Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 223 for Elk?

I noticed that Idaho allows 223/5.56 for Elk. I've never seen anyone do it and I've never considered it. What say ye?

Ahhh....No

I'd visit a .223 ai camp, for sure.

I post below

I have killed horses and cattle with 22 LRs. So the ability of a 223 to kill elk is not in question. However the horses and cattle I killed with 22s were all shot from about 2 feet away and at angels I got to choose.
Just because a cartridge can kill an animal doesn't mean it should be used if you can use something better.

I am a bit of a big rifle fan, but I have over 50 years of elk hunting and guiding experience, and I can tell you factually that a heavy caliber rifle with lots of power is not needed to kill elk. It is sometimes helpful to have range, power and penetration, and the smaller you go with your firearm the better you have to place the bullet. The smallest caliber I have personally used is a 270 with rifles and a 44 mag with handguns to kill elk, but I have seen several killed (very cleanly) with 243s 257 Roberts, 25-06s 6.5X55s, 260 Remingtons, 30-30s 357 mags from both handguns and carbines and one with a 41 mag from a 4" barrel.

If you can place a bullet in an elk at the angle you need to, and if that bullet will penetrate fairly straight and at least 16" deep you can kill elk.

So --- can a 223 kill elk well?
Sure.

Should you go that small for elk hunting?
I'd vote "no".

I fall back on a counter question:

Why would I want to?

Idaho's regs specify that any centerfire can be used on any big game. You can use a 22 Hornet on moose or bear if you want to. I've never heard of anyone using a 223 on elk but some will probably try it.

Idaho's one of the few places that allows that. It's a bad idea and causes problems with wounded animals.

I asked because some folks were pronouncing the 77gr Sierra TMK (Tipped Match King?) as the end all of 223 hunting bullets. Posting lots of pictures of bloody deer innards as proof that the TMK turns the 223 into a big league hunting cartridge. Then they made the pronouncement that it was a legit elk cartridge too.

And it turns out that it is legal for elk in Idaho.

I'm in Oregon and the 223 is not legal. A big Rosie will run 8-900lbs. Even the Rosie cows run an honest 600lbs. That's many times bigger than the biggest muley I've seen. I've tracked bad hits for multiple days and the 223 seems like a recipe for a long tracking job.

But maybe I'm wrong.

Not really the same thing, but I know a guy in Idaho that regularly kills bulls with a 22-250 with 50 grain Speer HP’s

Depends who’s gunning the 223 Win. 😎

WHY ?

I've done it twice, and my pard once. All within 100 yards, all head shots. It worked but wouldn't be my first choice, or even my second.

There were extenuating circumstances each time ( i.e. wounded by somebody else and the .223 was the only thing I had in my hands...)

I figure most of the elk I've killed could have been taken with my .22-250, so a .223 would probably do the same.

Not legal here in Colorado and wouldn't choose a .22 even if it was.

Some can’t place a round well enough at a distance, let alone close yards, with any rifle...You know this, or you should. 😎

I wouldn't personally do it but I am solidly in the .223 Rem for deer camp.

Smallest I have gone on elk is a 6mm Rem with 100 speer BTSP. It worked just fine.

22-250 is a quite different cartridge from the 223. Doesn't seem very "apples to apples" to me.

It's a bad idea to use any centerfire on any game, but I find "any centerfire" preferable to telling hunters they can't use certain centerfires on certain game ("24 caliber and above", "no .223", etc, etc). And I seriously doubt locations with such rules have any more wounded animals than in the neighboring areas. Most people tend towards magnumitis rather than the anemic, and you can't legislate good shooting, anyways.

I think that what I like about Idaho's regulation is that it's one less restriction placed on hunters, on Americans, by the government.

Maybe Idaho figures that it should be the hunter's choice. I kinda like that.

Personally though, I'm happy with my choice of larger cartridges for larger game.

Regards, Guy

I'm fine with Idaho's regulations that allow a .223 to be used on elk, moose etc. I think it should be up to the hunter. But I would choose a more powerful cartridge for my own elk hunting.

Fuggetaboutit.

While Idaho doesn't regulate caliber of centerfires, it does specify 45 cal ML for deer and 50 cal for elk. Also, there's a minimum arrow weight for archers.

Same bullets, just slower in the .223. Neither one offers what I want, even for hunting antelope. The .22-250 just extends the range somewhat.

dla..Long time no see...

I have a .223 tuned in with 60 grain Noslers just for that task,just have not had the op to use that combo..As you know,there are limitations with that combo and pre-season scouting hinted not to choose it "yet"..My son is all tied up cutting up game during hunting season which leaves me not having a backup and I'm not as anxious to hunt as I once was...

It is on my to do list, maybe from a wheelchair...

Well if you ever drop one with 223 post an honest appraisal. I'd be interested in the results.

.

Not that I'd try it.....

Sorry you got old and stoved up - no fun.

Hey..I didn't say that..

While I'm older than dirt is some ways,not so much when it comes to hunting and fishing..Once I am to old and stoved up for that,it's time to leave this planet...

As to your inquire on the 223 for Elk,I did alot of surfing about just that and in my opinion in the right hands,it is an Elk killer..They kill the big bears with them,why not an Elk..Shot placement is everything especially when the calibers get smaller...I wouldn't hunt elk with a .243 a while back and it still would not be my choice..As you know,the .270 was my go to rifle for years until I got a deal on a Weatherby Vanguard Sub MOA in 30-06..That thing is just sweet..I like it better than even my pre 64 Mod 70 SuperGrade..

I have seen the AR 15(223) used on deer in the wrong hands..It was ugly..But I have also seen the 243 used in the same way with the same outcome..Not pretty..And that could be said about many more calibers also..Some people should not be hunting..Period..

PS...A little secret between you and I...

The reason Idaho allows smaller calibers for Elk is in there survey Idaho hunters were far better marksman than Oregon hunters..(Big Grin)

when using a small cartridge/ caliber rifle you are restricting yourself on the ability to kill an elk easier and /or faster. my thought is kill them fast so you can get your animal down and cut up quickly, meat is tastier then. plus with a bigger cartridge/caliber if your a good shot you can kill an elk farther away to easier. i would say no too a 223/556 just take a good old 30-06 just a thought ?good luck with your choice,Pete53

logcutter -

Haven't seen your posts in a while - hope you are doing well.

Uncle owned a hunting lodge and flew the bush in AK when I was a rugrat (early '50's). In later years he would describe how the natives used dogs to get the bears up and would then shoot them with a .22 under the jaw. (Going for the spine, I assume.) Never asked what .22 but assume a .22 rimfire. I know they have been used successfully, including a world record bear back in the '50's. Also don't know if they would take a single shot or multiple. Regardless, I suspect it got pretty dicey at times.

I’d rather hunt elk with a .223 than a bow. But I’m happy hunting them with a bow.

From Wikipedia:
"The .22 Hornet also proved popular among the Alaskan Inuit due to low cost, who used it for hunting seals, caribou, and even polar bears."

You could do it but it is a little light for me.

Actually not. Its idiots that cause the problems. Sounds like gun control to say the 223 is the problem.

Its capable. Use the right bullet, pick the right shot. It limits you. But I've killed pigs bigger than small cow elk with sub sonic 22lr. And no, not always in the head, some in lungs and some in heart. You simply have to know what you are doing.

People are the responsible ones in the end. Always.

And one could also say magnumitis causes lots of wounded animals too.

And I say all the above having used from one end to the other basically on game and I still do today. I'd hunt whitetails with 22lr all day long if it was legal. Iv'e shot whitetails with 50 bmg and had to go trailing them... with a lung shot....

No flame intended. Only an example. On our deer lease the most deer we have to trail come from a single cartridge. Just so happens the guys that tend to be the worst shots use a 270. No flies on the 270 though. But its a fact on our lease and if I was to expound... I could say 270 is the worst by our examples. And another fellow that used one there passed on a few years ago, I finally had him loaded at 90 ttsx in the 270 and we didn't have to search far even gut shots, the dog could find em quickly.

OTOH wife and I hunt with 308, but more often 300.221 subsonic, and 10mm Glocks... I've had ONE issue in all those years where we had a time finding a deer, and I SAW where it hit, but could not get another shot. Just one of those big old bucks that was long for life regardless, even with a 180 xtp though both lungs it still took a LONG time to die.

Why anyone would choose to do so is beyond me? Can the 223 get her done by all means yes. Are there better choices out there? Ummmm- - - Yes!

Then I would consider my 6.5 Grendel bolt action W a 129 Gr SP for such a task and some would consider me severely under-gunned with that combo. Lot to be said for bullet placement and bullet choice.

Ok Idaho does not restrict their hunters from using the 223 for Elk. That being said Id venture to say only a very small minority would choose the 223 for such a task. Very few bullets in the 223 that may be up to the task. Certainly a few would be better choices than most.

I'm interested in your knowledge of how a possibly somewhat smaller hole in the lungs from a 223 is going to kill significantly slower than same or slightly larger hole in lungs from an 06?

Granted each could pick a bullet that would work on opposite ends, but from all the deer I've seen shot, the smaller the rounds are and usually somewhat faster, the quicker deer go down. I've had more DRT out of 243 than anything, the big mags, like 338 and 300 mags, seems like they just keep going till they fall over for some reason with same placement.

Granted the smaller hole could allow the elk to take maybe a minute more or so to die? If folks actually knew how long it takes animals to die anyway, they would be surprised to start with. But as long as the animal is bleeding its good for the meat IMHO. And if it goes bang flop and doesn't bleed out much, a cooler of ice water for a week will do the same job.

Too much of this thinking we have is old wives tales IMHO

With the TTSX available in almost all calibers, assuming reloading at least, I would never hunt an elk size animal with anything other than that bullet. That solves that part.

Why 223? heck I don't know. Can't answer for others either, but lets say I'm after a cow or spike or such. For meat only. Don't really care much if I tag out or not, just going for fun and luck. Why not a 223 or 243 or such. No need to take the thump from bigger rounds. Heck we hunted moose for how long with a 30-30. You know it did limit distances in my head. But you know we never had a single chance where I had to pass a shot, that I could have taken with a larger round.

The bad part about a thread like this is where and how do you draw the line? So many ways to hunt, etc... if thick timber and a fleeting glance while on foot. Dumb, of course I don't take fleeting shots even if I had my 50 bmg with a gun bearer. But I would lean towards 338 win mag side there, for angled penetration. But what about a feeding field, and they come out late, but 100 yards or less should be no problem? I just don't know. There have been SO many whitetails killed with the 22LR, maybe even shorts who knows, but I know I have heard lots of old timers talk about thats what they had and they were hungry and it was easy, Plunk one in the lungs, sit down and roll a smoke or have lunch etc... leave em alone. Just so you don't bump em from the first bed, and they would be in the bed bled to death right there, usually well inside 100 steps.

And you know even with whitetails, we still pick and choose before we go out, as to what/how we are hunting that day. I've had end of season when it gets tough, and need, well lets say want, to tag another doe or such... wait for a windy day, grab a shotgun, and ease through the bedding areas... buckshot is deadly and quick to about 50 yards...

At least 243 and it is small.

Part of the problem with a .223 is “Which .223?” My Ruger MKII is a slow 1-12 twist and, while extremely accurate with 40g bullets, doesn’t like 62g worth a damn. The heaviest I’ll shoot is 50g. OK, Barnes makes a 50g TTSX and, like you, if I was going to hunt with a .223 that is the bullet I would likely choose – partly for a dearth of better options. While I’ve often stated I use 2000fps and 1500fpe at impact as a rule of thumb minimum for elk, a 50g TTSX launched at 3400fps starts out with 1284fpe and falls below 1000fpe before reaching 100 yards. At least retained velocity is good at that range, over 3000fps. I’d rather use my .30-30, as even my Speer 130g /2486fps handload maintains 1900fps/1000fpe past 175 yards and has more energy at 100 than the aforesaid .223 load has at the muzzle. A Speer 150g is even better, 2440fps at the muzzle and at 175 yards essentially matches the Barnes .223 load at the muzzle. It maintains over 1750fps/1000fpe at 225 yards.

Granted, a fast twist .223 allows other options. How about a 77g TTSX at 2750fps? In terms of energy it starts out where the above 50g TTSX does (under 1300fpe) and falls below 2400fps/1000fpe just past 150 yards. Again, I’d rather use my .30-30. At 150 yards my 150g Speer load retains a bit under 2000fps and more energy (over 1300fpe) than the .223 77g load starts with.

Your experience with .300 and .338 mags seems to be different than mine. Most game taken with the .300WM have gone straight down. One cow went further than any other animal I’ve taken with it, doing a 180, taking a couple steps, turning uphill and taking a couple more before falling down. To say it travelled 15 feet is probably stretching it. My .338 puts thumb-sized holes in both sides of elk on a broadside. They don’t go far.

As I get older my preference is more and more to lighter rifles with lower recoil. My .257 Roberts with +P 110g AB loads is still my favorite for deer and smaller but for elk I prefer heavier bullets with more reach. The 7mm RM I started with in ’82 is still one of my best for elk. Got Daughter #1 set up with a .270 and a 150g ABLR at 2912fps with under 18 pounds recoil. I like shooting that a lot and would choose it 100-0 over a .223.

None of this is to say a .223 can’t do the job. It can and has. But bigger cartridges have more reach and where I hunt that I important.


[Edit to correct]
Correction to above, after looking through my records instead of my memory. Had a cow go about 50 feet after being shot with my .300WM. But she went very slowly and unsteadily. The cow mentioned above would be the second longest.
[End edit]

Not legal in Wyoming, and NOT something I would do anyway. Deer or pronghorn? Maybe, with the right bullet.

I'd rather a NEF 223(Dog Fhuqking Schit),than ANY fhuqking bow made.

Hint....................

I wouldn’t spend the time and money driving hours, prepping for months to wager a once in life time shot on a .223.

Now if I was a local rancher type out checking fences and had a good shot in a pasture, why not.

Jeezus Gawd...you Whining Kchunts are CLUELESS. Congratulations?!?

Hint.................

Can't say I wouldn't do it even for a once in a year shot, although I've sometimes hunted elk with a .44 Mag carbine and revolver, neither of which is much better.

Elk grazing in a pasture with a short range and legal shot and a .223 in the gun rack? Whole different story than picking a rifle and heading out to where ranges may get long and angles may be less than ideal.

Someone mentioned the 22-250 as an alternative. I have one and used it for a DRT on an antelope a couple years ago. It shoots the same bullets as a 223. However, mine is a slow twist, 1-14. I'm limited to 55 gr bullets for best accuracy. A fast twist would boost the bullet choices considerably. There are slow twist 223's out there, too.

What Ingwe and Beaver10 said, emergency and placement.

bull elk are a big strong animal that don`t die easy ,i know i have horns to prove it, if it is your chance of a life time with one shot at over 100 yards -200 yards or 300 yards do you want to take that shot with a 223 or a bigger cartridge like a 243 - 30-06 or bigger on a big 6x6 bull ? hand me my old Winchester Model 70 pre 64 338 Win Mag. i`ll knock that bull down now !

This whole idea is a dog and pony show with nothing accomplished other than a good chance of wounding a nice animal. Idaho might allow it but I strongly disagree with using one this way. I'm betting that 99% of the hunters who own a 223 also own something more suitable.

If they have any brains that is for sure Rock Chuck!!!

What he said...

In a word, NO. I don't even like them for deer, they can and do work but not for me. Used one for 20 years and shot expert with several. For what they are designed for they are a very good weapon. Elk wasn't something that was on the design board. Elephants have been killed with a 22LR doesn't mean I would choose one.

Lots of guessing on this thread.

Killed a few cow elk with a 223, from 40 to 400 plus yards. No issues. They died just like they had been shot with larger rounds.

As much as people want to imagine there's some big difference in killing power between different cartridges, the reality is that about any sort of halfway decent bullet placed into the vitals is going to kill the animal without drama.

I smell male bovine excrement.

Probably your breath blowing back into your face.

I have nothing to prove. The 223 works fine.

My choice is 300 WM for elk, 223 for coyotes.

Been elk hunting long enough to prefer to hit them fairly hard with a heavy for caliber bullet. But to be clear I have taken many more bulls than cows.

dia,

I know prairie goat very well, and have hunted with him quite a bit around his Montana home. He knows what he's talking about.

They used the 22-250 all over the Townsend area.

My friends on the Rez like the 223.....for many reasons.

Seems to work.

Are you his cheerleader shaking those pom-poms? Or do you have direct experience with hunting Elk with a 223?

I took a long time warming up to shooting a deer with a .223. I picked the 53 grain TSX and did enough testing to assure myself it would probably work OK. When I did it I carefully examined the wound channels while butchering. What I came to was that the wound channels looked more or less like a 30-30 wound channel. Two of the deer had their heart loose in the chest. One of the deer I shot with a .223 didn't bleed a drop until it tipped over. Nothing ran more than about 100 feet.

Would I use one on an elk? I have never had the inclination to shoot an elk, but, I wouldn't hesitate to use a 30-30 did I choose to hunt elk and I wouldn't hesitate to use a .223 in the same conditions. My experience with deer is that the .223 is not the least bit marginal. I killed big deer with it and it went right on through the shoulders, wrecked the contents of the chest and exited. I have had poor or no blood trail with probably every caliber rifle I have killed them with and with arrows. I have had very well hit deer go extraordinary distances and bleed like hell while doing so. IMO trying to predict what happens with a given shot will only teach you that the exceptions to the average can be pretty extreme. I have seen well more than enough deer shot with well placed 30 caliber bullets that would probably have survived. Just because a bullet is well placed does not mean it will follow the intended path through the deer. From what I have seen a 180 grain 30-06 bullet is not more guaranteed to go through Bambi any better than a 53 grain TSX. Even arrows can and do deflect.

being a non`-resident who has to pay way to much for a non-resident elk license if and when i go out west again ,i will be using a very accurate 338 rifle reason i plan on filling my tag one shot up to 500 yards ,probably in some hell hole in the mountains. now a resident using a resident cheap elk license then sure go ahead use a 223 your out there all season so residents can be a little picky when and where to shoot there elk by the road again. that`s why there is difference between what size rifle cartridge you can use ,so if your a non-resident the answer is a simple NO don`t use a 223/556 for elk it cost to much not to fill your non-resident license.

Pete53. You are a whining [bleep]. Hope you never draw another over priced MT tag again. Plenty of people want those tags and don’t biotch about em. Stay in MN with you stick and string

truth bothers you ? non-residents pay the way for all > residents should be paying much more on federal land that we all hunt on ! Montana should send all non-residents thank you cards because without us non-residents Montana DNR would go broke ! you can take that to the bank buddy

[bleep] crybabies....I'm suprised you poor souls have gas money left...

You have no idea what you are talking about....

Nope , and I don’t walk down the middle of the road either !

You obviously didn’t pay attention in lineman training when they said don’t touch a hot wire cuz you’re brain cells and synapse got smoked...You must’ve been stupid to begin with for not paying attention in class, so there’s that too. Just a dumbfûck your whole life.
😎

funny but no answer needed , i notice TROLLS

Ahhh, yes, provincial pete. There's dull-witted, and then there's pete.

For you, lithspy pete: