Minimum cartridge trend?

[458winshooter]

I just recently bought a Mossberg patriot in 300 win mag because I hope to hunt out west someday.But I would not be too quick to condemn the 6.8 spc,is very close to the 250 savage in ballistics.Elmer Keith ,Townsend Wheelan and others felt that the little savage was plenty good for deer.I have a friend that uses a 223 for deer,a former U.S. marine and a county deputy.He is a very(and I do mean very) accomplished marksman.My personal tastes are for more than enough needed.Overkill ain't a bad thing!If though you can cleanly and ethnically take game with it I have no trouble with it.The $64,000 question is how many can honestly do it.

[Kachok]

While I will defend most small calibers within reason I would prefer to never have to use a 223 for deer hunting. Living in Texas where it is legal I have seen many deer and hogs shot with 223s and in general I am less then impressed. While I would bet that nobody here could tell the difference between a deer shot through the vitals with my 6.5x55 and my 7mm Rem Mag I have never seen that kind of reaction by a deer hit by a 22 caliber, only one ever dropped on the spot and only because the bullet broke it's leg, seen a few deer hit with a 6.8SPC but not enough to form an educated opinion on it's use in hunting, seems solid though, should hit with 1,000 ft/lbs or better to about 250 yards with a 110-120gr .277 caliber bullet so it certainly meets all the basic criteria within normal hunting range so just judging on the ballistics I would call it an adequate cartridge.
The smallest cartridge that I have ever personally deer hunted with is the 243 and I never felt the urge to use anything smaller.

[gunrunner1]

So far, I have shot four deer with the .223 Rem out of my AR15. Two last year and two this year. One was a doe at 10 yards that ran in front of me. She folded up as soon as she was hit. I then shot a nice 8-point buck through the chest at 80 yards. He turned to his right and staggered about 10 yards before falling over dead. I shot a spike buck at 52 yards while he was running. He also immediately folded up when he was hit. I then shot a large doe at 129 yards behind her right shoulder as she was looking back over that shoulder at me. She dropped where she stood. I used Federal 62 grain Fusion factory loads.

I have shot numerous wild hogs with handloaded Sierra 65 grain Game King bullets and never has any issues with them. I've also shot a bunch with the .308 Win. I couldn't tell any difference between the two cartridges.

A lot of people in my neck of the woods also do just fine killing large numbers of deer with the .243 Winchester.

[Gunplummer]

Yeah, I don't see a difference either, except in meat loss. I think I only ever shot one deer with a .243, but a few with a 6mm. I remember at least two deer offering only a broadside shot that went right down. The bullet went through high in their lungs and there was so much pressure it disrupted the spine without hitting it. Some people had a bad experience one time and are just turned off by lighter bullets. Most of the complaining is internet gossip. There were not that many small caliber hunters in the PA deer woods 30-40 years ago, but the amount of wounded deer running around was really high.
One year I was hunting the first week of deer in WV. It was hot that year(70's) and on Thanksgiving day I found a good sized 8 point buck laying dead in a swamp. There was a white spot down near the base of the rack, and it was a small flake chipped out where a bullet went through. Looked to be about a .270 or 7MM went through the base of the rack. I don't doubt that someone unloaded on the deer when it was running away. Think it was the small diameter bullet, or maybe the shooter?

[treg]

Sitting in a stand and waiting for a broadside shot is really what opens up the possibilities of the minimum cartridge challenge.

Heck my Dad, Uncle and Grandpa shot many, many, a deer with .410 slugs and .22LR. It's what they had. Their style (and range) was akin to how most bowhunters hunt today, minus the camo and accessories, lol. When Grandpa got his Dads .30-30, that was a big deal.

Extended range, roaming or pushing still requires the use of a cartridge sufficient for the task.

[Ocraknife]

.223/5.56 has killed untold 10s of thousands of people with FMJ ammo, I figure it'll do fine on a 100-150lb deer with decent hunting ammo.

[lockedcj7]

This has been a great discussion and I appreciate the input from everybody.

My son killed his first deer this morning with a 6.8 SPC II @ 100 yds. The Hornady SST bullet made a small entry wound and an exit hole the size of a quarter. It left a decent blood trail for 30 yds or so, then quit. We found him piled up another 20 yds away and a piece of lung plugging the exit hole from the inside.

One deer is hardly definitive and I'm not impressed enough to call it. I've had deer drop DRT with the 7-08 and I've had them run 100 yards after being hit in the exact same spot with a 30-06. More research is clearly needed

[gunrunner1]

You never know how an animal will react when it is shot. While I would like every animal I shoot to drop dead on the spot, I think that is an unrealistic expectation, regardless of caliber, bullet type, or how well the shot was placed.

[lefteye]

If I have the time, a neck shot. In a hurry, I try to stay a little high with the vitals shot.

The spine in the neck provides a tiny target in a long, thin line, compared to the heart/lungs/liver area which provides a larger target from any direction. I realize some hunters still aim for the neck but I just can't understand why they would do it if they know the three-dimensional size of the heart/lungs/liver.

[Gunplummer]

I was a little too general there. I go for a neck shot if the deer is facing me or standing with it's back towards me. A side shot at the neck is really dicey and the situation would have to be absolutely perfect. Even then, I would hesitate a side neck shot. Country to popular belief, a lot of deer have been shot in the side of the neck and still made a run for it. Nothing wrong with a vitals shot, if you know where they are. With the added winter wool, a lot of people have a tendency to shoot too low. The heart and lungs sit a lot higher on a live, walking deer than a whole lot of people think. Situation is everything. I have head shot deer that were in laurel and from the neck down were screened by too many branches for a clear shot. Sitting with your rifle across a blow down is way different than getting caught in an open space with no tree to lean against, and the brush too high to get on one knee. You have to tailor your hunting to the area and situation. If hunting was a sure thing, I would probably quit.

[Erno86]

I like a bullet caliber that will reach the boiler room of a deer from any angle, as well as having the ability to take down any other critter that inhabits the woods --- That said --- I believe that a 223 sized bullet caliber, is a little bit dicey to use for deer sized game, since good bullet placement is a requirement for such a round.

[Hawg]

My favorite is a 30-06. I don't understand how so many people say it's a punishing round. I can shoot them all day long with a solid steel recoil pad. I also use 7MM Mauser, 8MM Mauser, 30-30 and several varieties of traditional muzzle loaders. I wouldn't give a dead rats behind for anything in 5.56. Yeah I'm old school and proud of it.

[Colorado Redneck]

Hawg--I hear what you're saying. But you evidently can handle recoil with narry a flinch. Not all of us are like that. Heck, after 50 rounds of 22-250 I get to jumping at the trigger break. And the older I grt the worse it affects me.

The question that needs answered is, will 1000 ft. Lbs. of energy with a decent projectile kill deer sized game or not? Does 2000 ft lbs work any better on a poorly placed shot? IMHO there are 3 components to cleanly taking game:
Good bullet
Proper shot placement
Adequate energy

A 6mm medium game bullet in the vitals with at least 1000 ft lbs of energy is plenty for me. I hunt to enjoy the experience of taking an animal cleanly and then eating it. A 30-06 is miserable to shoot, for me. 243 Win is fun to shoot.
As always, YMMV.

[Kachok]

Hawg I don't know many people that think the 30-06 is "punishing" round, I do know quite a few people that say it can make a mess of a deer inside woods hunting range and I have to agree, last deer taken with my 30-06 had a basketball sized exit wound (bullet fragmented) and almost the whole front half of the deer was dog meat. I have since retired the 06 from deer hunting and keep it loaded with TTSX for trophy hog hunting. I would argue that nobody south of Iowa needs that much gun for whitetail. 7mm-08 and 6.5x55 drop them with an authority without having to scrape them off of the trees.

[old roper]

The 243 been around since 1955 so it's not a newcomer to the shooting world and it's same with 30-06.

I sure can't understand why anyone would shoot a rifle that is bother by the recoil when there been options.

We can't use 22 cal for big game in Co but as long as I've been hunting Co since 1977 you can use 6mm with 70gr bullet for deer/antelope and 85gr bullet for elk/moose (must have 1,000lb impact energy 100yds).

I'm legal to use my 243 or 243AI to hunt big game with same as I can use my 30-06.

[603Country]

Like many others say, I'm not a big fan of using the 223 or my 220 Swift for deer hunting. I've killed deer with both, and if I had to do it again, I think I'd favor the 223 - due to heavier bullets with tougher construction. There was a time when I thought the 243 was not enough gun, but now that I've shot a bunch of deer and hogs with a 100 gr bullet in my 260, I've changed my mind on the 243. I shoot the 100 gr bullet at approx 3000 fps in my 260 and that's about the same thing you can do with a 243.

Now, having said the above, the 120 gr bullet in my 260 has been more effective on deer and pigs than the 100 grain. Doesn't kill them any deader, but definitely seems to kill them faster. No way to measure that, but that's what I think based on observation. And the 130 gr bullet in my 270 does the job even a bit better. Again, that's purely based on observation, but it's observation on many deer over many years.

I think I'd do just fine hunting deer with a 243. And I'd do fine with a 223, but more blood trailing would likely be necessary, and I'm not as good at tracking as I was when younger.

[Double Naught Spy]

The question that needs answered is, will 1000 ft. Lbs. of energy with a decent projectile kill deer sized game or not? Does 2000 ft lbs work any better on a poorly placed shot?

I sort of see this at the 800 lb gorilla in the room. Few people like to admit that a more powerful bullet certainly may work better with some poorly placed shots than a less powerful bullet. After all, we do NOT want to promote the notion of not needing to be as accurate with our shots. We DO want to promote the idea that we are only going to take the most accurate shot possible and in doing so, it is obvious that we don't need super powerful cartridges to accomplish the task. As noted above, animals don't get any deader.

However, the reality is that for a variety of reasons, we don't always make perfect shots and that well intended heart shot ends up 3" off the mark for some reason (wind gust, flinch, buck fever, animal started to move after trigger was pulled, etc.). That is just a reality of hunting. Do you want a less powerful cartridge does less tissue damage that might result in the animal suffering a prolonged death or one that might be considered "overkill" for the job that will put the animal down more quickly by penetrating deeper or doing more tissue damage despite the shot being less than great?

So with bigger, more powerful rounds, you do have the benefit of more probable tissue damage which should translate into being able to kill animals with less precise shot, but at the expense of recoil and wastage. With smaller, less powerful rounds, reasonably quick lethality may mean making more precise shots, but with the benefits of less recoil and less wastage.

So there has to be a balance. Right now, the swing is toward smaller and less powerful rounds, in part (and as noted) because bullet designs are now such that we can see similar types of tissue damage from these rounds now that are comparable to more powerful loads of yesteryear.

[Kachok]

We have all had a less then perfect shot, my most notable was my first feral hog, I made the mistake of shooting him like a deer and at 150yards I hit him exactly where I was aiming, right behind the shoulder halfway up, and of course completely missed all of the vitals in the process. Had I made that shot with the 22-250 I am certain we never would have found that hog, but my 6.5x55 blew a 3" hole through him and out the other side, he sprayed blood like a fire hose for about 40 yards where he fell down and died. So having a little extra is certainly a good thing but you don't need a 300 Win mag either. As far as recoil goes I am completely comfortable with everything up to and including a 270 or 308, I can shoot my 30-06 and magnums many times at the range but I have to wear my shoulderpad or it starts to sting after a couple boxes so I don't think I am quite as accurate with them as I am with my 6.5x55 or 7mm-08 both of which are an absolute delight to shoot and the only two centerfire rifles I have ever shot legit one hole groups with.

[ZeroJunk]

I may catch some grief for this, but I don't understand the big deal behind ruining a shoulder on a deer. I hardly find them worth messing with to start with.

[HiBC]

Not everyone has an assortment of rifles,like golf clubs,to select one for any task.
Its entirely reasonable (some would say "normal") for a person to have one centerfire rifle.The "hunting rifle" . For a whole lot of folks,the battery is a .22,a shotgun,and a big game rifle.
IMO,maybe up into the 80's and 90's,I'd venture that was typical.
Rifle selection was somewhat regional,but without hard and fast rules.For many folks who hunted in the woods,"Deer Rifle" meant something with a lever.
Yet there is no denying the DCM Springfields,P-17's,etc,and the "sporter" changed folks idea what a hunting rifle was. And sure,the commercial makers were there,too.
What was true then,is true today.
For any big game hunting that needed doing,at least in North America,if you showed up with a 30-06,you showed up with the "right" gun.
Of course,it was necked up and down. 25-06 to 35 Whelen.And,there were Mausers.The 7x57,gave us the 6mmrem,and 257 R.The 8mm,no slouch.6.5x55,too.
Then there were the 30-06 "equivalent" cartridges,with 30-06 the standard..300 Savage,and 308,and all the derivatives.

All of those pretty much defined the standard,and all will slap down game animals.

I started as a teen in the late 60's with a 7mm Rem Magnum.I walked into the gun store to buy a .270.The one in the store had a feed problem,so I left with the 7mm.
Of course,that became my new standard.At some point,20 some years ago,I decided I wanted less messy kills.I went to the 257 AI.I shot better,it was enough,it killed really well.But I had a larger rifle for elk.

I don't hunt much anymore.Some things,my body is done with.If I build more hunting rifles,I'll likely have my Grandkids in mind.I have mine to give them.
But,maybe.....The idea of a light,elegant 6.5 Grendel on a Howa is appealing.
IMO,that cartridge qualifies well.I'll probably pass my AR's on to them,but I'll lean them toward a bolt gun for hunting.My predudice.

I don't use a .223 on big game. I have other choices.IMO,its marginal,has limitations.That does not mean I criticize anyone for using it.

I have seen irresponsible shooting,with associated wounding/suffering,with big,belted cartridges.It is not the cartridge that does it.

If I were giving advice,my predudiced opinion would suggest .250Savage,.243,260,6.5 Grendel ,as good cartridges to select.I would give them a nod

If you choose to hunt with your AR-15,etc,in .223..if you do your part,you can make it work,but,IMO,its not ideal.I would give it a shrug.

For perspective,a .357 Mag handgun or a .45 cal roundball muzzle loader are regarded as adequate for deer hunting.

With a proper bullet,the .223 AR willcreate more wound channel,and potentially can be fired with more precision.

[globemaster3]

I’ve been hunting on vacation since this thread started and waited to reply until I had a full keyboard instead of my phone.

To the OP I have to ask: is this really a "race to the bottom?" This also sends us into the subjective topic of what constitutes "the bottom?” Where is it? Do we determine that from foot pounds of energy on impact, impact velocity, available bullets, or some subjective determinant that meets some “appropriateness” quotient?

From reading gun rags, folks’ posts here, and my personal experience, most shots are taken inside of 100 yards. Our esteemed brethren out west face longer shots not because of lack of stalking or hunting skills, but due to terrain. Their requirements differ from the guy who grows up hunting thick woods. I was firmly entrenched in my paradigm (dense woods and swamps) until this board and the USAF broadened my perspective. I suspect others (a minority) here hold to their own paradigms on what they experience and believe it to be universal.

Considering the average range of inside 100 yards, and let’s constrain the discussion to deer and hogs, do you need the energy of a traditional deer round? No! Let me be clear, I am not saying the guy who is shooting a 30-06 in an area where the longest shot is 100 yards is wrong. Neither is the guy carrying a .280, 7mmRM, .308, 7mm-08, .257 Roberts, etc. However, if you know your range is limited, what is wrong with downsizing to a cartridge that delivers an acceptable energy level on impact? What is wrong with shooting a cartridge that is more comfortable to shoot, which often leads to increased accuracy?

I shoot my Rem 700BDL .308 fine. I shoot an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC better! I also enjoy it more. The 6.8 SPC in a 120 gr SST offering from Hornady delivers 1,000 foot pounds out to 300 yards. Why would this be a bad cartridge at 100 yards? On top of that, the 6 deer taken in Texas and Missouri with this rifle have shown more than adequate results in terms of terminal performance. The only case of having to track a deer an excessive distance was one I shot last week… I gut shot it, plain and simple. I had an unstable rest and pulled the shot. Had it been my .308, the outcome would have been the same. Extra horsepower would not have made up for my lack of performance.

I have also witnessed people using large-for-game calibers hit deer and not put it on the ground. Learning to hunt in Florida, we had a hunter one season shoot and lose not 1, but 2 deer in the WMA I hunted shooting a .338 Win Mag. We are talking a German Sheppard sized deer. It demonstrates that even lots of extra power cannot make up for a lack of marksmanship.
Also, I’ve repeated this on here before: the animal gets a vote! I witnessed a doe take two .270 130gr Core-Lokts in the chest, hitting both lungs, and go over 100 yards before burying herself into a palmetto thicket. Tell me a .270 with 130gr Core Lokts is too small for a 90 pound deer… This is just one example; there are others out there: heart shots, lung shots, busted shoulders, and damage that seems to fly in the face of common sense on how the animal could have made it so far.

Back to the smaller cartridge discussion: so as long as I understand the limitations of the particular cartridge I am shooting, and my particular hunting conditions do not permit me going beyond those limitations, there is nothing wrong with me downsizing. Beyond that, if conditions change, I have to honor those limitations and pass on shots outside my cartridges capabilities.

If its legal, and the hunter is using it responsibly, why bash the guy/gal?

It's true that the popularity of the AR-15 drove some of the smaller cartridges like 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, etc. There is nothing wrong with that. For a couple generations of service members, they are thoroughly comfortable with the platform. Add to that the election concerns over the last couple years and there are a ton of AR-15s out there. Despite the discussions over their use in home defense scenarios, the reality is most are collecting dust leaving some owners looking for other uses. Getting an extra upper in another caliber that is more useful for hunting is a great way expand its use.

Each of my kids have one in 6.8 SPC for hunting. Why? With the felt-recoil-reducing operating system combined with a 6 position adjustable stock, it is easy for kids to master and it grows with them by extending the stock!

[Sarge]

In 2004 I watched a big doe saunter up from a creekbed, stand in an open field and scratch her ear with a hind hoof. She had stopped perfectly in line with a big cottonwood tree. I watched this from the concealment and solid shooting platform of a blown-down oak, 130 yards away, and when she put her hoof down I calmly centered her heart with a 150 grain Sierra SP from a 30-06, leaving the barrel at a chronographed 2947 fps.

At the shot, she walked about 20 yards and jumped over a 5 strand fence and out of sight. I stood there with my mouth open wondering what the hell went wrong... I had checked the zero with that load only the day before. I found her dead right where she landed after jumping the fence. I hit her exactly where I was holding and you could have dropped a silver dollar through the exit hole. Field dressing revealed an exploded heart. I walked back to the cottonwood tree and pried the bullet free of the bark, expanded right down to within a quarter inch of the base. There was literally nothing more you could ask of a hunting bullet in that situation; yet the doe walked off like nothing happened.

Fast forward ten years... same rifle, powder charge, same bullet weight; with the only substitution being a conventional Hornady bullet of the same weight. A doe about the same size as the first walks out of the fencerow and stops, this time at 156 long steps. Same broadside presentation. I hit her in exactly the same spot, give or take an inch, and she dropped like a piano fell on her.

Lesson learned? I guess they're a hell of a lot tougher if they have itchy ears

[Double Naught Spy]

And it is based on that sort of evidence that people will base their beliefs in bullets, calibers, shot placement, etc., Sarge, no kidding. Obviously, the Hornady bullet was superior.

The bottom line is that you simply cannot count on a round to absolutely drop an animal in place unless your bullet absolutely does significant damage to higher CNS. Otherwise, oxygen deprivation and/or exsanguination have to be allowed to run their course and the animal can cover a goodly amount of distance before that happens - sometimes just over a fence and sometimes more than 100 yards.

[Erno86]

I'm partial to the 30-06 for hunting whitetails, and I would be leery of taking a 243 shot --- on say --- a large Canadian Alberta buck.

A shoulder shot on a whitetail...is my preferred shot placement on a deer with woods crowded with hunters --- Since I figure he'll jump-up and fall straight down like a rock when I hit him with a shoulder shot.

The muzzleloader round ball, is a poor bullet choice for a shoulder shot on a deer, since it'll flatten out like a pie plate and suffer poor penetration as well when hitting large bone.

"The smaller 243 does not have the reliability of punching through bone on say a shoulder shot then you would with a more powerful round."

quote: http://www.deer30outdoors.com/calibe...whitetail-deer

[Guv]

A premium .243 bullet is going to go through a lot of different animals shoulder bones.
Funny how a 25-06 is considered by some to be miles ahead of the lowly 243, no offense to 25-06 shooters.