222 Rem- The ideal whitetail cartridge!

[PTS1]

Ok, this is just for thought....

The 338 Win Mag has been said by many folks, including most professional writers and guides, as the ideal elk cartridge. And here are the ballstics for the 338wm:

225 Grain Muzzle Velocity/Energy: 2,900/4,200

400 Yard Velocity/Energy: 2,100/1,900


Now the average weight of an adult bull elk is 600 pounds. The average weight of an adult whitetail buck is 150 pounds. The elk weighs 4 times as much as the whitetail. So with the figures given above divided by 4, we get the following:

Muzzle Velocity/Energy: 725/1050

400 Yard Velocity/Energy: 525/475

225 grains divided by 4= 56.25 grains

There is obviously no way we can get 1,050 pounds of energy from a 55 grain bullet traveling 725 fps. But here are the ballistics of the 222 Rem with a 55 grain bullet:

Muzzle Velocity/Energy: 3020/1115

400 Yard Velocity/Energy: 1990/485

Given we use a proper bullet (partition, barnes, etc..), why is the 222 rem not the ideal whitetail cartridge. For those who say the absoulute minimum for whitetail should be a 243, then you are going to need a cartridge that produces 8,000 foot pounds at the muzzle with a 400 grain bullet (ballistics for 243 multiplied by 4) as a minimum for elk.


Always find is funny that people who say a 300 win mag is a great elk cartridge but would never use anything under a 270 for whitetail. This might have been true 30 years ago, but with today's bullets, come on.....

 

[GeauxTide]

Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital. My minimum caliber for deer is 260 Remington with 120gr bullets. My minimum for elk is 338-06 with 210gr Partitions.

 

[Willie Lowman]

Why don't you take your calculator out in the woods and math the deer to death.

Deer aren't elk divided by four.

You clearly put some thought into this and I sincerely believe you were wasting your time.

 

[jimbob86]

Elk are 4 times heavier than whitetail, so you can use 1/4 the gun?

Right.......... assuming both elk and whitetail are made of an identical, homogenous material (think ballistic gel)............ except they are not. Get out of the Theoretical Math classroom and you'll find the real world gets messy.

I have seen .30 bullets do strange things upon hitting bone...... why start with the bare minimum? A good margin of error is a good thing.

Deer are not armored vehichles: Poke a 1/2" hole in both lungs and they will die in short order. A .222 MIGHT do that. Or it might hit a rib and disintegrate, or be deflected into Gutville by way of Stomach Street (ewwww!).

Maybe on some deer that I saw back East (SC has dog sized deer, from what I have seen), but deer around here run 150 lbs at 1 1/2 yr old. Some of the mature bucks run 250. Would I feel right about sending a 60 grain pill at the buck of a lifetime? Nope.

 

[NWPilgrim]

You propose the assumption that lethality of a ballistic projectile is linearly proportional to the size of the animal. I think this is a false assumption.

Using this logic, let's find the ideal cartridge/ballistics for elephant (let's say the larger African elephant of hunting yore), which weighs 7,000 - 26,000 pounds. Let's take 16,000 lbs as an average.

16,000 is 26 times greater than the 600 lbs you used for the size of an elk.

225 gr bullet x 26 = 5,850 grains bullet
4,200 ft-lbs energy x 26 = 109,200 ft-lbs.

Now obviously this linear extrapolation is a ridiculous method because we know some of the ideal elephant cartridges are no where near this huge. The .458 Win Mag is only 500 grains with perhaps 5,000-7,000 ft.-lbs. of muzzle energy.

If ballistics and game size are not linearly related on the upside then they probably neither are on the lower end.

 

[Art Eatman]

I'll bet real money that if you center-punch an elk between the running lights with a .22 rimfire, you'd have a dead elk. Hey, it works on cows, and they weigh more than elk, last I heard.

I've always figured that for deer or elk, "enough gun" is whatever lets you drive an angling shot right on through meat and reach the heart/lungs. That's not what you'd call ".22 country".

Now, you take a patient old doe at about twenty yards who just stands there and looks at you, a .222 bullet to the white spot means DRT. It did on the first deer I ever killed, anyway.

But I wouldn't use it in "real" deer hunting. Not enough gun.

 

[Hog Hunter]

IMO I wouldnt shoot anything smaller than a .270. I dont really belive in the calibure kills the deer but more less the bullet type that you shoot. Do the math on the average range youll be shooting, the velocity of the bullet and figure out what weight ball you need to be shooting. I shoot a 7mm mag with 160 accubonds running around 2950 fps. Dont mess up meat drops them in there tracks (so far) and takes down hogs with no problem. I love it. I would never shoot a deer with a 223 with a small grain bullet way to fast and not enough lead.

 

[PTS1]

"Deer are not armored vehichles: Poke a 1/2" hole in both lungs and they will die in short order."


That is exactly right. And no cartridge guarantees a DRT shot through the heart/lungs. I have witnessed a deer drt shot with a 22 hornet through the lungs at 50 yards and have witnessed a deer shot with a 300 win mag at 80 yards through the lungs run 50 yards before expiring. Obviously these are exceptions, but the end result is the same, dead deer. And for those who are talking about exploding bullets, didn't read the entire thread. I mentioned modern bullets like partitions and barnes. I am pretty sure a 55 gain barnes bullet traveling at 1990fps (400 yards on 222 rem) would penetrate both lungs of a whitetail. And no, I would not take a shot at a whitetail with a 222at 400 yards. Wouldn't take one with a 300wm at 400 yards either as I know my limitation is 300 yards with a solid rest.

And so for those that say the "4 times the size" theory is flawed, then what are we looking at? Penetration? If that is the case, how much wider and longer is an elk than a white tail? 2 or 3 times? Even if you go consevative and say only twice as wide or long, than a 110 grain bullet going about 2900 fps would be ideal. Those are about the ballistics of a 243win or 257bob.

Use what you want on deer. I currently use at 243, 270wsm, 300wm and 338 federal depending on my mood of rifle, don't give much thought to which cartridge. All deer have fell within 0-50 yards on all calibers when shot through the lungs.

 

[Daugherty16]

Basic Physics

Yout linear extrapolation is doomed from the start. Bullet energy is a linear function of mass, but geometric function of velocity. E=1/2 M(v)(v). There are 437.5 grains to the ounce, 16 ounces per pound, but lbs are weight not mass, and the math involves a calculator. To calculate energy in Ft/lbs from bullet weight and velocity use this: Energy = #Grains/7000 x FPS(squared)/32.179 or #Gr x FPS x FPS / 225,253

Then, you open up the discussion of energy vs. simple momentum (P=mv). Simply put, a heavier object (say a bullet) in motion at x speed takes longer to stop than a lighter object (a smaller bullet) at the same velocity, given the same force acting on it (say resistance from the shoulder of a deer. This explains why a .45ACP has so much more knockdown power than a 9mm, though the 9mm is faster and generates more energy. Because the .45 is slower and larger, it tends to stay in the target and expend all its energy (shock) on the recipient of your attention, while the smaller and faster 9mm may pass through with less energy expended.

Then you need to discuss bullet construction. Is it designed for extreme penetration, or expansion, or somewhere in the middle? HP? FMJ? Hardcast RN? Once you cross over the energy threshhold into a humane and ethical killing range for the target animal, your most important choice is bullet type.

Directly from the Hornady site:
Choosing the Proper Hunting Bullet
The target determines the ideal behavior that you want from a bullet. On smaller, lighter game such as varmints, you normally want the rapid destruction of the bullet on impact for the instant transfer of energy, since penetration is rarely an issue.

For common big-game animals such as deer and elk, you want the controlled release of energy at impact to increase bullet penetration. By using a moderately fast-expanding bullet, more projectile energy is retained to transfer to the animal’s internal organs.

For even larger, more dangerous, big-game animals, you want bullets designed for even slower energy expenditure in order to achieve the deep penetration necessary to create permanent and temporary cavitation in the vital areas of large animals even after the bullet has broken bones along its path.

End of discussion: check your local laws for the minimum legal caliber for whatever you're hunting.

 

[Wild Bill Bucks]

In a perfect world, where you get all the time you need, to take the perfect shot, almost any caliber will quickly dispatch a deer.
But here in the area I am forced to hunt, the average shot is around 60 yards, through some of the thickest brush in Oklahoma.
Smaller and faster just isn't the greatest of a choices. Around here, the most popular caliber, are the 30's. They aren't the fastest, but they tend to punch through the brush better, and leave a pretty good hole for a better blood trail.
You hardly ever get the "Perfect Shot" so having a good blood trail to follow is important.
I have trailed to many deer for guys hunting with a .223 or some of the other .22s and have come up empty, after hours of searching, for me to use anything less than the 30 calibers.
Not arguing that any caliber is better than another, and in certain areas, the .22s might be better than the larger calibers, but according to the area, game size, and distances you hunt, should be the indicator of what you use, to hunt with.

 

[Daryl]

Logic and reason can only take you so far, and when the results don't match what's been proven by experience over many years, then you can pretty much discount it.

IMO, the .243 Win is one of the best all-around whitetail cartridges ever designed, but other's opinions will vary according to their own uses and experiences.

Daryl

 

[PTS1]

Daughtrey16:

"Yout linear extrapolation is doomed from the start. Bullet energy is a linear function of mass, but geometric function of velocity. E=1/2 M(v)(v). There are 437.5 grains to the ounce, 16 ounces per pound, but lbs are weight not mass, and the math involves a calculator. To calculate energy in Ft/lbs from bullet weight and velocity use this: Energy = #Grains/7000 x FPS(squared)/32.179 or #Gr x FPS x FPS / 225,253"

So you gave me the formula for energy.....ok...... The ballistics I cited were taken from already published information from ammuntion web sites. I didn't just divide the 338wm ballistics by 4.

Then you give some other mombo jumbo about 45acp having more "knock down power" and "energy transfer" than the 9mm. First, I never mentioned knock down power or energy transfer. Just do a search on knock down power and energy transfer and you will see these are not based in any science and are terms people came up with to sell one cartridge over the other. Second, the only thing I said close to momentum was that a 55 grain barnes bullet at 1,990fps would penetrate both lungs of a whitetail deer hit broadside.

And then again, you bring up bullet type. Read the 2 prior posts of mine where I specifically mention bullet construction.

 

[PTS1]

Wild Bill Bucks

I very much agree with you. In you style of hunting, I would definitely use a slow moving large caliber bullet over a fast small diameter bullet due to shot angle and having to track through thick brush. I would want all the possible blood on the ground I can get from a complete pass through. A 44mag or 45-70 would be ideal. Both of which have very lack-luster energy figures. Just trying to make a point that some people make me laugh when they feel only a super-duper powerful cartridge will kill deer or elk humanely. Modern bullet design has made killing the animal we hunt so much more effective with the standard caveat of proper placement of the bullet. Here is a good artice about hunting with 22's. By the way, those axis deer go about 250 to 300 pounds.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/centerfire_22_biggame/

 

[James R. Burke]

Just look at the bullet, and with common sense think about it.

 

[phil mcwilliam]

222 rem- the ideal whitetail cartridge

I think you need to go do some more field research

 

[youp]

After following such logic, I am inclined to think you have brought up some interesting points.

This logic would imply a 243 Win as being over-gunned. I have seen what poor bullet placement from a 243 can do, or should I say not do.

I have yet to see a buck go over 200 yards after taking a real whitetail cartridge through a shoulder.

For the fellow that sits over bait, food plot, or some other method that always offers a perfect standing broadside at a relaxed animal. At close ranges where wind drift is not a problem. And shoots them little bitty southern deer. You know the 150 pounders with the guts in. You could be right on. Oh yea, better not be too close to the edge of your property.

Many whitetails have taken a 22 LR through the lungs. The poacher will back off and come back several hours later. I have read where natives use a 22 long for moose, feeling the LR is too much. Something about a canoe and shots through the ear while the moose is swimming.

IMO If you cannot shoot through the SHOULDER of a deer and still get into the lungs or top of heart you are under gunned. You hunt long enough and you will see the folly of your logic.

Let me phrase it like this. You have just laid out 6K for a Saskatchewan deer hunt. You are going to sit in a cold box from dark till dark hoping for a buck. You are going to bring your ideal 22 or step up to a 6 mm?

 

[Scorch]

FWIW, I knew a man in Idaho who hunted deer every year with a 222 and was quite successful. Neck shots on standing deer were the norm. I knew another old-timer that used a 22 Hornet and shot the deer right between the eye and ear. Again, standing shots only. Would I try it? No, not enough margin and not enough patience on my part to wait for the perfect shot.

Over the years, some very knowledgeable people have expounded on the use of 22 caliber centerfire cartridges for hunting. Charles Newton (inventor and ballistician) designed the 22 Savage High Power, PO Ackley (gunsmith, ballistician, cartridge guru) designed and promoted his 228 Ackley, and the list goes on. One problem often cited was that when small-caliber rifles worked they worked very well, but they often didn't work due to lack of skill on the user's part.

One of the problems with using energy figures to decide whether a given cartridge is powerful enough for deer is that it leaves out bullet construction as a consideration. The 338 Win Mag uses very tough bullets designed to punch through bone and tough muscle, the 222 typically uses very lightly constructed bullets designed to break up easily. Could you find and use a tougher bullet? Sure. Would it work well on game the size of deer? Sure. But even though the bullet might perform adequately, it might not penetrate deep enough to reach the vitals becasue of its light weight. If you are going to divide the energy by 4, why not also divide the bullet weight by 4? 338 Win Mag uses a 225 or 250 gr bullet, so your 222 should be loaded with a 60 gr bullet. Nosler makes a Partition bullet in that weight, and no one will argue with the quality and toughness of Partition bullets.

Another FWIW: 100 years ago, the 32-20 was considered a "deer cartridge". It fired a 100 gr bullet at roughly 1,800 fps from a rifle with the high-power rifle loads (about 1,300 fps with the lower-powered loads). Was it adequate? An awful lot of deer got turned into venison with it, and used appropriately (close range, standing shots, good tracking skills) it worked OK. But when there were other common rounds that could reliably drop a deer in its tracks (30-30, 44-40, etc), why bother?

So, to bring my ramble to an end, while the 222 might work OK, it would definitely require more than a small amount of effort to make it work well. A little more energy is always a good idea, good bullets are a must, and other cartridges that can do the job well are very common.

 

[PTS1]

Youp,

6k for a Saskatchewan deer hunt, you bet I am stepping up from a 22 and past a 6mm to a .308 caliber.

Guys, I think you are missing the point of this thread. I will always use the most gun I feel confident shooting, especialy on a paid hunt. The point of the thread is considering the figures thrown around by hunters, gun rags and especially ammo manufactures, It amazes me that a 270 will kill an elk at 300 yards quickly and ethically. Having read as much as I can about hunting and cartridges over the past few years and being told by countless people that a 243 is minimal for whitetail and 270 is about right, one would think that you would need someting much more powerfull than a 338 win mag to take an animal 3-4 times the size as a whitetail. And then to see that a 458 win mag will take an elephant weighing 16,000 punds on a broadside shot is even more amazing. And I am not talking about head shots on any animal as I know that is were most elephant hunters like to take shots. I have seen a few videos of broad side shots on elephants that did not go more than a few yards.

For many years, I would not even consider using a 223 for deer, however, I have in the past year started talking to older hunters who laugh at anyone using anything over a 243 for deer. (Disclaimer: I am talking about Texas whitetail that average about 125 pounds live weight). In fact many have used a 223 with 64 grain power points for years and don't care what you think cause their freezer is always full.

I used a 243 last year and took 4 deer with it and this year I used a 338 federal (new toy) and took 3 deer with it. To be honest, the only difference I saw in the deer were in the ones who ran a bit. The two who ran with the 338 left a trail of blood that looked like someone was running with an open gallon of red paint. The one that ran with the 243 left spots of blood along the way. All other deer were drt and all deer were heart/lung or lung shots between 75-150 yards.

Another thing I have found funny over the years is that when someone asks what is a good cartridge to start their young ones with, it is always 243 or 223. Usually recomended by the same people who will say they would never use a 223 or 243 for deer because it is way underpowerd but will recommend it to a 7 year old whose marksmanship is still in the developmental phase.

I guess in the end what I am trying to say is there is such a thing as a "deader deer". All things being equal, a deer shot with a 338 win mag is going to have a better chance of expiring quicker than a deer shot with a 222. Is it needed? Well that is up to you.

 

[Lee Lapin]

Gee. I hope no one ever does that kind of math on elephants and W. D. M. Bell's .275 Rigby/7mm Mauser... we'll need a microbore rifle if they do.

lpl

 

[murphyboy88]

in montana the minimum for deer size game is a .22 centerfire cartridge, ive shot my last 2 antelope bucks with a .22 hornet and a .223, with the hornet i shoot a 35 grain v-max and a 55 gr ballistic tip from my .223, so far 1 shot kills. i dont see a real problem just as long as you dont go for those 300+ yard shots...... just my 2 cents