.223 or 22-250 for deer

[Old Stony]

Probably just a personal peramater, but I like to have a tool that is designed and capable of the job to be done. I use a truck with a V8 instead of a 6 Cyl. to tow things, and some will probably be able to cite instances where they have used the 6 Cyl. and gotten a job done.
Most people have some personal rules they follow through their lives and some are maybe debatable. For instance I have a personal rule where I will not purchase anything advertised as "badass"...as I consider it a low class and offensive term to be used in a public venue.
Other people probably would have a different caliber they would consider a minimum for large game.....to each his own. They have to live with it...

[pete2]

.22,even a 22-250, at 250-300 yards is a poor choice. Gonna result in a lot of wounded deer. A .243 ain't got much punch left at 300. Better off with a 25-06 or .270 for long shots.
My 2 cents.

[1tfl]

We've been hunting hogs at my farm for 20+ years using various 223/5.56 rifles with good success. We originally used Winchester 64gr PSP (I think they used to call it something else back then) in Bushmaster AR rifles with 1-9" twist barrel. They were effective out to about 150 yards or so and would put down good size hogs effectively with good hit. Now we use mostly Barnes 55gr TTSX, Speer Gold Dot 55gr or 64gr, Federal Fusion 62gr MSR and couple others. They are all capable of putting down good size hogs with one well placed shot so I'm sure they would be effective on deer size game too.

[jimbob86]

To answer the OP:

Two years ago my then 11 year old daughter dropped a button buck with my M4gery and a 53gr TSX FB, pushed to near 3200 f/sec from 132 yards. Perfect behind the shoulder shot and the deer went 30 yards and piled up...... bullet exited the far side making about a 1" exit wound.....

Last fall she hit and we failed to recover 3 larger deer with the same bullet and rig...... two of which ran off on 3 legs...... looking for a better answer this fall.

[jimbob86]

A .243 ain't got much punch left at 300.

A 100gr SBT pushed to 3K at the muzzle will still be packing 1 1/2 times the energy that the average 44 Magnum load has at the muzzle..... at 300 yards. You hit a deer in the boiler room with that and they WILL die..... they are animals, not armored vehicles.

[zipspyder]

Serious question. Where are you people taking 300 yard shots at deer with these dinky calibers? Save those calibers and ranges for varmits or yotes. i guess I'm old school and prefer kids start with a .243 or better and keep the range within reason.

[jimbob86]

Where are you people taking 300 yard shots at deer with these dinky calibers?

South Central Nebraska. My first deer rifle was a .243WIN. 300 yards is well within it's effective range.

I shoot a .270WIN now.

[603Country]

Speaking only for myself, I would not dream of shooting a deer at 300 yds, using my 223 or 220 Swift. But....I sure will shoot at a hog or coyote at up to 400. My experience with that shows that it's very hard to put down even a medium sized hog at 300 or 400 with those calibers. It would help if they'd just stand still for 10 seconds, but that seldom happens. The coyotes generally drop on the spot, but the hogs stumble, sometimes hit the ground, get back up and keep on trucking. Used to be that on our place I saw mostly coyotes, so I hunted with the 220. But then the pigs started showing up in numbers, and here I was with my peashooter. I'd have gone to a 243 but didn't have one, so I started taking the 260. With that, I dropped hogs and coyotes out to 400.

I was up in my blind once with the 220, and here was a whopper hog, going away from me. I put a 55 grainier on the back of his head and got not the pink mist, but the dirt mist. And he shook his head and kept going.

[zipspyder]

South Central Nebraska. My first deer rifle was a .243WIN. 300 yards is well within it's effective range.

I shoot a .270WIN now.

That is why I stated to start with a 243.

[jimbob86]

Serious question. Where are you people taking 300 yard shots at deer with these dinky calibers? Save those calibers and ranges for varmits or yotes. i guess I'm old school and prefer kids start with a .243 or better and keep the range within reason.

I interpreted your post to suggest that 300 yards was an unreasonable distance.... was I mistaken?

[zipspyder]

I interpreted your post to suggest that 300 yards was an unreasonable distance.... was I mistaken?

With women and kids starting out taking a 300 yard shot I say no you are not mistaken. For 300 yard shots at deer I would use a larger caliber and definitely do not recommend a 243 unless that is all you have and are a skilled hunter.

[jimbob86]

With women and kids starting out taking a 300 yard shot I say no you are not mistaken. For 300 yard shots at deer I would use a larger caliber and definitely do not recommend a 243 unless that is all you have and are a skilled hunter.

Women and kids? As if they are less capable of learning to hoot than boys and men? Really, nobody should start out taking 300 yard shots..... but once thy have the fundamentals down and understand trajectory, 300 from a good solid field position isn't that hard, boy or girl, man or woman, with a .243.

[zipspyder]

Women and kids? As if they are less capable of learning to hoot than boys and men? Really, nobody should start out taking 300 yard shots..... but once thy have the fundamentals down and understand trajectory, 300 from a good solid field position isn't that hard, boy or girl, man or woman, with a .243.

You teach them your way and I'll teach them mine with proper expectations. Not a lot of chances for deer where I live where they are broadside and everyone has a perfect rest for 300 yard shots. We teach them to shoot first at modest ranges and 300 yards is a long shot. You don't get any bonus points for showing off how small a caliber you can use at long ranges. Not impressed.

[Dranrab]

Here's the thing with the 22 centerfires. Shooters are much more likely to be able to shoot them accurately than larger centerfires. If you were to gather a bunch of hunting guides together and ask them if too much gun or too little gun has caused them more headaches, overwhelmingly the response would be too much gun. I have seen more animals wounded as a result of botched shots with big centerfires than with smaller bores. It's as unethical to shoot badly with a 30-06 as it is with a 223, and based on my experience it happens more often. It's all about shot placement and bullet construction.

[jimbob86]

You teach them your way and I'll teach them mine with proper expectations.

Ah, the tyranny of low expectations.....

Not a lot of chances for deer where I live where they are broadside and everyone has a perfect rest for 300 yard shots.

Perfect does not exist this side of Heaven, but in the real world, a pretty solid position can be had just about just about anywhere, and quickly, with a set of shooting sticks, a m1907 style sling or both ..... and they take very little time to learn to use..... and when a deer is more than a hundred yards away, it is much less likely to spook, and you have plenty of time to get into that good position and wait until it's broadside and still..... we often hunt out of ground blinds, especially when the newest shooters are along, so there is always a solid rest available, and almost always time to use to use it. Of course we teach them to shoot at modest ranges first ..... but 300 yards is NOT long range under these conditions... with efficient bullets in flat shooting guns like the .243 or .270, trajectory or wind is barely a factor at 300 yards...... and certainly much less of a factor than recoil induced flinching is when new shooters are involved.....

You don't get any bonus points for showing off how small a caliber you can use at long ranges. Not impressed.

We don't hunt for points of any sort, but to fill our freezers for the year and test our skills ..... learn new ones...... I could care less if you are impressed..... so why do I post this? To dispel ignorant notions like "300 yards is a long shot" and "243Win is a tiny caliber and inadequate for deer on "long shots"" ..... but we have drifted from the OP ..... which was asking about .223 and .22-250 .... I think both will work alright at short range with the proper bullets and good placement. Nothing will work very well with poor placement.

[zipspyder]

@jimbob86 - They are not low expectations, they are reasonable expectations. There is no way I'm going to let a first time shooter have their first shot be at 300 yards on a deer. And unless it's a wall hanger there is really no need for one either as chances are you can close that distance. Come on man, it's just common sense, why are you arguing that point?

Here's the thing with the 22 centerfires. Shooters are much more likely to be able to shoot them accurately than larger centerfires. If you were to gather a bunch of hunting guides together and ask them if too much gun or too little gun has caused them more headaches, overwhelmingly the response would be too much gun. I have seen more animals wounded as a result of botched shots with big centerfires than with smaller bores. It's as unethical to shoot badly with a 30-06 as it is with a 223, and based on my experience it happens more often. It's all about shot placement and bullet construction.

I absolutely agree with that point. The issue is you don't need to go from 11 back down to 1 with the smallest 22 caliber's if recoil is an issue. A 243 caliber or higher would be a much better choice if recoil is a problem. heck slap a muzzle brake on that 30-06 and you could shoot all day! I don't understand this obsession with smallest caliber's possible now days????

[jimbob86]

@jimbob86 - They are not low expectations, they are reasonable expectations. There is no way I'm going to let a first time shooter have their first shot be at 300 yards on a deer. And unless it's a wall hanger there is really no need for one either as chances are you can close that distance. Come on man, it's just common sense, why are you arguing that point?

If you'd read the thread, you'd know that's not what I'm suggesting, nor what I've done.

And why would it matter if there was a wallhanger or a button buck involved?

As for closing the distance, there's no way to get closer to a deer in the middle of a cut alfalfa/ beanfield measuring 600 yards x 800 yards. You are not going to sneak up on them in daylight ..... with the kids, we do our best to sneak into the blinds before first light.... and with the rut on and temps low, deer generally wander by every couple of hours during the day..... it's fairly open country, and if one never learns to make good hits to the middle of those fields, there's going to be a lot of winters eating ghetto round steak instead of venison..... the ideal is to teach them to "shoot up to their rifle" from field positons..... but this is the internet, and everyone tends to take the most extreme view what the other guy is doing ..... you go ahead and put a muzzle brake on a 30-06 and hand it to a little kid if that works for you ..... best of luck with that.

[zipspyder]

If you'd read the thread, you'd know that's not what I'm suggesting, nor what I've done.

I read the thread and that is what you were inferring or why in the hell would you be arguing with me? I also take it you've never used a muzzle break as well? You know you can add them to other calibers as well right? I have one on a 7mm-08 that kicks less than a .223 with 120 grain bullets.

the ideal is to teach them to "shoot up to their rifle" from field positons..... but this is the internet, and everyone tends to take the most extreme view what the other guy is doing

Pot , kettle, black...Best of luck with those kid's first deer at 300 yard shots. I'm sure every one has hit the mark in your next post. I think you want to argue for the sake of arguing now. lol

[jimbob86]

I read the thread

Bullsqueeze. See post 54..... or maybe you readit and failed to comprehend.....

ot , kettle, black...Best of luck with those kid's first deer at 300 yard shots. I'm sure every one has hit the mark in your next post. I think you want to argue for the sake of arguing now. lol

You keep telling me what I'm doing .... just to be arguing. None of my kids shot their first deer at 300, or have even attempted a 300 yard shot until they could consistently get hits on paper and milk jugs at that distance.... the youngest two are not cleared past 200 yet..... but we are working on that.

As for the muzzle brake onto an existing full size, medium bore rifle: what's that cost? Add to that that i does nothing to help the youngster carry and hold the adult sized gun ..... so add another pile of cash to shorten the length of pull and lighten the gun (if possible) to make handling easier for them..... and then when you lighten it, perceived recoil increases.... as it does when the gun gets louder for the shooter and everyone around them because of the increased muzzle blast with the brake ..... would it not be wiser to get them a rifle that fits them in the first place, in a chambering that will kill deer without beating the hell out of them? Then you'd have two rifles with some value, instead of one that's been butchered ...... But of course, you seem to be married to the idea that a .243 won't kill a deer at the extreme range of 300 yards, and is marginal at best for shorter shots ....whatever.

[zipspyder]

idea that a .243 won't kill a deer at the extreme range of 300 yards

Show me my post where I stated that the 243 is not good enough for a 300 yard shot? I said there are much better calibers for deer at long ranges. So getting a better rifle and putting a muzzle brake on it is not as economical as getting another bigger rifle later? Got it. BTW my 7mm-08 was $300 with a muzzle break that was $85. Cost is not an issue.

Who are these people all around you hunting that can't stand a rifle shot? It only effects you if standing 15 feet away to the side of the barrel at the range. Stop taking Internet misinformation. Now you are bringing costs and loudness into this equation LOL????

Please go be miserable to somewhere else.

[jimbob86]

Show me my post where I stated that the 243 is not good enough for a 300 yard shot?

For 300 yard shots at deer I would use a larger caliber and definitely do not recommend a 243 unless that is all you have and are a skilled hunter.

That was you in post 61. You infer it's pretty substandard.

I said there are much better calibers for deer at long ranges.

This is where I think we disagree most fundamentally: I fail to see how 300 yards is "long range" with a .243- fed BTSP ammo, zeroed at 235, MPBR is 275yards, and impact is only 4 1/2" below POA at 300. That's still holding in the hair, with room to spare. Ballistics for a 30-06 are worse, without resorting to very heavy (hard kicking) or very light, very fast (again with the increased recoil, and they'd be pretty explosive at shorter ranges) bullets....

Your answer to the problem is not the same as mine ..... and I explained my reasoning before.... won't bother again....

Who are these people all around you hunting that can't stand a rifle shot?

Little kids, and latemiddle aged to old men with significant hearing loss .... every one of us.....a couple of us that had their ears ringing for days 2 years ago when a kid touched off her 7-08 with the muzzle not completely outside the ground blind.....


... and I know all about the joys of muzzle brakes, in person, next to me on the range. I despise them.

Cheers.

[Dranrab]

If every deer my grandson has squeezed the trigger of his 223 on has died, most of them in their tracks, how much deader would a .243 have killed them?

[Art Eatman]

Thread drift + getting personal = Yuck.

Enuf.