The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 10, 2017, 08:50 PM   #26
Dranrab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2016
Location: NOLA
Posts: 203
If you aren't handloading, Fusion is the way to go. It's reasonably priced, more than accurate enough for deer hunting, penetrates all the way through on our deer around here, and WRECKS the vitals.
Dranrab is offline  
Old May 11, 2017, 10:06 AM   #27
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 1,868
I think before buying some of these loads mentioned, the 60gr plus, I'd find out for sure the rate of twist in your rifle. I don't know if the 55gr Partition come's in the 223 or not or the 55gr tsx. I think Nosler has a 55gr Partition bullet. If not I might try the 60gr partition but wouldn't get my hope's up to high. Actully I think the guy' shooting the heavier bullet's say their rifle is a 1-8 twist. Start getting into heavy for caliber bullet's way down there and twist needs to be known. Just looked in my Nosler manual, the 55gr bullet's are Ballistic tip's, I'd try the 60gr. May and may not shoot in your rifle. Of course if you got 1.5" group's from it, it would work.
Don Fischer is offline  
Old May 11, 2017, 03:43 PM   #28
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 3,995
Like someone mentioned, one bullet that is sure to work (and stabilize) is that Sierra 63 gr SMP. It's shorter than the 65 gr Sierra GK, the 60 gr Partition, and the 64 gr Nosler Bonded Solid Base. I'm not a big fan of using the 223 for deer, but it most certainly will do the job, if you place the bullet properly. Years ago I was invited on a hog hunt in South Texas. A buddy also was invited, but had no rifle. I loaned him the only other rifle I had, which was a short barreled 220 Swift. I loaded up some rounds with the 63 gr Sierra. I was standing next to him when he shot a decent sized hog that was running full tilt. That hog tumbled and flopped for 15 yards, and was as dead as a hog can get. And he shot a couple more later that weekend. The bullet performed well.
603Country is offline  
Old May 11, 2017, 10:51 PM   #29
MosinNOUGAT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2017
Location: Southwest US
Posts: 148
It would work, but I would go with maybe .308 (or 7.62x54r ).

But if you feel comfortable with it, it'll serve it's purpose.
__________________
O LA VITTORIA, O TUTTI ACCOPPATI!
MosinNOUGAT is offline  
Old May 12, 2017, 09:12 PM   #30
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylorce1
First thing we need to discuss is your rifle, do you know the year of manufacture? The reason I ask is before 2007 the H&R Handi Rifles used a mixture of 1:12 and 1:9 twists, and this will make a big difference on the bullets you can use. After 2007 they only used 1:9 twists which will handle most bullets that are suitable for hunting.
Very important information here. If you have a 1:12 twist barrel you're going to be disappointed with the accuracy performance of bullets on the heavy end of the spectrum.

You may get good results from copper-jacketed lead bullets in the mid 60 grain range, but anything heavier than that is likely to be inaccurate in a 1:12 twist. And if the bullet is a monometal bullet (copper or gilding metal) then it will be longer for a given weight and even something in the 60 grain range may not stabilize.

Get your cleaning rod and put a tightly fitting patch on it and push it most of the way through the bore. Then put a small piece of tape on the cleaning rod to provide an index and also so you can clearly see the rod rotating as you pull it back out of the bore.

Slowly pull the cleaning rod out of the bore. When the tape shows that the rod has completed one full rotation then take a measurement to see how far the rod moved while it completed a full rotation. If it moves 9" then your twist is 1:9 and you should be able to use conventional bullets up into mid 70 grain range. If it's 1:12, then you need to stick to conventional bullets in the low 60 grain range.

Whatever you pick, you definitely need to take it to the range and shoot it at the ranges you would expect to take a shot while hunting.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old May 13, 2017, 06:51 AM   #31
Big Tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2009
Location: Northeast, Maryland
Posts: 441
I bought this rifle around 2012 or 2013 and I had it special ordered from the Factory at my local gun shop. I'm fairly certain it's a 1:9 twist. I'm not sure if the H&R website can give me any info on it being that the company went under.
__________________
ANTI-GUN is ANTI-AMERICAN!
Big Tom is offline  
Old May 13, 2017, 08:38 AM   #32
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Tom
I bought this rifle around 2012 or 2013 and I had it special ordered from the Factory at my local gun shop. I'm fairly certain it's a 1:9 twist. I'm not sure if the H&R website can give me any info on it being that the company went under.
There are other places to get the info you need besides the H&R web page. Graybeard Outdoors and Marlin Owners forum both have a H&R forum with a lot of info on them. I mainly use Graybeard as I'm registered there and can post questions. Graybeard has a very extensive FAQ page on Handi Rifles that'll save you a lot of internet search time.

Even if you find out your rifle was manufactured after 2007, I'd still check the twist rate. You never know if they accidentally used a barrel that was supposed to go on a .22-250. Stranger things have happened, than a barrel being mixed up at the factory.

The nice thing about H&R rifles is you can change the barrels to a larger cartridge, it isn't as simple as TC Contender/Encore but it isn't hard. There are many places you can find a used barrel like one of the forums, eBay, and gunbroker if you watch you can find one to fit in your budget. .243 barrels were pretty common and can be had fairly reasonable. A gunsmith can fit the barrel to your action since H&R no longer offers this service, or if you are handy you can do it yourself pretty easily.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old May 13, 2017, 08:38 PM   #33
Big Tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2009
Location: Northeast, Maryland
Posts: 441
I was under the impression that each barrel had to be specially fitted for your rifle at the H&R factory.
__________________
ANTI-GUN is ANTI-AMERICAN!
Big Tom is offline  
Old May 13, 2017, 10:56 PM   #34
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,993
Using the stability calculator at JBM Ballistics the 60 gr nosler partition at 3000 fps with 1:12 twist looks ok. If you can get a load for yoyr rifle using that bullet it should worh even with a 12 twist.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old May 14, 2017, 12:27 AM   #35
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Tom
I was under the impression that each barrel had to be specially fitted for your rifle at the H&R factory.
That was to appease the lawyers. I've swapped barrels no problems before, and I've had some that needed some fitting. Like I said read and study the FAQ page it'll explain alot.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old May 14, 2017, 10:19 PM   #36
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,649
Lots of details being discussed, but let me simplify it. Many states allow handgun hunting of whitetail. No one ever argues about the 600 ftlbs of 357 (and that's a very warm load) being insufficient. 223 more than doubles that. Use a bullet suitable for the application and you'll be fine. Go for it.
5whiskey is offline  
Old May 15, 2017, 11:10 AM   #37
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,583
The kinetic energy of a bullet does not kill. What does kill is damage to the cardiovascular or central nervous system. Choosing the right bullet goes in the right direction but caliber does play a role too.
You can kill a whitetail with a 22 caliber gun but you have to place the correct bullet properly. If you can keep your shots in a 2" circle at 200 yards and you know the anatomy of a white tail then it should not be a problem to kill one cleanly and quickly.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 15, 2017, 01:56 PM   #38
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,649
Quote:
The kinetic energy of a bullet does not kill.
Ok, I guess in the same sense that mass of a bullet doesn't kill, nor does velocity of a bullet.

Quote:
Choosing the right bullet goes in the right direction but caliber does play a role too.
K/E is the closest measurement we have to adequately compare the potential lethality of one caliber to another. It is, in fact, an industry standard. We all know that deer hunting with a .22 short is ill advised. It's K/E reflects that. We all know that .308 is plenty adequate, and likewise it's K/E reflects that.

Quote:
You can kill a whitetail with a 22 caliber gun but you have to place the correct bullet properly.
Likewise I've tracked a deer that a friend gutshot with a 300 mag. We tracked it for nearly 1/4 mile and it crossed a river, lost forever. So the same holds true with a high power 30 caliber round as well.

Quote:
If you can keep your shots in a 2" circle at 200 yards
While more accuracy certainly helps alleviate the potential for errors, I would argue that a 6" circle at 200 yards is plenty adequate. Not many hunters are an honest minute of angle marksman, especially from field positions. Nor do they need to be.
5whiskey is offline  
Old May 15, 2017, 02:30 PM   #39
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,583
Kinetic energy is totally dependent on speed. Destruction of tissue is based on the size of the wound channel. Lethality is based on the correct tissue being damaged.
If velocity (or kinetic Energy) was all that was necessary we would all be hunting with 220 Swifts and 40 grain bullets and the guys who hunted buffalo and grizzly bear with 45 and 50 caliber round balls would never have killed any.

The reason kinetic energy was popularized was the advent of high velocity small caliber cartridges and the publicity surrounding them. Dr. Martin Fackler proved long ago that only the permanent wound channel mattered in the lethality of any hit. He also proved that larger caliber bullets made larger permanent wound cavities. Light bullets are more easily deflected during the impact process and the biggest part of the permanent wound channel they create is due to tumbling or fragmentation. Dr. Fackler is THE leading authority on terminal ballistics and has worked with the military and tried to educate the general public for decades writing more than 2-300 books and articles on the topic. He busted the myth of "Hydrostatic Shock" as a killing mechanism and improved testing media for bullet impact effect testing.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 15, 2017, 11:36 PM   #40
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
Quote:
Kinetic energy is totally dependent on speed.
Kinetic energy is dependent on both velocity and mass, not just velocity.
Quote:
The reason kinetic energy was popularized was the advent of high velocity small caliber cartridges and the publicity surrounding them.
Whether or not that is why it was popularized, it came into use in the first place, and has stayed in common use because it is a scientific quantity which quantifies the potential of a projectile to do work/cause damage. There are any number of reasons why a projectile may not do as much damage as it has the potential to do, but kinetic energy provides a good starting point for those who want to try to boil things down to a single number.

For what it's worth, I don't believe any single number comes close to telling the whole story when it comes to insight into terminal effect, but if you're going to pick only one number, you could certainly do worse than kinetic energy. Momentum is another scientific quantity which provides insight and which is used (though not as commonly) to attempt to quantify terminal effect, especially in handguns.
Quote:
Dr. Martin Fackler proved long ago that only the permanent wound channel mattered in the lethality of any hit.
While he did make the claim that temporary cavity was not a significant wounding effect, it was specifically in reference to handgun caliber lethality, not rifle caliber lethality. While that is generally accepted to be a fairly accurate generalization, it is not a universal truth, nor has it ever been conclusively been proven to be universally true even when applied only to handgun caliber lethality.

In fact, temporary cavity can have a significant effect on lethality even in handgun calibers--though it is generally not very reliable even in the more powerful handgun calibers.

Here's a quote from Dr. Fackler. "It should be noted, however, that stretch from temporary cavity tissue displacement can disrupt blood vessels or break bones at some distance from the projectile path, just as they can be disrupted by blunt trauma."
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old May 16, 2017, 06:28 AM   #41
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Manatee County, Florida
Posts: 1,974
My secondary job while serving in USAF was wildlife control near the airfields. The rifle I used for shooting deer was an older Winchester bolt action in .243 shooting plain Power Point ammo. This was a very good outfit because the bullets did not exit the animals. But for a time in 1998, I was issued a semi-auto M-16 shooting 64 grain soft tip Winchester ammo. The bullets always exited which was an undesirable factor we considered when switching back to the .243 rifle. I found the .223 cartridge to be adequate but not impressive since the animals always bounded away after the impact. In contrast, most deer typically drop in their tracks when struck by the .243 bullet.

Jack
__________________
Fire up the grill! Deer hunting IS NOT catch and release.
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Old May 16, 2017, 01:39 PM   #42
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,649
Quote:
Kinetic energy is totally dependent on speed.
As John said, Kinetic Energy is not TOTALLY dependent on speed. It is a factor of mass and the exponent of velocity (specifically 1/2 that value). Velocity effects the equation exponentially, so the K/E is skewed toward velocity. I have long argued that K/E does not tell the whole story, and momentum does have an effect. Alas, my argument mostly falls on deaf ears, even when I use sources provided by those who would argue against me to support my position. At any rate, I digress. Both mass and velocity are used in the kinetic energy equation, and really there is no other one single measurement that is as effective at comparing the potential lethality of one caliber to another as K/E. There are some factors that may make comparing a 357 mag to .223 on K/E alone an apples/oranges argument. .223 projectile construction is often a choice between a varmint round or an FMJ round, with little selection of true medium game hunting bullets. There are some though. Plain ole Remington core-lokt comes to mind.

I stand by my original point. No one argues that a .357 mag is underpowered for handgun hunting, and it's tough to argue that .357 is any better than .223. So why are we saying that .223 isn't adequate to hunt dear?
5whiskey is offline  
Old May 17, 2017, 02:08 AM   #43
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,583
I am not saying that the 223 isn't able to harvest deer. The triple deuce (.222) used to be a very popular deer rifle cartridge. The two cartridges are close enough ballistically that they could be interchanged for any practical purpose.
I would only use the 223 with head and neck shots using varmint bullets but I have several guns that do a better job of insuring a quick and less painful death for deer. I doubt that most hunters would be capable of cleanly killing a deer with a 223 but then most of them couldn't cleanly kill a deer with a 400 nitro express. It is for that reason that I would not recommend it as a deer cartridge, more because of the hunter and not the cartridge.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old May 17, 2017, 08:32 PM   #44
Gunplummer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 3,364
Can't argue with that. Back in the day when heavy bullets ruled the deer woods, you saw a LOT of wounded deer running. It was not unusual to find a lot laying when late season grouse hunting either. A bad hit is a bad hit no matter what you are using.
Gunplummer is offline  
Old May 17, 2017, 10:46 PM   #45
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
Quote:
I would only use the 223 with head and neck shots using varmint bullets but I have several guns that do a better job of insuring a quick and less painful death for deer.
It's certainly wise to keep the limitations of a particular cartridge/rifle/sighting system/loading/shooter combination in mind while hunting.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old May 19, 2017, 02:37 PM   #46
muleman11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 2016
Posts: 14
Head shots work well for me, no tracking and no bloodshot meat.
muleman11 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.11603 seconds with 10 queries