250. They're dangerous because they shoot too far; they retain too much energy. They damage the unprotected ears of the hunter. The rounds are too expensive. Plus, I can use my .22 lr for rabbits and squirrels. It’s the ultimate in versatility. And there’s no getting around the fact that thousands of deer have been killed (poached) with nothing more than a .22 long rifle. Thousands. In the right hands, at the right distance, with the right round, a 22 lr is perfectly adequate.

In the end, the take-away from the discussion shouldn't be about what is adequate, but what is optimal. A 22 lr isn't optimal for deer. Neither is a 22-250.

[44 AMP]

But what works, works.

WDM Bell killed elephants with 6.5 & 7mm rifles. Does that make them good elephant rifles? Only in his hands, and under those conditions he used them.

The .22-250 can be used for deer, where legal, but for most people it would not be a good choice. The .458 Win Mag can be used for deer (and as far as I know, legal everywhere), but for most people it would not be a good choice.

I reload for, and shoot rifles in a couple dozen different calibers, from .22 Hornet to .458 Win Mag, and have owned and used a .22-250 in one rifle or another since before Remington made it a factory round back in the 1970s. I am quite familiar with it, and what it can, and cannot easily do. And I stand by my opinion. Since you are legally restricted to .22s, the .22-250 is one of the best calibers you could use. But if you are not, a larger caliber is a better choice.

[Art Eatman]

Back in the 1930s when gunsmith Jerry Gebby of Nebraska copyrighted "Varminter" for the necked-down 250-3000, about all that were available for bullets were the 40- to 50-grain "blowup" varmint bullets. Remington did a minor amount of tweaking, decades later, and just called it the ".22-250".

The last dozen or so years have seen a bunch of R&D in bullet technology, and not just in the itty-bitty sizes. However, .22 jacketed bullets are now available which don't come all unglued the instant they hit something. They won't necessarily penetrate through a lot of meat, or blow through any heavy bone, but for careful shot placement on deer they're quite adequate.

The .22-250 is like any of the lesser cartridges in that it has more limitations than, say, the 6mm to 30-caliber range. Possibly the 6.5mm to 30-caliber range. (Not worth arguing over, and I've killed 20+ bucks with a .243.)

I don't shoot at a deer's neck. I shoot at one particular place on that neck. I don't shoot somewhere in the heart/lung area; I pick a particular place for the shot. And I darned sure don't shoot "somewhere in the brown".

Common sense and careful shot placement are requisite for any cartridge. Just moreso with the small bullets.

[treefarmernc]

I illustrated the scalability of force and effect. The higher the fall, the more deleterious the effect. The bigger the bullet, the more deleterious the effect. Apples to apples. That's not to say some people don't die from a 3 foot fall, but the folks who don't grasp this concept are the ones who are doomed to fail at suicide by diving off a foot stool.

I have in no way indicated that a 22-250 is as powerful as or more so than any other caliber. I do believe that I am comparing apples to apples only apples of different sizes. I am only showing that to a certain point one can serve the same purpose as the other. A white tail deer could be satisfied with the small apple but for an elk it will take the larger to fulfill its need. Turn the tables and give the white tail the large apple and the elk small you will still fulfill the whitetails hunger but not the elk. This related to this debate by the fact that the 22-250(small apple) will kill a whitetail as affectively as the 30-06(Large apple) but after this point the larger calibers take over. I don’t debate that within the list of effective deer cartridges the 22-250 is at the bottom just that it is and should be on the list.

WDM Bell killed elephants with 6.5 & 7mm rifles. Does that make them good elephant rifles? Only in his hands, and under those conditions he used them.

This is where I guess that I am differing from the rest of you the most. I do not believe the 22-250 to require extra ordinary effort on behalf of its user to hunt deer. It takes no more expertise to use this caliber for whitetail deer than it does any other caliber for whitetail deer. I am not indicating in any way that the 22-250 is more powerful just that is handled in much the same way. This caliber has been used by the youngest to the oldest, the least experienced to the most experienced. The learning curve is the same as any other caliber for those just starting out. The same aim points on the deer are used by 22-250s as those when using larger calibers.

Since you are legally restricted to .22s, the .22-250 is one of the best calibers you could use. But if you are not, a larger caliber is a better choice.

We are no longer restricted to .22,that was changed some time around 2000. My aim is not to declare the 22-250 to be the better choice just for it to be considered a good choice.

[Nnobby45]

When a 22-250 bullet strikes the shoulder bone, the force of the blow (explosion) is driven into the chest cavity, causing sever damage to internal organs.

If the "force of the blow" does't include bullet and bone frags, then what does this force consist of, since the temporary cavity doesn't precede the bullet.

[ChiefMuzz]

Odd, it's pretty standard in the southeast. I have several friends who swear by it. For some of the smaller deer in the southeast, a .270 or .30-06 can result in a lot of bloodshot meat.

I think you may have just misread or misunderstood what I said. The .243 was a very good deer rifle for me, but that doesn't make it a good deer rifle. It the hands of somewhere unfamiliar with it's abilities and limitations it becomes ineffective. Like I said I've shot many deer with that gun and it performed well, but that's just for me. My experiences have no bearing on someone else's ability to use the rifle. Is that a little easier to understand?

[ZeroJunk]

Most of us can go kill deer with just about anything that will make a hole. The naysayers are making the case that it is a matter of percentages.The exact percentage will never be known so I will throw one out for discussion.
If 100 different shots are made in hunting conditions from a group of average hunters frrom different angles and some wandering away from the best placement let's say 95% of the results between a 22/250 and a 270 Win will be for all practical purposes the same.
But, there will be occassions when the extra energy of the 270 will rupture an artery or penetrate a little further and you will get a deer that you would have lost with a 22 caliber.
The same could be said for moving up to a 300 magnum of some sort vs the 270. But, you get to a point of diminishing returns because they kick so bad a lot of people can't shoot them well.
The meat damage is not much of an issue. If you shoot the deer broadside in the lungs you are not going to have any meat damage unless you were planning on eating the heart or the liver. Sometimes you have to sacrifice one of the shoulders and about any cartridge will ruin it if that's where the shot hits.If you hit the loins or the hams you should have aimed better.

So, my logic is that in the long run you will get more deer if you use a larger cartridge and bullet as long as you can shoot it well even if the difference is very small. It could be the buck of your lifetime.

[treefarmernc]

If the "force of the blow" does't include bullet and bone frags, then what does this force consist of, since the temporary cavity doesn't precede the bullet.

Why does it not contain the bullet and bone fragments? The bullet does not vaporize into thin air. The force of the blow is simply the energy being released by the motion of the bullet. A large part of that energy is still directed in the same direction the bullet is traveling The 22-250 is starting it energy dump earlier upon entering the deer but it still is more than enough to cause the damage it needs to enter the chest cavity. This energy transfer is what makes soft points, hollow points, etc. better than FMJs for hunting. The FMJ is still carrying much energy with it throughout its travel through the mass and possibly with it as it exits. Expanding bullets such as the soft points dumps all or most of the energy into the mass. It’s the energy release that causes the most damage.

[ZeroJunk]

http://www.firearmexpertwitness.com/...s/calcnrg.html

It’s the energy release that causes the most damage.

Exactly.

[Art Eatman]

Water--and blood--are incompressible liquids. A bullet hits and drives liquid ahead of it. And, of course, bone chips and meat, depending on the location of the hit. But it's much like driving a nail except that this nail is not rigid. The destructive pressure has a side-component. The summation of all this happiness is what's pictured in the photos of bullets fired into ballistic gel.

And by the way: Bloodshot meat only means a bad hit, since if you don't shoot 'em in the eating meat, there's no bloodshot meat to worry about.

What state allows what diameter bullet has nothing to do with the thread.

[riggins_83]

There's a good reason it's not legal in so many states for deer hunting... it's not really consistently sufficient for a quick drop. Rather use the 30-06 and have less chance of the deer feeling anything.

[Tom Matiska]

Any round that can turn a few pounds of neck into purple jelly or penetrate past the ribs far enough to make some heart/lung soup will do the trick... as said before just don't do the quartering meat shot.

Countless thousands of hunters here in PA fall in love with their chuck rifles and use them with great success on bambi. It works not just because the round is good enough, but because hunters who just spent the summer blasting little critters in the head at hundreds of yards are more than good enough.

[UniversalFrost]

ok, i read the OP's post and a few below that. didn't feel like reading the other 3 pages.

Here is my view point.

I am originally from up north (south dakota). they have minimum calibers and cartridges allowed for deer hunting. This is for a good reason. You try and take a big 225+ whitetail or even larger muley with a .22 caliber weapon and the only shots that you have available are head and neck shots and these are really iffy and un-ethical in my book and most of the G&F departments in the midwest.

me. the smallest caliber I would use on a deer up north is 6mm (my chambering would be .243).

Now, down here in AZ where I currently reside. I would not hesitate to drag out my .22-250 on the small coues deer ( smallest subspecies of whitetail and average under 100lbs alive).

smaller southern deer are the only deer I would shoot (in the vitals and not a neck or head shot) with a 22-250. I want to shoot a caliber and cartridge that has ample energy when it impacts the animal that it will power through bone and be able to deliver a clean pass through. Also want it to be wide enough to create a nice big wound channel (i know that this comes down to more of bullet design than bullet diameter, but for me bigger is better).

Now you will see me in the northern deer woods with a 30/06 or .243, but down south i would drag my 22-250 or .243 out.

[LanceOregon]

It is not "good" for deer hunting. It is adequate, with the right bullet. It is NOT legal for deer hunting in about 80% of the US! Think about that for a moment.

Flatbush Harry:

That is no where even remotely close to being an accurate or true statement. In all 4 states that I have hunted in ( California, Nevada, Oregon, and Idaho ), even the .223 Remington is perfectly legal to use for Deer hunting.

I personally would never hunt deer with anything less than my .243 Win But the fact is that even the .223 Remington can take Deer cleanly, as long as an appropriate bullet is used and the range is reasonable.

--

[Daryl]

That is no where even remotely close to being an accurate or true statement. In all 4 states that I have hunted in ( California, Nevada, Oregon, and Idaho ), even the .223 Remington is perfectly legal to use for Deer hunting.

It's also legal in Arizona, and I'm pretty sure in New Mexico, Utah, and Texas (I know of people in each of these states that have taken deer in season with .22 centerfires).

.22 centerfires aren't legal in Colorado though.

Daryl

[butta9999]

The .22-250 might be fine for the little whitetail deer, as it would be for our smaller species like hog deer, small fallow, and chital..

I would not attempt using a .22-250 on a 250kg sambar stag though, or a mature sambar doe.. Not enough gun in my book.

[LanceOregon]

Here in Western Oregon, where we have the generally smaller Blacktail Deer species, the .243 Winchester is extremely popular with hunters. And I know of a couple of guys who have taken Blacktail with their AR-15's using the .223 Remington at short range.

I've not heard of anyone in our area hunting deer with the .22-250, though.


-

[Daryl]

To illustrate one point a bit further...

I know of a couple of ol' boys that insist that anything bigger than a 22-250 for elk is just overkill. Not only that, but they use single shot "hand-rifles", to boot.

They take neck shots only, and they're very successful on deer, elk, and antelope. They're also about the biggest bunch of rough necks you'd ever find in a hunting camp.

But they got in a problem one year, because the elk were wise to 'em. Those 22-250 handguns weren't worth a darn at 500-700 yards, but they had to try.

I know one ol' boy that hunted with them using a .243, mostly because they gave him too hard of a time if he used a 7mm mag. The fella with the .243 got an elk that year, at pretty long range, and considered himself lucky...even though he's a crack shot with a rifle.

The point is, you have to honor the firearm and cartridge's limitations. A lot of folks don't know the limitations of the 22-250, and even those who do can try to push it too far (pun intended).

So, when someone comes on board and tries to tell everyone that the 22-250 bullets do the same thing as larger bullets, no matter the shot, then I'm going to disagree with them on that point.

The 22-250 is capable of taking deer, but as others have said, it's not considered a good deer rifle. If it works for you, then by all means use it. Recommending it to others as a "good deer rifle" is a half-truth though. It's an adequate cartidge in the right hands, but likely won't do as well in the hands of someone new to hunting; one who's succeptable to buck fever, and who might not place that bullet quite right.

For them, I'd recommend a 30-30, .243, or .308 as a "good deer cartridge", and those would be my minimum recommendations.

Daryl

[treefarmernc]

The point is, you have to honor the firearm and cartridge's limitations.

Always, I could not agree more!

[treefarmernc]

So, when someone comes on board and tries to tell everyone that the 22-250 bullets do the same thing as larger bullets, no matter the shot, then I'm going to disagree with them on that point.

I have expressed throughout this thread what I believe the limitations are for the 22-250. I have mentioned the weight range of the deer that I believe it can handle, the yardage, the correct ammo, and the need to be accurate. If you disagree with those numbers, that is OK. Most people have their own ideas of what the limits is of any thing they shoot. What I have posted is what I believe is a rounded view of what I have experienced and from the experiences of those around me.

[emcon5]

That is no where even remotely close to being an accurate or true statement. In all 4 states that I have hunted in ( California, Nevada, Oregon, and Idaho ), even the .223 Remington is perfectly legal to use for Deer hunting.

This is correct, at least as far as California is concerned. The only provision is "rifles using centerfire cartridges with softnose or expanding projectiles" (353. Methods Authorized for Taking Big Game)

In other words, 17 Remington is a legal deer cartridge.

[bhannah]

I love my 22-250 it is by far my favorite rifle, but…
Lets look at all the things that CAN kill a deer..

Rocks
Spear
Knife
Stick
Car/Truck
Ninjas

I saw a video of an air rifle killing a hog… bet it would kill a deer just as well.
I killed a deer with a .22 short after I hit it with my truck.

All of these things can kill a deer the reason we don’t use them is there is a better tool for the job.

[Nnobby45]

Why does it not contain the bullet and bone fragments? The bullet does not vaporize into thin air.

You're talking in circles. If the lightweight bullet could penetrate bone and continue to the vitals, we wouldn't be discussing the bullet disintegrating on the shoulder with failure to PENETRATE. Maybe your definition of the shoulder is really the "shoulder area kill zone area", but my definition of the shoulder is the shoulder, complete with heavy bones, through which small caliber high velocity bullets don't usually pass. Without that penetration of real projectiles, there isn't any "energy" transmitted to the vitals.

When a bullet disintegrate on heavy bone, it doesn't disappear into thin air, it just tears up the shoulder meat without further penetration.

I've heard on other forums that .223 DPX is a bullet that might be capable of accomplishing such a feat---defeating bone and penetrating. I'd assume, handloaded into the .22-250, a DPX, or copper Barnes bullet of some sort might work out. Don't think it'll come apart.

[Dearhunter61]

treefarmernc,

I agree with you that the 22-250 will kill deer. Heck it will kill an elk. But so will a 22lr. I have killed a couple of deer with my 22-250 and it did the job well but I do not think it is the best cartridge for it. I do believe you made some good points but just as a .375 will take a deer it does not make it a great deer cartridge. I have hunted deer for years with my 7mag and just this past year dropped down to a 6.5x55 which I personally believe is a GREAT round for deer hunting. I believe you can be a little on the light side and the 22-250 is in my opinion. You point out that a bad shot is a bad shot. Agreed...but I do believe that larger cartridges will do more damage to the deer than smaller on average and that hopefully would allow the hunter a better chance to recover the wounded/killed animal.

Bottom line is that shot placement is critical no matter what you shoot and if a 22-250 allows you the chance to make a better shot and therefore a more humane kill then go for it.

[ken22250]

"even the .223 Remington can take Deer cleanly"
the last deer i shot with a .222 rem was last september in the crop-damage red tag season, and it dropped where it stood, shot from arround 50yards with a 50 gr soft point in the head, not ideal caliber, but i eat the meat, and it does no damage in the head.
ken