Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 223 for Elk?

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.