Rafiki
AH enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2023
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 824
- Location
- Florida and Minnesota
- Media
- 4
- Hunted
- Tanzania
Have some res[ect for the animal.
Yeah, because the 7mm-08 doesn’t exist. If only there was some like that.Thats a question that still hasnt been definitively answered...
The military is now moving to a 6.8x51 round... still trying to find a balance between 556 and 762 NATO I believe..
I’m sometimes second guessing Mono bullets.I'm personally not a fan of mono bullets, they do not kill as quickly from my experience. I'm not going to say they don't work. I'm just saying until I do not have a choice, I have no plans for using them on game.
How do you post pictures of an unrecovered animal??? Also, who is out there bragging up all.of the animals that they wounded and lost? I have tracked several bears and deer shot with .223's and .22/250's and/or match bullets where the trail was long and the animal either not recovered or recovered after a long lingering death. We now have required minimums and equipment/marksmanship checking for all clients. I have had clients ask for input and then ignore that input to their own ultimate (and the animals) detriment. Another example of this are bowhunters who ask about mechanical broadheads for moose hunting, and here again, I strongly advise against it... and similarly have experienced much higher rates of failures and negative outcomes as with small bore and match bullets. Folks, just stop testing your latest pet theories on animals in the field and stick with the tried and true equipment... there is enough that can go wrong even when your equipment allows for the largest margins for success, why would you intentionally reduce those margins??? Ego.I’m not high on them. I just find there to be a compelling amount of evidence that suggests 223 isn’t entirely rubbish for anything bigger than a rabbit.
Additionally, I would be interested in seeing failed terminal ballistics (if the animal had to have a follow up from another weapons, etc.) for comparison. I don’t sell the things so I have no skin in the game, but I like seeing the data and examples from both sides. Unfortunately, as has been stated in multiple settings, most people don’t post pictures of their failures.
I never mentioned unrecovered animals. I said I would be interested in seeing the failed terminal ballistics of an animal that may have needed a follow up shot from another weapon. This is not meant as an insult, but this is (partially, not the full brunt of what a stated earlier) what I meant by people getting emotional and not reading what someone actually says on the subject.How do you post pictures of an unrecovered animal??? Also, who is out there bragging up all.of the animals that they wounded and lost? I have tracked several bears and deer shot with .223's and .22/250's and/or match bullets where the trail was long and the animal either not recovered or recovered after a long lingering death. We now have required minimums and equipment/marksmanship checking for all clients. I have had clients ask for input and then ignore that input to their own ultimate (and the animals) detriment. Another example of this are bowhunters who ask about mechanical broadheads for moose hunting, and here again, I strongly advise against it... and similarly have experienced much higher rates of failures and negative outcomes as with small bore and match bullets. Folks, just stop testing your latest pet theories on animals in the field and stick with the tried and true equipment... there is enough that can go wrong even when your equipment allows for the largest margins for success, why would you intentionally reduce those margins??? Ego.
Does this look disrespectful? I don’t mean to sound antagonistic, but…it looks like ethical results.Have some res[ect for the animal.
Wait ... that guy was bragging about the mess he made of that elk? Really? That's a disgusting waste. Just as well shot it with an RPG. He should have been charged with wasting game.Does this look disrespectful? I don’t mean to sound antagonistic, but…it looks like ethical results.
View attachment 628287
View attachment 628288
Yet again, I’m not advocating for “experimental” shooting on giant PG or DG. Just suggesting that there’s evidence to suggest that newer advances in construction and technique may have different results than 50 years ago.
Nailed ItHow do you post pictures of an unrecovered animal??? Also, who is out there bragging up all.of the animals that they wounded and lost? I have tracked several bears and deer shot with .223's and .22/250's and/or match bullets where the trail was long and the animal either not recovered or recovered after a long lingering death. We now have required minimums and equipment/marksmanship checking for all clients. I have had clients ask for input and then ignore that input to their own ultimate (and the animals) detriment. Another example of this are bowhunters who ask about mechanical broadheads for moose hunting, and here again, I strongly advise against it... and similarly have experienced much higher rates of failures and negative outcomes as with small bore and match bullets. Folks, just stop testing your latest pet theories on animals in the field and stick with the tried and true equipment... there is enough that can go wrong even when your equipment allows for the largest margins for success, why would you intentionally reduce those margins??? Ego.
So, if we hear “223” then it’s incapable of ethically killing game, they’ll wander around with the firearms equivalent of a field tipped arrow in their rear, but if we look at the pictures then we think they’ve been hit with an RPG.
Do have it correct now?
I disagree, but that’s ok. Statements like, “All of the XYZ is designed to be inflammatory.” are themselves inflammatory. Why is it so hard to have an objective, data-based conversation about smaller calibers, just like we do all day with the larger calibers?Of course you don't have it correct, because you are not trying to be correct... all of the .223 talk is designed to be inflammatory... to push buttons for the sake of emotionally charged arguments.
Whenever the subject comes up, most reasonable people point out the obvious... just because it "can" work, doesn't mean that it is a good idea on a regular basis. That is because of what I stated earlier... "MARGINS." Reduce the margins and you increase the negative outcomes... why as ethical hunters would we want to increase the negative outcomes?
Of course you don't have it correct, because you are not trying to be correct... all of the .223 talk is designed to be inflammatory... to push buttons for the sake of emotionally charged arguments.
Whenever the subject comes up, most reasonable people point out the obvious... just because it "can" work, doesn't mean that it is a good idea on a regular basis. That is because of what I stated earlier... "MARGINS." Reduce the margins and you increase the negative outcomes... why as ethical hunters would we want to increase the negative outcomes?
Truely baffled.....100%I’m truly baffled with these guys post on rockslide that , a .223 , 22cm , 22-250 ,ect
Shooting a 77gr match bullet , is more than adequate for hunting kudos, eland , gembuck , waterbuck, ect ( large PG ) , shooting a unbonded 22cal explosive bullet through the ribs , seems like a disaster to me , yet there are multiple people saying explosive small caliber is more effective then say a 7x57 with a bonded bullet.
What’s your opinion? I’m sure you can see I disagree
One response
“”
Put a 2-3 or 4" hole in the lungs of the toughest oryx, blue wildebeest, zebra or whatever with one of the little guys, and all the theories about the African animals being magically tougher that the rest of the world´s will fall to pieces.
Someone mentioned he had killed 10 oryx, and being that a great experience, let me say I have shot 20, this year, just to put things in perspective.
And no, you should not take a PH judgement on these things as the word of God, at least not any PH´s, since many of them are simply not interested and pay no attention to these things at least at the level some of us do.
Just my 2 cents.””
I disagree, but that’s ok. Statements like, “All of the XYZ is designed to be inflammatory.” are themselves inflammatory. Why is it so hard to have an objective, data-based conversation about smaller calibers, just like we do all day with the larger calibers?
Margins. Yes. Control and accuracy are another end of the margins spectrum. There are plenty of real world reports about people shooting various Weatherby calibers that illustrate this. The ones that can control and be accurate with such calibers are sitting pretty!
Truely baffled.....100%
Idiotic idea....never mind the legality....
Now I will be lambasted again.....
Accuracy is a given, we are talking about terminal effectiveness and the margins for success at that point. Do you think these proponents of the .223 can't handle some sort of 6.5mm? Do they not have access to equipment that might increase the margins for success? Again, a .223 can work, but it should be only for those willing to accept it's limitations, with proper bullets on game that presents a proper target, ie. broadside lungs at a reasonable distance... forgive me if I am skeptical regarding the restraint of those who choose the .223 as their big game weapon of choice. Bowhunters run into this all the time, from people who don't understand the terminal application differences between bullets and arrows. An arrow is just as lethal as a .300 Magnum "WITHIN" it's unique limitations, outside of those limitations and you are going to see increased negative outcomes, just as you do with .223's utilizing frangible bullets, where the potential for it to fail on something as flimsy as a rib bone, is significantly increased over more conventional options. Again... why??? There is simply no need for it. "Why not?" Is not always a reasonable answer. Nor is providing a picture of a carcass with a gaping wound and saying, "see it works!"
Yup, you are open-minded and not caustic at all....and certainly seeking truth.I’ve seen the arguments for its use in NA. I’ve seen some claims of its use on African game, but the responses of some posters aren’t likely to be welcoming for anyone to supply corroborating data for or against, because now it’s a caustic discussion that should have been civil. I engaged because I was hoping to see unemotional responses about the actual or hypothesized performance of, specifically, the 77gr OTM 223 projectile on African game. I didn’t claim to be an authority or try to shoehorn my (open minded) opinion into someone else’s head. I just wanted to learn from others who I hoped were more knowledgeable than I am.
Well said, hoytcanon!Of course you don't have it correct, because you are not trying to be correct... all of the .223 talk is designed to be inflammatory... to push buttons for the sake of emotionally charged arguments.
Whenever the subject comes up, most reasonable people point out the obvious... just because it "can" work, doesn't mean that it is a good idea on a regular basis. That is because of what I stated earlier... "MARGINS." Reduce the margins and you increase the negative outcomes... why as ethical hunters would we want to increase the negative outcomes?