Pros and cons of .222 Rem for whitetails

[kombi1976]

Bravo, JohnClif!!! Bravo!!!    :wink:

[mitchell]

well i think johnclif is right about using a heavy gun for starting hunters . BUT i do not agree with most of you on a 22cal being good enough for deer. just a thought how much energy does a crossbow have at 300 yards? i don't know but i'll bet it isn't no 1000lbs. so does that mean a crossbow is a bad choice for deer no it needs to be used for what its purpose was . now i know a crossbow kills by cutting and a rifle kills by shock but the princiable still applys. use weapons for what there made for!!  don't try to make the 243 into a 7mm-08 don't try to make the 7mm-08 into a 30-06 and don't try to make the 30-06 into a 300win mag. i have only killed a few deer past 300 yards but most of them have been with in 150. and i don't think i have ever kill a deer ruining i have alway taken a broad side shot with the exception of two neck shots. so just about all the deer i have took have been just about 100 yards broad side and standing still and if i would of had a 223 all of those deer would still be dead. use your head we don't load V-max's in our 30-06's and go hunt deer well hello don't do it with your 223 either! use the right tool for the job!!! and keep the yardage close 75 -100 yards and put the bullet behind the shoulder that thing will die with in 100 yards. if you can't the bullet where you want it no matter what gun you use you don't need to be hunting .

[Ricci Price]

Back in my younger days the only two centerfire rifles in the house was 222 and a 243 my dad didn't see a use for anything bigger.I have killed right at 20 deer with that 222 up until a few years ago ,the biggest deer I have ever killed was with that 222 about 180lbs. Now it has alot to do with where you are hunting, I wouldn't go chasing deer that weigh more than 150lbs with it but down here in north florida & south georgia the deer are don't get much over 150lbs. most don't weigh but 120lbs.,never lost a deer ,all were dead when I recovered them, most of them drop in their tracks, most of the time I would neck shoot them just in front of the front shoulder (can't understand why most people don't shoot here anyway).I did shoot one about 350-375 yards, lung shot,he made it about 30 more yards and kicked over. NEVER made head shot though,my dad would have tore me up for even trying. used 52grn seirra match bullets on most. I have shot deer behind the shoulder with alot of different calibers .224,.243,.257,.308,.500(muzzleloader) and all them run till they die.Neck shot in shoulder area ,they can barely pick there head up after they hit the dirt.

[poncaguy]

223 cal. is legal in Oklahoma for deer. I wouldn't use a 222 or a 223 for deer, but would use my 22-250 and be confident. But, I use my 270 WSM most of the time, made a kill at 351 steps this year with it, last day of season, and that's the reason I use it, long shots are common. Sonme days I use my Handi 243 and Encore 7mm-08. Most of my deer have been taken with a 270.  :lol:

[cal sibley]

To each his own I guess, but I'm not about to gamble a successful hunt on my ability to make a perfect shot with a .222.  Hell, you can kill a deer with a .22 rimfire if you're so inclined, but not many of us would attempt it.
I'm not out there to wound the animal, but to kill it.  You're tilting the odds too much by using a small caliber like this.  Just one mans opinion.  Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

[bwana]

It's really all about the energy and the resulting wound channel.  We had two deer brought in at our camp this year one particular day that make a good comparison for this topic.  Both shot in the heart/lung area from about 75 yards one with a 7mm mag one with a .17 rem.  The 7mm went clean through the deer made a small exit hole and a sizable hole in the ground.  The .17 rem did not exit from a shot in the same place, same size deer.  Both lungs and heart area were pulverized.  the wound channel was very tightly contained about the size of a 20oz. Coke bottle.  No other meat was affected.  Deer dropped within three steps.

This comparison sparked a three day long discussion among a group of fine, seasoned hunters.

I think that the light bullet/high velocity combination is a fine tool in the hands of a disiplined hunter who understands what it can do.  I have a .222 rem too and would not hesitate to use it on deer but ONLY at 75 yards or less, ONLY at a clean heart/lung shot when the shoulder was not an issue (broadside or quarting away).  

The example of the 7mm at close range was a MUCH smaller wound channel, about the size of a ax handle clean through.  The bullet expended far more energy AFTER it passed through the deer.  The hole in the ground was a FAR bigger hole.  If it had not hit the heart area the deer could well have run a very long way bleeding into it's lungs before it died.  The actual lung damage was not too impressive.  We've all seen examples of this.

Bottom line is this, the 7mm had a far smaller effective killing target (heart) than the .17 (heart AND lungs) at 75 yards.  It's about the energy.  The 7mm's was wasted because of the short range and the .17's was optimized because of it.  The .17 got 100% of it's energy expended into the animal and resulted in an impressive wound and a dead deer (actually two dead deer that day from the .17).

So, is the .17 better, heck no.  But it was easilly able to kill a deer IF done at close range.  Now, whether the gun is in the hands of a hunter with the disipline and/or hunting ability to get a shot at 75 yards or less, is a whole different story.  It's like fishing with light line.  You had better respect the limits of your gear AND the limits of your abilities.  And a responsible hunter will NEVER attempt to take an animal when he is unsure of the outcome.

In dense woods, close quarters and skilled hunter a .222 would be a workable choice, but there are better ones.  Longer ranges, different conditions make different limitations.  Lots of folks have opinions about the "perfect" gun for this and that, truth is they will all kill whatever you want if you use them within their limitations.

A novice hunter is always better with a big slow bullet.  Longer shots and greater velocities require more skill.  Problem is guys in love with making lots of noise and playing with big guns want to rationalize a use for them.  I saw a guy hunting from the ground in East Texas in woods so dense you'd never see a herd of deer if you were more than 30 yards from them.  He had a .300 win mag.  If he touches off a round it could pass through a deer and go another 200 yards easilly.  Poorly chosen tool for the job.  The notion that bigger is better is just as foolish.

Another fella used the tool analogy and it is a good one.  Guns don't kill deer, bullets do.  It's all about the energy.


With MY luck I'd have a world record buck come in the day I had a little too light of gun and show me nothing but the shoulder.  Better off in the middle somewhere.

bwana

[poncaguy]

I have always preferred the small-fast over the big-slow for deer. Now, I'm 64 with a bad right shoulder, I really do! Usually always do the behind the shoulder heart lung shot, usually turns them to jello. Have never lost a deer., and most just fall at the hit. I know there are exceptions, and I have a Handi 45-70 for them (OUCH!), but for one shot  :eek: , I can bear it. 22-250 would still be the smallest I would use for deer.

[PEPAW]

I have used a  Sako .222 since my first deer in 1967.      My family now has a cut down .222 Savage that is everybody's first rifle, including my friend's children.  Plain soft points behind the shoulder or in the neck.  
Of course, these are small TX deer, mostly does and never a big buck.  But most of our youngsters start going hunting as soon as they can shoot and cannot handle a bigger gun.  These little deer are not that hard to kill with a shot to the lungs.  Kind of like an broadhead.   Knockdown power is not necessary.
What is surprising is the size of the wild hogs we have killed with a .222!
I don't recommend a .222 for others, but for "culling" does or pigs (standing, at close range), it works fine.

pepaw

[TNrifleman]

I fail to understand why anyone would deliberately chose a tool of such marginal capability for this task. So many other, better choices are readily available. Deer hunting is not some "stunt," and the game animal deserves a much better effort on your part. As fine a cartridge as the 222 is, it is not good deer round. It is also illegal for big game hunting in most states for just that reason. Please rethink this foolishness!

[skb2706]

It must be a whole different animal than what we see as deer.
I know for a fact that here in CO we have deer that will go over 300 lbs. If I were going 'on a chance' I would take a weapon suitable for the biggest possible and know I was well equipped.

[PEPAW]

I knew this would irritate some.   My point is every deer is not created equal.    Depending upon the part of the state, a mature buck may dress 70-90lbs.    Where we now hunt, the does are approx. 80 lbs.  It does not take a .300 cal magnum to kill an animal this size.  

But for doe management hunts (close, broadside standing shots with a rest), a double lung shot is always lethal.    
It is not a stunt after the first couple dozen.


Just my opinion.

pepaw

[Ramrod]

A 300 pound buck is going to go down just as fast as an 80 pound doe with a shot through the ribs right behind the shoulder from most .22 centerfires. The violent bullet expansion does it. I have also seen both big bucks, and small does run a long way when hit in the same place with a .30 cal bullet that did not expand. On the other hand, if you have a marginal angle and still must take the shot, the .30 cal is none to small, and .35 might be even better.

[cal sibley]

Most states do not allow .22 Centerfires to be used on deer, and there are reasons why.  My main concern is that as a hunter I have an obligation to kill that animal quickly and cleanly, to make sure it doesn't suffer needlessly by wandering away only to die a painful and protracted death later.  Just one mans opinion.  Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

[Lawdog]

Most states do not allow .22 Centerfires to be used on deer, and there are reasons why.  My main concern is that as a hunter I have an obligation to kill that animal quickly and cleanly, to make sure it doesn't suffer needlessly by wandering away only to die a painful and protracted death later.  Just one mans opinion.  Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Actually it's the opinion of most I have found.  and with good reasons too.  I have seen way to many deer wounded with .22 centerfires(I tried the mighty .220 Swift with unsatisfactory results) with solid body shots to ever trust using one again on big game.  Bullet deflection becomes a real problem when dealing with high speed .22 centerfires(seen it happen more than once).  Leave the .22 centerfires to what they were designed for, Varmints and Targets.  Lawdog
 :toast:

[Lone Star]

I am in 100% agreement with Lawdog on this one.  I've shot five Kodiak Island blacktails with six shots from an AR-15, firing the old 60-grain Solid Base Noslers at a reduced velocity.  These bullets behaved like game bullets and were not overly fragile - at lower velocities.  The first deer didn't drop at the shot so I fired again - both hits were right next to each other in the lungs.  The next four deer were just shot once and I waited a few seconds for the deer to fall over.  They exhibited no obvious signs of a hit - odd, and another reason not to use the .223.  

This hunting was done when there were a lot of deer on the island and the limit was seven deer.  I passed up a lot of animals until I got perfect presentations for my shots - on a typical Lower-48 hunt I would probably never have had the opportunity for those perfect shots.  That trip was a stunt I will not repeat, nor will I ever recommend that anyone else do it.  Period.   BTW, that year a Kodiak brownie was killed with a .22RF - so what does that prove?

[Ramrod]

I've shot five Kodiak Island blacktails with six shots from an AR-15, firing the old 60-grain Solid Base Noslers at a reduced velocity.

You are making a pretty good argument for the effectiveness of .22 centerfires. I know alot of guys shooting .30-06 and 7mm mags that can't touch that record. And in the shotgun only areas I hunt, I routinely hear 3-5 shots per deer. Personally, I have experienced a greater number of "drop in their tracks" kills on deer with a .223 and a .22-250 than any other weapon, and that includes 12 gauge slugs, and buckshot.

[cal sibley]

We all know of people who have killed deer with .222Rem. sized cartridges.  I would never hunt with someone using one though.  We've got an obligation to kill the animal quickly and humanely.  There are just too many things that can go wrong when shooting deer with these small calibers.  We don't always end up taking the perfect shot under ideal conditions.  There's too much chance of not recovering the animal especially if shot towards dusk.  It's going to ultimately die of course, but what a tragic waste to lose it.  Just one mans opinion.  Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

[Bim]

I think just because you use a cannon doesn't mean you can take chancy shots or under low light or at longer ranges. Some people think that if they can just hit a deer with a 300 mag it's going down. If a person can't handle the recoil of a 30/06 and uses it because another says it's minimum for deer and flinches at 100 yd's will it drop in it's tracks because it was hit with a big gun in the butt? I've skinned a black bear with a beautifully expanded .30 cal. slug just under the skin from a previous season. Let's face it not everyone makes perfect shots no matter what cal. gun they are using just because it's a larger caliber dosen't mean it's a better miss.

[China Fleet Sailor]

TNrifleman expressed my thoughts exactly.  

As far as I'm concerned, when I shoot at a game animal I have a moral obligation to kill it cleanly.  That means I use a cartridge that can do the job even under less than ideal conditions and that I practice with it.  I honestly don't understand the impulse that drives some people to use the smallest possible cartridge that they can think of.  Hunting isn't like fishing, where light tackle gives the fish a sporting chance to get away.  

Yes, it's possible to go too far the other way.  If you can't hit 'em you can't kill 'em.  But is something along the lines of a .25-06 or 6.5mm Swede (or whatever small but fully CAPABLE cartridge you favor) such a "cannon" that the average shooter can't handle the recoil?

[mag shooter]

I like everyone else, have an opinion on this, but I would just like to ask a question. The phrase "use enough gun" confuses me. Is it the same for a 350 lb B.C. whitetail as for a 90 lb southern deer? Also, can anyone tell me where the 1000 ftlb theory orginated and is it anything scientific or just a general concensious of opinions? Are there ftlb. theories for other game, ie moose , elk, ect. ? If not ,why?

[China Fleet Sailor]

There are energy recommendations for other animals.  For instance, I've come across a 2000ft/lb. minimum for elk.   John "Pondoro" Taylor's wrote on African rifles, and he thought a competent hunter could take on any African big game with a rifle that made 4000ft/lb.s.  That's why he liked a 450/400 double rifle as an all-around gun.  As far as I know there's nothing scientific about these minimums and they are just general guidelines based on observations over time.

Other people have other criteria; momentum gives more importance to bullet weight, as do Taylor's Knock Out (TKO) values, and Optimum Game Weight (OGW) calculations also takes into account bullet construction.  These haven't been validated scientifically either.

The only scientific studies I've ever seen on retained energy have been on waterfowl, and were used to determine the minumum amount of retained energy a pellet had to have to penetrate the feathers and reach vitals.

What's good for the goose is good for the, well, other animals, too.  Energy alone doesn't kill; the projectile has be able to hold together and reach the vitals on the largest animal you may encounter from whatever angle you may have to shoot it from.

There are .22 caliber big game bullets (Nosler Partition, Barnes TSX, etc.) but most .22 bullets are not designed to hold together on large animals.  Most .22 caliber rifles have twist rates of around 1 in 12" designed for optimal performance with the lighter, frangible varmint bullets.  The energy may be just barely there, but if you use the wrong bullets or your rifle can't shoot the right bullets then it's still irresponsible.  If you have a rifle that can shoot big-game bullets, or rebarrel to a better twist rate, and the deer are small then it'll work under ideal conditions if you're a good shot and a patient hunter.  But it's marginal and, in my opinion, doesn't show the proper respect to the animal you're hunting.

[SeekHer]

Most US states and Canadian provinces DO NOT allow the use of .22 caliber rimfire or centerfire rifles in the pursuit of big game.  

The reason is quite simple really, It doesn't kill them, it leaves too many cripples.  Yes, a perfect shot puts them down but the problem is that us hunters aren't perfect...as one said "their kids start with it"...that is not an experience shooter or hunter and will be prone to buck fever.  Also, how many times has an animal stood with a perfect broadside to you, c'mon?

Why not go up to a .243/6mm...still has a light recoil, small sound signature, and now you're shooting bullets with twice the weight, twice the B.C. and a lot better killing potential.

[mag shooter]

http://www.mdwfp.com/customerService/faq.asp?Division=Wildlife

What are the rifle and ammunition restrictions for deer hunting?
(Question asked on 8/22/2002 1:00:00 PM )

There are none except for certain Wildlife Management Areas and Federal Refuges. Check with that area for specific restrictions.

You are probably correct about " most" but I think that if you did some research you might be surprised at the number of states that do not have a minium caliber law. No we as hunters are not perfect, regardless of caliber used. I do not subscribe to the train of thought that states more gun will make up for a bad shot. It's still going to be a Bad shot.

[R.W.Dale]

This year Arkansas added a minimum caliber restriction for the first time.

 " Centerfire cartriges must be at least .22-caliber for the modern gun deer hunt"

[Jay Johnson]

Most States do not allow 22 center fires for deer with good reason.

Any larger caliber will work better and more humanly.

[TX50CAL]

I got to go hunting with a buddy of mine a few days ago. we were hunting the late season antlerless. first day in the stand I saw nothing and about froze myself. went back to the cabin, buddy came back and said he got one but couldn't find it. We looked for a little while and found no blood. split off about 30 yds apart and started walking. about 40 yds in the little button buck took off my way and went down with one shot from my Remington 722 triple deuce. Hunted all day the next day and were about ready to leave when the feeder went off at 5:00pm, at 5:02 a doe came running down the fence line making a bee-line for the feeder, fired the triple deuce and had my first TX deer. She went about 100 lbs, no rack but couldn't be prouder of the little .222.   Would I use this round at more than 150 yds? Probably not, but at the distance I used it at it dropped them like they were hit from a 30-06.
Dave in TX

[Slamfire]

The big game rated .22 bullets seem to be all heavier (60-70gr.) than the 50 grain bullets the .222 is set up for. I'd expect stability problems with the heavier ones, as the .222 don't come with a 7.5" twist, and can't drive the 60 grain bullets fast enough. Do it if you want, but I won't.  :roll:

[rickt300]

I have seen the 222 in action on deer in south Texas and will say the 50 grain factory load worked pretty good on them. Another thing, the 222 does not provide the velocity to easily fragment the Remington 50 grain PSP in the factory load and that bullet has no problem shattering the spine either behind the shoulder blade or in front of it.  The bullet will usually end up under the hide on the far side on a behind the bone heart shot.  Do I recommend this cartridge for any other than easy shots under 100 yards no I don't but it can do good work under the right circumstances. If you aren't confident that you can make good hits then don't use it. My minimum is a 22-250 with a 60 grain Hornady soft point.

[BlackWolf]

A .22 caliber for deer?  Is that the most unethical thing I've ever heard of?  Thats like taking a tooth pick to the local golf course to use on your drives.  It just doesn't make any sense.

Even though I know that deer have lost their lives to a .22 before, do me a favor and put yourself in the deer's place.  After you shoot and the .22 merely gives it a flesh wound or worse, that deer has to deal with that wound for the rest of its life - and why?  Because you were curious as to wether or not it would kill the deer?  Or because your ego and a post on some website said it couldn't be done?

To the deer it isn't a game- any licensed hunter should respect that.

[Savage .250]

Nothing like being late to the dance but the music is still playing so .......
   " 1950.... Remington commerically introduces the .222 Remington as a Varmint cartridge."
    My choice as a deer round? Nope.
    How bout if i were to use Conleys 60 gr Premium rifle ammo? Nope
    There are a million calibers available(or so it seems) for all types
    game animals so why go with a "what do you think round" when it`s
     just as easy to get one intended for the job at hand.
     Cross over calibers acknowledged.