55 grain FMJ or 45 grain JHPs?

I have used the 55 grain soft points with pretty good success in the 222 which is awful close ballistics wise speaking to the 223.
 
For Gods sake, use the .270. You can kill deer with a .223, but neither load you have mentioned is suitable. Out of respect for the animal, use the .270. You will have no regrets.
 
I've got a mini-14, and so I'm reminded of another thing to keep in mind. Whatever ammo you decide to buy, remember to spend some quality time at the range so you know how your mini will respond to it... I only say this, because I know that mine can be finicky... As for the effectiveness of the .223 cartridge against a deer, I know a guy who's reliably used a .17 (Remington, I think) on deer... It's really all about where you put the hole... As long as one knows their limits, that's what matters I guess. Your mileage, of course, may vary.
 
Sort of off topic, but one problem I have seen in Texas is that people start off kids deer hunting with .223's and .22-250s because they have little to no recoil. This is sort of the equivalent of starting a kid dove hunting with a .410. While the guns are not really that powerful, they are not guns for beginners, they are guns for experts. A .223 or a .22-250 will kill about any deer that walks, but the shot must be perfect. Since most beginners are not going to be perfect shots, they are a bad choice. My dad taught me and my two brothers how to shoot with a full choked single-shot .410 and I am glad he did, because it made all three of us much better shots. However, a .20 gauge with low recoil rounds would have been a better choice since the added recoil is offset by the heavier gun, the pattern is thicker and you have more than one shot.

Basically, if you are going to use the .223 get some of the Nosler Partitions or a similar deer hunting bullet, don't get a fast expanding varmint round or a military FMJ bullet. The FMJ will put a .223 caliber hole all the way through the deer and result in the deer suffering and dying sometime in the next week. Also, if you are not 100 percent sure that your Mini 14 can put your bullet exactly where you want it, every time, I would just use the .270, which everyone knows is the most perfect deer round of all time. (ducks as the .30-06 crowd unleashes on me). Or if there is no chance of the shot being over 100 yards, get yourself a Marlin .30-30 (the best short range round of all time) with 170 grain Remington Core-Lokt's.
 
For Gods sake, use the .270. You can kill deer with a .223, but neither load you have mentioned is suitable. Out of respect for the animal, use the .270. You will have no regrets.
Click to expand...
Col Cooper did a pretty good job of brainwashing most folks against the .223, out of his personal crusade to return the military to bolt action 30-06 rifles. He was a dinosaur from the 1890's or 1900s.

A .223 has about as much energy as a many rifles commonly used to hunt medium game. A 30/06 or 270 is commonly used for medium game and can be used for anything on the continent. That doesn't mean that they are the baseline of what can effectively take whitetail or smaller game. .223 has nearly the energy of many calibers generally considered "bread and butter" deer calibers, say 30/30. Frankly, the 223 can be had with superior bullets (like the nosler mentioned) that can make it the equal or superior to a 30/30 with an ancient round nose bullet. 223 has much more energy than the pistol caliber rounds that are often used or even required in many states. It makes a FAR larger hole and penetrates more deeply than ANY commonly used handgun round (357 mag or 44 mag). It also creates much more damage and kills quicker than any blackpowder round or any bow.

A .270 is a fine round too and would probably be my choice if I already had the 270, but that doesn't mean that a .223 won't do the job.

The average hunter these days isn't too skilled. And a .223 may not do as well as a .300 ultra magnum if you intend to shoot the animal through the hindquarters as seems to be all to common these days. That doesn't mean that that a skilled hunter can't do well with a less powerful cartridge however. We have taken deer for years with rounds less powerful than the Super Short Turbo Ultra Field Artillery Mags or even the venerable .270 or 30-06 that many profess are the "minimum" caliber for deer.
 
The .223 is, honestly, not a deer round. If you are going to use it, don't waste your time on FMJ, get the heaviest soft point you can, and go for a CNS shot, not a heart/lung shot. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it shouldn't be done.

Raw energy doesn't mean as much as how it is applied when you want meat on the table. Remember, .270 is derived from a round designed to kill angry mammals in the 150-200 pound range, mostly by a lot of penetration and shock/blood loss. .223/5.56mm (not quite the same thing, but close) is derived from a round designed to kill not so angry mammals in the 15-50 pound range, mostly by maximum expansion and fragmenting of the bullet. Which one sounds closer to a deer?

What other options do you have?
 
Thanks for all the advice...

My main rifle is the .270 Remington 700 BDL with an older Redfield 3-9 power variable scope. It is a great rifle and scope, but I notice that when I get into low light conditions, I can't see the scope's crosshairs all that well, hence the consideration of using the Mini-14 with the red dot sight instead. I figure that I would rather be accurate with the .223 round than miss with the .270. Any centerfire cartridge over .22 is legal here. There are no restrictions on the FMJ either.

Based on the consensus, I'll skip the 45 grain JHP as well as the 55 grain FMJ and look for a heavier HP or reassess the whole idea of using the red dot sight and stick with the .270.

I have both a 12 gauge and 20 gauge shotgun. Niether have sights on them and I think I'll go with the .270 before I switch to using slugs with the shotguns.

Thanks again for all the great advice!
 
Remember, .270 is derived from a round designed to kill angry mammals in the 150-200 pound range, mostly by a lot of penetration and shock/blood loss. .223/5.56mm (not quite the same thing, but close) is derived from a round designed to kill not so angry mammals in the 15-50 pound range
Click to expand...
That's a direct Cooper quote, so I think you should credit him with it. :) However, it is a lie. The .223 Remington was developed for the Armalite AR15 to kill 150-200 lb people, which it apparently does very well unless the papers have been lying about the tragic shooting in Wisconsin last week.
 
I kill deer every year with a .223 and haven't lost one yet. If you can shoot and use a proper controlled expansion bullet, which is neither of the bullets you mentioned, it will put meat in the freezer. The problem is that you have to be pickier about your shots, you can not lay the crosshairs on the point of a bucks shoulders at 200 yds and drop him. You have to make sure that the deer is close enough, in the proper position and that you can make the shot.

On paper the round may produce impressive figures that overshadow rounds like the 30/30 and the 44 mag. In real life that little bullet loses it's punch very quickly and never has the mass to punch through big bones like the former rounds will and do. Don't be fooled into thinking that the older slower calibers are inefficient killers because they are not. Millions of buffalo bones are bleaching in the sun due to an old black powder loaded 45/70 that doesn't make as much energy as a hot loaded 44 mag, I certainly would not suggest someone buffalo hunt with a 223 because on paper it has more FPE. Chris
 
nemoaz said:
It makes a FAR larger hole and penetrates more deeply than ANY commonly used handgun round (357 mag or 44 mag). It also creates much more damage and kills quicker than any blackpowder round or any bow.
Click to expand...


This statement simply is not true. Chris
 
I was reading an article by Craig Boddington and he was trying to come up with a reason why the .30-30 was so effective on game, when on paper it looks like it would not be near as effective. He didn't have any hard data, but his guess was that the large diameter bullet hits very hard since it has a flat front, instead of a point. While it doesn't have the penetration of other rounds, the initial bullet shock is something that is not easily measured and is his theory as to why it kills extremely quickly, even quicker than the super magnum rounds that are so popular these days.
 
I have a friend who used to dispose of nuisance deer from farms using a .22 WMR. He never had anything but a one-shot kill. If the 40 yard range is accurate a .223 should be plenty of gun. Study where to put the bullet and put the bullet where you intend. Don't try and break bones.
 
Fix the problem, which is your optics, not your rifle. Time to buy some new glass, like a Leupold 1.5-5x or 1.75-6x (or similar).
 
After reading through all this, and tossing in my two cents worth (only worth about half a cent actually), I think we've all been overlooking the obvious solution. Time to get a new gun!

I'm thinking a Marlin 336 with a good small (1.5-4 or 2-7) scope would be just about perfect. :D. I'll leave it up to you about a .30-.30 or .44 Magnum. Either one will be fine.
 
Ok Everybody that has actually shot deer with a 223 raise your hand.

Look around you.

I HAVE shot deer and pigs with 223. I have used FMJ when I was shooting hogs with a depredation permit. LOTS of shooting.

At the short ranges the round acts on Small and medium game pretty much like it does on people. The Bullet enters travels a short distance and destabilizes and tremendous bullet yaw is the result.

The bullet then breaks in half at the Crimp line and causes a serious mess.

In my experience it was devastating. WORKED GREAT.

Now extend the ranges and get less than optimum hits... All bets are off.

Ignore most of this blather except for the it maybe illegal parts because it could be. But brother let me tell you that if you are close in like you say and put some of that 223 love in the Heart/lung/liver area and then sit down for a few mins to wait. I will be stone cold surprised if one of the critters makes it 50 yards.

Once again...from experiance... not the Internet or books.
 
Justabuyer said:
Ok Everybody that has actually shot deer with a 223 raise your hand.
Click to expand...

Can you see my hand up? :thumbup:

At least three a year all inside 100yds all 1 shot kills so far, CZ527 wearing a 4x12 leupy. I will not mention what bullet I load but it has a full case of W748, 27.4 grs IIRC, behind it and puts all its shots in a tiny little cluster. Chris
 
Once again, I am not saying that a .223 cannot kill a deer, or kill a deer quickly. However, in this case it appears the shot will be in low light and with a Mini 14. I have shot numerous Mini 14's and I have never fired one that is very accurate. They will put five shots on a paper plate at 100 yards, but that is certainly not that impressive. (if the Mini 14 mentioned this post is a tackdriver, disregard the rest of the post) My Savage 111GL .270 will put five shots on top of each other at 100 yards with Winchester 130 grain Super X rounds, that is what I consider accurate. I have shot some bolt action .223s that were tackdrivers and I wouldn't hesitate to use them in this situation, I just don't know if a Mini 14 in low light conditions is going to be accurate enough to put that .223 round exactly where it needs to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top