Earlier in the week Eaton Rapids Joe started a fascinating discussion about using pea shooters on big game, specifically thin skinned critters like deer. It is his contention that the Sierra Tipped Match King is a viable deer bullet for the .223. Up here in Alberta the 223 is banned for use on big game but is legal in other provinces. I’d never considered the 223 for deer…and it makes for some fascinating discussion. According to Joe the relatively heavy 77 gr. Sierra TMK looks like this on paper:
Joe’s reasoning was that the TMK is heavily constructed enough that it won’t fragment on the surface of the deer’s hide, and leave a nasty flesh wound that would make for a long and agonizing death for the animal. He argues that the TMK will penetrate and do the job just fine at reasonable ranges. The problem with these charts and graphics is that they are only as good as the retard that prepared them… and there is a MASSIVE over abundance of stubfarts, morons and pin heads in this sport that think they know it all. I do not necessarily disagree with Joe, but I have big reservations about the 223 as a deer round. I figured an outhouse ballistic work up might be worthwhile to give me a better starting point to evaluate the topic. Is Joe full a beans? I decided to check his homework against mine
My bargain basement Ruger American spits the 77 gr. out at around 2600 FPS. That’s a load a little on the warm side - that is out of a short 16” pipe with no pressure signs.If recall I am using about 24.6 gr. of H4895 and I got that from some other manual. All these reloading manual figures are close so I’m probly not going to blow my face off with this load. I like the Nosler load data and trust it implicitly. Even so I developed this load by starting at the minimum charge… and working my way up.
Plugging that into the ballistics calculator … at 100 yards I’m clocking 2381 FPS, 2172 at 200, 1974 at 300, 1788 at 400, 1615 at 500. So that tracks pretty closely with Joe’s chart. I suspect that the rifle used to compile Joe’s chart has a 20 inch barrel, maybe? We can say that their rifle shoots a smidge faster than mine does with its shorty barrel. Overall Joe’s data looks good to me.
This is where things get dicey. An outhouse “rule of thumb” is that you want to smack a deer with at least 1000 ft. Lbs. of kinetic energy. The tards around here seem to like a figure of 1200 ft. Lbs. Regardless of which tard pulled which figure out of which orifice…shot placement is by far more crucial to performance than kinetic energy. As I told Joe… I was out 100 years ago with Baloney Bob just north of Duvernay. We got caught by surprise by a buck that jumped out of the bush at 75 yards. I held my fire; I had the sun in my scope and couldn’t see a thing. Bob, on the other hand shot and spun the deer around when he smacked him in the ass with a 7mm magnum. That deer ran a quarter mile and disappeared into a clump of bush. I potted him after a bit of a chase… and discovered that Bob had blown a chunk of meat out of that deer the size of a small cantaloupe. Deer are incredibly tough animals when their adrenaline flows. The poor thing must have been in excruciating pain to run with an injury like that. It was a slob’s shot, in hindsight, and eventually I stopped hunting with Bob because of it. Sure…Bob was ordinarily a great marksman… and he probably killed more animals than Joe and I put together… but hell’s bells..he had no problem at all with low percentage shots. I do - I think they’re inhumane and that’s why I always passed on them. Sanctimonious preaching aside… I want to put those critters down and kill them dead with one shot and no suffering. Let us put a pin in that, and run with kinetic energy as a measure of lethality for the sake of argument. Plugging the data into the kinetic energy calculator, I get
1156 ft.lbs. at the muzzle
969 ft.lbs. at 100 yards
807 ft.lbs. at 200 yards
666 ft.lbs. at 300 yards
547 ft.lbs. at 400 yards
446 ft.lbs. at 500 yards
I dunno about you…but based on this preliminary info I am not liking the .223 for deer at all! Even at moderate ranges there is no room for error and you are on the minimal edge of ballistic performance by the time you get out to 100 yards. This, combined with a bullet meant for targets and punching paper…? At this point, for me… it’s no sale. I’d need to see something like a ballistic gel test at 100 yards…but that has its limitations too. For me…I have way better guns for the job.
Not saying Joe is wrong…but if you’re going to go with the 223 you had better have the sporting ethics Joe has too. You don’t want to push these pea shooters past their limits. But nothing changes with calibre and greater performance either; you want to get in close, make a good shot and put them down in one, regardless of what you’re shooting. That is what the game is ultimately all about whether you’re shooting a pea shooter or a cannon.
I hope you guys have time for some range work this weekend too.
Cheers!
Filthie
The US Army (re)discovered 20 years ago that it took 3-5 rounds of .223 to the torso to stop a man. Men and deer are roughly the same size through the vitals.
ReplyDeleteI would only shoot a deer with a 5.56/223 if I had no choice. Then, ambush, assassinate at close range, preferably, head shot range.
ReplyDeleteEven a 300 BO or 7.62x39 is way better than 223, and I consider both of those as marginal. My personal minimum would be the Swedish, 6.5x55, it's adequate/humane out to my maximum range of 200-250 yards, depending on conditions, rifle rest.
DeleteRemember, military doctrine, doesn't want a dead enemy, it wants a screaming, incapacitated, out of service, soldier, to have 4 other soldiers haul his ass back to an aid station, 5 out of battle, traumatized, demoralized. 5.56 does OK at that.
Well ya gotta remember fellas… that’s all with military ball. For hunting, we have our pick of bullets so we should be able to get substantially better performance with properly constructed bullets.
ReplyDeleteI’m with Mike…I’d hunt with it in a survival situation if I had too…but yeah…I’d like to go bigger. My deer gun is a 243… I better run a ballistic work up on it too…
I always thought a 243 was the minimum for whitetail.
ReplyDelete.243 is 6.17mm. At least you can load it with 100 grain bullets going about the same speed as a 77gr. 223. That translates to a lot more energy. I like the 6.5 because they go up to 140 gr. and are legendary for accuracy and flatter trajectories while still having mild recoil.
ReplyDeleteDown in south Texas our white tail deer are about the size of a greyhound..... A rimfire 22 can bring home the meat. Best bet is to use a black powder 50. You can eat right up to the bullet hole with those. The 243 creates a mess. I figure a 44 mag, or 45 LC would work pretty good, too. Brush ranges are 100 yards or less. If you're shooting down a sendero, you'll need the sniper tool kit. Axis and mulies are big meat and need bigger medicine.
ReplyDelete