.223 and 7.62x39, bad deer rifle

[ratkiller]

Why do so many people say the .223 will just wound deer, and yet a lot of people say a 7.62x39 makes a good cheap deer rifle.

Is there that much difference or what?

[Big-Foot]

"They are the same caliber right?"

Umm no. One is .223 and the other is 7.62.

[cntryboy1289]

In some states it is illegal to hunt with a 22 caliber bullet. Some states allow you to use the .223. If you can use it, I would suggest using as heavy a bullet as you can that will stay together instead of the light varmint bullets. Here in Ms, there is a 24 caliber minimum. As far as the 7.62x39mm, if you can find a good soft point, use it as long as you keep the shots under 150yds or so. It would be tough enough with a small scope to shoot it well at that range, but harder still with iron sights.

[dfaugh]

and IMHO not at all suitable for deer (let the flames begin!)...As noted its not even legal for deer in many states...The 7.62x 39 throws a bullet AT LEAST twice as heavy...Some compare it to the .30-30 (which has probably killed more dear than any other cartridge), although this isn't quite right either, as the .30-30 throws heavier bullets, still. 7.62x39 is probably maginal, but acceptable for deer, AT SHORT RANGES, with proper (HP or SP) bullets. Note that I also consider .243 marginal(more flames), at least for larger Northern deer...My personal minimum, for an "all-around" deer rifle (including the possibility of longer shots, 200-300 yards) would be a 7mm or .270. My .02

[jefnvk]

Most of my hunting is done at under 50 yards. So, a 7,62 is acceptable. Much bigger bullet, 60-70 grains v. 120+ grains. Plus, it is nearly 50% larger than a .223.

[ratkiller]

Sorry I guess I was mistaken about them being the same.

[Handy]

5.56 and .223 are the same. Russian 5.45 is very similar.

[smince]

For a little more clarity, .223(5.56) is .22 caliber in diameter. 7.62x39 is .311, or roughly .30 caliber. .223 is much faster than a .22 rimfire, but still a small diameter and lightweight round. 7.62x39 is a larger, but slower round.

.223 = 40-75 grains @2800-3200fps
7.62x39 = 123 grains @ approximately 2300fps

These figures are ballpark, but close. .223 was legal to hunt deer with in my state, last time I checked, but I would never use it for that. I've never used 7.62x39 either. As an aside, .30 carbine was legal for deer also, and it is just a souped-up pistol round.

[Handy]

With a soft point load, I don't see the problem with using 7.62 for any hunting where 30-30 is appropriate. It's a wide, tough bullet that is likely to expand in one piece. Much more round than .223 or .30 Carbine.

[smince]

I agree that 7.62 is a useable deer cartridge, with a properly designed bullet.

I've just never hunted with one. My weapon of choice is a sporterized 1903 Springfield, 30.06 with 165 grain softpoints.

[Mannlicher]

The issue with the .223 is the 55 grain solids. The issue with the 7.62 X 39 is the rifle and the bullet, not the cartridge itself.
A quality bullet in the .223, like the Federal 60 grain Nosler Partition Premium Vital Shok will certainly take a whitetail.
The 7.62 X 39 in an accurate rifle will also. Helps to use whatever passes for a 'hunting' bullet.
Personally, I think that there are much better choices than either of them.

[kl3640]

There are both cheap and expensive rifles that shoot 7.62x39. There are plenty of other 30 cal solutions that you can get for the same price as an cheaper 7.62x39 (SKS/AK or the like), such as .30-06, .308, .300winmag, etc... So if you want that size projectile, you have many choices of "better" deer cartridges than the warsaw, imho. One thing to note is that as a round, the 7.62x39 can be cheap, just as .556 can be (you can order big ammo cans of them for next to nothing), where as some of the more eccentric 30 caliber rounds can be $1 or more per round. (although common rounds, like .30-06, can be bought cheaply). But to your question about rifles, you can find cheaper rifles in almost all of those calibers, and expensive ones as well. I just saw a brand new Remington 710 package in .30-06 (which is their value version of their very popular, classic, and good Model 700) with 3x9x40 scope, gray synthetic stock, blued barrel and action, for $310 on sale, normally $399, msrp $450. Most quality SKS's that I've seen are between $250-$400, depending on exactly what you get. Then you've got the issue of optics. So for the same money for rifle and ammo, you can get a "better" deer cartridge.

There is also a lot of difference in the wounds inflicted depending on what type of bullet you choose (JHP, etc...). Keep in mind expansion, weight retention, etc..., which are factors of bullet materials and construction methods, design, and shape. Those things (particularly shape) will also affect ballistics.

I don't know of many people who hunt deer with .556, I think it's more of a varmint type round with respect to sport hunting (I don't know, I only use mine for target). 22-250 is also popular for varminting. The many different .30 caliber solutions are by far more popular for deer, both in terms of cartridge configurations (there must be a dozen "common" ones) and in terms of projectile types designed for hunting. Go check out Remington.com or federalcartridge.com to get an idea of the variety available for popular .30 cals, such as the .30-06.

[ratkiller]

I still can't beleive I that stupid of a mistake, but thanks for all the advice.

My brother came in and while I was looking at a post and saw ratkiller (me) and said "man some stupid guy named ratkiller thinks that the .223 and 7.62 are the same" I guess he did not know my name.

Needless to say my face is still red

[travis_cc]

I've shot wolf hollow points through my sks at my form of ballistics gel, a thin sheet of tin in front of a snow pile, and found that they hit the target sideways a lot so bullet fragmentation was a minimum. There was no damage to the tip but a flat side of the bullet.

[JKump]

Couple weeks back I took a 5 point buck with a 7.62x39. I had a good shoulder shot and droped him right there. The shot was right at 50 yards. I was using wolf 122 hollow point. Seems to have worked fine.

[wingman]

A standing deer shot in proper place with the 223 will go down on the spot,
a deer is fairly large, a head shot is not a great trick with a scope. I've seen
more deer wounded with 3030 cal then say a 243, it's all matter of shot
placement. My father for years used a winchester model 70 243 on eastern whitetail, 85gr hp bullet, he always killed them one shot. No blood trail to follow, no loss of meat.

[jefnvk]

But to your question about rifles, you can find cheaper rifles in almost all of those calibers, and expensive ones as well. I just saw a brand new Remington 710 package in .30-06 (which is their value version of their very popular, classic, and good Model 700) with 3x9x40 scope, gray synthetic stock, blued barrel and action, for $310 on sale

Have you taken a look at the 710's? I was not at all impressed with them. I would definitely go with a Savage combo over one of those.

OTOH, where are you at? Good condition SKS's around here for $99 are not uncommon. They are capable of killing a deer out to 100 yards, probably more, but I wouldn't try it. For the people who only go a few days a year, I think they are an excellent option, right up there with a Russian M38.

And the only cheap .223 I can think of off hand is probably a NEF single shot. But you can get those in anything.

[Bill.H]

KL3640,

You said "There are both cheap and expensive rifles that shoot 7.62x39".

I know of the SKS/AK and the Mini 30, which would be the cheap and the medium-priced, are there others?

The ammo is so cheap it's got to be the best choice for plinking, after a .22, of course.

Edit: Oops, I just found the answer (ruger bolt, CZ) in another thread! Thanks anyway

[smince]

They are both bolt actions, and they are both Remington's, but a 710 ain't no 700 by a long shot.

[Steve499]

A .223 can reliably take deer under certain conditions. A female of my acqaintence wanted to deer hunt but was so sensitive to recoil she couldn't shoot well enough for me to turn her loose. I got her an Interarms Mini Mark X in .223, then handloaded Trophy Bonded bullets for it.They are solid copper and will shoot completely through a deer. That has been about 10 years back and I no longer have a .223 so I haven't kept up with bullet development. I think the .223 got a bad reputation years ago as a deer wounder because no commercial round was offered with a bullet of strong enough construction to penetrate reliably. If you handload, you can make a deer load that works well if you just HAVE to shoot a .223. Something bigger is preferable, however.

[Drakejake]

I assume .308 is fine for big game including deer. I have Saigas in 7.62 and .308 on the way. I have never hunted, but I live in TN and have family in MS so you never know. I am now just a target shooter with handguns, mainly autos. I recently bought a Ruger 9mm carbine and now the Saigas.

Drakejake

[FirstFreedom]

Agree that .223 is a varmint round. It's best reserved for big, 2-legged varmints.