Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Boland
    Posts
    7,985

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Koebelwagen View Post
    Load the 53gr TSX, it goes straight through an adult impala ram's neck vertebrae and penetrates easily and deeply into the chest cavity with a heart/ lung shot, exiting again most of the time depending on angle, it will have no problems taking down a springbuck.
    Sounds like an answer for the OP's 1:12 twist BRNO

    With my 1:9 twist Howa (still held hostage without a license card) the 62gr will stabilize well so I'd prefer the somewhat heavier bullet.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Port Elizabeth
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    I must just be a shitty shooter then, but it does make me wonder why there is even debate in regard to the caliber if its so simply capable - and laws restricting its use to a few animal sizes.
    Springbuck are wounded with .270ties and what was thought to be a good chest shot, now we want to say a .223 will work fine MORE often than not? Mostly, well mostly if you a real good shot and you miss this and hit that but its not recommended, but actually good enough.

    All I will say further, is that many a .223 wounding shot would have been a kill shot if it was almost any other bigger caliber.

  3. #23
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    45
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    You are right Treeman, bigger guns make bigger holes.

    But I myself have seen enough shots on springbok to tell you straight that won't help in this scenario, most shots missed on springbok cannot be saved by using a bigger cal, the shot simply ain't good enough.
    You make a good shot with a 223, the animal goes down, same as any other cartridge.
    I want every person here who's ever hunted a lot of springbok to think back and they will know, either the shot is complete miss, or the vitals completely missed.
    If you hit the vitals of a springbok or blesbok with a 223 that animal is dead.

  4. #24
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    BFN Freestate
    Age
    45
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    Same as any other type of hunting, a lost animal will have 99.5% excuses, where in fact for 99.5% of lost animals the shot wasn't good enough.

  5. #25
    User
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    To get back to the original question. It is legal to hunt with a .223 provided you do not hunt red hartebeest, gemsbok, blue and black wildebeest, kudu, and buffalo. At least in the Western Cape.

    All provinces have their own hunting ordinances which sets out these rules. It may be different in other provinces.

    I do remember a number of years ago they tried to implement a countrywide "Norms and Standards" regulations that specified minimum weight and energy of hunting ammunition depending on game , but, as far as I am aware, it was never implemented as it was not realistic.

  6. #26
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Jo'burg.
    Age
    51
    Posts
    443

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    The problem with the argument of the "shot was simply not good enough" is that it means the 223 was enough gun, but the idiot behind it should have known better. And that is Treeman's point: the 223 is often not enough gun, because - evidently- the idiot does not know better.

    Of course the gun is enough for the right shot. However, wind being wind, the problem is that 223's will never be 50, or 30 cal, or a 7mm. And 50gr is never 150gr.

    The 7mm and 30 cals bring enough more to the party to make the average hunter look better than what we are, whilst the .22 familycaliber loves to prove we are pretenders.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Port Elizabeth
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: Species lawfully hunted with .233

    Quote Originally Posted by AJR View Post
    The problem with the argument of the "shot was simply not good enough" is that it means the 223 was enough gun, but the idiot behind it should have known better. And that is Treeman's point: the 223 is often not enough gun, because - evidently- the idiot does not know better.

    Of course the gun is enough for the right shot. However, wind being wind, the problem is that 223's will never be 50, or 30 cal, or a 7mm. And 50gr is never 150gr.

    The 7mm and 30 cals bring enough more to the party to make the average hunter look better than what we are, whilst the .22 familycaliber loves to prove we are pretenders.
    ***********************
    Precisely !

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •