Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Its possible that a .223 works on deer better than 30-06?

I hunted with a 223 this year, I have several rifles like most of us do so I did not see anything when hunting the 5 or 6 times with my .223. I was really hoping that something would allow me to try the 62 grain barnes over 24 grains of TAC. In looking at the reports on the various 223 vs all other calibers on Whitetail deer in these forums, in listening to people I hunt with or have hunted with, then the pictures with more damage posted from 223's on this forum it looks to me that the .223 actually does a better job than the 30-06 when used out to 100 or so yards. For sure it looks like it kills just as well or better than a 30-06.

Sure, within 100 yards. A .22 lr is as effective at point blank range.

i've shot lots of deer with a .22 lr in my younger years (from 3 to 10 yards at night off the back of my mule) - it worked every time. shot some with a 22-250, and that worked every time. shot many more with other big game calibers, and they all worked. they all work if you use them in specific applications. but for hunting, i'd prefer a 243 win or larger just because they give me more flexibility. ymmv.

my point is that I wonder if a 3000+ fps .223 round that goes all the way thru is more damaging to the deer than a 2600 FPS 180 grain 30-06 bullet that goes all the way thru or a 2400 fps 358 bullet. What role does velocity play as long as you get full penetration? Secondly does the .223 because it is smaller impart more work to the innards of a deer as it probably loses more velocity while its going thru.

killing deer is made up of many factors.
the lowest of importance is caliber.

I could go for "It kills just as well" , but I would have a hard time believing "It kills better".

I know you said neither, I'm just say'n.

Terry

NO

.223 bullet doesn't have the penetration power to pass through big deer bone.

Yeah.
Regarding holes in critters, you often can only see the real damage/performance if you take the hide off and look inside of a critter. If you cut your own up, you get to see it all.
A 30 06 can definitely make a big enough mess of a deer that you gotta wonder if you should be using something smaller........depending.

I meant yeah to the NO.

Actually he did.

"it looks to me that the .223 actually does a better job than the 30-06 when used out to 100 or so yards."

based on the pictures posted on this forum the holes look as big or bigger with a .223 than I have seen with many 30 caliber deer rifles. Someone will say "what about a bad angle" I wonder if a TSX bullet shot up the bung hole would go all the way to the heart/lungs out of a 223?

If there close enough and the angle is right dead is dead,. But if its long shooting and you have a bad angle I just dont see a 223 pulling it off. But I have never shot big game with one either.

Seems that the AK boys shoot a bunch with 223's, wonder if they will chime in.......

I look at it this way. I have Rem. 700 BDL-SS in 223- 6mm- 25-06 & 280. Come buck season, you can bet I will have the 280 with me. If a super big buck comes out I want the best suited rifle I own to take the buck with. Not no "maybe" caliber.

There is no replacement for shot placement. However if you dont hit it just right, say good bye to injured animal.

I have shot a lot of deer with both the 223 and the 30-06 and either can be effective, but there is more to it than that. My kids and grandkids all started out with a 222 and shot only under perfect conditions and they were successful..I have culled in Africa with the 223 and it worked under the conditions that I used it..I have seen the fast 22s fail on more than one ocassion when folks used them beyond their capabilities.

The 223 has limited effective range on big game, it can also fail to penetrate on ocassion, but one ocassion is enough to make it a non deer caliber IMO..It must be used very carefully as it is underpowered. It can be very destructive to flesh and excessive bloodshot meat can be prevelent. Although it works most of the time you cannot depend on it fully IMO...What impresses people is the explosive effect that kills instantly, but when that fails to happen then your deer runs a 100 or so yards and crawls into a thick brushy hidey hole and no blood trail and one deer wasted...

The 30-06 is under all condition a much better big game rifle, It will punch two big holes in anything and leave big time blood trails, sometimes it kills quickly, sometimes not, but you can always find your deer..It can be used at extreme range of say 400 yards and has been effective much further I suppose. You can take a shot from any angle and be assured of full penetration. With the right bullet you can control the amount of blood shot area or increase it. If you wound him pretty well he will lay down, and when you jump him you can stick one up his keyster and kill him on the spot, not so the 223.

The choice is an absolute no brainer IMO....There is more to killing a deer than those nice little instant kills that may or may not take place.

The problem with the internet is a couple guys that are very experienced at putting a marginal cartridge in just the right spot, can make it appear that anyone or everyone will have the same results.

Any cartridge can kill a deer and any cartridge in the right hands can consistently kill a deer. The question is, can any cartridge kill a deer consistently for everyone? The answer is no, as the majority of hunters have neither the skill nor take the time to practice to the point that they can consistently put that shot where it needs to go.

Of course it doesn't matter what you hit em with, if you don't hit em in a vital area, the difference between a .223 or .243 and a more forgiving round like a 7mm-08 or 30-06 is really margin of error. If they did a comprehensive study of hitting a deer from every angle and with varying accuracy by the shooter using the same bullet construction, I am positive that a 140gr bullet at 3000 FPS is going to drop that deer quicker and more often than a 60gr .223 at 3000fps.

i guess that it had to happen....

we had the .270 vs the 30-06..

the .308 vs. the 30-06

the .30 mags vs. the 30-06

the 7mm s vs. the 30-06

seems like somebody always has to assert that A is better than B...
or might be better... or could be better...
or.....
would be better if

a] the factories would load it right
b] the general populace would see the light
c] shooters in general could learn to shoot
d] everybody would get a clue/life/new job
d] ad nauseum, ad ignorem.....

+1 atkinson, well said and I agree it's an absolute no brainer for me too. I for one don't look for massive exit and wasted or bloodshot meat, no problem if they run 100 yards with a good bloodtrail, 30-06 does a mighty fine job. You must also factor in the shock value of an '06 on marginal hits, Waidmannsheil, Dom.

I shot a pig maybe 60 yards away about a month ago. He was walking, didn't stop, so I put the crosshairs on his shoulder and let one go with my .30-06, 150 fusion. The animal stepped forward as I fired, the bullet hit too far back...kidney area or so back there. Squealed really loud...I walked up and put one more in his chest and that was it. He would have died either way though. Maybe 150-175# so comparable in size to the average deer....most deer down here probably don't weigh even that.

I bought the '06 since I only wanted one rifle for now that I could take anything on this continent with, if I use the proper bullet and put it in the right place. IMO.

Oh yeah, the bullet went right through and made two big bleeding holes.