223 - 50 gr V Max for Springbuck

[tcbc]

I have read that the Yanks prefer a bang-flop approach to hunting, willingly and knowingly sacrificing some meat in favour of a very dead and traceable animal.

I have seen this and participated in some N American/ Canadian hunts. In forested areas one doesn’t get much of a look or time to shoot. Quick shots at vague targets, so the guys look for a lot of damage. Deliberately break a shoulder or the like, as a wounded animal is really hard to track. Autumn weather can be cold and wet, and the bloodhound services take several hours and big money to call up.

My other observation is that a lot of northern NA hunters mainly practice shooting at a bench, and when they get into the field and have to shoot sitting or standing, they often pull shots. So to get around this they shoot from tree stands or blinds, mostly at baits, with supported rifles.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tcbc]

Treeman....here is some weirdness for you to digest.

High impact velocities and fragile bullets create meat damage.....fact....but....to a point.

A 130gr PMP 270 bullet or an 80gr soft 243 bullet chews up a Springbuck like you would not believe. How about a wee little 204 40gr Vmax at 3700fps? What would this do to a Springbuck on a vaporization scale of 1 to 10? The answer is not much , with body shots the Springbuck mostly wanders off for 50-100m,then lies down requiring a walk up to finish off. Meat damage ....nah. Head shots , no problem.

This observation comes from culling Springbuck and seeing this result repeated over and over again. I do not think the little bullet,as "explosive" as one may think has enough mass or momentum to ruin much meat.

I have also shot a lot of springbuck with 223 55gr Sako factory ammo and it worked well.

While maybe not my choice of bullet for Springbuck [and definitely not Impala/Blesbuck] i think you will be OK.

When I was much younger (like many of us here!) , I would help with Springbok harvesting at my uncles farm in E Cape. I used a Musgrave 243, but there were 222 and 223’s and some 7mm Mauser’s.

We were asked to make neck shots, if possible, from voorsit positions. After a few occasions, my thoughts about rifle suitability then (our choices in the 80’s were more limited than today), were : 222’s were too light and wind blown; 223 was about enough for springbok, with little meat damage; 243’s were good, and the 7mm’s shot front legs off (people misjudged ranges). Nobody there had a 270, I’m not sure why. Sometimes these things are just a fashion…

I do agree about 243 meat damage though. Hit a springbok in the shoulder at less than about 150 yards and at least one shoulder ruined and possibly the other as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[driepootx]