55 grain FMJ or 45 grain JHPs?

Justabuyer said:
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.
Click to expand...

This has been my experience firing a FMJ also. It tumbles and Fragments on anything that has some mass. A very devestating wound profile for sure. But my understanding is that the speed at which the bullet yaws and fragments at the cannelure (sp?) is a function of the velocity that it strikes the target at. A sure hit against short barrel lengths. Do you have any experience with this?

I would be interested to know, since it seems the general opinion is that 5.56 round FMJ rounds are all about penetration. Which is contrary to everything with any mass that I have ever shot.
 
AustinTXShooter said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well said. I salute you, sir. My mini is basically still factory, and let me just say, it's obvious that you know Ruger's little ranch rifle quite well. :)

I understand that deer hunting with 12-gauge slugs isn't allowed in my neck of the woods, but more and more, I like that idea... Particularly in dense forest. Our friends over at the box o' truth Just came up with an interesting bit on branches deflecting bullets... and the 12-gauge slug presented some interesting results.

I hope this comment wasn't considered too off topic.. that wasn't my intent. :)
 
runningboar said:
This statement simply is not true. Chris
Click to expand...
Chris, that is my experience from about 21 years in public service, including 8 in EMS. No commonly available pistol round comes close to creating as much of a wound channel as a .223. I keep saying commonly available because I haven't seen any 454 Casull, 460, 480, and 500 SW wounds-and I doubt anyone has-- but I know they both approach rifle velocity and energy.

This isn't to say that I think a 357 or 44 rifle isn't adequate. I absolutely think they are. You may remember that I want a 44 lever pretty bad. But I get tired of Cooperesque rants against the .223. And, again, I'm not saying that a 270 won't give you more margin for error, especially at greater ranges. I just get tired of people dismissing the .223 because a codger who was stuck in 1903 told them so. Funny that Codger Cooper also thought the 30 carbine was fine for deer. Rolleyes.

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.
Click to expand...
I've never seen a Ruger Mini that was accurate, but that is another issue. It probably doesn't matter much because at short range a Mini14 lung shot will drop a deer or a man.

My apologies if my tone has been snippy. It is a pet peeve of mine. Just finished reading a thread on another forum where some Cooper Trained Commando recommended replacing the home defense shotgun or 223 carbine with an M1A because it it fires the only appropriate round with which to shoot goblins (Coopertalk for badguys). I'm just surprised he didn't recommend a bolt action.
 
Geraldo is completely correct: the .270 should get new glass, but the rig is about 35 years old and I don't want to separate the two. Shann has it on the money too that I need a new gun (that is ALWAYS a great solution :D).

Some notes on both set ups:

I used the Mini-14 on a buck years back at about 70 yards in a wide open field. I can't recall what type of bullet I had, but I think it was full metal jacket. The hole going in was tiny, but the exit wound was huge- about 3.5 inches. I hit him just behind the front shoulder and after the round exited it broke the opposite side's leg. He was still very much alive and I had to take a second shot to the head, also at 70 yards, to put him down (no exit wound by the way). If I had not broken his leg with the first shot, he would have gone a long way without trouble I believe. However, that large exit wound would have given me a sufficient blood trail to find him. Still, a better bullet than FMJ may have done the trick with the first shot.

I used the .270 in the North Carolina woods a few years ago and plugged a buck at 30 yards. It was hard to see the crosshairs in the low light and even though I had the scope powered down to 3X, it seemed that all I could see in the scope was the deer's brown hair. Too much scope for the conditions. I shot him right behind the front shoulder and he ran off like nothing touched him. I found him about two hundred yards away and when we gutted him his heart was a ball of goo. Nothing left, yet he was able to flee a good ways. (So why did I have a .270 with scope for a 30 yard shot, you ask? I was traveling and the hunt was a side trip for me. I did not know what the hunting area was going to be like, so I took the .270 in case I was going to have to do a longer shot.)

Yet, I still think that a .223 with the right bullet (and, yes, of course the right shot placement) will take care of a deer at 40 yards. Again, this is for my alternate set up where I think the low light conditions favor the glass that is on the Mini-14 over the glass on the .270.

Mini-14s are not the most accurate, but AR-15s can be something else. I've whacked targets accurately at 300 yards using iron sights with the ARs. I would not have believed it unless I did it myself. Still, anything under 100 yards has been OK with my Mini-14. That's why I took the scope off of it and put the red dot sight on instead.

If I am going to use the Mini-14 in the ravine (hey, that rhymes! :D), I'll look to use something else other than 55 gr FMJ or 45 gr JHP. I'll track down the heavier expandable lead for the hunt.

If I do get a deer down in there, I'll keep you guys posted.
 
By the way... I remember I went hog hunting with some friends last year and I brought the .270 with me. I hit a hog right in the heart and he took off like nothing. We found him about 30 yards in the woods. I hit another smaller hog later, also in the heart, and while he took a bit to expire, he was not able to get up and run. Both shots hit lower than I wanted and both tapped the hearts.

On the same trip, one guy brought his Mini-14 in .223 with FMJ bullets! He also got two hogs on the hunt. They dropped right where he shot them. In both cases he aimed just behind the ear and they died instantly.

All shots were at 100 yards.

Comments?
 
Heart shot animals running off and dying within 30-50 yards is not rare at all. A brain shot animal like your friends hog drops dead right there every single time. That is the best place to shoot a hog assuming you can make the shot since there is no trailing involved and no meat damage. The problem with the brain shot on a hog is that the margin for error is very small, as opposed to shot into the vitals where if you miss the heart, you could still hit the lungs.
 
nemoaz said:
That's a direct Cooper quote, so I think you should credit him with it.
Click to expand...

Actually, it isn't. At least not intentionally- it may be a case of parallel development. In fact, I generally don't give Cooper's obsession with bigger bullets much credit- mass, velocity and surface area all play in. But it is also hard to dispute the fact that for forty years, military personnel have been less than thrilled with the performance of 5.56mm (55 or 62gr) at anything much over 200, 300 meters. Or that we've been trying to find something that works better for 30 years. Humans generally fall down easier than animals do.

And you should check your facts Nemoaz- Eugene Stoner developed the 5.56mm with Remington as a result of his attempted to turn .222 Remington into a usable carbine round for the Small Caliber/High Velocity program in the late-50s. (Springfield had a similar program, their cartridge is known commercially as the .222 Magnum.) And that is from Stoner's own statements; as I recall, it was also clearly stated in Remington's history of the cartridge.


Runningboar, you've hit my point, it takes shot placement. I'm more conservative perhaps than most are, perhaps- I'll honestly admit I've never taken deer with .223. But I've been hunting with people who have- none of those were over a hundred yard shot, but every single one of them ran further and had worse meat loss than I've had with .30-06, 30-30 or .44 Mag. If you can do it, more power to you, but I have to ask if you are hunting for meat or for liquidation? I've used .223 for feral dog and been reasonably happy, but that isn't the same as shooting for the table. I'll use it for self defense, my house gun is a Mini-14, but I'm also not planning on eating any human I ever shoot. :P

And Scout, CNS shots work for pretty much everything. If I felt I could get the angle and placement just right for the brain, I'd hunt a T-Rex with a .22. But the Murphy Factor is awfully high on that.
 
ironraven said:
And Scout, CNS shots work for pretty much everything. If I felt I could get the angle and placement just right for the brain, I'd hunt a T-Rex with a .22. But the Murphy Factor is awfully high on that.
Click to expand...

CNS= Center neck shot? Yes, no?

If you ever get a T-Rex, .22LR or not, let me know. :D
 
And you should check your facts Nemoaz- Eugene Stoner developed the 5.56mm with Remington as a result of his attempted to turn .222 Remington into a usable carbine round for the Small Caliber/High Velocity program in the late-50s. (Springfield had a similar program, their cartridge is known commercially as the .222 Magnum.) And that is from Stoner's own statements; as I recall, it was also clearly stated in Remington's history of the cartridge.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you said. .223/5.56 was designed to kill 150-200 lb. people. I'm not sure how we are disagreeing.
 
.223 will kill deer just fine. Most of the reason that all the new super-duper-ultra magnums have been introduced is because guys are taking longer shots, on bigger game, and most hunters can't shoot worth a crap, so they attempt to make up for a lack of skill with better ballistics.

Winchester's 64gr SP Ranger has worked very well for me. Give it a shot.

You don't need a new gun. New glass? Maybe. Your Mini with decent loads will do fine.
 
Any fire arm can kill almost anything if shot placement circumstances are corect....That is not the issue if I had to survive and needed to take a deer with a .22lr I'm sure I would attempt it and not feel under gunned...THe question is ethics.... which is bases on a personal choice, and individual skill. my limited understanding seems to make me think that A .223 might create a larger wound channel (as mentioned) because the light bullet tumbles on impact but the size of a wound channel does not nec equate to more force delivered if I get stabbed wityh a garden trowel it's going to create quite a large wound channel but if I attatch a much smaller phillips head to screwdriver to the front of a 10 pound sledge hammer and swing it into something it will deliver a shockwave that will dirupt surrounding organs vessels and tissue.... (i'm not pretending to be an expert I don't know alot about guns....most people however cannot ethically take a deer with a .223 it's a varmint round...I don't know if this is true but I was told the reason the military uses the 5.56 (the gov version of the.223) is because it takes 2 enemy soldiers to carry 1 wounded soldier off the field while dead men are just left....however a skilled narksman could surely make it work for deer i personally at my skill level as a new deer hunter would not attempt it... but if I had too and had to dhoose a round to do so I would look for some sort of nosler partition round
 
nemoaz said:
Chris, that is my experience from about 21 years in public service, including 8 in EMS. No commonly available pistol round comes close to creating as much of a wound channel as a .223. I keep saying commonly available because I haven't seen any 454 Casull, 460, 480, and 500 SW wounds-and I doubt anyone has-- but I know they both approach rifle velocity and energy.

This isn't to say that I think a 357 or 44 rifle isn't adequate. I absolutely think they are. You may remember that I want a 44 lever pretty bad. But I get tired of Cooperesque rants against the .223. And, again, I'm not saying that a 270 won't give you more margin for error, especially at greater ranges. I just get tired of people dismissing the .223 because a codger who was stuck in 1903 told them so. Funny that Codger Cooper also thought the 30 carbine was fine for deer. Rolleyes.

I've never seen a Ruger Mini that was accurate, but that is another issue. It probably doesn't matter much because at short range a Mini14 lung shot will drop a deer or a man.

My apologies if my tone has been snippy. It is a pet peeve of mine. Just finished reading a thread on another forum where some Cooper Trained Commando recommended replacing the home defense shotgun or 223 carbine with an M1A because it it fires the only appropriate round with which to shoot goblins (Coopertalk for badguys). I'm just surprised he didn't recommend a bolt action.
Click to expand...

I have shot game with most of the common handgun calibers out there and I also have spent a few years with EMS. A 223 fmj does not produce a big ger or worse wound channel than most handguns. I have shot animals with good quality hollow points in many handgun calibers (380 acp, 9mm luger, 357 sig, 357 mag, 40 S&W, 10mm, 44 mag, 45 acp ) and most leave very nasty wound channels. A 223 softpoint or hollowpoint leaves a very large and nasty wound channel but it is also very shallow and will not usually exit even a small animal. I shot a 300 lbs hog with a 55 grn fmj out of a 16" barreled Bushmaster AR-15 not to long ago and it went through bone and lung tissue without much more than a pencil sized hole through and through. Fortunately for me it dropped in its tracks. I have also shot a lot of hogs with 30 carbine soft points and they work very well. The 30 carbine has more energy than than a 357 mag and sits up there with a 44 mag. A 30 carbine will just about always outperform a 223 on deer or hogs up close. This is just based on my first hand experience and what I have seen in the medical field.
 
I can understand a two gun battery. My field gun is a 30-06AI with a long heavy barrel and a Zeiss 3.5x10. My woods/swamp gun is a 45/70 with a compact Zeiss 3x9. Why a 45/70? I want to break bone. I don't want to have to track a deer through the muck and mire or in your case over the next ridge or ravine.

I'd carry a 223 only if I was very capable with it, kept my shots under 100yds and waited for the perfect shot. Of course that would be the day the biggest buck in my life would be seen at 150yds quartering away.

Buy Federal's 60g Nosler Partition and try it in your gun prior to hunting with it.
 
The .222 was, and continues to be used as a deer getter, especially in Europe. Once the darling of the benchrest crowd, the old triple-deuce has now been eclipsed by slightly more accurate designs. The .223 is in the same class as the .222 and has been used as a deer rifle for years. Again, careful shot placement is the key here. You can use the heavier bullets for a bit of extra power, but this does not make up for lack of accuracy. I once saw a gut shot animal with a .300 mag run off into the woods never to be found. We all can come up with stories to prove the point...

Jack O'Connor's pushing of the .270 as the ultimate deer rifle is still as solid today as it was in yesteryear. Squeeze the trigger on that flat shooting number and you'll likely be done with your hunting for that day. The .270 is just about the perfect combination of power, balance, recoil and accuracy that allows many of us to point to the trophy and smile. Keep the .223 as a survival/home defense gun unless you are a very keen shooter with an ultra steady grip. These are two VERY different calibers.
 
Another reason the military uses .223s over .30-06 and .308 rounds is because the .223 doesn't really have any recoil. If you are going to shoot hundreds of rounds a day, one of the .30 calibers is much less pleasant to shoot. For fully automatic fire, the .30s are a beast to control, at least compared to the .223s.
 
AustinTXShooter said:
Another reason the military uses .223s over .30-06 and .308 rounds is because the .223 doesn't really have any recoil. If you are going to shoot hundreds of rounds a day, one of the .30 calibers is much less pleasant to shoot. For fully automatic fire, the .30s are a beast to control, at least compared to the .223s.
Click to expand...
Also the ammo is lighter and you can carry more. Since it is lighter higher capacity mags are not as much as a weight problem.
 
Midnight Scout said:
CNS= Center neck shot? Yes, no?

If you ever get a T-Rex, .22LR or not, let me know. :D
Click to expand...

No, CNS is the Central Nervous System, brain and spinal cord. Head shots on deer are tricky, the head is generally always moving and a deer jerks it's around without warning. Chris
 
runningboar said:
No, CNS is the Central Nervous System, brain and spinal cord. Head shots on deer are tricky, the head is generally always moving and a deer jerks it's around without warning. Chris
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris. Yeah, I think I am going to stick with the heart-lung area rather than head shots for both the .223 and the .270. I don't want to shoot low and shoot off the jaw. If I hit low on a heart-lung shot, it is still going to hit in the kill zone. Scout
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top