So I know hunting with .223 is looked down on by a good bit of people.

If its so bad, then why does the US Military think its good enough for hunting people?

EDIT: Wrong forum...

This post has been edited by AnonymousD: November 25th 2008 6:51 PM

The original concept had more to do with wounding people rather than killing them. Th AR15 was designed for Cold War and anti-Soviet use. The theory is that you wound one guy. Then it takes two more guys to take him the the rear.

That doesn't mean .223/5.56 can't kill people because it can and does on a daily basis.


TS

Different animals. Deer have a tougher hide. It's not a humane cartridge on deer.

On the other hand, it is light, and a soldier can carry plenty of firepower. It will take out a human and if not kill hime, force another soldier to help, thereby removing two from the fight.

Makes sense.

For ammo to use in a situation calling for killing power, I would go 55 grain or the 70 and above grain loads. Why?

The current issue ammo, 62gr M855, was designed to punch through the vests of Soviet soldiers, not guys wearing a sheet. The hard core of the M855 tends to punch little holes in Haji.

The 55gr M193 was designed to go several inches into skin, yaw and fragment. A 55gr soft point will mushroom and cause more damage than the M855. A ballistic tip will also do more damage than M855. All of those can be had in 55 grains which is, generally, cheaper than other ammo.

The 70+ grain ammo will do more damage than either the M193 or M855. SOCOM is now using Mk262 Mod 1 77gr ammo that will have more "knock down power" that the other two and will fragment at longer ranges... especially with issue 14.5" barrel M4 carbines. The Marines are currently working on a 73 grain round for combat use in Iraq, Afghanistan and similar places against similar enemies.


TS

Two words: Shot placement

Something else to consider, the different reactions to getting shot, and the different goals. If I am shooting at a threat, I'm putting as much lead into it as possible, trying to stop the threat as fast as possible. If I hit him in the groin, guts, chest, and noggin, and then he's no longer a threat, what do I care? I would care greatly if I hit a deer in the groin, guts, chest, and noggin. There's going to be a whole bunch of meat damage, if the critter will stand still long enough for me to put that many rounds into him.

5.56 is to stop combatents, be it by killing or injurying them.

Hunting rifles are designed to kill. 'Cause you can't eat a living bowl of deer chili.


5.56 was designed for a higher rate of sustained fire with low recoil.

Less recoil creates tighter patterns when firing in quantity.

People shoot back, deer don't. Using "high volume of fire" is where chamberings like the 5.56mm get their advantage. It enables the shooter to make a follow up shot much quicker than the shooter could if he was shooting a high powered deer tifle.

I don't know many people who do, or who would want to, but dumping 5 rounds all at once on a deer would probably be pretty effective.

At least for killing the deer. May do some damage to the meat though.


Don't get me wrong, pople hunt deer around here with .223 all the time.

But our deer are tiny, if you don't watch you step, you may crush one.

This post has been edited by POOR_MAN: November 25th 2008 8:13 PM

Ed Zachery.

When deer hunting you want the deer to die within a short time and distance of being shot so you do not have to track it very far and so it does not suffer more than necessary. I hate to hear about deer that were wounded but could not be found. If I am going to kill it I do not want to waste the meat.

45 ACP and 30-06 were designed to kill. 5.56 and 9mm were designed to wound. The theory is that the enemy soldier will cease fighting once wounded and several more soldiers will be needed to transport and treat him. This is probably true while fighting a european enemy and even of our own soldiers. However it did not work against the Japanese who would fight to the death or the drugged up enemies our soldiers are currently sending off to meet their virgins.

I have hunted with 222 which is very similar to 5.56 / 223. Then I upgraded to 243. I drastically prefer the quick kill of a 243 to the slow kill and long track of a 222 kill. With the 308 this year one deer fell on the spot, it was hit high and probably broke its back, and the 200+ pounder died within 20 yards from a heart shot.

Same here.



TS

I personally think it should be illegal to hunt deer or larger animals with anything less than 100 grain bullet, the hunt is to kill the game and eat it and mount it if nice Buck or trophy not wound a bunch of animals for them to live who knows how long suffering.
No I am not PITA and yes I use to be a hunter and plan on getting back into hunting, b