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

I'd not mind shooting deer with a .223, but it isn't legal here. Probably for the better, in all honesty, because I don't trust lots of guys I meet to pick a heavily constructed bullet for the .24s let alone their .22s. I've actually seen guys hunt mule deer with 58gr VMAXs in rifles they haven't fired in years.

Stupid always finds a way.

there ... now your statement is +P ... (grin)

Respectfully, I suspect that less than 1% of deer hunters made their cartridge selection based on your criteria.

I can and do because I can and want to, can't give a tinker's damn about the other 99% but I do know it works and works well.

I've also stated I think a 357 Magnum in a rifle is plenty of deer, but never said it was perfect for shooting mule deer at 623.748 yards in a 47mph crosswind.

I enjoy getting close and for that can't think of much of anything that don't work on deer, avoiding extremes.

Ain't it so!

Steely ... what are you doing this weekend? I'm going to be at the camp, and you're welcome to come along ...

Damn, that sounds TEMPTING, especially with the colder weather. I'm currently in VA and will be back in LA around midnight tomorrow. Promised someone a fishing trip on Sunday.

How's the 7mm-08AI treating ya? Ever do any squirrel/rabbit hunting up that way after deer ends?

the 7mm-08AI remains unfinished, as I've still not sent it back to the smith to fix the threads in the magazine tab screw hole in the action ...

I've been hunting with my .243, .45-70, and my bow ...

I'll have to call you tomorrow to discuss ... unless you call me first ...

I left my phone in LA, so it would be Saturday.

just call me whenever you get back to your phone ...

Roger, even MIDNIGHT Friday.........grin

Have you checked your messages?

God no, not in the past week, if she's pregnant again it weren't me...............grin

Hung with Paul some today, he said HEY!

Hope you two were planning a trip up North........grin.

Simply put, a .223 in the hands of someone who practices and is a good shot, is far more capable of making critters dead than a .30-06 in the hands of someone who's a [bleep] shot, and you can take that to the bank!

Going out on a limb, are we? No one disputes that.

Then what are we disputing, varying degrees of dead?

Gratuitous insults aside, what appears to be in dispute is whether there is any 'grey' between the 'black and white' views of hunters as 'good' shots or crappy shots. Further, in the case the existence of a 'adequate' shot, does a larger bullet travelling just as fast (e.g. .30-06 vs. .223) provide any 'margin for error' in the case of a slightly less than ideal (but not very bad) shot location on a deer. I've only see one person claiming that the .223 'couldn't' reliably take a deer (Mr. Tumbling after 100 yards). Otherwise the .223 (proper bullet selection and spin to stabilize it assumed) would seem to be a 'death ray' compared to a bow for instance.