Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Hunting Deer With Smaller Calibers

With the bullets available back then, that was pretty solid advice.

Well said, this reflects my evolution as a hunter/shooter perfectly.


mike r

105 grain Speers were used mostly. And one more thing, he was National Benchrest champion...so there goes the argument of "you just need good bullet placement" down the drain.

With a 7-8 lb rifle, shooting a .223 offhand loaded with 60 grain projectiles or more, you loose your sight picture during recoil. If they are any reasonable distance away, by the time you regain your sight picture, you are usually not going to see the entrance hole especially if its very small. You will see the reaction just as much after you regain your sight picture with a medium size cartridge as a small one.

It’s not if, it’s when. Shorter runs and more blood on the ground are far better in thick stuff. So, while I’ve culled and killed my share with a 223, it’s not optimum if it makes the brush line. I want two holes, and at least one of them decent sized. Everyone has different terrain or requirements. 223s with good bullets likely fit in well with some of them. I’ve no problem with the idea of smaller calibers making stuff dead, it’s more about placement vs time windows….for deer AND shooter. I’d also feel better about a violent confrontation with a 9 or 45 than a 32acp….for some of the same rationale.

I cannot speak for T Inman, but something else that everyone in my shooting circles who has also migrated to "smaller" chamberings has done is added muzzle brakes or suppressors to our firearms. This allows us to stay on target through the shot due to recoil being significantly lowered. Again, it has nothing to do with us not being able to tolerate recoil, it has everything to do with being precision shooters, which takes a lot of practice.

I predominately use 6.5 Grendel, 7TCU, or 6X45 for all of my whitetail rifle hunting. With my set-ups, I can watch the impact on the animal and gauge its reaction through the scope.

Those who use a gas gun in .223 and get say 2 x 64 grain bullet holes in a vital area would approximately equal a 130 grain .270 in its effect...I would think.

I am not so sure my experience aligns with this.

62 TSX out of my Kimber Montana .223 REM and SWFA 6x42 allows me to see the deer’s reaction just fine. I don’t shoot offhand very often and certainly not beyond “reasonable” distances, but this combo does usually allow me to see the critter’s reaction. I also can’t say I have ever seen the entrance hole, as opposed to their reaction to the shot. Step up to the .22-250 in a lighter rifle, and I do tend to loose that sight picture.

Retaining sight picture when firing may be a personal ability. I can say for a fact 100 gr Hornadys with just above minimum load in a Model 7 .260 do not make me lose sight of bowling pins at 100 yards when standing offhand. How’s that for qualifiers. My son and I were chuckling about that when using up some old loads he started with at 7 years old. I suspect about any .223 load would act similarly. Just one example.

The only way I'd use something like a 223 would be if it was all I had available. Given that choice, I'd use it and not think twice. I have better choices and they are what I prefer to use. As others have said, where you are hunting has a lot to do with it.

No wonder you think using a .223 gives the same effect as a .270 or .280 or 30-06, bowling pins are already dead.

I’ve never turned down a shot with a 243 or 22/250 because they’re “smaller”. If I don’t get the look that I want, I don’t shoot no matter what I’m carrying. I think that just comes from maturing as a hunter, and age has little to do with that.

I have lost a couple of deer with an ‘06 when I was in my early 20’s, because I didn’t have the patience to wait for the right time to shoot. Ive killed lots of deer with a 243 and a fair amount with the 22/250, and so has my daughter. We’ve yet to lose one. The blood trails might be a little more sparse on occasion, but being cleanly hit, they’re laying close by.

I have, however, had to help friends track down and finish butt-shot deer, and deer shot around the edges of vitals. Most of em were using cartridges that folks think would give you an edge if “shot placement” is marginal.

Well, it didn’t help. I don’t think I’d look up from behind the rifle after gut shooting a deer and say, “ Whew, glad I had the 300 magnum !”

I think that your post is spot on.

It takes maturity to turn down a suboptimal shot when you really, really want to squeeze the trigger.on a trophy deer or a deer that you need to feed your family.

I've followed up my share of deer that other hunters put a bullet into, mostly deer that were shot while moving or even jumping over 4-strand barbed wire fences

Isn't it amazing that people tend to recount the times that they had perfect shot placement, or took the high moral ground and didn't take the shot...but no one recounts the stuff-ups they had and wounded game. From this, one might conclude that people tend to cherry-pick the best encounters they have and sweep the bad ones under the carpet and forget about them. But there are lots of instances of wounded or crippled game and I don't believe that its always someone else, or that it doesn't happen that much.

Regardless of which cartridges you're comparing, this line of thinking does not pan out in practice, IME.

You mean like this:




My experience is similar. Almost all of the rodeos I've seen were caused by poor shot placement, often with a cartridge that was larger than the shooter was capable of shooting proficiently (given their minimal level of practice and dedication), though a few were with smaller cartridges, and those that weren't caused by shot placement were the result of poor bullet selection.

If you’re referring to me, hey, I admit I’ve fluffed a few shots in my life. I’m ashamed to admit that I’ve lost 4 deer in 35+ years of hunting. Two with an ‘06, one with a 44 mag, and one with a muzzleloader. Two of them even after I’d “matured” and waited for good shots while taking the moral high ground. Poor shooting on my part.

Hey, it happens to everybody. And, there have been a couple of fiascos flinging lead and friends helping me follow up those couple. One with a 444 Marlin, and one with the ‘06. Thankfully those were recovered, and I realized that it was my impatience that caused it. It’s a rare person that doesn’t have it happen.

But, in reply to the OP, none of it was because of poor cartridge selection or being smaller caliber. It was my impatience and piss-poor shooting.

if they're running in thick cover you have no business taking a shot
i don't care what caliber your using or how good your shooting skills are or you claim they are

I’ve tracked a lot of perfectly shot deer that went a ways. It’s always easier with more blood. Bigger holes do that better. Perfect, broadside, double lung and/or heart….easier, shorter tracking is with the bigger holes and more leakage. Generally, they lose blood pressure/die faster with more blood loss. Just is. Unless you’re guaranteeing cns all the time, there’s no guarantees, regardless of chambering….but common sense dictates there’s better or worse, when that happens.

Whether the target is animate or inanimate, alive or dead has nothing to do with retaining sight picture and observing bullet impact. The combination mentioned did not produce enough recoil to prevent me seeing the result of my shots. This is nothing unusual. A mouse gun is not required to observe bullet impact. The last two bucks I shot were with 7-08/120gr TSX/ 48gr CFE223 from a Model 7 and a muzzleloader with 80 gr weighed of BH209 and a .429 Barnes 200gr pistol bullet. Rifle shot was 75-85 yds IIRC and the muzzleloader at around 50. Bullet impact and target reaction were no problem to observe.

I’ve actually never killed anything with a .223 but probably will take a deer or two with one next year. Having seen deer shot with rifles ranging from a .22 Mag to a .340 Weatherby, shotguns, and Broadheads I have no doubt the 223 will kill properly.