Anyone using .223 / 5.56 cal for deer hunting?

[woodchuckc]

I agree that everyone's goal should be to never lose an animal, no matter what the weapon, and they should do all in their power to prevent it. Realistically, it does happen however and there has to be some level that a hunter deems to be "acceptable". If you have killed 100 deer and lost one, than that must be an acceptable level to you or else you would not still be a hunter.

Back to the topic of this thread; for a youngster or someone who is very recoil-shy, you have a few choices:
1. Make them use a larger caliber weapon than they are comfortable with because it is more "deadly" and risk them taking a bad shot because they close their eyes before shooting or flinch.
2. Let them use a smaller but legal caliber that they are comfortable shooting and have proven themselves to be proficient with on the range.
3. Don't let them hunt until they are old enough / big enough to shoot a larger caliber.

I think most everyone can agree that choice 1 is not acceptable and while choice 3 is a viable option, it is not a very good one especially if you have daughters who want to hunt as they may never be ready for anything larger than a 22 caliber centerfire or 243. That leaves choice 2, and when my daughter is old enough (she's only 2 right now), proves herself capable on the range of shooting accurately and we use the appropriate bullet design and limit shot selection to broadside heart/lung shots, I would have no problem with her using a 223.

 

[BirdDog123]

I hate losing deer but when I do it just makes me more determined to go to the range and become a better shot.

I would venture to say that someone who burns 1,000rds of .223 at the range would be able to kill a deer more humanely than the guy who keeps his 7mm in the safe until its time to hunt.

Not saying that anyone in the debate does either of those things but its about marksmanship and shot placement not a huge caliber.

 

[-DRM-]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

 

[cecil30-30]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

Or why not stop archery hunting? Your odds of looseing a deer is far greater with archery equipment than it is with a 223..That I guarentee.

 

[Jcalder]

I'm not trying to argue the point of the caliber. I'm not saying outlaw anything. I have my personal beliefs and certain things I won't do. The point I was trying to make was losing deer under any circumstances should never be ok. We should all strive to make every shot count. I agree that people who shoot more often than the ones who just check scopes generally have more success at shot placement and finding shot deer. I also know that anytime you're hunting something can happen or change at the moment you decide to fire the shot. I'm not trying to argue the point of smaller calibers. But at what point are you ok with losing wounded animals?

 

[scn]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

Or why not stop archery hunting? Your odds of looseing a deer is far greater with archery equipment than it is with a 223..That I guarentee.

The controlled studies that have been done found exactly the opposite. Gun hunters lost more deer than archery hunters.

As an officer in the field, that is what I found as well. Many gun hunters are so conditioned mentally to seeing an animal drop in their tracks that when one runs off they don't even check to see if they hit or missed the deer. And, with many being hundreds of yards away, it is much more difficult for the hunter to pinpoint where the deer was standing to look for sign of a hit.

 

[Barnes Ridge Rambler]

It's like I said before. Set yourself up for success rather than failure. Practice is key no matter what caliber you want to legally use; however, you won't catch me in the deer woods with a .22 cal.

 

[Hunter 257W]

In my opinion a deer cartridge at a minimum should be able to give full penetration with a broadside hit. This gives you a better blood trail to follow if required and obviously because blood leaks out 2 holes faster than just 1, the deer dies quicker and more humanely. Yes, bullet design has improved dramatically in the past 20 years so that there are .224 caliber bullets around that can give performance beyond what you would expect from such a small caliber. What bothers me though is the fact that so many hunters don't know enough about bullet design to chose the proper bullet when using these small bores and pushing them to the limits of what they can do. Yes, in the hands of a cool experienced hunter who can really shoot, and is willing to pass up some shots, a .223 Remington loaded with a Nosler Partition bullet can kill deer. However a novice hunter/marginal shooter who goes to his local gun shop and picks up some .223 ammo loaded with a 35grain Hornady VMax bullet is asking for trouble because his bullet is intended for prarie dogs rather than a 150lb animal.

The gun I have in mind for my daughter to use for deer when she starts hunting is my CZ Carbine chambered in 7.62x39. It has negligible recoil and is going to give much more consistent terminal performance on deer sized game than a .224 caliber.

 

[BirdDog123]

What bothers me though is the fact that so many hunters don't know enough about bullet design to chose the proper bullet when using these small bores and pushing them to the limits of what they can do.

^^^ This.

 

[Bayou Buck]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

Or why not stop archery hunting? Your odds of looseing a deer is far greater with archery equipment than it is with a 223..That I guarentee.

The controlled studies that have been done found exactly the opposite. Gun hunters lost more deer than archery hunters.

As an officer in the field, that is what I found as well. Many gun hunters are so conditioned mentally to seeing an animal drop in their tracks that when one runs off they don't even check to see if they hit or missed the deer. And, with many being hundreds of yards away, it is much more difficult for the hunter to pinpoint where the deer was standing to look for sign of a hit.

I can believe this happens a lot! Especially with less experienced hunters.

 

[Hunter 257W]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

Or why not stop archery hunting? Your odds of looseing a deer is far greater with archery equipment than it is with a 223..That I guarentee.

The controlled studies that have been done found exactly the opposite. Gun hunters lost more deer than archery hunters.

As an officer in the field, that is what I found as well. Many gun hunters are so conditioned mentally to seeing an animal drop in their tracks that when one runs off they don't even check to see if they hit or missed the deer. And, with many being hundreds of yards away, it is much more difficult for the hunter to pinpoint where the deer was standing to look for sign of a hit.

I can believe this happens a lot! Especially with less experienced hunters.

Yeah, I may have very well left deer in the woods when I 1st started deer hunting now that I can look back with more experienced eyes on my early escapades. I had no adult to learn from and I just assumed that a centerfire rifle with all that noise and energy would drop a deer in it's tracks if you hit it. When I shot and they didn't fall, I assumed that I had missed. (Probably did most of the time because I had a lot of trouble with buck fever as a kid.) :blush:

But when looking at lost deer, rather than lumping them all together, I think you have to break them down into two basic categories. The 1st would be deer that killed quickly but simply not found. The hunter shoots, the deer runs a couple hundred yard into a gosh-awful briar thicket - dies within a minute and is never found. Nobody likes losing one like that but at least the animal didn't suffer a lingering death. The 2nd group would be a deer that is hit but the wound is not severe enough to cause quick death which allows it to run far enough that it's never found. This animal may die hours or days later or may even recover.

I bet there are more bow shot deer in that last category.

 

[mathews338]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

we all know that things don't always go as planned and with that in mind i killed a 4.5 year old 8pt 2 years ago.
i had just climbed down out of the tree and was gathering my things when i heard something coming. i turned around and he had just topped the hill. he was looking right at me standing broadside but there was a cedar bush between me and him. i needed to shoot 1" to the right of the bush in order to still hit vitals.
it was only about 40 yards but i was off handed. i shot through the bush which was 3" in diameter and killed that deer stone dead, complete pass through btw.
that is the only proof i need and like i said before, i hunt hard all year for only a few encounters each year so i want every advantage i can get because i know i'm not perfect and i will make mistakes from time to time.
i believe my .338 or other large calibers do increase a shooters odds. they won't fix everything but they do help. do not limit yourself unless you have to is my way of looking at it.

 

[MRUTVOL]

Losing

The controlled studies that have been done found exactly the opposite. Gun hunters lost more deer than archery hunters.

As an officer in the field, that is what I found as well. Many gun hunters are so conditioned mentally to seeing an animal drop in their tracks that when one runs off they don't even check to see if they hit or missed the deer. And, with many being hundreds of yards away, it is much more difficult for the hunter to pinpoint where the deer was standing to look for sign of a hit.

I can believe that since there are more gun hunters than bow hunters so they should have a larger number of lost deer. BUT I would say the percentage of lost deer to the number of hunters for each group ,Gun or Bow, would be higher for Bow Hunters. In my circles anyway I hear more bow hunters who remark of hitting a deer but not finding it which in a lot of cases means a bad hit and probably not a dead deer but a crippled deer. I have heard several hunters speak of multiple loss deer during bow season. One guy I suggested he quit bow hunting because he lost 4 deer in one week of hunting. Just my opinion no studies to back it up.

 

[hunter0925]

Regarding head shots with any cartridge, I used to agree that they would either be a kill or clean miss but I disagree now. It would be very easy to hit a jaw or nose and leave a deer with a horrible wound to slowly die. I just don't think head shots are a good idea unless the deer is really close and you KNOw you can make it and how do you ever know 100%. A behind the shoulder has a lot more margin for error if you wobble or the deer moves just as you pull the trigger.

My uncle lives and hunts in TX and solely uses a 223 with head shots. He has told me of shooting a 10pt and watching it run off with its' jaw hanging off never to be seen again. I agree with you one hundred persent in this aspect.

 

[Winchester]

Losing one out of ten deer is unacceptable in my book. Why not increase your odds with a gun that is better suited for deer.

Do you have any hard proof increasing caliber will remove all other variables and increase the shooter's odds? Seems like a mighty big assumption.

Or why not stop archery hunting? Your odds of looseing a deer is far greater with archery equipment than it is with a 223..That I guarentee.

The controlled studies that have been done found exactly the opposite. Gun hunters lost more deer than archery hunters.

As an officer in the field, that is what I found as well. Many gun hunters are so conditioned mentally to seeing an animal drop in their tracks that when one runs off they don't even check to see if they hit or missed the deer. And, with many being hundreds of yards away, it is much more difficult for the hunter to pinpoint where the deer was standing to look for sign of a hit.

Im not surprised at all, I have saw similar situations in the past myself!