JagMagMan

I don' t condone expert shooters using the .22' s for deer! If you want to get into name calling, letting novice hunters, such as kids use any .22 on deer, thats stupid! Thats asking for crippled game! So what you are saying is if a child can' t handle the recoil of say a 22-250, go on down to maybe a .22 rimfire, just so they can hunt! Let her use a .22 to learn to shoot or on small game. When she can handle a deer rifle, let her move up to a .243 or .257!

eldeguello

I don' t RECOMMEND a .22 of any kind for game as large as deer. However, as Jack O' Connor' s Indian gude once told him, during a similar debate in a sheep hunting camp in B.C., " Any gun good, shoot ' em good!!"

The Eskimos now use the .222 and .223 almost exclusively, as opposed to their previous selection (the .22 Hornet), and they regularly kill game up to polar bear and walrus with these pipsqueaks!! They are avid reloaders, due to cost of ammo. They don' t lose much game, and they don' t get et up very often, either!!

woodseye

Still a wounded deer don' t make much of a consolation prize.[] Those Eskimos are well skilled at what they are doing and tend to hunt in groups(harder to et that way),a lot different with a youngster on their first hunt with a case of the jitters and a less than perfect shot taken at a less than perfect target angle.

woods

Judson

If I lost my legs I could not play football, not that I do but same with hunting. If you can not handly the reciol of an approprate rifle for what you are going to hunt don' t hunt it. Work up to handling the recoil and for a kid let them grow up and grow into it. I would rather tell a child that you got to wait a year or two to hunt deer then follow a blood trail that leads to nothing but heart ach for the child and a lost deer. What do you tell them, so what we will find another to shoot that one will wonder off and die in a few days and feed the coyotes?
Now lets change the picture alittle. Little Johnnie does not like the recoil of a .375 H&H. I know we will have him hunt Cape Buff with his .223 Remington. Hmmmm, good by little Johnnie

whelen36

338 , have you considered useing a muzzlebrake , or upgrading to a better more absorbant recoil pad if recoil with heavier calibers is a problem for her ??

or have you given the lever action rifles in .44 mag or .41 mag a look ? from what i' ve heard they don' t have a lot of recoil and they are both good for hunting use

bigcountry

Guys, I am not sure, maybe didn' t read the posts good enought, but I don' t think anyone was saying give a 22-250 to kids or a concern about recoil. These guys that I know in Ky that do hunt with a 22' s are very experienced hunters. The reason they use them, is they feel very confident in the rifles accuracy, and feel very confident in there skills. Maybe you guys don' t. I may be wrong, but I bet more experienced than most people on here. Maybe I am wrong.

Again I will ask the question, if these people recover their game, what does it matter?????

Jagman, again, I am not actually comparing bows and bullets, but more comparing killing to killing. If an animal is down, he down. He can' t be any more dead. The people I know that hunt this way are usually more successful than the average hunter with the 30-06 or 300win mag.

neweboarhunter

You know the old saying you can' t argue with the results, but you don' t have to like the means either.

Come on lets leave the .22 centerfires for varmints and coyotes and plinking. Lets shoot a real caliber for hunting.

James B

Although It would not be my first choice, I know quite a few good hunters who use the 22-250 for deer. There are at least three factory loads for the 22-250 that are intended for use on deer. People who have the disapline to choose thier shots carefully can get by with a 22-250 which is legal where I hunt. I have as much faith in my 22-250 as I do my 243 if not more. I would support a 25 caliber low limit.

338

OK doubters .. Here are the ballistics for a .223 and .243 with 70gr. starting 3000 fps. Keeping shots within 100 yds. 223 energy 1072 ft. lbs (keep in mind most other .22 exceed this) .243 1075 ft. lbs (most all .22 exceed this also).. There is .20 difference in bullet size( which is nil.) .. Yes you can get the .243 up too 100 gr. (some .22 even exceed thisft. lbs) which makes some difference but the deer won' t know it .. If you load tough bullets (barnes X) for a .22 it will penatrate just as far or futher then the .243 with a soft point.. .22 work for deer or Alot of states wouldn' t let you use it ..

No I don' t think " johnnie" should use a .223 for cape, It would work. Or do I think a " child" should use a rim fire for deer, Which would also work .. But we are talking deer wich are not hard to kill.. Like I said any animal need a heart and lungs to live .. And a .22 with good bullets has no problem reaching and could even pass .. Bill

woodseye

My boy started at twelve with a 243 with 100gr bullets and within two years was shooting a 7mm-08.Using the example that a 22CF is just as deadly as a 243 is pure bunk and skewering the energy numbers to make it seem that way is also foolish(everyone has access to ballistics charts).I know no one that goes out and loads 70 gr bullets to deer hunt with their 243.In fact a 243 hornady load available over the counter with 100 gr pill develops 1790 ftlbs at 100yds,a 70 gr ballistic tip that I' d never use has 1465 ftlbs,and a power point plus 100 gr has 1764 at 100yds.Where in the world are you getting these anemic numbers you quote for the 243 at?Anyway you don' t need to quote skewered numbers to make your point,if you want to use a 223 that barely breaks 1000ftlbs at 100yds and its legal in your state ,have at it.Just don' t expect everyone to agree and applaud your decision as a good one.I for one view 1200 ftlbs at 100yds as on the extremely low side and could never support your choice,especially in a state where if you shoot one and it runs far there is a good chance someone else will be tagging it anyway.

woods