Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/2/2005 7:35:47 PM EDT
No, not really. I actually have the cranial capacity to breath through my nose while talking.

But what I would like to know is if anyone has purchased, loaded, shot, experimented with, etc with either of the following bullets. Of particular interest would be any load-data/experiences that would reflect application(s) to deer from an AR with either. Or of any commercial companies loading either.

1. 70gr Barnes TSX in .223 (.224 actual)

2. 75gr Swift Scirocco in .223 (.224 actual)

If no-one replies, I am going to mame some poor, innocent deer w/ M855 to spite all of you!
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:42:03 PM EDT
stupid gimmick

Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:47:25 PM EDT
just make sure you use a 10.5 commando too, those things have soo much evil the deer will drop instanly out to 1000 yards
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:51:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DvlDog:
stupid gimmick




I'll admit, I felt sleazy posting it. I was desperate. My apologies for the offense...
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 8:20:55 PM EDT
I think that the 75gr Scirroco would be best but I'm not positive. I too would like to know which is best for deer.

Does Remington make a .223 70+gr bullet that mushrooms on impact? If they do, that wouldn't be a bad choice.

First deer I ever killed was with a .223 so it can be done. The deer also dropped on the spot. Just make sure you can make a clean shot. A gut shot will only make the deer suffer and you probably won't find it either seeing as they can run a good ways even after taking a lung shot with a .30-06. Just try to aim right around the front shoulder where the heart, lungs, and other vitals are. I would go against going for a neck shot unless you are positive you will hit the throat/spine. The neck is alot bigger than what is important on the inside of it. Also, I would recommend against any headshots. It can be done and will bring them down in an instant but if you miss even slightly you will just blow the deer's lower jaw off and it will starve to death.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 9:14:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By m4hk33:
just make sure you use a 10.5 commando too, those things have soo much evil the deer will drop instanly out to 1000 yards



I hear you can get another 500+ yards of spontaneous deer resignation with it if it has a SureFire.

They'll even cry "Uncle!" first if you're sportin' a five round mag with a MagPul Ranger plate.


Originally Posted By TylerM_8:
Does Remington make a .223 70+gr bullet that mushrooms on impact?


Not that I'm aware of... so says the Remington site. Sensible advice and congrats on the .223 kill.

I'm liking the TSX becasue of the fact it's an X-bullet - great penetration and nasty mushrooming with 100 percent weight retention. I have first hand experience in 30-06 and 7mm with XLC's. I just don't know what to expect with the .223 heavy version.

I'm liking the Scirocco because of the high BC @ .417. That's higher than the 77gr SMK (ala, MK262) @.362 (nominal). I was wondering if the high BC of the Scirocco might actually extend the feasible range of a .223 hunting bullet on deer, or at least to any significant degree. I have had good experiences with Scirocco's in 30-06 and 7mm also. But again, I just don't know what to expect with the .223 version.

I'd be willing to try some ballistics trials in gel, but don't know where to get some loaded ammo. I have gel. I don't yet have the dies, bullets or powder to reload .223 and I won't until post-hunting season - something about buying a house.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 9:23:39 PM EDT
A high BC helps maintain positive trajectory. Once you fall below 1000ft/lbs of energy you have left the realm of clean shots on deer, regardless of the cartridge.

I would pick which ever bullet shot the best at 250 yds. (TSX or Scirroco). You really can't benefit from extreme BC while within the parameters of a .223.

I have killed a few with the lowly Partition and never had extreme bullet failure, but never shot beyond 200yds, ALWAYS shot the lungs, and never really got the performance I am comfortable with.

Link Posted: 10/2/2005 9:46:39 PM EDT
The Swift, hands down, is the best bullet. High BC with great weight retention. The sectional density is also good for the closer range work. It still has acceptable penetration at higher velocity, close range work. The Barnes might not expand at the longer ranges as it has a lower BC.

If you load it correctly, it will be good out past 300 yards with enough velocity to assure expansion. Sure, you might think you can dial in drop or hold over but only if you are absolutely sure of the range and more importantly, wind.

The old adage of 1000 ft*lbs is pure hooey. A gut shot with a .375 H&H Mag FMJ is no more lethal than the same shot with a .223 Rem softpoint.

.223 Remington is only the name, all .22 center fires in common use today are .224". The .22 Savage High Power (.227") is obsolete as is the .22 Jet (.222").

Now imagine the 75 grain Swift in a fast-twist .224 Middlestead at 3500 FPS! It is still going at 2800 FPS AT 300 YARDS!
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 10:41:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bubba99:
A high BC helps maintain positive trajectory. Once you fall below 1000ft/lbs of energy you have left the realm of clean shots on deer, regardless of the cartridge.



Agreed. I've always tried to set the absolute floor at 900 ft/lbs though (maybe splittin' hairs I guess for 10 percent). There are "experts" that claim it is inhumane to drop below 1500 ft/lbs. One thing that has been left out of alot of those arguments is inertia and energy transfer efficiency (bullet design) - but this aint a physics forum and I know just enough to be dangerous to myself anyway I do know that my archery rig is putting out ~53 ft/lbs and some deer have fallen real dead to it. I like the term "clean shot" - none of any of this is relevant without good placement!


You really can't benefit from extreme BC while within the parameters of a .223.


I suspect that myself. Wish I knew what the MV of either bullet is in an SS, 1/8, Wylde barrel at a robust, but safe loading. I'm curious what yardage the 900 ft/lb threshold is broken in either bullet.


I have killed a few with the lowly Partition and never had extreme bullet failure, but never shot beyond 200yds, ALWAYS shot the lungs, and never really got the performance I am comfortable with.



How big were the deer (dressed) and what did you find lacking?I don't dislike the Partition and although I've not killed anything with one, they seemed to fair pretty well in my gel - again no .223 experience. Initially, I got away from Partitions not for any terminal performance issue but just because it has an open base. The whole, "gotta clean molten lead out o' the bore" thing and some other reading I came across that said something about open based bullets and their degenerative impact on accuracy in sequential firings. Maybe that was a dupe on me - haven't had alot of "sequential firings" during rifle pursuits of deer. I eventually found they weren't as accurate as the others but they weren't "minute-of-deer" inaccurate and it wasn't a dumbfounding degree IIRC. The XLC's and Scirocco's did seem to have better (subjective) terminal performance as I eventually found out - according to my homebrewed, highly "scientific" backyard gel splatting anyway.

SO much to learn about these new, heavy-to-the-caliber, hunting bullets. Maybe I'm looking for a fix for something that isn't all that broke or can't be fixed much more than it is. Maybe I have no life and I muse myself with with such concerns - it's not like I would be thinking/typing such things at 2:30am if that were true

Appreciate the input regardless...
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 11:34:51 PM EDT
BC helps the .223 Remington a great deal, considering the very short bullets normally associated with .224 calibers.

With correct propellents and full length barrels, 2800 FPS muzzle velocity is possible. This puts the 300 yard velocity right at 2200 FPS which should be considered the minimum striking velocity for the 75 grain Swift when used on deer. Note, at that velocity, the penetration will be greater than at shorter range and higher velocity. Sounds backwards but it is fact. At higher velocities, you MIGHT recover a bullet from a larger deer but not at 300. You trade cavity diameter for total depth...

That being said, if you don't recover the bullet, then all of that mythical "energy" some claim as necessary for a humane kill is "wasted". But the tradeoff of expansion for greater penetration is often a benefit to lethality. Such has been the case in my experiences with "2 for 1" kills. That is where two deer line up and are felled with one shot. Now I haven't tried that with the .223 but with a 7mm Mauser. Only 145 grain Speers, driven at 2500 FPS. Clean through the first deer and stopping in the far side skin of the second. I would estimate the bullet MIGHT have been going 1200 FPS exiting the first deer and was probably at 130 grains. Only a bit over 400 ft*lbs killed the second deer.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 11:23:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/3/2005 3:22:21 PM EDT by watson]

Originally Posted By Keith_J:
The Swift, hands down, is the best bullet. High BC with great weight retention. The sectional density is also good for the closer range work. It still has acceptable penetration at higher velocity, close range work. The Barnes might not expand at the longer ranges as it has a lower BC.



The Swift SD (.214) is certainly right up there (77gr SMK @ .219), another lethality enhancement over the more established .224 hunting bullets. The Swift SD is only 7 percent better than the TSX @ .199. Wasn't sure how that'd translate comparitively or if a meaningful degree. However, it seems to me that the 14 percent SD over the Sierra 65gr Gameking was substantial enough to be a notable lethality improvement in deer.


If you load it correctly, it will be good out past 300 yards with enough velocity to assure expansion. Sure, you might think you can dial in drop or hold over but only if you are absolutely sure of the range and more importantly, wind.


I would like to see spec data for the expansion-to-velocity comparison for the TSX/Swift in .223. I've seen some captioned pics of the Scirocco, but it didn't specify what caliber bullet it was and I wasn't sure if the same extrapolation would apply to diffrent size bullets. The higher BC was more relevant to me in that the subjective bullet would be maintaining more energy at distance than a lower BC one, not so much the wind/elev dope - albeit, that's not an insignificant element. I can deal with bullet dope, but I can't control what steam it has when it gets there though, I guess. That's up to the bullet.


The old adage of 1000 ft*lbs is pure hooey. A gut shot with a .375 H&H Mag FMJ is no more lethal than the same shot with a .223 Rem softpoint.

Lots to be said for that. It's a long story and isn't what it appears on the surface, but I had a big buck go down (permanently) to 00 buck at 150 yards. I do think that tertiary tissue damage (concussion to the tissue) has an important threshold and is accomplished by the available energy. But like so many other things, it isn't the "all important" factor. It's like saying the carburator is "the most important" element of a NASCAR motor.

.223 Remington is only the name, all .22 center fires in common use today are .224". The .22 Savage High Power (.227") is obsolete as is the .22 Jet (.222").


Now imagine the 75 grain Swift in a fast-twist .224 Middlestead at 3500 FPS! It is still going at 2800 FPS AT 300 YARDS!


Hooo-doggy! That's a .223 kick-in-the-pants! Never heard of it before. Just looked it up. I can only imagine what the life-expectancy of that critters throat is! Reminds me of a woman I know that smokes 3 packs a day - as soon as she talks, seems like she aint got no throat I can see myself driving something like that someday.

Good stuff.

Edit for Sierra, not Swift... the hand was quicker than the mind
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 11:58:40 AM EDT
I am having a .224 Middlestead barrel made by Blackstar with the Durabore...even then, accurate life is less than 2000 rounds. Much better than the Eargersplittenloudenboomin (.22-378 Weatherby!) which is toast at 70 rounds.

On the Swift bullets, the 75 grain Scirocco .224" has a perfromance envelope from 3200 to 2100 ft/sec. While I haven't tried it on test media at those velocities, I have no question it will work at impact velocities of 2200+.

At very close ranges, especially when driven over 3000 ft/sec, I would opt for neck shots.

Mind you, I have hunted with a .22 Hornet, legal in Texas. Yes, even a chest shot is lethal. YOu have to be sure where you put it...
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 12:07:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Keith_J:
With correct propellents and full length barrels, 2800 FPS muzzle velocity is possible. This puts the 300 yard velocity right at 2200 FPS which should be considered the minimum striking velocity for the 75 grain Swift when used on deer. Note, at that velocity, the penetration will be greater than at shorter range and higher velocity. Sounds backwards but it is fact. At higher velocities, you MIGHT recover a bullet from a larger deer but not at 300. You trade cavity diameter for total depth...


That's the kind of data that can be helpful to understand what to expect. Thanks. Any idea what percentage expansion at 2200 FPS with the Swift .223 ? 2200 FPS would put the ft/lbs at about 800'ish - worth considering. That's about what the 60gr Nosler Partition is at 140 yards! If I can find some 75gr Scirocco ammo, I'd love to see what it'll do in reality for expansion and penetration (okay... in gel, then maybe in reality). Tracking with you on the rest of it...


Originally Posted By Keith_J:
Able Danger? Time to prosecute Gorelick and Berger et al for sedition.



Roger that.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 2:19:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By watson:

Originally Posted By bubba99:
A high BC helps maintain positive trajectory. Once you fall below 1000ft/lbs of energy you have left the realm of clean shots on deer, regardless of the cartridge.



Agreed. I've always tried to set the absolute floor at 900 ft/lbs though (maybe splittin' hairs I guess for 10 percent). There are "experts" that claim it is inhumane to drop below 1500 ft/lbs. One thing that has been left out of alot of those arguments is inertia and energy transfer efficiency (bullet design) - but this aint a physics forum and I know just enough to be dangerous to myself anyway I do know that my archery rig is putting out ~53 ft/lbs and some deer have fallen real dead to it. I like the term "clean shot" - none of any of this is relevant without good placement!


You really can't benefit from extreme BC while within the parameters of a .223.


I suspect that myself. Wish I knew what the MV of either bullet is in an SS, 1/8, Wylde barrel at a robust, but safe loading. I'm curious what yardage the 900 ft/lb threshold is broken in either bullet.


I have killed a few with the lowly Partition and never had extreme bullet failure, but never shot beyond 200yds, ALWAYS shot the lungs, and never really got the performance I am comfortable with.



How big were the deer (dressed) and what did you find lacking?I don't dislike the Partition and although I've not killed anything with one, they seemed to fair pretty well in my gel - again no .223 experience. Initially, I got away from Partitions not for any terminal performance issue but just because it has an open base. The whole, "gotta clean molten lead out o' the bore" thing and some other reading I came across that said something about open based bullets and their degenerative impact on accuracy in sequential firings. Maybe that was a dupe on me - haven't had alot of "sequential firings" during rifle pursuits of deer. I eventually found they weren't as accurate as the others but they weren't "minute-of-deer" inaccurate and it wasn't a dumbfounding degree IIRC. The XLC's and Scirocco's did seem to have better (subjective) terminal performance as I eventually found out - according to my homebrewed, highly "scientific" backyard gel splatting anyway.

SO much to learn about these new, heavy-to-the-caliber, hunting bullets. Maybe I'm looking for a fix for something that isn't all that broke or can't be fixed much more than it is. Maybe I have no life and I muse myself with with such concerns - it's not like I would be thinking/typing such things at 2:30am if that were true

Appreciate the input regardless...



They biggest complaint I had about the .223 for deer was just a general lack of performance. At the same time, I can't quote exactly when, during the animals death, the bullet or cartridge failed. (pun intended)

I simply like the option of breaking both shoulders and driving the blade thru his septem, if I wish.
I can only recall two deer (out of a total of eight) that had an exit wound, after a lung shot. Usually found an intact and fully expanded Partition on the far skin. The bullet did its job and my rifle shot them well. I just prefer two holes.

These were South Texas deer, 100 to 150 lb range, dressed.

Maybe I am paranoid, and I will readily admit a .223 will kill a deer, I just feel like a larger cartridge does a larger job. I am not critical of anyone who used a .223 responsibly.


Link Posted: 10/3/2005 2:29:49 PM EDT
Bah. Just rack your shotgun. Deer'll drop dead at 100 yards.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 5:02:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bubba99:
...
They biggest complaint I had about the .223 for deer was just a general lack of performance. At the same time, I can't quote exactly when, during the animals death, the bullet or cartridge failed. (pun intended)

I simply like the option of breaking both shoulders and driving the blade thru his septem, if I wish.
I can only recall two deer (out of a total of eight) that had an exit wound, after a lung shot. Usually found an intact and fully expanded Partition on the far skin. The bullet did its job and my rifle shot them well. I just prefer two holes.

These were South Texas deer, 100 to 150 lb range, dressed.

Maybe I am paranoid, and I will readily admit a .223 will kill a deer, I just feel like a larger cartridge does a larger job. I am not critical of anyone who used a .223 responsibly.





How does one break BOTH shoulders and drive the shoulder blade through the septum (sic) without complete penetration? Even the lowly .30-30 is hard pressed to keep the bullet in a deer unless you are using varmit bullets.

On the management hunts I have been on, most of the professionals used .243s, loaded with 55 grain varmit bullets punching the lofty 4100 FPS muzzle velocity barrier. Why? Because on these management hunts, secondary kills are to be AVOIDED and the herds can get rather thick. Typical head and neck shots but no one aims for the shoulder. Never have I seen or heard of anything but one shot, one kill. Nothing gets away that has been shot. Most don't even twitch with upper neck/head shots.

But the typical "box a year" shooter who calls himself a hunter NEEDS 1500 ft*lbs of energy because he cannot shoot or gets himself into a tizzy over the inedible antlers...

Plenty of deer have fallen from tiny calibers wielded by people who know their rifles. Calibers like .25-20, .218 Bee and .22 Hornet were the standard for Depression-era hunters in Texas. And the favorite of the latter generations was the .22-.250
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 7:41:33 PM EDT
.22 magnum killed the biggest deer on my wall. I shoot either my ar or my 7mm for deer. The sirocco swift is a mean chunk of lead. Most of my deer are shot in teh neck or head. Not hard to do for a shot under 200 yrds. The head at teh jaw is about 6 inches.
Top Top