Just checked an article I wrote for GUNS magazine last year on using .22 centerfires for big game. I researched the rules in all 50 states, and they're legal in over 2/3, and legal for some kinds of big game in several of others.
As I noted in the article, quite a few hunters (usually older) have an immediate gut reaction against hunting deer with "twenty-twos," probably due to .22 rimfires. The same hunters are usually fine with using 6mm's, though sometimes (because they're old enough to remember the day before 6mm's) desire a minimum of .25 caliber. Guess what? The difference in diameter between a .224 bullet and 6mm or .25 is about the thickness of human fingernails, though of course depending on individual nails.
I'm "older" and my gut reaction is "why do you need something as big as a 6mm?"
You need a 6mm 'cause of numerology. Small numbers mean power, and you cannot argue with St. Augustine of Hippo - first, he's a saint, and second, he's dead.
I could never trust using a 223 for deer, but a 6mm/223 is different. The 6mm/223 is smaller, but it's a vastly superior cartridge. I can prove it using math and numericals in numerology..
223 - 2+2+3 = 7 6/223 - 6+2+2+3 = 13 - 1+3 = 4 (4 is smaller than 7)
From this, we see that a 223 is a 7. The 6mm/223 is a 4.
Saint Augustine might argue that you got lucky, being able to take those animals. 7 is a lucky number after all.
Mathematically speaking, the proof is right in front of you. Perhaps that is the reason why Americans don't like metricals, but you cannot deny science!
As I noted in the article, quite a few hunters (usually older) have an immediate gut reaction against hunting deer with "twenty-twos," probably due to .22 rimfires.
More likely because they read over and over again in gun/hunting magazines how .22 centerfires were woefully inadequate and should never be used on deer. I remember reading that many times in gun/hunting rags in articles written by many different gun writers. It wasn't until relatively recently that some writers changed their tune and started writing articles about using .22 centerfires on deer. Mostly none did until the introduction of .22 caliber "big game" bullets like the Nosler partition and Barnes x.
I know a couple of young Alaskans who've taken plenty of big game, including moose and grizzly, with their .223's. They're kind of puzzled when people say it isn't enough.
^this I remember watching one of the Alaska shows on discovery. They had a bear coming in at night eating their salmon. They caught the bear in the act, couple shots from an AR (only assume it was 223 or 556) and it was over with!
All of them do something better than the 30-06, but none of them do everything as well.
Steve, the 6/223 would equal 6 / 2+2+3 which would equal 6 / 7, which is about .85 dumbass.
Wayyyy smaller than 7. Do you know anything about rifles?
Back in St Augustine's day (400 A.D.), they didn't use the / (slash) for division. Division wasn't invented until the 1700s. Multiple-cation was developed by Ben Franklin in the 1700s also, to explain taxation to farmers. That's what I learned in school.
New math rules were the reason why you see the 6mm/223 written so many different ways - including 6x45mm. If we applied modern mathemication rules to the metrical designation, the 6x45mm would be a 9. That is, 6x45 = 270. 2+7+0 = 9. But we can't, so it isn't.
Killed a black bear with a 22-250. That probably doesn't count, does it? Was still only in my long-johns, hadn't got the camo on yet--so it wasn't ethical, I guess.
He was a thiever and am sure it was the load of guilt he was carrying that made him go down so dang fast...relief no doubt...thought I had missed him at first....
Steve, the 6/223 would equal 6 / 2+2+3 which would equal 6 / 7, which is about .85 dumbass.
Wayyyy smaller than 7. Do you know anything about rifles?
Back in St Augustine's day (400 A.D.), they didn't use the / (slash) for division. Division wasn't invented until the 1700s. Multiple-cation was developed by Ben Franklin in the 1700s also, to explain taxation to farmers. That's what I learned in school.
New math rules were the reason why you see the 6mm/223 written so many different ways - including 6x45mm. If we applied modern mathemication rules to the metrical designation, the 6x45mm would be a 9. That is 6x45 = 270. 2+7+0 = 9. But we can't, so it isn't.
This is what will happen to us if the U.S. adopts the metric system.
The first great thing is to find yourself and for that you need solitude and contemplation. I can tell you deliverance will not come from the rushing noisy centers of civilization. It will come from the lonely places. Fridtjof Nansen
Yeah, a lot of gun writers were writing that when I started hunting. Didn't believe it for long, however, as too many hunters I knew used 'em--and not too much later I did too--first the .220 Swift with a so-called varmint bullet weighing 60 grains, that as far as I could tell worked just about like 100-grain bullets from a .243.
Of course, there were some gun writers who said the .243 was too small as well when it came out. But they were even older than Ingwe.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Steve, the 6/223 would equal 6 / 2+2+3 which would equal 6 / 7, which is about .85.
Wayyyy smaller than 7. Do you know anything about rifles?
T, I think he's from Canukia. And knows all about Cooey's. They're rifles up there I hear.
I believe we know cooeys as something different down on this side of the medicine line. (See .223 AI thread, but you already know that)
Now, what bullet do I use to take deer with a 1:14 twist .222
Geno
The desert is a true treasure for him who seeks refuge from men and the evil of men. In it is contentment In it is death and all you seek (Quoted from "The Bleeding of the Stone" Ibrahim Al-Koni)